I. What are the parts of a pleading? Give brief description of each part.

(10 pts)

ANSWER:
The parts of a pleading under Rule 7 are: the caption (Sec. 1), the text or the body (Sec. 2), the
signature and address (Sec. 3), the verification (Sec. 4), and the CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM
SHOPPING (SEC. 5).

Caption

The caption must set forth the name of the court, the title of the action, and the docket number if
assigned. The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. They shall all e named in the original
complaint or petition; but in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party on
each side be stated with an appropriate indication when there are other parties. Their respective
participation in the case shall be indicated.

Signature and address

Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating in either case his
address which should not be a post office box.

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

An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court may, in its discretion, allow such
deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that the same was due to mere inadvertence and not
intended for delay. Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or signs a pleading in violation
of the Rule, or alleges scandalous or indecent matter therein, or fails to promptly report to the court a
change of his address, shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary action.

In every pleading, counsel has to indicate his professional tax receipt (PTR) and IBP receipt, the purpose
of which is to see to it that he pays his tax and membership due regularly

Verification

A verification of a pleading is an affirmation under oath by the party making the pleading that he is
prepared to establish the truthfulness of the facts which he has pleaded based on his own personal
knowledge.

The general rule under, Sec. 4. Rule 7 is that, pleading need not be under oath. This means that a
pleading need not be verified. A pleading will be verified only when a verification is required by a law or
by a rule.

A pleading is verified by and affidavit, which declares that: (a) the affiant has read the pleading, and (b)
the allegations therein are true and correct to his personal knowledge or based on authentic records.

The verification requirement is significant, as it is intended to secure an assurance that the allegations in
a pleading are true and correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and
that the pleading is filed in good faith. The absence of proper verification is cause to treat the pleading
as unsigned and dismissable.

It is, however, been held that the absence of a verification or the non-compliance with the verification
requirement does not necessarily render the pleading defective. It is only a formal and not a
jurisdictional requirement. The requirement is a condition affecting only the form of the pleading
(Sarmeinto vs. Zaratan, GR 167471, Feb. 5, 2007). The absence of a verification may be corrected by
requiring an oath. The rule is in keeping with the principle that rules of procedure are established to
secure substantial justice and that technical requirements may be dispensed with in meritorious cases
(Pampanga Development Sugar Co. vs. NLRC, 272 SCRA 737). The court may order the correction of the
pleading or act on an unverified pleading if the attending circumstances are such that strict compliance
would not fully serve substantial justice, which after all, is the basic aim for the rules of procedure
(Robert Development Corp. vs. Quitain, 315 SCRA 150).

CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM-SHOPPING

The certification against forum shopping is a sworn statement certifying to the following matters:

That the party has not commenced or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal, or
quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending;

That if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present status thereof;
and

That if he should therefore learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he
shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.

The certification is mandatory under Sec. 5, Rule 7, but nor jurisdictional (Robert Development Corp. vs.
Quitain, 315 SCRA 150).

There is forum shopping when, as a result of an adverse opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favorable
opinion, other than by appeal or certiorari in another. There can also be forum shopping when a party
institutes two or more suits in different courts, either simultaneously or successively, in order to ask the
courts to rule on the same or related causes and/or to grant the same or substantially the same reliefs
on the supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition or increase a party’s
chances of obtaining a favorable decision or action (Huibonhoa vs. Concepcion, GR 153785, Aug. 3,
2006). It is an act of malpractice, as the litigants trifle with the courts and abuse their processes. It is
improper conduct and degrades the administration of justice. If the act of the party or its counsel clearly
constitutes willful and deliberate forum-shopping, the same shall constitute direct contempt, and a
cause for administrative sanctions, as well as a ground for the summary dismissal of the case with
prejudice (Montes vs. CA, GR 143797, May 4, 2006). Forum shopping exists when the elements of litis
pendentia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another.

It is the plaintiff or principal party who executes the certification under oath, and not the attorney. It
must be signed by the party himself and cannot be signed by his counsels. As a general and prevailing
rule, a certification signed by counsel is a defective certification and is a valid cause for dismissal (Far
Eastern Shipping Co. vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30).
This certification is not necessary when what is filed is a mere motion for extension, or in criminal cases
and distinct causes of action.

Requirements of a corporation executing the verification/certification on non-forum shopping

A juridical entity, unlike a natural person, can only perform physical acts through properly delegated
individuals. The certification against forum shopping where the plaintiff or a principal party is a juridical
entity like a corporation may be executed by properly authorized persons. This person may be the
lawyer of a corporation. As long as he is duly authorized by the corporation and has personal knowledge
of the facts required to be disclosed in the certification against forum shopping, the certification may be
signed by the authorized lawyer (National Steel Corp. vs. CA, 388 SCRA 85).

Effect of the signature of counsel in a pleading

A certification signed by a counsel is a defective certification and is a valid cause for dismissal (Far
Eastern Shipping Company vs. CA, 297 SCRA 30). This is the general and prevailing rule. A certification by
counsel and not by the principal party himself is no certification at all. The reason for requiring that it
must be signed by the principal party himself is that he has actual knowledge, or knows better than
anyone else, whether he has initiated similar action/s in other courts, agencies or tribunals. Their
lawyer’s explanation that they were out of town at the time their petition was filed with the CA is bereft
of basis. That explanation is an afterthought as it was not alleged by counsel in her certification against
forum shopping (Go vs. Rico, GR 140682, April 25, 2006).

Allegations in a pleading

Every pleading shall contain in a mathematical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of
the ultimate facts on which the party relies for his claim and defense, as the case may be, containing the
statement of mere evidentiary facts.

II. On February 14, 2019, Celestina borrowed Php 500,000 from Maria. It was agreed that the amount
would be paid in full one (1) year after, with interest at the rate of 10% per annum, without necessity
of a demand. For this purpose, Celestina executed a promissory note, secured by a postdated check in
the amount of Php 550,000 drawn from her current account, which check was dated February 14,
2020.

When the debt became due, Maria deposited the check but it was dishonored for insufficient funds.
Maria who is due to leave for South Korea issued a Special Power of Attorney to his brother Scottie to
represent her in court and to sign pleadings in connection thereto. Scottie then sued Celestina for
Estafa through falsification of a commercial document. After finding probable cause, the prosecutor
filed a criminal case in court, where Celestina agreed to execute a Judicial Affidavit in lieu of her direct
testimony. In her affidavit, she raised the defense that she could not be guilty of Estafa because: (1)
the check was issued only as a form of security; (2) even if issued as payment, it was for a pre-existing
debt; and (3) it was only upon Maria’s insistence that she issued the check.

Prepare the following documents in legally acceptable and enforceable forms, based on the above
facts:
(a) The Special Power of Attorney (10 pts.);
(b) The Information (20 pts.) and
(c) The Judicial Affidavit (20 pts.).

ANSWER:

A. FORM 5-SCC

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS:

I, __Maria_____, of legal age, single, with residence at __Brgy. Ibingay , Masbate City__
do hereby appoint, name and constitute ___Scottie__, likewise of legal age, single/married, with
residence at _Brgy. Ibingay, City______, who is related to me and/or is my next-of-kin, and is not
a lawyer, as my true and legal representative to act for and in my name and stead and to
represent me during the hearing of Civil Case No._123456__, to enter into amicable settlement,
to submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution and to make admissions or stipulations of
facts and documents without further consultation from me.

I hereby grant my representative full power and authority to execute and perform every
act necessary to render effective the power to compromise as though I myself have so
performed it and hereby approving all that he may do by virtue of these presents.

In witness whereof, I hereunto set my hand this _14_ day of __February_, 20 20__, at __Alavarez Law
Office_____

_____Maria______________________________
Principal

______Scottie__________________________
Agent

Witnesses: _________Brok Lesner____________

____________Hulk Hogan____________

(ACKNOWLEDGMENT)