Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region 3
Branch 271
Taguig City

JOANNA M. DE JESUS, DENISE

ANN D. CORONEL
and CHIZ C. MARQUEZ,
Unit 705, Avida CityFlex Tower, 7th
Avenue corner Lane T,
North Bonifacio, Bonifacio Global City,
Taguig,
Plaintiff,

- versus -
CIVIL CASE NO. 554987
For: Damages Based on
Reckless Imprudence and
Serious Physical Injuries

VANESSA ANGELINE P. CRUZ,

157 Marupok St., Brgy. Makahiya,
Taguig City,
Defendant. xx
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - xx

DEFENDANT’S PRE-TRIAL BRIEF

I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

A. Theory of the Plaintiffs

1.1 Plaintiffs claim that due to the defendant’s overspeeding and lack of
care in driving the car, defendant's car hit the plaintiff De Jesus’ Toyota Wigo
which was parked at the side of the road. This caused De Jesus’ Wigo to be
compressed and knocked to the right side of the road, which then pinned Coronel
and Marquez to the railings attached on the road and crushed De Jesus’ legs.

1.2 Plaintiffs maintain that they incurred injuries because of such event. It
was maintained that Coronel had four (4) fractured ribs, rupturing her left spleen.
Marquez had a broken left arm and shoulder. Both of them suffered concussions.

1
De Jesus was found to have fracture both of her legs and ankles. This caused
Coronel, Marquez, and De Jesus to be confined at Baguio Medical Hospital for
sixty days (60) days, fifty-three (53) days, and fifty-five (55) days.

1.3 Plaintiff thus seeks for Defendant to be made to be liable for medical
expenses for their hospitalization, cost of repairs for the damaged Wigo, moral
damages, exemplary damages, attorney’s fees and cost of the suit.

B. Theory of the Defendant

1.4 Defendant denies Plaintiff’s claims because:

a. Complainants were violating several traffic regulations since the

Complainants’ car was parked in the middle of a two-lane road, and the
footage recorded by the dashboard camera attached to the Defendant’s car
shows that the early warning device was placed too close to the
Complainant’s car, and only the right hazard light was blinking.

b. the Complainants did not exercise due diligence in making sure that
the components of the car were properly working and in placing the early
warning device farther due to the zero to low visibility in the area.

c. the driver of the Defendant’s car was driving slowly as shown by the
CCTV footage.

1.5 Defendant maintains that due to the incident, the car suffered
substantial damage on the right side of the car, and the car insurance did not cover
all the expenses, so the Defendant had to pay the remaining balance.
1.6. The Defendant claims that due to the incident, the Defendant
suffered severe bruises and scratches in her arms and legs, trauma on her
head, as well as sleepless nights, mental anguish, fright, and serious anxiety.

1.7. The Defendant thus seeks that the Complainants be made liable
for the expenses she suffered for the repair of the Hyundai Starex, her
hospitalization and medical expenses, moral damages for the sleepless
nights, mental anguish, fright, and serious anxiety, attorney’s fees and cost
of suit.

II. ADMISSIONS AND PROPOSED STIPULATIONS

2.1 Defendant makes no admissions other than what are stated in her Answer.

2
 III. RESORT TO AMICABLE SETTLEMENT AND/OR ALTERNATIVE
MODES OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION

3.1 Defendant is open and willing to discuss options as to a fair and

amicable resolution of the instant controversy.

IV. ISSUE

4.1 Whether or not Plaintiff is entitled to its claims against the Defendant.

V. EVIDENCE FOR THE DEFENDANT

Testimonial Evidence

5.1 Defendant will present an expert witness who will testify as to the
truthfulness of the allegations stated by the defendant as to the weather conditions
at the time the incident occurred to prove the level of visibility in the area.

5.2. Defendant will also present Dr. Macalino in order to authenticate and
identify the Medical Report herewith attached as documentary evidence.

5.3. Defendant will also present an expert witness from the Accounts and
Billings Executive from Notre Dame Hospital in order to identify and authenticate
the Medical Receipts acquired because of the medical expenses.

5.4. Defendant will also present an expert witness, particularly the CCTV
Footage Operator of the Local Government of Baguio, being the place where the
incident happened and such CCTV was owned and controlled by such LGU, in
order to authenticate and identify the CCTV footage.

5.5. Defendant will also present an expert witness competent in the field of
video surveillance and electronic recordings in order to authenticate and identify
the dashboard camera footage for its admissibility to prove culpability of plaintiff
in the incident.

5.6 Defendant reserves the right to present other witnesses whose testimony
may become necessary in the course of the proceedings in the case.

Documentary Evidence

5.7 The Judicial Affidavit of the Defendant in accordance with A.M. 12-8-
8-SC is attached hereto marked as Exhibit “1” and made an integral part hereof.

3
 5.8 The Judicial Affidavit of one Maria Makahiya in accordance with A.M.
12-8-8-SC is atatched hereto marked as Exhibit “2” and made an integrap lart
hereof

5.9 The Defendant adopts as her Exhibit “3” the video recorded by the
dashboard camera of defendant’s car, and identified by the defendant who took
such video.

5.10 The Defendant attaches as her Exhibit “4” the Official Receipt from
Hyundai-Pasig Branch to prove the defendant’s counterclaim for the cost of
repairs.

5.11 The Defendant attaches as her Exhibit “5” the Medical Report
completed by Dr. Macalino for the examination of defendant’s injuries

5.12 The Defendant attaches as her Exhibit “6” the Official Receipt from
the Notre Dame de Chartres Hospital to prove the medical expenses for the
recovery of defendant’s injuries.

5.13. The Defendant attaches as her Exhibit “7” the Official Invoice from
the law firm LAC Law Offices for the attorney’s fees and cost of suit.

5.14. The Defendant reserves the right to present other documentary

evidence whose relevance and importance may become necessary in the course of
the proceedings in the case.

VI. AVAILABLE TRIAL DATES

6.1 Plaintiff proposes that trial dates be set by the parties during the pretrial
conference, after consulting the case calendar of the Honorable Court and the
schedules of parties’ counsel.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Taguig City. 05 November 2018.

4
 ___________________________________
ATTY. ALFONSO MIGUEL C. LOEPZ
Counsel for the Defendant
Lawyers’ Roll No. 3395656
PTR No. 202022211332.
IBP No. 78940045998
MCLE Comp. No. 21646649812122
Unit 1004 Uptown Tower, 32nd St cor 9th Ave,
Bonifacio Global City, Taguig City
Tel. No.: (02) 4304465 E-mail: partners@laclawoffices.com

COPY FURNISHED :

Atty. Wendy Angeline A. Penafiel

Complainant’s Counsel
Unit 8010 McKinley Tower, 47th St cor 4th Ave,
Makati City
Email: counsels@cpslaw.com
Tel.: (02) 5678910
Cell No.: 0917563789