CIV PRO DOCTRINES II

PAYMENT OF FILING FEE

MANCHESTER VS CA

Court acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon payment of docket fees; an
amendment of the complaint or similar pleading will not vest jurisdiction in the
court, much less payment of docket fee based on amount sought in the amended
pleading.

All complaints, petition and other pleadings should specify the amount of damages
prayed for not only in the body of pleading but also in the prayer , and that the
damages should be considered in the assessment of the filing fees, any pleadings
that fails to comply with the requirement shall not be accepted or admitted.

SUN INSURANCE VS ASUNCION

Same rules apply to permissive counterclaim, 3rd party claim and similar pleadings
which shall not be considered filed unless and until the filing fee prescribed
therefore is paid. The court may also allow payment of said fee within reasonable
time but also in no case beyond its applicable prescriptive or reglementary period.

METROPOLITAN BANK VS PEREZ

When insufficient filing fees were initially paid by the plaintiff and there was no
intention to defraud the govt , the Manchester rule does not apply,

CAPTION , BODY AND SIGNATURE

REPUBLIC VS KENDRICK

Section 3 Rule 7 requires that a pleading must be signed by the party or the counsel
representing him.

The signature of the counsel constitute an assurance by him that that he has read
the pleading ; that to the best of his knowledge , information or belief, there is a
good ground to support it ; and that it was not interposed for delay.

LACUROM VS JACOBA

Signing of the motion , certifies that the person signing it had read, that it is
meritorious and it was not for the purpose of delaying the case. The signature on
the pleading elevates its status from a mere scrap of paper to that of a court
document.
VERIFICATION

ROLANDO CLAVECILLA VS QUITAIN

The lack of certification against forum shopping , unlike that of verification , is

generally not cured by its submission after the filing of the petition. Certification
must be made by the petitioner himself and not by a counsel , since it is the
petitioner who is in the best position to know whether he has previously
commenced any similar action involving the same issues in any other tribunal or
agency.

ARGALLO VS CA

The lack of certification against forum shopping or a defective certification is

generally not curable by its subsequent submission or correction , unless there is a
need to relax the rule under special circumstances or for compelling reason.

NOPA VS PRESIDING JUDGE

A party’s knowledge must be specifically alleged under oath to be either personal

knowledge or at least based on authentic records.

The effect of the failure to properly verify a pleading is that the pleading shall be
treated as unsigned.

TORRES VS SPECIALIZED PACKAGING

The purpose of requiring a verification is to secure an assurance that the allegations

of the petition have been made in good faith, or are true and correct not merely
speculative.

Submission of certification against forum shopping is deemed obligatory though not

jurisdictional, requirement may be relaxed under justifiable circumstances under
the rule of substantial compliance,

CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

BA SAVINGS VS CA

The certificate of non forum shopping required by the Supreme court circular 28-91
may be signed for and of behalf of a corporation by a specifically authorized
counsel who have personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in that
statement.
PNB REPUBLIC BANK VS CA

Forum shopping consist in the act of the party against whom an adverse judgment
have been rendered in one forum , of seeking another opinion in another forum , or
the institution of two or more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause
on the supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.

A case pending in the ombudsman cannot e considered for purposes of determining

if there was forum shopping. The power of ombudsman is investigatory in
character and its resolution cannot be considered a valid and final judgement.

AYALA LAND VS VALISMO

Forum shopping exist when the elements of litis pendentia re present or where a
final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in one case.

GOODLAND COMPANY VS AUB

ELEMENTS OF FORUM SHOPPING

A. Identity of parties or at least such parties as represent the same interest

in both action
B. Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for , the relief being founded
on the same facts
C. Identity of the preceding particulars such that any judgment rendered in
the other action will regardless of which party is successful

The essence of forum shopping is the filing of multiple suits involving the same
parties for the same cause of action , either simultaneously or successively , for the
purpose of obtaining favorable judgment through means other than appeal or
certiorari.

YOUNG VS SY

A party by filing an ordinary appeal and a petition for certiorari with the CA ,
engages in forum shopping

ALMA JOSE VS JAVELLANA

Forum shopping is the act of a party litigant against whom an adverse judgment
have been rendered in one forum seeking and possibly getting a favorable opinion
in another forum , other than by appeal or the special civil action of certiorari or
the institution of two or more action or proceedings grounded on the same cause or
supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.

EXECUTION BY A JURIDICAL PERSON

CYMCA VS REMINGTON STEEL

AS to verification , the requirement that the petitioner should sign the verification
and certification of non forum shopping applies even to corporation s, considering
that the mandatory directives of the rules of court makes no distinction between
natural and juridical person.

HASEWAGA VS KITAMURA

The dismissal of the case without prejudice signifies the absence of decision on the
merits and leaves the parties free to litigate the matter in subsequent action as
though the dismissed action has not been commenced.

ALLEGING CAUSES OF ACTION

MACASLANG VS ZAMORA

Failure to state a cause of action refers to insufficiency of the pleading and is ground
for dismissal while lack of cause of action refers to a situation where the evidence
does not prove the cause of action in the pleading.

In resolving whether the complaint states a cause of action or not , only the facts
allege in the complaint are considered,

TANTUICO VS REPUBLIC

A complaint is a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the palintiffs

cause of action .

Where the allegations in the complaint are vague , indefinite or in the form of
conclusion , the proper recourse would be not a motion to dismiss but a motion for a
bill of particulars.

LOCSIN VS SANDIGANBAYAN

A party may amend his pleading once as a matter of right at any time before a
responsive pleading is serve or in the case of a reply , at any time within 10 days
after it is served.

ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT

MALAYAN INSURANCE VS REGIS

If legal claim is irrefragably sourced from an actionable documents, the defendants
cannot be deprived of the right to examine or utilize such document in order to
intelligently raise a defense. The inability or refusal of the plaintiff to submit such
document into evidence constitute an effective denial of that right of the defendant
which is ultimately rooted in due process of law, to say nothing on how such failure
fatally diminishes the plaintiffs substantiation of its own causes of action.

REMITERE VS YULO

A pleading should state the ultimate facts essential to the right s of action or defense
asserted, as distinguished from mere conclusion of facts or conclusion of law .

AFFIRMATIVE AND NEGATIVE DEFENSE

VILLANUEVA VS CA

Notice of lis pindens is an announcement to te whole world that a particular

property is in litigation.

SPECIFIC DENIAL

EQUITABLE CARD VS CAPISTRANO

AN answer to the complaint may raise a negative defense which consists in

defendants specific denial of the material fact that plaintiff alleges in his complaint,
which fact is essential to the latters cause of action.

Issues not raised by the pleadings may be tried with the implied consent of the
parties as when one of them fails to object to the evidence adduced by the other
concerning such unimpleaded issues.

PNB VS CA

The purpose of requiring the defendant to make a specific denial is to make him
disclose the matters alleged in the complaint which he succinctly intends to
disprove at the trial , together with the matter or which he relied upon to support
the denial.

GAZA VS LIM

THREE MODES OF SPECIFIC DENIAL

1. By specifying each material allegations of the facts in the complaint, the truth
of which the defendant does not admit, and whenever practicable , setting
forth the substance of the matter which will rely upon to support his denial
 2. By specifying so much of an averment in the complaint as is true and material
and denying only the remainder
3. By stating that the defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment in the complaint ,
which has the effect of denial.

PNB VS GO

To specifically deny a material allegation , a defendant must specifically deny a

material allegation , a defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the
truth of which he does not admit, and whenever practicable shall set forth the
substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial,