CLIENT’S COPY

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Branch 147
City of Makati

LUZ R. MANIPON, NOEMI R.

CHICO, and THELMA R. RA-
MOS represented by LYN-
DON R. RAMOS,
Plaintiffs,

-versus- Civil Case No. 15-754

For: Partition

ELEONOR RAMO LUCAS and

CESAR RAMO
Defendants.
x---------------------------------------x

MOTION TO ADMIT
[Attached Answer to the Complaint dated 29 July 2015]

Defendant ELEONOR RAMO LUCAS, through counsel, and unto

this Honorable Court most respectfully seeks the admission of the attached
Answer to Complaint dated 29 July 2015, and in support thereof, states that:

1.0 On 03 September 2015, Eleonor received a summons from this

Honorable Court requiring her to file an Answer within fifteen (15) days
after service or until 18 September 2015. However, due to financial
constraint, Defendant was not able to timely secure the services of counsel to
represent her in the instant case.

1.1 It was only on September 30, 2015, when the services of the
undersigned counsel was engaged. Forthwith, this representation carefully
evaluated the Complaint and all related documents necessary to draft an
intelligent Answer. However, it, still, took him more than three (3) days to
complete this Answer.
 P a g e | 2 of 3
MOTION TO ADMIT ATTACHED ANSWER

1.2 While a defendant is required to file an Answer to the

Complaint within fifteen (15) days after service of summons, 1 the court may
allow an answer or other pleading to be filed after the time fixed by these
Rules.2

1.3 Additionally, the court may allow the admission of an Answer

belatedly filed when it is due to the following: [1] excusable negligence; [2]
the defendant has meritorious defenses; [3] it was filed before defendant is
declared in default; and [4] that the late filing of the answer did not in any
way prejudice or deprive the plaintiff of any substantial right, nor was there
intention to unduly delay the case.3

1.4 Eleonor, through counsel, is filing this Motion to Admit

attached Answer based on the foregoing grounds and in the interest of
substantial justice.

ACCORDINGLY, it is respectfully prayed of this Honorable Court

to grant this Motion and issue an order admitting the attached Answer.

OTHER RELIEFS just and equitable under the foregoing premises

are likewise prayed for.

[Explanation: Copies of this Motion have been served on the counsel

for the Plaintiffs and on the Honorable Court by registered mail in view of
the distance involved and lack of messenger who could undertake personal
service.]

City of San Pedro, Laguna for Makati City, 05 October 2015

[Attorney’s Box]

[NOTICE OF HEARING]

1
Section 1, Rule 11, Rules of Court
2
Section 11, Id.
3
Sps. Delos Santos vs. Hon. Carpio and Metrobank, G.R. No. 153656, September 11, 2006 citing Mercader
vs. Hon. Bonto, G.R. No. L-48564, August 20, 1979