hearing of their motion none of the accused showed up in court for fear of

Hearing of their motion none of the accused showed up

This preview shows page 48 - 50 out of 57 pages.

hearing of their motion, none of the accused showed up in court for fear of being arrested. The RTC judge denied their motion because the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over the persons of the movants. Did the RTC rule correctly? (4%)XIArturo lent P1 Million to his friend Robert on the condition that Robert execute a promissory note for the loan and a real estate mortgage over his property locatedin Tagaytay City. Robert complied. In his promissory note dated September 20, 2006, Robert undertook to pay the loan within a year from its date at 12% per annum interest. In June 2007, Arturo requested Robert to pay ahead of time but the latter refused and insisted on the agreement. Arturo issued a demand letter and when Robert did not comply, Arturo filed an action to foreclose the mortgage.Robert moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of cause of action as the debt was not yet due. The resolution of the motion to dismiss was delayed because of the retirement of the judge.
Image of page 48
a.On October 1, 2007, pending resolution of the motion to dismiss, Arturo filed an amended complaint alleging that Robert's debt had in the meantime become due but that Robert still refused to pay. Should the amended complaint be allowed considering that no answer has been filed? (3%)b.Would your answer be different had Arturo filed instead a supplemental complaint stating that the debt became due after the filing of the original complaint? (2%)XIIAfter receiving the adverse decision rendered against his client, the defendant, Atty. Sikat duly filed a notice of appeal. For his part, the plaintiff timely filed a motion for partial new trial to seek an increase in the monetary damages awarded. The RTC instead rendered an amended decision further reducing the monetary awards. Is it necessary for Atty. Sikat to file a second notice of appeal after receiving the amended decision? (3%) An heir/oppositor in a probate proceeding filed a motion to remove the administrator on the grounds of neglect of duties as administrator and absence from the country. On his part the heir/oppositor served written interrogatories to the administrator preparatory to presenting the latter as a witness. The administrator objected, insisting that the modes of discovery apply only to ordinary civil actions, not special proceedings. Rule on the matter. (4%)XIVOn August 15, 2008, Edgardo committed estafa against Petronilo in the amount of P3 Million. Petronilo brought his complaint to the National Bureau of Investigation, which found that Edgardo had visited his lawyer twice, the first timeon August 14, 2008 and the second on August 16, 2008; and that both visits concerned the swindling of Petronilo. During the trial of Edgardo, the RTC issueda subpoena ad testificandumto Edgardo's lawyer for him to testify on the conversations during their first and second meetings. May the subpoena be quashed on the ground of privileged communication? Explain fully. (4%)XVHalf-brothers Roscoe and Salvio inherited from their father a vast tract of unregistered land. Roscoe succeeded in gaining possession of the parcel of land
Image of page 49
Image of page 50

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture