Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Appellee S Brief
Appellee S Brief
COURT OF APPEALS
Manila, Philippines
JUAN BIGLANGYAMAN,
Appellant,
PEDRO NAGHIRAP,
Appellee.
x--------------------------------------------x
APPEALLEE’S BRIEF
The appellee, PEDRO NAGHIRAP, through the undersigned counsel, and
unto this Honorable Court, in answer to the allegations raised by the
defendant-appellant in his Brief, respectfully submits the following:
PREFATORY STATEMENT
Through this appeal, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT assails the judgment, dated
14 September 2013 rendered by Judge Zosimo Allegre of the Regional Trial
Court Branch 1 of the National Capital Judicial Region of Manila, dismissing
his complaint for Collection of Sum of Money.
COUNTER-STATEMENT OF FACTS
Plaintiff – Appellant, JUAN BIGLANGYAMAN, filed a complaint for the
Collection of a Sum of Money against herein defendant-appellee, PEDRO
NAGHIRAP, based on a duly executed promissory note dated June 12, 2012.
Plaintiff – appellant is the owner of the BIGLANGYAMAN ENTERPRISES, a
lending company.
SO ORDERED.”
COUNTER-ARGUMENT
DISCUSSION
A. THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT HAD COMMITTED A REVERSIBLE ERROR
THROUGH MISAPPREHENSION OF FACTS WHEN IT FAILED TO APPRECIATE
THAT THE PROMISSORY NOTE, THE PRIVATE DOCUMENT EVIDENCING THE
CREDIT, IS STILL HELD BY THE PLAINTIFF – CREDITOR, THEREBY PROOF
OF NON-PAYMENT OF DEBT
8. The appellant submits that the Regional Trial Court had committed a
reversible error when it did not look into the credence of the promissory note as
held by plaintiff-appellant. This promissory note was marked “Exhibit A.”
Jurisprudence abounds that in civil cases, one who pleads payment has the
burden of proving it.1 When the creditor is in the possession of the document of
credit, proof of non-payment is not needed for it is presumed. 2 The debtor has
the burden of showing with legal certainty that the obligation has been
discharged by payment.3
PRAYER
1
Royal Cargo Corporation v. DFS Sports Unlimited, G.R. No. 158621, December 10, 2008.
2
Tai Tong Chuache & Co. v. Insurance Commission, 242 Phil 104, 112, (1988).
3
Supra note 1, at 422.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed and pleaded of this Honorable
Court that the decision promulgated on 14 September 2013 dismissing the
complaint be RECONSIDERED, REVERSED, and SET ASIDE.
Other reliefs just and equitable are likewise prayed for.
GERALD CO
Counsel for the Plaintiff
2134 Jose Abad Santos, Sta Mesa
PTR No. 12345/09-24-13/Manila
IBP No. 42956/10-10-14/Manila
Roll No. 912345
MCLE No. IV-0001234
COPY FURNISHED
Copy Furnished:
SAHLIE GONZALES
Counsel for the Defendant
123 Napoles Street,
Sta. Ana, Manila
IBP No. 14344/02-14-88
Roll No. 12345/04-24-93
MCLE Exempt
PTR Exempt
Date: _____________________________
VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
3. I have read the contents thereof and the facts stated therein are true
and correct of my personal knowledge and as culled from authentic records;
JUAN BIGLANGYAMAN
Affiant
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 21 st day of September, 2013
affiant exhibiting to me his Driver’s License No. N02-12345 issued on March
04, 2013 in Manila.
EDUARDO MINGOA
NOTARY PUBLIC
Until December 31, 2014
Roll of Attorneys No. 23456
IBP No. 333945/01-05-03
PTR No. 175456/02-07-13/Manila
MCLE Compliance No. I 0007865/04-01-13
COPY FURNISHED:
SAHLIE GONZALES
Counsel for the Defendant
123 Napoles Street,
Sta. Ana, Manila
IBP No. 14344/02-14-88
Roll No. 12345/04-24-93
MCLE Exempt
PTR Exempt