Random Thoughts

UY KIAO ENG vs. NIXON LEE G.R.No. 176831 January 15, 2010 Nachura, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:17:00 +0000

Facts: Respondent Nixon Lee filed a petition for mandamus with damages against his mother Uy Kiao Eng, herein petitioner, before the RTC of Manila to compel petitioner to produce the holographic will of his father so that probate proceedings for the allowance thereof could be instituted. Respondent had already requested his mother to settle and liquidate the patriarch’s estate and to deliver to the legal heirs their respective inheritance, but petitioner refused to do so without any justifiable reason. Petitioner denied that she was in custody of the original holographic will and that she knew of its whereabouts. The RTC heard the case. After the presentation and formal offer of respondent’s evidence, petitioner demurred, contending that her son failed to prove that she had in her custody the original holographic will. The RTC, at first, denied the demurrer to evidence. However, it granted the same on petitioner’s motion for reconsideration. Respondent’s motion for reconsideration of this latter order was denied. Hence, the petition was dismissed. Aggrieved, respondent sought review from the appellate court. The CA initially denied the appeal for lack of merit. Respondent moved for reconsideration. The appellate court granted the motion, set aside its earlier ruling, issued the writ, and ordered the production of the will and the payment of attorney’s fees. It ruled this time that respondent was able to show by testimonial evidence that his mother had in her possession the holographic will. Dissatisfied with this turn of events, petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration. The appellate court denied this motion. Left with no other recourse, petitioner brought the matter before this Court, contending in the main that the petition for mandamus is not the proper remedy and that the testimonial evidence used by the appellate court as basis for its ruling is inadmissible.

Issue: Whether or not mandamus is the proper remedy of the respondent.

Held: The Court cannot sustain the CA’s issuance of the writ.

Mandamus is a command issuing from a court of law of competent jurisdiction, in the name of the state or the sovereign, directed to some inferior court, tribunal, or board, or to some corporation or person requiring the performance of a particular duty therein specified, which duty results from the official station of the party to whom the writ is directed or from operation of law. This definition recognizes the public character of the remedy, and clearly excludes the idea that it may be resorted to for the purpose of enforcing the performance of duties in which the public has no interest. The writ is a proper recourse for citizens who seek to enforce a public right and to compel the performance of a public duty, most especially when the public right involved is mandated by the Constitution. As the quoted provision instructs, mandamus will lie if the tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.

The writ of mandamus, however, will not issue to compel an official to do anything which is not his duty to do or which it is his duty not to do, or to give to the applicant anything to which he is not entitled by law. Nor will mandamus issue to enforce a right which is in substantial dispute or as to which a substantial doubt exists, although objection raising a mere technical question will be disregarded if the right is clear and the case is meritorious. As a rule, mandamus will not lie in the absence of any of the following grounds: [a] that the court, officer, board, or person against whom the action is taken unlawfully neglected the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from office, trust, or station; or [b] that such court, officer, board, or person has unlawfully excluded petitioner/relator from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which he is entitled. On the part of the relator, it is essential to the issuance of a writ of mandamus that he should have a clear legal right to the thing demanded and it must be the imperative duty of respondent to perform the act required.

Recognized further in this jurisdiction is the principle that mandamus cannot be used to enforce contractual obligations. Generally, mandamus will not lie to enforce purely private contract rights, and will not lie against an individual unless some obligation in the nature of a public or quasi-public duty is imposed. The writ is not appropriate to enforce a private right against an individual.] The writ of mandamus lies to enforce the execution of an act, when, otherwise, justice would be obstructed; and, regularly, issues only in cases relating to the public and to the government; hence, it is called a prerogative writ. To preserve its prerogative character, mandamus is not used for the redress of private wrongs, but only in matters relating to the public.

Moreover, an important principle followed in the issuance of the writ is that there should be no plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law other than the remedy of mandamus being invoked. In other words, mandamus can be issued only in cases where the usual modes of procedure and forms of remedy are powerless to afford relief. Although classified as a legal remedy, mandamus is equitable in its nature and its issuance is generally controlled by equitable principles. Indeed, the grant of the writ of mandamus lies in the sound discretion of the court.

In the instant case, the Court, without unnecessarily ascertaining whether the obligation involved here—the production of the original holographic will—is in the nature of a public or a private duty, rules that the remedy of mandamus cannot be availed of by respondent Lee because there lies another plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Let it be noted that respondent has a photocopy of the will and that he seeks the production of the original for purposes of probate. The Rules of Court, however, does not prevent him from instituting probate proceedings for the allowance of the will whether the same is in his possession or not.

There being a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the production of the subject will, the remedy of mandamus cannot be availed of. Suffice it to state that respondent Lee lacks a cause of action in his petition. Thus, the Court grants the demurrer.

PEOPLE vs. JOSELITO NOQUE G.R.No. 175319 January 15, 2010 Del Castillo, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:14:00 +0000

Facts: Accused Joselito Noque was caught in a buy-bust operation conducted by SPO4 Norberto Murillo on January 30, 2001. Two Informations were filed before the RTC of Manila docketed as Criminal Case Nos. 01-189458 and 01-189459 charging of the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of a regulated drug. The trial court convicted the accused on both charges. The trial court held that while the Informations alleged methamphetamine hydrochloride as the drug seized from the appellant, the drug actually confiscated which was ephedrine, which by means of chemical reaction could change into methamphetamine. Thus, the trial court ruled that the appellant can be convicted of the offenses charged, which are included in the crimes proved. The CA affirmed the trial court’s decision. The CA held that the designations and allegations in the informations are for the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of regulated drugs. Hence, the accused appealed the case before the Supreme Court.

Issue: Whether or not appellant’s right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation was not violated.

Held: The appeal is bereft of merit.

As correctly observed by CA, the offenses designated in the Informations are for violations of Sections 15 and 16 of RA 6425, which define and penalize the crimes of illegal sale and possession of regulated drugs. The allegations in the Informations for the unauthorized sale and possession of “shabu” or methamphetamine hydrochloride are immediately followed by the qualifying phrase “which is a regulated drug”. Thus, it is clear that the designations and allegations in the Informations are for the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of regulated drugs. Ephedrine has been classified as a regulated drug by the Dangerous Drugs Board in Board Resolution No. 2, Series of 1988.

The CA correctly ruled that Sections 4 and 5, Rule 120 of the Rules of Court, can be applied by analogy in convicting the appellant of the offenses charged, which are included in the crimes proved. Under these provisions, an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of those constituting the latter. At any rate, a minor variance between the information and the evidence does not alter the nature of the offense, nor does it determine or qualify the crime or penalty, so that even if a discrepancy exists, this cannot be pleaded as a ground for acquittal. In other words, his right to be informed of the charges against him has not been violated because where an accused is charged with a specific crime, he is duly informed not only of such specific crime but also of lesser crimes or offenses included therein.

PEOPLE vs. EDGARDO ESTRADA G.R. No. 178318 January 15, 2010 Del Castillo, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 23:47:00 +0000

Facts: On November 19, 1997, two similarly-worded Informations were filed against appellant Edgardo Estrada charging him with two counts of Rape committed against his niece, 12-year old minor and is living in the house of his parents. On August 16, 2002, the trial court found the accused guilty of qualified rape on two counts and sentenced him to suffer the supreme penalty of death. The CA affirmed the decision of the trial court with modification finding the appellant guilty of simple rape. The Court of Appeals opined that mere allegation in the Information that the appellant was the victim’s uncle would not suffice to satisfy the special qualifying circumstance of relationship. It must be categorically stated that appellant is a relative within the 3rd civil degree by consanguinity or affinity. Hence this appeal.

Issue: Whether or not the accused should be convicted of qualified rape or simple rape.

Held: Applying the guiding principles that “a) an accusation for rape is easy to make, difficult to prove and even more difficult to disprove; b) in view of the intrinsic nature of the crime, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with utmost caution; and c) the evidence of the prosecution must stand on its own merits and cannot draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense”, we affirm the Decision of the Court of Appeals finding herein appellant guilty of two counts of simple rape.

The rape incidents were committed in July 1997 hence the law applicable is Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659. In the instant case, it was clearly established by the prosecution that on two occasions in July 1997, the victim was sexually abused by appellant through force and intimidation, against her will and without her consent. The qualifying circumstance of minority of the victim was likewise proven by the presentation of the latter’s Birth Certificate.

However, as regards the allegation in the Information that appellant is an uncle of the victim, we agree with the Court of Appeals that the same did not sufficiently satisfy the requirements of Art. 335 of the Revised Penal Code, i.e., it must be succinctly stated that appellant is a relative within the 3rd civil degree by consanguinity or affinity. It is immaterial that appellant admitted that the victim is his niece. In the same manner, it is irrelevant that “AAA” testified that appellant is her uncle.

In view of the foregoing, the Court of Appeals was correct in finding appellant guilty only of two counts of simple rape and in sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each count, and in ordering him to pay P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages for each count of rape.

WELFREDO CENEZE vs. FELICIANA RAMOS G.R. No. 172287 January 15, 2010 Nachura, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:38:00 +0000

Facts: Petitioner Welfredo Ceneze filed an action for declaration as bona fide tenant-lessee of two parcels of agricultural land owned by respondent Feliciana Ramos located in Lelemaan, Manaoag, Pangasinan. Petitioner alleged that in 1981, Julian Ceneze Sr., petitioner’s father, transferred his tenurial rights over the landholding to him with the consent and approval of respondent and that, since then, petitioner had been in actual and peaceful possession of the landholding until April 12, 1991, when respondent forcibly entered and cultivated the land for the purpose of dispossessing the petitioner of his right as tenant.

Respondent denied that a tenancy relationship existed between her and petitioner, asserting that she had never instituted petitioner as a tenant in any of her landholdings. She averred that petitioner had never been in possession of the landholding, but admitted that it was Julian, Sr. who was the tenant of the landholding. After Julian Sr., his wife and his son Julian Jr. migrated to the U.S.A. she reported on April 8, 1991, to the Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer (MARO) of Manaoag, Pangasinan, the abandonment of the landholding by Julian, Sr., his wife and his son, Julian, Jr.

On December 19, 1997, the Provincial Adjudicator rendered a decision in favor of petitioner for it find the petitioner a bona fide tenant-lessee of the landholding. The Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB) affirmed the decision.

Respondent elevated the case to the CA through a petition for review. On December 29, 2005, the CA resolved the petition in favor of respondent landowner and dismissed petitioner’s complaint. Likewise, petitioner’s motion for reconsideration was denied for lack of merit. Hence, this petition for review was filed.

Issue: Whether or not petitioner had tenancy relationship with respondent.

Held: The petition is not meritorious.

In resolving this petition, the Court is guided by the principle that tenancy is not purely a factual relationship dependent on what the alleged tenant does upon the land; it is also a legal relationship. A tenancy relationship cannot be presumed. There must be evidence to prove the presence of all its indispensable elements, to wit: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant; (2) the subject is agricultural land; (3) there is consent by the landowner; (4) the purpose is agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation; and (6) there is sharing of the harvest. The absence of one element does not make an occupant of a parcel of land, its cultivator or planter, a de jure tenant.

The certification or findings of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform (or of an authorized representative) concerning the presence or the absence of a tenancy relationship between the contending parties are merely preliminary or provisional in character; hence, such certification does not bind the judiciary.

From our own assessment of the evidence at hand, we find that petitioner failed to establish the existence of a tenancy relationship between him and respondent. To prove a tenancy relationship, the requisite quantum of evidence is substantial evidence, or such relevant evidence as a From our own assessment of the evidence at hand, we find that petitioner failed to establish the existence of a tenancy relationship between him and respondent. To prove a tenancy relationship, the requisite quantum of evidence is substantial evidence, or such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. The Certification of the BARC Chairman and the affidavits of Julian, Sr. and of the tenants of the adjacent landholdings certainly do not suffice. By themselves, they do not show that the elements of consent of the landowner and of sharing of harvests are present.

In any case, the fact alone of working on a landholding does not give rise to a presumption of the existence of agricultural tenancy. Substantial evidence requires more than a mere scintilla of evidence in order that the fact of sharing can be established; there must be concrete evidence on record adequate enough to prove the element of sharing. To prove sharing of harvests, a receipt or any other evidence must be presented, because self-serving statements are inadequate. In this case, petitioner failed to present a receipt for respondent’s share in the harvest, or any other solid evidence proving that there was a sharing of harvest.

To recap, petitioner is not a de jure tenant entitled to security of tenure. There being no tenancy relationship between the parties, the DARAB did not have jurisdiction over the case. We, therefore, sustain the ruling of the CA, dismissing petitioner’s complaint.

CELESTINO BALUS vs. SATURNINO BALUS G.R.No. 168970 January 15, 2010 Peralta, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:36:00 +0000

Facts: Herein petitioner and respondents are the children of the spouses Rufo and Sebastiana Balus. On January 3, 1979, Rufo mortgaged a parcel of land, which he owns, as a security for a loan he obtained from the Rural Bank of Maigo, Lanao del Norte. Rufo failed to pay his loan. As a result, the mortgaged property was foreclosed and was sold to the bank as the sloe bidder at a public auction held for that purpose. The property was not redeemed within the period allowed by law. More than two years after the auction, or on January 25, 1984, the sheriff executed a Definite Deed of Sale in favor of the Bank. Thereafter, a new title was issued in the name of the Bank.

On October 10, 1989, herein petitioner and respondents executed an Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate adjudicating to each of them a specific one-third portion of the subject property consisting of 10,246 square meters. The Extrajudicial Settlement also contained provisions wherein the parties admitted knowledge of the fact that their father mortgaged the subject property to the Bank and that they intended to redeem the same at the soonest possible time.

Three years after the execution of the Extrajudicial Settlement, herein respondents bought the subject property from the Bank. On October 12, 1992, a Deed of Sale of Registered Land was executed by the Bank in favor of respondents. Subsequently, a TCT was issued in the name of respondents. Meanwhile, petitioner continued possession of the subject lot.

On June 27, 1995, respondents filed a Complaint for Recovery of Possession and Damages against petitioner, contending that they had already informed petitioner of the fact that they were the new owners of the disputed property, but the petitioner still refused to surrender possession of the same to them.

The RTC held that the right of petitioner to purchase from the respondents his share in the disputed property was recognized by the provisions of the Extrajudicial Settlement of Estate, which the parties had executed before the respondents bought the subject lot from the Bank.

Aggrieved by the Decision of the RTC, herein respondents filed an appeal with the CA. The CA ruled that when petitioner and respondents did not redeem the subject property within the redemption period and allowed the consolidation of ownership and the issuance of a new title in the name of the Bank, their co-ownership was extinguished. Hence, the instant petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45.

Issue: Whether or not co-ownership by him and respondents over the subject property persisted even after the lot was purchased by the Bank and title thereto transferred to its name, and even after it was eventually bought back by the respondents from the Bank.

Held: The court is not persuaded.

At the outset, it bears to emphasize that there is no dispute with respect to the fact that the subject property was exclusively owned by petitioner and respondents' father, Rufo, at the time that it was mortgaged in 1979. This was stipulated by the parties during the hearing conducted by the trial court on October 28, 1996. Evidence shows that a Definite Deed of Sale was issued in favor of the Bank on January 25, 1984, after the period of redemption expired. There is neither any dispute that a new title was issued in the Bank's name before Rufo died on July 6, 1984. Hence, there is no question that the Bank acquired exclusive ownership of the contested lot during the lifetime of Rufo.

The rights to a person's succession are transmitted from the moment of his death. In addition, the inheritance of a person consists of the property and transmissible rights and obligations existing at the time of his death, as well as those which have accrued thereto since the opening of the succession. In the present case, since Rufo lost ownership of the subject property during his lifetime, it only follows that at the time of his death, the disputed parcel of land no longer formed part of his estate to which his heirs may lay claim. Stated differently, petitioner and respondents never inherited the subject lot from their father.

Furthermore, petitioner's contention that he and his siblings intended to continue their supposed co-ownership of the subject property contradicts the provisions of the subject Extrajudicial Settlement where they clearly manifested their intention of having the subject property divided or partitioned by assigning to each of the petitioner and respondents a specific 1/3 portion of the same. Partition calls for the segregation and conveyance of a determinate portion of the property owned in common. It seeks a severance of the individual interests of each co-owner, vesting in each of them a sole estate in a specific property and giving each one a right to enjoy his estate without supervision or interference from the other. In other words, the purpose of partition is to put an end to co-ownership, an objective which negates petitioner's claims in the present case.

SPS. JESUS AND EMER FAJARDO vs. ANITA R. FLORES G.R. No. 167891 January 15, 2010 Nachura, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:34:00 +0000

Facts: Leopoldo delos Reyes owned a parcel of land located in Barangay Sumandig in Hacienda Buenavista, San Ildefonso, Bulacan. In 1963, he allowed petitioner Jesus Fajardo to cultivate said land. The net harvests were divided equally between the two until 1975 when the relationship was converted to leasehold tenancy. From the time petitioner cultivated the land, he was allowed by Leopoldo delos Reyes to erect a house for his family on the stony part of the land, which is the subject of controversy.

On January 26, 1988, Leopoldo delos Reyes died. His daughter and sole heir, herein respondent Anita Flores, inherited the property. On June 28, 1991, Anita Flores and Jesus Fajardo executed an agreement, denominated as “KASUNDUAN NG PAGHAHATI NG LUPA AT PAGTATALAGA NG DAAN UKOL SA MAGKABILANG PANIG followed by another agreement, “KASUNDUAN SA HATIAN SA LUPA,” executed on July 10, 1991, wherein the parties agreed to deduct from Lot No. 2351 an area of 10,923 sq m, allotting the same to petitioner. Apparently, there was a conflict of claims in the interpretation of the Kasunduan between Anita Flores and Jesus Fajardo, which was referred to the DAR, Provincial Agrarian Reform Office, Baliuag, Bulacan. The case was referred to the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB), Malolos, Bulacan.

On December 22, 2000, a complaint for ejectment was filed by herein respondent Anita Flores, assisted by her husband Bienvenido Flores, against petitioners with the Municipal Trial Court (MTC), San Ildefonso, Bulacan.

Petitioners filed a Motion to Dismiss, alleging that Lot No. 2351, was agricultural land; that they had been continuously, uninterruptedly, and personally cultivating the same since 1960 up to the present; that the MTC had no jurisdiction over the case, considering that the dispute between the parties, regarding the Kasunduan, was referred to the DARAB; and that the assumption by the DARAB of jurisdiction over the controversy involving the lot in question therefore precluded the MTC from exercising jurisdiction over the case.

Resolving the Motion to Dismiss, the MTC ruled that, while at first glance, the court did not have jurisdiction over the case, considering that it was admitted that petitioner was allowed to cultivate the land, a closer look at the Kasunduan, however, revealed that what was divided was only the portion being tilled. By contrast, the subject matter of the complaint was the stony portion where petitioners’ house was erected. Thus, the court ruled that it had jurisdiction over the subject matter. On April 25, 2001, the MTC rendered judgment in favor of respondent.

On appeal, the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 16, Third Judicial Region, Malolos, Bulacan, affirmed the MTC Decision in toto upon a finding that no reversible error was committed by the court a quo in its Decision dated August 29, 2002. On motion for reconsideration, however, the RTC issued an Order on December 10, 2002, reversing its decision dated August 29, 2002. The RTC found that the issue involved appeared to be an agrarian dispute, which fell within the contemplation of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988, and thus ordered the dismissal of the case for lack of jurisdiction.

A petition for review was then filed by respondents with the CA to annul the Order of the RTC dated December 10, 2002. On October 28, 2004, the CA rendered the assailed decision, which reinstated the MTC decision. It disagreed with the findings of the RTC and ruled that the part of Lot No. 2351 where petitioners’ house stood was stony and residential in nature, one that may not be made to fall within the ambit of the operation of Philippine agrarian laws, owing to its non-agriculture character. The subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied; hence, this petition.

Issue: Whether it is MTC or the DARAB which has jurisdiction over the case.

Held: We agree with the RTC when it clearly pointed out in its Order dated December 10, 2002 that the resolution of this case hinges on the correct interpretation of the contracts executed by the parties. The issue of who has a better right of possession over the subject land cannot be determined without resolving first the matter as to whom the subject property was allotted. Thus, this is not simply a case for unlawful detainer, but one that is incapable of pecuniary estimation, definitely beyond the competence of the MTC.

An agrarian dispute refers to any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements, whether leasehold, tenancy, stewardship, or otherwise, over lands devoted to agriculture, including disputes concerning farmworkers’ associations or representation of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of such tenurial arrangements. It includes any controversy relating to compensation of lands acquired under this Act and other terms and conditions of transfer of ownership from landowner to farmworkers, tenants, and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whether the disputants stand in the proximate relation of farm operator and beneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor and lessee. It relates to any controversy relating to, inter alia, tenancy over lands devoted to agriculture.

Undeniably, the instant case involves a controversy regarding tenurial arrangements. The contention that the Kasunduans, which allegedly terminated the tenancy relationship between the parties and, therefore, removed the case from the ambit of R.A. No. 6657, is untenable. There still exists an agrarian dispute because the controversy involves the home lot of petitioners, an incident arising from the landlord-tenant relationship.

Furthermore, the records disclose that the dispute between the parties, regarding the interpretation of the Kasunduan, was, in fact, raised and referred to the DAR, which in turn referred the case to the DARAB. In view of the foregoing, we reiterate Hilario v. Prudente, that:

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction precludes the courts from resolving a controversy over which jurisdiction has initially been lodged with an administrative body of special competence. For agrarian reform cases, jurisdiction is vested in the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR); more specifically, in the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB).

SPS. CARMEN and JOSE TONGSON vs. EMERGENCY PAWNSHOP BULA, INC. G.R. No. 167874 January 15, 2010 Carpio J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 04:30:00 +0000

Facts: In may 1992, Napala offered to purchase from the spouses Tongson their 364-square meter parcel of land, situated in Davao City for P3,000,000.00. The spouses found the offer acceptable and executed with Napala a Memorandum of Agreement on May 8, 1992. Upong signing the Deed of Absolute Sale, Napala paid the spouses P200,000.00 in cash and issued a post-dated check in the amount of P2,800,000.00 representing the remaining balance of the purchase price of the subject property. When presented for payment, the PNB check was dishonored for insufficient funds. Despite the spouses Tongson’s repeated demands to either pay the full value of the check or to return the land, Napala failed to do either. The spouses filed with the RTC of Davao City a Complaint for Annulment of Contract and Damages with a Prayer for the Issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order and a Writ of Preliminary Injunction.

The trial court found that the purchase price of the subject property has not been fully paid and that Napala’s assurance to the Spouses Tongson that the PNB check would not bounce constituted fraud that induced the Spouses Tongson to enter into the sale. Without such assurance, the Spouses Tongson would not have agreed to the contract of sale. Accordingly, there was fraud within the ambit of Article 1338 of the Civil Code, justifying the annulment of the contract of sale, the award of damages and attorney’s fees, and payment of costs. Respondent appealed to the Court of Appeals.

The Court of Appeals agreed with the trial court’s finding that Napala employed fraud when he misrepresented to the Spouses Tongson that the PNB check in the amount of P2,800,000 would be properly funded at its maturity. However, the Court of Appeals found that the issuance and delivery of the PNB check and fraudulent representation made by Napala could not be considered as the determining cause for the sale of the subject parcel of land. Hence, such fraud could not be made the basis for annulling the contract of sale. Nevertheless, the fraud employed by Napala is a proper and valid basis for the entitlement of the Spouses Tongson to the balance of the purchase price in the amount of P2,800,000 plus interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum computed from the date of filing of the complaint on 11 February 1993.

The Spouses Tongson filed a partial motion for reconsideration which was denied by the Court of Appeals in its Resolution dated 10 March 2005. Hence, this petition for review before the SC.

Issue: Whether or not the contract of sale can be annulled based on the fraud employed by Napala.

Held: The petition has merit.

A contract is a meeting of the minds between two persons, whereby one is bound to give something or to render some service to the other. A valid contract requires the concurrence of the following essential elements: (1) consent or meeting of the minds, that is, consent to transfer ownership in exchange for the price; (2) determinate subject matter; and (3) price certain in money or its equivalent.

Under Article 1338 of the Civil Code, there is fraud when, through insidious words or machinations of one of the contracting parties, the other is induced to enter into a contract which, without them, he would not have agreed to. In order that fraud may vitiate consent, it must be the causal (dolo causante), not merely the incidental (dolo incidente), inducement to the making of the contract. Additionally, the fraud must be serious.

We find no causal fraud in this case to justify the annulment of the contract of sale between the parties. It is clear from the records that the Spouses Tongson agreed to sell their 364-square meter Davao property to Napala who offered to pay P3,000,000 as purchase price therefor. Contrary to the Spouses Tongson’s belief that the fraud employed by Napala was “already operational at the time of the perfection of the contract of sale,” the misrepresentation by Napala that the postdated PNB check would not bounce on its maturity hardly equates to dolo causante. Napala’s assurance that the check he issued was fully funded was not the principal inducement for the Spouses Tongson to sign the Deed of Absolute Sale. Even before Napala issued the check, the parties had already consented and agreed to the sale transaction. The Spouses Tongson were never tricked into selling their property to Napala. On the contrary, they willingly accepted Napala’s offer to purchase the property at P3,000,000. In short, there was a meeting of the minds as to the object of the sale as well as the consideration therefor.

Some of the instances where this Court found the existence of causal fraud include: (1) when the seller, who had no intention to part with her property, was “tricked into believing” that what she signed were papers pertinent to her application for the reconstitution of her burned certificate of title, not a deed of sale; (2) when the signature of the authorized corporate officer was forged; or (3) when the seller was seriously ill, and died a week after signing the deed of sale raising doubts on whether the seller could have read, or fully understood, the contents of the documents he signed or of the consequences of his act. Suffice it to state that nothing analogous to these badges of causal fraud exists in this case.

While they did not file an action for the rescission of the sales contract, the Spouses Tongson specifically prayed in their complaint for the annulment of the sales contract, for the immediate execution of a deed of reconveyance, and for the return of the subject property to them. The Spouses Tongson likewise prayed “for such other reliefs which may be deemed just and equitable in the premises.” In view of such prayer, and considering respondents’ substantial breach of their obligation under the sales contract, the rescission of the sales contract is but proper and justified. Accordingly, respondents must reconvey the subject property to the Spouses Tongson, who in turn shall refund the initial payment of P200,000 less the costs of suit.

RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE A.M. No. 06-11-5-SC

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 09:56:00 +0000

SECTION. 1. Scope.—This Rule shall apply whenever DNA evidence, as defined in Section 3 hereof, is offered, used, or proposed to be offered or used as evidence in all criminal and civil actions as well as special proceedings.

SEC. 2. Application of other Rules on Evidence.—In all matters not specifically covered by this Rule, the Rules of Court and other pertinent provisions of law on evidence shall apply.

SEC. 3. Definition of Terms.—For purposes of this Rule, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

(a) “Biological sample” means any organic material originating from a person’s body, even if found in inanimate objects, that is susceptible to DNA testing. This includes blood, saliva and other body fluids, tissues, hairs and bones;

(b) “DNA” means deoxyribonucleic acid, which is the chain of molecules found in every nucleated cell of the body. The totality of an individual’s DNA is unique for the individual, except identical twins;

(c) “DNA evidence” constitutes the totality of the DNA profiles, results and other genetic information directly generated from DNA testing of biological samples;

(d) “DNA profile” means genetic information derived from DNA testing of a biological sample obtained from a person, which biological sample is clearly identifiable as originating from that person;

(e) “DNA testing” means verified and credible scientific methods which include the extraction of DNA from biological samples, the generation of DNA profiles and the comparison of the information obtained from the DNA testing of biological samples for the purpose of determining, with reasonable certainty, whether or not the DNA obtained from two or more distinct biological samples originates from the same person (direct identification) or if the biological samples originate from related persons (kinship analysis); and

(f) “Probability of Parentage” means the numerical estimate for the likelihood of parentage of a putative parent compared with the probability of a random match of two unrelated individuals in a
given population.

SEC. 4. Application for DNA Testing Order.—The appropriate court may, at any time, either motu proprio or on application of any person who has a legal interest in the matter in litigation, order a DNA testing. Such order shall issue after due hearing and notice to the parties upon a showing of the following:

(a) A biological sample exists that is relevant to the case;

(b) The biological sample: (i) was not previously subjected to the type of DNA testing now requested; or (ii) was previously subjected to DNA testing, but the results may require confirmation for good reasons;

(c) The DNA testing uses a scientifically valid technique;

(d) The DNA testing has the scientific potential to produce new information that is relevant to the proper resolution of the case; and

(e) The existence of other factors, if any, which the court may consider as potentially affecting the accuracy or integrity of the DNA testing.

This Rule shall not preclude a DNA testing, without need of a prior court order, at the behest of any party, including law enforcement agencies, before a suit or proceeding is commenced.

SEC. 5. DNA Testing Order.—If the court finds that the requirements in Section 4 hereof have been complied with, the court shall —

(a) Order, where appropriate, that biological samples be taken from any person or crime scene evidence;

(b) Impose reasonable conditions on DNA testing designed to protect the integrity of the biological sample, the testing process and the reliability of the test results, including the condition that the DNA test results shall be simultaneously disclosed to parties involved in the case; and

(c) If the biological sample taken is of such an amount that prevents the conduct of confirmatory testing by the other or the adverse party and where additional biological samples of the same kind can no longer be obtained, issue an order requiring all parties to the case or proceedings to witness the DNA testing to be conducted.

An order granting the DNA testing shall be immediately executory and shall not be appealable. Any petition for certiorari initiated therefrom shall not, in any way, stay the implementation thereof, unless a higher court issues an injunctive order. The grant of a DNA testing application shall not be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any component of the DNA evidence that may be obtained as a result thereof.

SEC. 6. Post-conviction DNA Testing.—Post-conviction DNA testing may be available, without need of prior court order, to the prosecution or any person convicted by final and executory judgment provided that (a) a biological sample exists, (b) such sample is relevant to the case, and (c) the testing would probably result in the reversal or modification of the judgment of conviction.

SEC. 7. Assessment of probative value of DNA evidence.—In assessing the probative value of the DNA evidence presented, the court shall consider the following:

(a) The chain of custody, including how the biological samples were collected, how they were handled, and the possibility of contamination of the samples;

(b) The DNA testing methodology, including the procedure followed in analyzing the samples, the advantages and disadvantages of the procedure, and compliance with the scientifically valid standards in conducting the tests;

(c) The forensic DNA laboratory, including accreditation by any reputable standards-setting institution and the qualification of the analyst who conducted the tests. If the laboratory is not accredited, the relevant experience of the laboratory in forensic casework and credibility shall be properly established; and

(d) The reliability of the testing result, as hereinafter provided.

The provisions of the Rules of Court concerning the appreciation of evidence shall apply suppletorily.

SEC. 8. Reliability of DNA Testing Methodology.—In evaluating whether the DNA testing methodology is reliable, the court shall consider the following:

(a) The falsifiability of the principles or methods used, that is, whether the theory or technique can be and has been tested;

(b) The subjection to peer review and publication of the principles or methods;

(c) The general acceptance of the principles or methods by the relevant scientific community;

(d) The existence and maintenance of standards and controls to ensure the correctness of data generated;

(e) The existence of an appropriate reference population database; and (f) The general degree of confidence attributed to mathematical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles and the significance and limitation of statistical calculations used in comparing DNA profiles.

SEC. 9. Evaluation of DNA Testing Results.—In evaluating the results of DNA testing, the court shall consider the following:

(a) The evaluation of the weight of matching DNA evidence or the relevance of mismatching DNA evidence;

(b) The results of the DNA testing in the light of the totality of the other evidence presented in the case; and that

(c) DNA results that exclude the putative parent from paternity shall be conclusive proof of non-paternity. If the value of the Probability of Paternity is less than 99.9%, the results of the DNA testing shall be considered as corroborative evidence. If the value of the Probability of Paternity is 99.9% or higher, there shall be a disputable presumption of paternity.

SEC. 10. Post-conviction DNA Testing. Remedy if the Results Are Favorable to the Convict.— The convict or the prosecution may file a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the court of origin if the results of the post-conviction DNA testing are favorable to the convict. In case the court, after due hearing, finds the petition to be meritorious, it shall reverse or modify the judgment of conviction and order the release of the convict, unless continued detention is justified for a lawful cause.

A similar petition may be filed either in the Court of Appeals or the Supreme
Court, or with any member of said courts, which may conduct a hearing thereon or remand the petition to the court of origin and issue the appropriate orders.

SEC. 11. Confidentiality.—DNA profiles and all results or other information
obtained from DNA testing shall be confidential. Except upon order of the court, a DNA profile and all results or other information obtained from DNA testing shall only be released to any of the following, under such terms and conditions as may be set forth by the court:

(a) Person from whom the sample was taken;

(b) Lawyers representing parties in the case or action where the DNA evidence is offered and presented or sought to be offered and presented;

(c) Lawyers of private complainants in a criminal action;

(d) Duly authorized law enforcement agencies; and

(e) Other persons as determined by the court.

Whoever discloses, utilizes or publishes in any form any information concerning a DNA profile without the proper court order shall be liable for indirect contempt of the court wherein such DNA evidence was offered, presented or sought to be offered and presented.

Where the person from whom the biological sample was taken files a written verified request to the court that allowed the DNA testing for the disclosure of the DNA profile of the person and all results or other information obtained from the DNA testing, the same may be disclosed to the persons named in the written verified request.

SEC. 12. Preservation of DNA Evidence.—The trial court shall preserve the DNA evidence in its totality, including all biological samples, DNA profiles and results or other genetic information obtained from DNA testing. For this purpose, the court may order the appropriate government agency to preserve the DNA evidence as follows:

(a) In criminal cases:

i. for not less than the period of time that any person is under trial for an offense; or,
ii. in case the accused is serving sentence, until such time as the accused has served his sentence; and

(b) In all other cases, until such time as the decision in the case where the DNA evidence was introduced has become final and executory. The court may allow the physical destruction of a biological sample before the expiration of the periods set forth above, provided that:

(a) A court order to that effect has been secured; or

(b) The person from whom the DNA sample was obtained has consented in writing to the disposal of the DNA evidence.

SEC. 13. Applicability to Pending Cases.—Except as provided in Sections 6 and 10 hereof, this Rule shall apply to cases pending at the time of its effectivity.

SEC. 14. Effectivity.—This Rule shall take effect on October 15, 2007, following publication in a newspaper of general circulation.

TORRES vs. CHINA BANKING CORPORATION G.R. No. 165408, January 15, 2010 Peralta, J.:

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 04:28:00 +0000

Facts: On August 27, 1986, petitioner Jaime T. Torres, as owner of St. James School, and respondent China Banking Corporation executed a mortgage agreement over parcels of land to secure petitioner’s loan in the amount of P4,600,000.00 evidenced by a Promissory Note dated August 22, 1986, which stated that the “loan was repayable within a period of five years with interest, payable monthly in arrears at 20 percent per annum commencing on September 22, 1986 until fully paid.” Thereafter, petitioner requested the restructuring of the loan.
On November 29, 1988 and February 20, 1989, respondent sent petitioner demand letters to settle his overdue account of P4,600,000.00, exclusive of interest and penalties, rendering the obligation due and demandable; otherwise, respondent would extrajudicially foreclose the real estate mortgage.

In a letter dated February 20, 1989, respondent’s Senior Vice-President informed petitioner that his partial payments of P200,000.00 and P654,465.75 made on October 6, 1988 and October 28, 1988, respectively, were applied to the interest on the loan.
On May 25, 1989, petitioner tendered another payment in the amount of P2,000,000.00, together with a letter stating that the amount was to update payment of petitioner’s restructured account, and the excess amount to be applied to the principal balance, under Official Receipt No. 59845. Another payment was made on June 1, 1989 for P1,000,000.00 under Official Receipt No. 60084.

On June 6, 1989, respondent formally notified petitioner that since the latter refused to submit to the former the request for postponement of the auction sale of the property, scheduled on June 7, 1989, respondent would proceed with the auction sale. the following day, respondent caused the extrajudicial foreclosure and auction sale of the mortgaged properties. The Clerk od Court and the Ex Officio Sheriff of pasig sold the properties to respondent as the highest bidder. On November 3, 1989, petitioner filed an action for annulment of extrajudicial foreclosure sale against respondent for the alleged illegal foreclosure of mortgage over the parcels of land and the subsequent sale of the properties.

Respondent stated that [petitioner had no valid cause of action against it, since petitioner failed to pay his obligation in accordance with the terms of the promissory note, which rendered the entire principal of the promissory note due and demandable. Instead of paying the same, petitioner formally requested respondent to restructure the subject loan. Respondent required petitioner to pay all past due interests and quarterly installments before loan restructuring could be discussed. However, respondent accepted the check payment of P2,000,000.00, which was applied to petitioner’s loan interest up to January 14, 1988. Respondent stated that in the letter dated February 20, 1989, it formally informed petitioner that it never agreed to the restructuring of the loan for P4,600,000.00. Respondent also claimed that in its last letter dated February 28, 1989, it reiterated its position that the promissory note was due and demandable, and extrajudicial foreclosure would push through if full payment was not made within seven days. Respondent asserted that the foreclosure proceedings were conducted in accordance with the requirements of Act 3115, as amended.

On May 30, 1990, petitioner tendered payment in the amount of P2,756,487.77 as redemption price of the foreclosed property.[11] Respondent protested the tender of payment, maintaining that Section 78 of the General Banking Act applied in this case, not Section 30, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court; hence, the redemption price due as of May 30, 1990 should be P2,993,219.41, resulting in a deficient payment by petitioner in the sum of P236,731.64.

On September 29, 1993, the trial court rendered a Decision in favor of petitioner. It held that respondent acted in bad faith and deceit in foreclosing the subject properties after the offer for restructuring by petitioner, together with substantial payments made.

Respondent appealed the trial court’s decision to the Court of Appeals. The Court of Appeals found respondent’s appeal to be partly meritorious. It disagreed with the trial court’s finding that the foreclosure sale was null and void, because the trial court’s conclusion that the foreclosure was premature and attended by bad faith was not supported by the facts of the case and the law on the matter. The Court of Appeals agreed with respondent that the redemption price should be P2,993,219.41, which was petitioner’s outstanding balance as of May 30, 1990 after deducting his total payments amounting to P3,854,465.75. It also agreed with respondent that the applicable law was Section 78 of Republic Act No. 337, otherwise known as the General Banking Act, and not Rule 39 of the Rules of Court.

On April 20, 2001, petitioner, through his counsel of record, Atty. Salvador B. Britanico, filed a Motion for Reconsideration. On November 5, 2001, the Court of Appeals issued a Resolution,[21]which denied the motion for reconsideration for lack of merit. The Resolution became final and executory and an Entry of Judgment was issued on November 30, 2001.

On July 10, 2002, almost eight months after the Entry of Judgment, Atty. Bonifacio A. Alentajan entered his appearance as counsel for petitioner. However, the records of the case did not show that petitioner’s counsel of record, Atty. Britanico of the S.B. Britanico Lisaca Lisaca Apelado Law Offices, had withdrawn from the case.

On March 19, 2003, petitioner, through Atty. Bonifacio A. Alentajan, filed a Motion to Set Aside Entry of Judgment and to Resolve Appellant’s Motion for Reconsideration, alleging that the motion for reconsideration had yet to be resolved. In a Resolution dated September 10, 2004, the Court of Appeals denied the motion for lack of merit. Petitioner filed this petition.

Issues:

1. Whether or not the Motion for Reconsideration had already been resolved.

2. Whether or not the entry of judgment issued by the CA is premature, considering that petitioner’s Motion for Reconsideration has not yet been resolved despite announcement of the CA that it had already resolved said Motion.

Held: The petition lacks merit.

1. The Court of Appeals resolved petitioner’s motion for reconsideration in its Resolution dated November 5, 2001. The Resolution was properly served on petitioner’s counsel of record on November 14, 2001. Notice sent to counsel of record is binding upon the client, and the neglect or failure of counsel to inform him of an adverse judgment resulting in the loss of his right to appeal is not a ground for setting aside a judgment valid and regular on its face. Fifteen days from receipt of the Resolution dated November 5, 2001, the Decision became final and executory absent any appeal by petitioner. Hence, the Entry of Judgment issued on November 30, 2001 was in order.

2. Based on the records of the case, the Resolution dated November 5, 2001, denying petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of the Decision dated March 23, 2001, was received by petitioner’s counsel on November 14, 2001. Petitioner failed to appeal the Court of Appeals’ Decision to this Court.

The failure to file an appeal from the decision rendering it final and executory is not a denial of due process. The right to appeal is not a natural right or a part of due process; it is merely a statutory privilege, and may be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the provisions of the law.

Further, the proper remedy for allegations of mistake or inexcusable negligence of counsel, which prevented a party from taking an appeal, is a petition for relief under Rule 38 of the Rules of Court. The petition must be filed within 60 days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside, and not more than six (6) months after such judgment or final order was entered. It must be filed within the reglementary period, which is reckoned from the time the party’s counsel receives notice of the decision for notice to counsel of the decision is notice to the party.

Since the Decision of the Court of Appeals became final and executory and Entry of Judgment was issued on November 30, 2001, the Decision can no longer be reviewed by this Court.

COMPLETE LIST OF SUCCESSFUL EXAMINEES IN THE 2009 BAR EXAMS

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 02:42:00 +0000

1. ABANTE, Maria Evitha A.
2. ABAQUITA, Allan C.
3. ABARQUEZ, Leandro E.
4. ABARQUEZ, Paolo E.
5. ABDULLAH, Anzarullah Zhadradi A.
6. ABELLA, Harve B.
7. ABELLAR, Eleanor Agnes F.
8. ABENOJAR, Irene U.
9. ABIBICO, Mona Liza D.
10. ABIERA, Stephanie E.
11. ABLAÑA, Lindy Andre P.
12. ABOGANDA, Alexander D.
13. ABRASALDO, Wilson C.
14. ABRUGAR, Vanessa Q.
15. ABUEDO, May Flor C.
16. ABUTAN, Leah C.
17. ACAS, Althea Barbara E.
18. ACOSTA-QUIROS, Annemarie
19. ADAOAG, Janice M.
20. ADASA, William Chino T.
21. ADDUG, Fredelyne H.
22. ADEVA, III, Daniel A.
23. AGATON, Jonathan R.
24. AGNES, JR., Jerry P.
25. AGRAVIADOR, Karisma Ivee L.
26. AGUHAYON-ESCOLAR, Ghenee Rose C.
27. AGUIHAP, Beverly D.
28. AGUILA, Mildred R.
29. AGUINALDO-BALUYA, Ranelle R.
30. AGUIRRE, Leandro Angelo Y.
31. AHAJA, Yasmin Ayesha K.
32. ALABAN, Daniel B.
33. ALAGAR-BERNARDO, Rowena E.
34. ALAGCAN, Angeli A.
35. ALARILLA, Jeffrey John S.
36. ALARILLA, Maria Angela I.
37. ALASKA , Hazel Mae A.
38. ALAZAS, Adrianne Marie C.
39. ALAZAS, Beatriz Irina Denise C.
40. ALBAN, Beethoven M.
41. ALBANO , Wyndel P.
42. ALBERTO, Ruby Ann Theresa L.
43. ALBORES, Melanie F.
44. ALCERA, Aimee Marie B.
45. ALDAY, Arlene D.
46. ALEGARBES, Augustus M.
47. ALEGRE, Adrian B.
48. ALEJANDRO, Eduardo Jerome T.
49. ALEJO, Judith Ann C.
50. ALESNA, Sheena A.
51. ALESON, Melanie F.
52. ALFECHE, Claribelle Jane A.
53. ALIBANG-SALUD, Jocelyn M.
54. ALICUMAN, Abelardo C.
55. ALINDATO, Diane Angela O.
56. ALIVIO, Kenneth O.
57. ALMAJOSE, Maricar C.
58. ALMERO, Leo Rey F.
59. ALMERO, Marie Beth S.
60. ALMOITE, Wilma M.
61. ALO, Jennifer Karen L.
62. ALPASAN, Roumelia B.
63. ALQUIROZ, Jason B.
64. ALQUISADA, Pamela Joy L.
65. ALURA, Maricris O.
66. ALVAREZ, Jeanette S.
67. ALVAREZ, Riza Gloria V.
68. ALVARICO, James Roulyn R.
69. ALZATE, Kimberley Joy T.
70. AMANO, Rachel O.
71. AMARGA, Lizanilla J.
72. AMARILLA, Romela T.
73. AME, Valentino Alvin C.
74. AMORANTO, Sarah Jane SJ.
75. AMORES, Luvim D.
76. ANCIADO, Pilar C.
77. ANCIANO, Frederick I.
78. ANDAL, Maria Bernadeth S.
79. ANDALIS, JR., Roberto C.
80. ANDAMAN, Margaret Raizza A.
81. ANDAMO, John Paul A.
82. ANDOLANA, Christ May V.
83. ANDRES, Paraluman D.
84. ANG, Anna Margarita G.
85. ANGELES, Francisco B.
86. ANGWAY, Cohleen Dianne SJ.
87. ANORE, Marlon DL.
88. ANSELMO, Duchess Veneru J.
89. ANTONIO-LADISLAO, Bianca Cecilia B.
90. APALING, Allen D.
91. APOLINAR, Anna Luisa P.
92. APOLINARIO, Floreida A.
93. APOLONIO, Joseph O.
94. AQUINO, Benedict Benigno A.
95. AQUINO, Mary Joy S.
96. AQUINO, III, Leopoldo D.
97. AQUINO, JR., Rodrigo F.
98. ARANDIA, Erwin F.
99. ARANETA, Henry O.
100. ARAOS, Tessa Mae L.
101. ARBOLADURA, Magelio S.
102. ARCEGA, Garnet Eneli Mae M.
103. ARDIENTE, Rochelle S.
104. ARDINA, Elmarie C.
105. ARENAS, Jose Lemuel S.
106. ARIAS, Alma Alyn O.
107. ARICAYOS, Crisale B.
108. ARIOLA, Reynaldo A.
109. ARLES , Maria Estelita B.
110. ARMECIN, Jhomel M.
111. ARNESTO, Tristan G.
112. AROMAS, Camille Khristine I.
113. ARPON, Renold C.
114. ARTIFICIO, Aileen R.
115. ASADON, Baltazar C.
116. ASTAÑO, Imelda L.
117. ASUNCION , Hirou Glenn A.
118. ATANACIO-FACUN, Mary Ann S.
119. ATIENZA, Shermaine M.
120. ATIENZA, JR., Edgardo P.
121. AUMAN, Evangeline C.
122. AUSTRIA , Mary Evangeline J.
123. AVENGOZA, Ma. Rhoda J.
124. AVILA , Mae Lizbeth I.
125. AVILA , Mark Gregory R.
126. AWKIT-BAN-EG, Alice L.
127. AYONG, Juris Iris M.
128. AYSON, Aldin C.
129. AYUYANG, Helga Anne Treasure L.
130. AZUCENA, Michael David B.
131. AZUR, Marita Lourdes S.
132. AÑOVER, Josephine Ann W.
133. BABALCON, Julius P.
134. BABIA, Jose Marcos A.
135. BACANI, Philip Jorge P.
136. BADDIRI, Jurmobin T.
137. BADILLA, Reynaldo R.
138. BAGASIN, Gladys Sarah R.
139. BAGRO, III, Herminio C.
140. BAGSAO-MANALANG, Liza Lorena C.
141. BAINTO, Naealla Rose M.
142. BALAGOT, Anthony Quin A.
143. BALAIS, Jason P.
144. BALANGKIG, Glynmar C.
145. BALBASTRE, Kristoffer Gil P.
146. BALBASTRE, III, Juanito H.
147. BALDERAMA, Gilberth D.
148. BALDOMAR, Ceezaye A.
149. BALDRIAS-SERRANO, Lorybeth R.
150. BALISACAN, Ryan Hartzell C.
151. BALIÑA, Elsa T.
152. BALLESTEROS, Danilo C.
153. BALSICAS, Noel D.
154. BALTAZAR, Ben Joshua A.
155. BANA, Aldous Januarius S.
156. BANDAY, Christine Joy B.
157. BANDERADO, Theodore P.
158. BANDILLA, Enrico G.
159. BANDONG, Therese Lynn R.
160. BANGUIS, Joseph L.
161. BANQUERIGO, Mark Christoffel L.
162. BAQUIAL, Cheryl L.
163. BAQUIANO, Randolph P.
164. BAQUIRAN, Giovani Gio G.
165. BARBA, Ria Karla A.
166. BARENG, Christian P.
167. BARENG, Jezer G.
168. BARIMBAO, Maria Rainelda L.
169. BARIT-CARIG, Ayn Marie Grace G.
170. BARLIS, Lanie Lee Marie A.
171. BARODI, Norhabib Bin Suod S.
172. BAROLA, Sherwin Gardner A.
173. BARROA, III, Guillermo B.
174. BARRON, E. Patrice Jamaine T.
175. BARTOLOME, Ryan Philipp L.
176. BARZAGA, Kristian G.
177. BASAR, Jamaloden A.
178. BATALA, Ngiyan P.
179. BATAN, Timothy John R.
180. BATHAN, Joseph Patrick Byron M.
181. BATHAN, Marygrace DC .
182. BATINGANA, Nicole R.
183. BATINGANA, Nikko R.
184. BATONAN, Elizabeth O.
185. BAUTISTA, Antonette L.
186. BAUTISTA, Deodar Lovell C.
187. BAUTISTA, Gino Marco P.
188. BAUTISTA, Jennifer L.
189. BAUTISTA, Ma. Carmencita P.
190. BAUTISTA, Roderick L.
191. BAUTISTA-ALDAVE, Maria Minerva T.
192. BAUZON, Edward R.
193. BAYHON, Margret D.
194. BAYOT, Armi Beatriz E.
195. BAÑAL, Gilemi L.
196. BAÑARES, Marcus Aurellius M.
197. BELENO, Efren B.
198. BELGICA, Jeremiah B.
199. BENIPAYO, Lourdes P.
200. BERANGO, Joan Abigail B.
201. BERNARDO, Arly Christine S.
202. BERNARDO, JR., Lester F.
203. BEROL, Ronald S.
204. BERONQUE, Al L.
205. BETITO, James Anthony D.
206. BILGERA, Ma. Corazon B.
207. BILLONES, Cherrie Lou H.
208. BINALDO, Julie M.
209. BINUYA, Mary Dian Grace N.
210. BLANCO, Janess A.
211. BOGACON, Melissa W.
212. BOGNEDON, Jado Rafael A.
213. BOLAÑO, Richie John D.
214. BOLAÑOS, Ma. Julie C.
215. BOLISAY, Bernard James S.
216. BONIFACIO, Gherwin S.
217. BORNAS, Renier Joy Nonito B.
218. BORRES, Mark D.
219. BORROMEO, Carlo C.
220. BORROMEO, Maria Lilia Gemmilyn M.
221. BORROMEO, II, Noel T.
222. BORROMEO-SY, Ruth G.
223. BOSI, Christine Joy D.
224. BOY, Allen Blair B.
225. BRAVO, Hanna Lee E.
226. BRIASA, Gerardo S.
227. BRILLANTE, JR., Bayani B.
228. BRION, Valery Joy A.
229. BRUAL, Johannes Angelo L.
230. BUENAFE, Roy L.
231. BUENVIAJE, Rickson M.
232. BUMAGAT-NACPIL, Journalyn S.
233. BURGOS , Aileen Grace H.
234. BUSLIG, Jenny Vi B.
235. BUTED, Kristine Angeline R.
236. CAABAY, Herminia E.
237. CABADING, III, Mauro Anthony B.
238. CABALONGA, Ella A.
239. CABANSAG, Jasmin S.
240. CABAYAN, Maria Theresa P.
241. CABEZA, April D.
242. CABIGAS, Chato A.
243. CABRAL, Fernan H.
244. CABRERA, Nathaniel G.
245. CABRIDO, Jorge Christian A.
246. CADIO, Joan O.
247. CAFE, Dominador
248. CAGAS, Den Ryan R.
249. CAGUIOA, Arvin M.
250. CAJARA, Marian L.
251. CAJARDO, Monique E.
252. CAJIPO, Karen C.
253. CALABIO, Garri T.
254. CALACAL, Roda K.
255. CALAOA, Elizabeth B.
256. CALDERON, Arnel T.
257. CALEJESAN, Roldan G.
258. CALLEJO, Marc Karlo N.
259. CAMAZO, Lawrence S.
260. CAMBA, John Rainier T.
261. CAMPILAN, Kristine Esther F.
262. CAMPOS , Maria Paz Geraldine J.
263. CAMTUGAN, II, Francis Rae G.
264. CANAPI-OTGALON, Marites A.
265. CANIOS, Charisma Eden N.
266. CANLAS, Jerome D.
267. CANO, Maricel D.
268. CANTO-HERNANDEZ, Rosalyn C.
269. CANTUBA-SINGSON, Daria B.
270. CAPISTRANO, Armand P.
271. CARBO, Ramon Q.
272. CARDENAS, Marites G.
273. CARDENAS-EJERCITO, Aileen Mary S.
274. CARIÑO, Materno Marcos Ma. G.
275. CARO, Danna Wylene R.
276. CARPIO, May Flor C.
277. CARRANZA, Kamille Joyce E.
278. CARRASCO, Angeline Marie T.
279. CARRASCO-AZUCENA, Maria Bernadette R.
280. CARREON, Cresilda B.
281. CARTUJANO, Mariblithe A.
282. CASES, Katharina C.
283. CASIPIT, Jekereen Joy R.
284. CASTELLANO, Janice P.
285. CASTILLO, Chrisgene A.
286. CASTILLO, Dyann O.
287. CASTILLO-ABENALES, Aivy Lou P.
288. CASTILLO-CANDIDO, Hope Jan D.
289. CASTRO, Easter Princess U.
290. CASTRO, Meliecar R.
291. CATAHAN, Emmanuel D.
292. CATALAN, Kelly Eusebio P.
293. CATAMEO, Marizon C.
294. CATAPAT, Maria Nenita D.
295. CAYLAO, Christian Ferdinand R.
296. CAYOD-ONG, Ma. Angelica M.
297. CAÑARES, Marlon T.
298. CAÑAS, Vicente B.
299. CAÑERO, Marvin P.
300. CAÑETE, Maria Floren S.
301. CAÑETE, Vincent Ryan Y.
302. CEBUJANO, Ceasar Augustos E.
303. CENIZA, Deonhar M.
304. CEPILLO, Kenelyn DG.
305. CERVANTES, Maria Patricia R.
306. CHAM, Edward C.
307. CHAN, Rochelle T.
308. CHARCOS, Katheri Ann L.
309. CHAVEZ, Stephanie R.
310. CHING, Diane Madelyn C.
311. CHING, Wilbert H.
312. CHIONG, Chiole L.
313. CHU , Allan Christopher S.
314. CHUA, Joana Olivia L.
315. CHUA, Jose L.
316. CHUA, Robinita P.
317. CHUA, Sheryl Lyn T.
318. CIPRIANO, Ma. Dominique Christine S.
319. CLAR, Edgar Bonette B.
320. CLAVERIA, Kathleen Karinina R.
321. CLEDERA, Tristan Jiff B.
322. CLORIBEL, Michael P.
323. CLOSA, Felippe Mart E.
324. CO, Jillian Marie B.
325. CO, Maria Theresa C.
326. COLAGO, John Paul G.
327. COLIAMCO, Cherry C.
328. COLLADO, Jo Ellaine L.
329. COMPE, JR., Graciano C.
330. CONCEPCION, Haidee M.
331. CONCEPCION, Mark Nette E.
332. CONCEPCION, Rowena L.
333. CONDAT, Ariel B.
334. CONEJOS, Antonio Esteban G.
335. CONSTANTINO, Aiza B.
336. CONSTANTINO, Arturo Jose M.
337. CONSUL, Jurist Castrence R.
338. CORDERO, Antonette B.
339. CORDERO, JR., Jose I.
340. CORPUZ, Marichelle G.
341. CORRO, Arlyn T.
342. CORSIGA, Joachim Florencio Q.
343. CORTEZ, Elmo R.
344. CORTON, Gabriel P.
345. CREAG, Mary Joyce Roselle P.
346. CREER, Eleanor M.
347. CRISTALES, Inban Q.
348. CRUCIO, Gina A.
349. CRUZ, Mary Grace G.
350. CRUZ, Richard Leonard A.
351. CRUZ, JR., Jessie A.
352. CU, Lourdes Clarissa Donnatilla K.
353. CUANSING, Edward Joseph C.
354. CUARTERO, Floritz G.
355. CUEVAS, Dolly Angeli M.
356. CUEVAS, Faith A.
357. CULIMA, Riza Ann Donalyn B.
358. CUNANAN, Earvene Jared S.
359. CUNANAN, Myron C.
360. CUNTAPAY, Ana Florence S.
361. DACAWI, Joseph-hans B.
362. DACPANO, Jeannette M.
363. DADIS, Joel P.
364. DALANGIN, Aysac V.
365. DALAWAMPU, Louie Mark M.
366. DALIGCON, Mumar T.
367. DAMASCO, Elmer P.
368. DANAO, JR., Camilo N.
369. DANGLI, Florimae L.
370. DAPULA, Katrina C.
371. DARBIN, Billy Joe Ivan D.
372. DARE, Katrina S.
373. DAUS, Christopher B.
374. DAVIDE, JR., Jorge S.
375. DAY, Tzadhi C.
376. DAYANGHIRANG, Rochelle A.
377. DAYAO, Vincent M.
378. DAYO, Jesus Frederick D.
379. DE CASTRO, Maureen B.
380. DE GRACIA, Elinor E.
381. DE GUIA, Eugenie Celie A.
382. DE GUZMAN, Cara Martha R.
383. DE GUZMAN, Jacquelyn L.
384. DE GUZMAN, Jason B.
385. DE GUZMAN-ALINAO, Kristina D.
386. DE JESUS, Allelu N.
387. DE JESUS, Darren M.
388. DE JESUS, Jennyvive L.
389. DE KEYSER, Evee Eunice P.
390. DE LEON , Cindy A.
391. DE LOS REYES, Maricor V.
392. DE VERA, Coney Rose M.
393. DE VERA, IV, Felipe Geoffrey K.
394. DE VILLA, Lezel E.
395. DECANO, Ronald John B.
396. DEGUIÑO, Aileen M.
397. DEKIRE, Samrollah M.
398. DEL ROSARIO, Katrina Elsa D.
399. DEL CASTILLO, Xavier Paolo R.
400. DEL PILAR, Jovill C.
401. DEL PUERTO, Laurence Edgardo A.
402. DEL ROSARIO, Maria Katrina G.
403. DEL ROSARIO, Rafael Celestino D.
404. DELA CALZADA, Jo Feliz Marie M.
405. DELA CRUZ, Lenielyn S.
406. DELA CRUZ, Roderick C.
407. DELA CRUZ, Walter Magnum D.
408. DELA FUENTE, Kim Ceasar P.
409. DELA PEÑA, Eleanor P.
410. DELA PEÑA, Nikki Rose L.
411. DELA ROSA, Arnel A.
412. DELANTAR, Eleanor S.
413. DELAS ALAS, Noel A.
414. DELEGIRO, Janet L.
415. DELES, Karla Grace J.
416. DELEÑA, Ryan B.
417. DELFIN, Diana Jane F.
418. DELFIN, Gerri Ann C.
419. DELOS SANTOS , Benito Jose L.
420. DEMAFELIS, Jo Anne S.
421. DEMANO, Mary Pauline R.
422. DENILLA, Resly Ann M.
423. DEPASUCAT, Hope Marey B.
424. DESINGAÑO, Ritchelle M.
425. DETICIO, Farid Eshwer C.
426. DEVELOS, V, Esperidion Augustus O.
427. DIAZ, Ana Charissa D.
428. DIAZ, Daniel L.
429. DIAZ, Ferdinand Arthur B.
430. DIAZ, Ma. Hiyasmin N.
431. DIAZ, Romano M.
432. DIAZ, JR., Honorio T.
433. DICHAVES, Kenny Roy S.
434. DICKPUS, Charisma Anne O.
435. DIESTRO-DESLATE, Gwendolyn
436. DIETA, Don G.
437. DILLA, Marlon A.
438. DIMARUCUT, Ivy C.
439. DIOKNO, Michael William T.
440. DIWA, Wilhelmina M.
441. DIZON, Betheena C.
442. DIZON, Jeifan-ira C.
443. DIZON, Mark Anthony P.
444. DIZON, Peter Michael G.
445. DOBLADA, Marife C.
446. DOBLE, Francis R.
447. DOFELIZ, Auxillador Avitus D.
448. DOGELIO, Jairus Anthony D.
449. DOLIGON, Daniel C.
450. DOMINGO, Katrina Frances M.
451. DOMOGAN, Janice Marie N.
452. DOOLANI, Sunita G.
453. DOQUILLA, Rubylin G.
454. DRILON, Catherine Marie D.
455. DUEÑAS, Odyssa A.
456. DUJUNCO, Raquel R.
457. DUKA, Annabelle B.
458. DULIG, Amethyst L.
459. DUMALIANG, Jana A.
460. DUMPIT, Donna Diana R.
461. DY, Samantha Paula G.
462. EBARLE, Emanuelle A.
463. ECLAR, Catherine M.
464. EDULAN, Charles Ceasar L.
465. ELBANBUENA, Kahlil Paolo O.
466. ELTANAL, Karen Mae G.
467. EMBIDO-BUENAVENTURA, Crystal Dei L.
468. ENAGE, Kim Boysie A.
469. ENCANTO, Melissa R.
470. ENCARNACION, Vincent Joseph T.
471. ENCINARES, Marife E.
472. ENERIA, Celeste E.
473. ENRILE, Christy Irene D.
474. ENRIQUEZ, Marizza P.
475. ENRIQUEZ, III, Juan Jose P.
476. ENTREDICHO, Delima S.
477. ESCALA, Lyndon D.
478. ESCALANTE, JR., Felix M.
479. ESCALANTE, JR., Vic T.
480. ESCANDER, Abdel Jalil A.
481. ESCIO, Madonna Gay L.
482. ESCOLANO, JR., Benjamin V.
483. ESCOLAR, Ahmad Clay C.
484. ESCUBIO, Jessica Guia E.
485. ESPALDON, Ruel H.
486. ESPARRAGO, Janice C.
487. ESPEJO, Bernadette B.
488. ESPEJO, Edwin M.
489. ESPEJON, Charisse B.
490. ESPERANTE, Jason C.
491. ESPINAS, Jeshiree D.
492. ESPINO, Franco P.
493. ESPINOSA, Kristine M.
494. ESPUELAS, Haide T.
495. ESTAÑO, Liza Jane B.
496. ESTEBAN, Sheena E.
497. ESTORNINOS, Jamil V.
498. ESTUR, Mark Julius C.
499. EUSTAQUIO, Karldon M.
500. EVANGELISTA, Anna Tricia P.
501. EVANGELISTA, Ma. Rebecca G.
502. EVANGELISTA, Roberto P.
503. FAJARDO, Juan Paolo F.
504. FALCON, Lyndon D.
505. FAMOR, Pacholo S.
506. FARAON, Redeemer B.
507. FAUNI, Peter Joseph L.
508. FELIX, Melchor M.
509. FERNANDEZ, Clint M.
510. FERNANDEZ, Dick F.
511. FERRER, Anthony G.
512. FETILO, Aires R.
513. FILARMEO, Charmaine Joy P.
514. FLORES, Divina M.
515. FLORES, Erickson A.
516. FLORES, Judith T.
517. FONTANILLA, Psyche Rizsavi B.
518. FORNOLLES, Angelo Vegie A.
519. FORTICH, Farrah N.
520. FRANCISCO, Valerie E.
521. FRIAS, Ma. Karla Denise M.
522. FUENTES-DUMLAO, Camille Rose D.
523. FUNTILA, Karla A.
524. GABATO, Vien Lawrence S.
525. GABINETE, John Warren P.
526. GABRILLO, Jenifer M.
527. GABUYA, Ademar A.
528. GAFFUD, Jovilyn M.
529. GALANG, Arman Jason M.
530. GALANG, Marianette A.
531. GALARRITA, Kathryn A.
532. GALIMA, III, Epifanio Delbert G.
533. GALLARDO, Jeffrey G.
534. GALURA, Maria Ofelia B.
535. GALVEZ, Grace A.
536. GAMALO, Castor A.
537. GAMAS, Godwin B.
538. GAMBOA, Jufran A.
539. GAMBOA, Mark Anthony M.
540. GAN, Hansen P.
541. GANAN, Mark Anthony N.
542. GANDAMRA, Khanini B.
543. GANDIONCO, Barbara Anne A.
544. GANZON, Leo Theodore A.
545. GARCE-MEJIA, Racquel F.
546. GARCELLANO, Anita B.
547. GARCIA, Andrea Lou J.
548. GARCIA, Charlie S.
549. GARCIA, Irvin L.
550. GARCIA, Leamor B.
551. GARCIA, Ronaldo M.
552. GARCIA, JR., Alberto C.
553. GARCIA, JR., Jose Melandro H.
554. GARCIANO, Suzette L.
555. GARIANDO, Cesar C.
556. GARRAEZ, Albert C.
557. GARRIDO, Maica C.
558. GATCHALIAN, Oliver R.
559. GATMAITAN, Rowena B.
560. GAUDIEL, IV, Bibiano Marc P.
561. GAVIOLA, Bryan O.
562. GAVIOLA, Maria Christina E.
563. GAVIOLA, Mark Anthony P.
564. GAYAGAY-APALING, Catherine B.
565. GEALAN, Noel Francis L.
566. GELLADO-CARREON, Maricon M.
567. GENCIANOS, Eden Rachel M.
568. GENERAL, Jose Martin O.
569. GENERAL, Maria Francina Louise O.
570. GENERAL, Marianne C.
571. GENOVA, Carmi Rose M.
572. GENOVESA, Katherine A.
573. GENTUGAYA, Norman Vincent O.
574. GEPOLONGCA, Josecor S.
575. GERONIMO, Krystine B.
576. GERONIMO, Maria Ilyn C.
577. GERONIMO, Michelle N.
578. GEROY, Mylen C.
579. GERSAVA, Socrates T.
580. GESMUNDO, Joseph Benedict G.
581. GEÑOSO, Al An E.
582. GIGANTONE, Alexander G.
583. GIGAWIN, Ma. Kristina R.
584. GINGO, Rowena G.
585. GITGANO, Lylani A.
586. GLORIA, Laila May A.
587. GO, Sheila Abigail O.
588. GOCHANGCO, Jose Marie V.
589. GODORNES, Janice A.
590. GOMEZ, Gian Franco R.
591. GOMEZ, Ma. Krizna S.
592. GONZALES, Antonio G.
593. GONZALES, Jesus Nathaniel Martin B.
594. GONZALES, Nichole D.
595. GONZALES, Ricel M.
596. GONZALES, Ulysses L.
597. GONZALES, III, Emilio R.
598. GONZALES-DIEGO, Maria Victoria M.
599. GONZALEZ, Yves-randolph P.
600. GOZE, Gilbert C.
601. GREGORIO, Carlo O.
602. GUALBERTO, Rhett Matthew S.
603. GUANZON, Kathlyn Joy M.
604. GUAZON, Rhea A.
605. GUELOS, Orchid Marie D.
606. GUERRA, Marvin Jasper B.
607. GUIAM, Joseph E.
608. GUIANG, Sandra Therese Christine C.
609. GUINOCOR, Rysan C.
610. GUIRAO, Nerissa G.
611. GUMALING, JR., Robert N.
612. GUTIERREZ, Alvin A.
613. GUTIERREZ, Chiara Feliz C.
614. GUTIERREZ, Melina Rose E.
615. GUTIERREZ, Rowena M.
616. GUZMAN, Carl Stephen A.
617. GUZMAN, Cristina Amelia R.
618. HAIRUN-NATIVIDAD, Jhihann C.
619. HALILI, Madonna F.
620. HAMOY, Jim A.
621. HERMOSO, Rosa Christina R.
622. HERMOSURA, Glenda V.
623. HERNAEZ, III, Rosendo Emilio R.
624. HERNANDEZ, Juan Carlo B.
625. HERNANDEZ, Katrina P.
626. HERNANDEZ, Mary Catherine T.
627. HERNANDEZ, Michael Gerard S.
628. HERNANDO, Harold Kim C.
629. HERRERA, Pamela Joy T.
630. HILADO, Jessica Kristine F.
631. HILARIO, Alen Fredd L.
632. HIPOL, Aurora Catalina M.
633. HIRANG, Gemelee G.
634. HOLLERO, Valerie Anne H.
635. HONTUCAN-QUIJANO, Vanessa A.
636. HUMARANG, Michael John M.
637. IBAOC, Cherry P.
638. IBAÑEZ, III, Manuel Joseph B.
639. IGNACIO, Erik Donn
640. IGNACIO, Vanessa Grace M.
641. ILAGAN, Ma. Criselda D.
642. ILAHAN, Benjan B.
643. ILANO, Helen Grace O.
644. IMPERIAL, Jonas Luis P.
645. INES, Benedict Vincent L.
646. INFANTE, Philippe Lauren M.
647. INGUITO, Lora Mae T.
648. INVENTOR, Angelo T.
649. IPAC, Jay-R C.
650. IRASGA, Matthew N.
651. IRORITA, Jay M.
652. JACOBA, Anthony Raphael V.
653. JAGMIS, Richander G.
654. JALA, Gena B.
655. JALAD, Andrew S.
656. JAMBALOS, Johanna V.
657. JANIYA, Shalom P.
658. JARDELEZA, Maria Carmen L.
659. JARENCIO, Cherylle E.
660. JAVELLANA, Gerardo B.
661. JAVIER, Maureen Seymour D.
662. JAVIER, IV, Eugene C.
663. JAVIER-JIMENEZ, Cristina Marie Eugenie R.
664. JAVINAR, Donato B.
665. JIMENEZ, Arianne Vanessa Josephine T.
666. JIMENEZ, Jasmine M.
667. JIMENEZ, Thea Marie B.
668. JIMENO, Nikki Sarah V.
669. JORDAN, Roma Joy R.
670. JORNADA, Ryan Rene C.
671. JORVINA, Karmela H.
672. JOSON, Joanna Marie O.
673. JOVEN, Suzette C.
674. JUBAN, Rowell G.
675. JULIAN, Cherry Amor A.
676. JUNIO, Irene May I.
677. KABATAY, Rodrigo Jose A.
678. KANAPI, Erwin Bryan S.
679. KAPUNAN, Armina Dielle R.
680. KATALBAS, Jubert P.
681. KO, Kevin L.
682. LABADAN, Leah Theresa L.
683. LABANEN, Argyle Karen M.
684. LABAO, Daisy Jane L.
685. LABITAD, Tarcisio Z.
686. LABRO, JR., Edwin Valente Z.
687. LACANILAO, Redgeanald S.
688. LACUATA, Daniel Christian B.
689. LACUESTA, Andrea Patricia R.
690. LAGMAY, Nikko G.
691. LAGOS , Caroline P.
692. LAGUESMA, Gabriel Russel B.
693. LAGUINDAM, Arvin E.
694. LAINEZ, Marco Gregorio L.
695. LAITA, Rainier F.
696. LAMANILAO, Stephen A.
697. LAMAYAN, Gretchen D.
698. LAMBINO, Marie Claire Therese C.
699. LAMEYRA, Ericson D.
700. LAMINATO, Claryl-anne D.
701. LAPUZ, Anson T.
702. LAPUZ, Jesusa R.
703. LARON, Richard E.
704. LASAM, Ma. Katrina A.
705. LASSITER, Bryan A.
706. LASTIMOSO, Arthur J.
707. LATAWAN, Wade A.
708. LATO, Lesley Norreen G.
709. LAVA, Ma. Glaiza L.
710. LAYSON, Reinier B.
711. LAYUG, Marilet S.
712. LAZA, Rely D.
713. LAZARO, Paul Ernest M.
714. LEE, Everlene O.
715. LEE, Judith Z.
716. LEGASPI, Melvin I.
717. LEQUIGAN-PIOL, Milagros C.
718. LERIOS, Edmar D.
719. LEYNES, Jerome Christopher G.
720. LIANZA, Mellicent C.
721. LIBERATO, Allen A.
722. LIBUTAQUE, Jenny G.
723. LICAROS, Anna Theresa L.
724. LIGUTAN, Amando Virgil D.
725. LIM, Aldean Philip A.
726. LIM, Bernadette C.
727. LIM, Charmian D.
728. LIM, Dianne A.
729. LIM, Elnathan C.
730. LIM, Janette T.
731. LIM, John Paul T.
732. LIM, May Abigail T.
733. LIM, Shelly T.
734. LIMBONHAI, Katrina Anne T.
735. LIMPOT, Marcelina C.
736. LIN, Chin C.
737. LINDONGAN, Arnel A.
738. LIONG, Frederick G.
739. LIPORADA, Isagani S.
740. LIQUETE, John Henry C.
741. LIRA, Jimmy Lyn F.
742. LIZANO, Jennifer M.
743. LIZASO, Marina Elenita S.
744. LLAMEDO, Lecel R.
745. LLASOS, Ma. Paz A.
746. LLAVE, Jose Fernando G.
747. LLEDO, Precious Angela L.
748. LLESOL, Kristine Jolly S.
749. LLOSA, Ruben M.
750. LOBO, Allan C.
751. LOBO, Alvin C.
752. LOGRONIO, Nelson U.
753. LOMBOY, Alex Norman B.
754. LONTOK, Benito M.
755. LOPEZ, Jess Raymund M.
756. LOPEZ, Nastasja Karina J.
757. LOPEZ, Precious Czar A.
758. LOPEZ, Sarah Jane D.
759. LOPEZ, Welson M.
760. LORENZO, Rochelle V.
761. LORENZO, III, Andres D.
762. LOZANO, JR., Ernesto S.
763. LOZARE, Allan C.
764. LUBRIO, Maria Cristina L.
765. LUCERO, Arlene O.
766. LUCILA, Marguerite Therese L.
767. LUGO , Marylois C.
768. LUMAGUE, Ma. Cecille D.
769. LUMAUIG, Timothy Joseph N.
770. LUMAWAG, Joan O.
771. LUNA, Hans Roger S.
772. LUNA, Reymund F.
773. LUNDANG, Lynneth T.
774. LUPOS-GERALE, Lyn N.
775. LUZUNG, Fred C.
776. MABANSAG, Ulidia B.
777. MABUTE, Neddejohn L.
778. MACABATA, Michael S.
779. MACAGAAN, Sittie Aleah C.
780. MACALABO-ABDUL, T'hasmin P.
781. MACALINTAL, Ma. Jinel G.
782. MACAM, JR., Cezar A.
783. MACAPAS-GAGARACRUZ, Leah Meih S.
784. MACAPAYAG, Neliza N.
785. MACAPILI, Judelyn T.
786. MACASAET, Bhong Paulo A.
787. MACASAET, Julius Caesar Junior I.
788. MACLANG, Cisco Franz S.
789. MADARCOS, Rachelle G.
790. MADERAZO, Gail Stephanie C.
791. MADRID , Dianne Ricci DC.
792. MAGALLOSA, Jan Rey E.
793. MAGAT, Edward S.
794. MAGCAMIT, Eric Jay A.
795. MAGLANQUE, JR., Abelardo P.
796. MAGLASANG, Chevrolie E.
797. MAGLUNOG, Tiffany Kim R.
798. MAGMANLAC, Joysha D.
799. MAGSANO, Rexie May E.
800. MAGUGAT, Jenny Vi H.
801. MAGUIGAD, Vanessa Q.
802. MAILOM, Mariel A.
803. MAIQUEZ, Kristine Anne L.
804. MALABANAN, Melvin C.
805. MALALUAN, Joseph S.
806. MALANG , Kristine Margret M.
807. MALAPITAN, Elmar H.
808. MALINAO, Rose A.
809. MALLETE, Elbert R.
810. MALLILLIN, Bryan Joseph L.
811. MALLILLIN, Maria Rea A.
812. MALVEDA, Patrick John V.
813. MANAHAN, Elson B.
814. MANAHAN, Geline Joy C.
815. MANALANG, Jerry L.
816. MANALO, Eric N.
817. MANANES, Edward Martin M.
818. MANCOL, Creschic C.
819. MANDAP, Charity P.
820. MANGAMPO, Mark Philip C.
821. MANGUERA, Aris S.
822. MANGUERA, Erwin C.
823. MANINGAS, Peter Kate C.
824. MANLANGIT, Constantino U.
825. MANLAPAZ, Benedicto G.
826. MANLAPAZ, Raian Joy G.
827. MANTICAJON, Ian Vincent C.
828. MANZANO, Catherina N.
829. MAPULA, Paolo Marco R.
830. MAQUIRAYA, Mark Albert Gregory B.
831. MARAJAS, Camille Suzanne R.
832. MARALIT, Maricon Z.
833. MARASIGAN, Michael Jobert M.
834. MARASIGAN, Nicholas S.
835. MARAÑON, III, Emilio L.
836. MARIANO, Charlen Masha A.
837. MARIANO, Karmina A.
838. MARISTAZA, Ryan F.
839. MARISTAZA, JR., Romulo T.
840. MAROHOMSALIC, Aliya L.
841. MARQUEZ, Carlo B.
842. MARQUEZ, Jemil Christian B.
843. MARTIN, Marilou C.
844. MARTINEZ , Joseph L.
845. MARTINEZ , Ken Emery B.
846. MARTIZANO, Giuseppe G.
847. MARZAN, Kareen Silver P.
848. MAS, JR., Emmanuel N.
849. MATIAS, Michael Drake P.
850. MATIB, Erwin G.
851. MATOZA, Jason T.
852. MATULOY, Rhandell Alvin B.
853. MAUHAY, Gisela Cecilia A.
854. MAUNTING, Aisa (Bruneiry) G.
855. MAZO, Rosalie T.
856. MEDEL, Edward B.
857. MEDEZ, Rosanne Chriselle S.
858. MEDRANO, Ryan P.
859. MEER, Francis James E.
860. MELCHOR, Jennifer M.
861. MENCHAVEZ, Estrella G.
862. MENCHAVEZ, Llewelyn P.
863. MENDIGUARIN, Donna D.
864. MENDIOLA, Dana Paula B.
865. MENDOZA, Bernadette C.
866. MENDOZA, Felix Glenn C.
867. MENDOZA, Josephine Marie B.
868. MENDOZA, Julie Aylene DV.
869. MENDOZA, Marco T.
870. MENDOZA, Rizaldy L.
871. MENDOZA-MACROHON, Iris May T.
872. MERACAP, Charlemaigne L.
873. MERCADO, Aissa C.
874. MERCADO, Ronald Crisanto P.
875. MERIN, Iris Victoria U.
876. MESA , Reina L.
877. MESINA, Bridget Rose M.
878. MESINA, Rita Marie L.
879. MIGRIÑO, Joseph R.
880. MIGUEL, Filamer D.
881. MIJARES, Cecil Joy T.
882. MIMBALAWAG, Ibrahim M.
883. MINA, Marita Anna C.
884. MIRANDA, Francis E.
885. MIRANDA, Hazel May P.
886. MIRANDA, Maricel C.
887. MIRASOL, Rommel Jan T.
888. MOCNANGAN, Tom P.
889. MODESTO , Katherine Joy R.
890. MOHAMETANO, Gift S.
891. MOLDEZ, Maria Cecilia A.
892. MOLINA, Chenellyn S.
893. MOLINA, Mat J.
894. MOLINA, Rosana M.
895. MOLO, Junalit G.
896. MONCERA, Ana Marie N.
897. MONDEZ, Thomas Elliot A.
898. MONFERO, Deane Ruth S.
899. MONJE, Johannes S.
900. MONSOD, Eunice Zuleika N.
901. MONTEALTO, Beverly V.
902. MONTECILLO, Conchita D.
903. MONTEFALCON, Donna April G.
904. MONTEMAYOR, Patrick G.
905. MONTENEGRO , Nabi Karl Bayani O.
906. MONTERO, Froilan A.
907. MONTERO, II, Jose Voltaire B.
908. MONTESA, Cyrus Richard A.
909. MONTEZA, Evangeline C.
910. MONTIBON, Gemmini N.
911. MONTILLA, Aris R.
912. MORAL, Leah Marie A.
913. MORALDE, Ginalyn O.
914. MORALES, Maria Liberty D.
915. MORALES, Maria Teresa G.
916. MORALES, Rhea Joy M.
917. MORANDARTE, Ian E.
918. MOREÑO, J. Ricardo H.
919. MOSCARE, Daisy Lily O.
920. MOSQUERA, Joanne Lenny M.
921. MUAÑA, Cara S.
922. MUTIA, Rowena F.
923. MUÑIZ, Sheila DM.
924. MUÑOZ, Jo Ann Marie A.
925. NADUMA, Mat Kieven T.
926. NAMUAG, Maria Roana O.
927. NARIDO, Eleuterio C.
928. NATIVIDAD, Cynthia C.
929. NATIVIDAD, Peter Paul T.
930. NAVAL, Bodie Edward D.
931. NAVAL, Vanessa O.
932. NAVALLO, Michael Jobert I.
933. NAVARRO, Analissa V.
934. NAVARRO, F.J. Edmund Jensen S.
935. NAVARRO, Herbert C.
936. NAVERA, Angeline Z.
937. NEDIC, Riya Adelaida C.
938. NER, Alexander D.
939. NICANOR, Morgan R.
940. NICOLAS, Jeneline N.
941. NICOLAS, Jona Liza F.
942. NIERE, Sheila Simonet G.
943. NIERVA, Carmela B.
944. NOCOS, Gent Paul A.
945. NOLASCO, May Rachel S.
946. NUEVE, Thea Gicela C.
947. NUGUIT, Mark Anthony M.
948. NUÑEZ, Rene John V.
949. OANDASAN, Nelia O.
950. OASAY, Jenny F.
951. OBILES, Jayson
952. OBLIGACION, Romelyn A.
953. OBON, Maureen Rose T.
954. OBSUM, Shaun Hassen C.
955. OCAMPO, Analita E.
956. OCAMPO, Angelique Michelle Irene L.
957. OCAMPO, Kenneth Z.
958. OCAMPO, Lovereal Joy M.
959. OCAMPO, Ma. Sarah Kay N.
960. ODERO, Rhoda N.
961. OFENDA, Giovanni C.
962. OGOY-BERNARDO, Sherryl B.
963. OJEDA, Susana Grace L.
964. OLAN, Rodolfo M.
965. OLANO, Alisa Trena R.
966. OLERIANA, Caress L.
967. OLITOQUIT, Leila C.
968. ONA, Maricar L.
969. ONCOG-ALBANO, Rosa Theresa A.
970. ONG, Edward T.
971. ONG, Vic Ruskin M.
972. ONTALAN, Frances Mae Cherrie K.
973. OQUINDO-GONZAGA, Maria Karina B.
974. ORDONEZ, Lady May F.
975. ORILLA, Donna Marie G.
976. OROLA-ABAYGAR, Elnora J.
977. ORPIADA, Mary Jane N.
978. ORTEGA, Sarah T.
979. PAALA, Eumaida C.
980. PABALAN, Mary Grace A.
981. PABELLANO, Joycee M.
982. PABLEO, Ann Marie Teresa B.
983. PACHECO, Peter John Raymund B.
984. PACLEB, Kathleen Carisa C.
985. PADILLA, Agnes L.
986. PADILLA, Dexter V.
987. PADILLA, Patrick A.
988. PADILLA, Rafael Angelo M.
989. PADILLA, II, Victor Luis Q.
990. PADKIW, Appasan K.
991. PADULLO, JR., Macario C.
992. PAGAYANAN, Claire Eufracia P.
993. PAGUE, Kristine Jane B.
994. PAGUNSAN, Pampross J.
995. PALACAO-CONDAT, Cheryl M.
996. PALAD, Dennis M.
997. PALIC, Anabelle S.
998. PALLARCA, Cecilia S.
999. PALOMA, Eileen C.
1000. PAMINTUAN, III, Alberto D.
1001. PANDOY, May R.
1002. PANES, Shirley S.
1003. PANGANIBAN, Jasmin P.
1004. PAPA, Ma. Leonila P.
1005. PARAS, Joyce D.
1006. PARCIA, Mark Anthony M.
1007. PARDUCHO, Nestle Lyn M.
1008. PAREDES, Annabel M.
1009. PAREDES, Mark Allen M.
1010. PARGAS, May Chrysaliz E.
1011. PARROCHA, Rodan G.
1012. PASAGUI, Ryan Rey L.
1013. PASAMONTE, Jan Philip O.
1014. PASANA-TURGANO, Princesita C.
1015. PASCO , Lyle Filomeo C.
1016. PASCO , Maria Rosario B.
1017. PASCUA, Elmer G.
1018. PASCUA, Sherwin P.
1019. PASCUAL, Kalvin Henson C.
1020. PASCUAL, Rafael Allan P.
1021. PASCUAL, Rosemary T.
1022. PASTOR, Mark Steven C.
1023. PASTOR-CORPUZ, Gizelle R.
1024. PASTORFIDE, Grace C.
1025. PATALITA-ARCOLAS, Nelsie V.
1026. PATANGAN, Al-may Sair F.
1027. PATDU, Ivy D.
1028. PATRIARCA, Judith P.
1029. PAUDAC, Hasminah D.
1030. PAULINO-GOGOLIN, Edna C.
1031. PAZ, Ma. Patricia B.
1032. PE LIM, Alfred John C.
1033. PEDROSA, Arnel M.
1034. PELAEZ, Joseph Paul B.
1035. PELAYO-ALUTAYA, Marlou
1036. PELEA, Emmanuel E.
1037. PENADOS, Faith C.
1038. PENSOY, Randolf C.
1039. PEPITO, Charisse Faith T.
1040. PEPITO, Isar O.
1041. PERALTA, Xandrix J.
1042. PERANDOS, Mitos Shiela J.
1043. PERDIGUERRA-MUÑOZ, Divina Lea A.
1044. PEROLA, Melissa Grace T.
1045. PETEROS, Rosarie A.
1046. PEYRA, JR., Monico L.
1047. PEÑA-MALLANAO, Ana May Concepcion C.
1048. PEÑAFLOR, Maria Christina P.
1049. PICAR, Rianne M.
1050. PICO-ELUMBA, April Joan B.
1051. PIJO, JR., Reynaldo M.
1052. PINATARA, Nadjer D.
1053. PITAHIN, Ferdinand Emmanuel C.
1054. PITPIT, Froilan B.
1055. PIZARRO, January C.
1056. PIZARRO, IV, Zacarias L.
1057. PLATA, Kristine C.
1058. PLOTEÑA, Vivian T.
1059. PONCE, Rebecca Carla M.
1060. PONIO, IV, Amelia S.
1061. POSIO, Jake Patrick P.
1062. POZON, Ira Paulo A.
1063. PRADAS, Liza D.
1064. PRESTOZA, Anthony G.
1065. PUA, Maricris Connie B.
1066. PUACHE, Melojean M.
1067. PUERTO, Ofelia R.
1068. PULICAY, Rey B.
1069. PUNAY, Arceli C.
1070. PUNO, Vincent I.
1071. PUNSALAN, Enjl D.
1072. PURGANAN, Anthony J.
1073. PUSPUS, Archie B.
1074. PUZON, Dominique Jose S.
1075. PUZON, Jocelyn V.
1076. QUEROL, Marah Victoria S.
1077. QUEVENCO, Jesus Ramon M.
1078. QUIJANO, Mia Antonette M.
1079. QUILAQUIGA, Sharina C.
1080. QUIMPO, Nancy Aurora D.
1081. QUINIO, Patrick Joseph M.
1082. QUINTANILLA, Czarina G.
1083. QUINTON, Larry M.
1084. QUIOC, Marina Luz P.
1085. QUIOGUE, Marie Antonette B.
1086. QUIPSE, Isabel Milagros L.
1087. QUIRANTE, Aileen L.
1088. QUIÑONES, Charlie A.
1089. RABANAL, Diana F.
1090. RACOMA, Monica Rose B.
1091. RAFOLS, Jeanny Mae H.
1092. RAGOJOS, Michael A.
1093. RAMIREZ-CAÑETE, Margaux Angeli R.
1094. RAMIRO, Tanya Faye O.
1095. RAMOS, Frances Lynn C.
1096. RAMOS, Kristian Lorenz B.
1097. RAMOS, Lanie B.
1098. RAMOS-TEJADA, Elsiemarie B.
1099. RANCES, Katherine May N.
1100. RAPATAN, Neil Jerome A.
1101. RAVANERA, Ilya Kristine R.
1102. RAYOS DEL SOL, Juan Fermin D.
1103. REANTASO, Maria Celeste A.
1104. REBADOMIA, Venice Cyrus M.
1105. REBUGIO, Dani Jay G.
1106. RECTO, Rolando R.
1107. REDOBLADO, Bea Carla C.
1108. REDOBLE, Luisito D.
1109. REGALA-PAVIA, Alma Renee C.
1110. REGALADO, John Christian Joy A.
1111. RELAMPAGOS, Janris Jay G.
1112. REMIGIO, Frederick Jay E.
1113. REQUIÑO, II, Claudio G.
1114. RESARI, Steve G.
1115. REVAMONTE, Vanessa G.
1116. REY, Mark Ryan B.
1117. REYES, Cherrie Lynne May P.
1118. REYES, Irene Mischele B.
1119. REYES, Jennylyn V.
1120. REYES, John Philip L.
1121. REYES, Julius Christian L.
1122. REYES, Leslie Ann A.
1123. REYES, Mariflor V.
1124. REYES, Mark Anthony P.
1125. REYES, Mary Kristine C.
1126. REYES, Mary Ann H.
1127. REYES, Remus Romano A.
1128. REYES, JR., Arsenio C.
1129. REYNOSO, Jay Paolo A.
1130. RICABLANCA-PARGAS, Sonia Philipa M.
1131. RIMANDO, Rhiza Lee D.
1132. RISMA, Ace Victor F.
1133. RIVAS, Amy S.
1134. RIVERA, Lordaliza R.
1135. RIZON, Maria Theresa V.
1136. ROBINO, Leif John L.
1137. ROBLES, Margarita Angela B.
1138. ROBREDILLO, Jose Ruther P.
1139. ROCAMORA, Timothy John G.
1140. RODAS, Carlo D.
1141. RODENAS, Jason G.
1142. RODRIGUEZ, Jay Y.
1143. ROJAS, Aileez C.
1144. ROJO, Alejandro N.
1145. ROLDAN, Maria Theresa A.
1146. ROMERO, Anna Leah T.
1147. ROMERO, Ginalin Joy C.
1148. ROMERO, Maria Paula G.
1149. ROMERO, Ryan V.
1150. RONDARIO, Christina Eden M.
1151. RONULO, Jonathan B.
1152. ROQUE, Patricia Marie Regina V.
1153. ROSACIA, Diane Christie A.
1154. ROSALES, Rose Anne P.
1155. ROSOS, Mya Analene D.
1156. ROXAS, JR., Almario H.
1157. RUBINOS, Danielle-anne O.
1158. RUBIO, Ophelia Pilar E.
1159. RUEDAS, Ronald P.
1160. RUFO, Ivy G.
1161. RUFON, III, Jose Athanasius S.
1162. RUIZ, Kathleen Joy M.
1163. RUSELL, Rosemarie A.
1164. SABADO, Kathryn S.
1165. SABINO, Sheila May S.
1166. SAC, Abbiegail D.
1167. SACAY-HWANG, Emmeline A.
1168. SACLOLO, Sharon N.
1169. SACRAMENTO , Allan M.
1170. SAGADAL, Darius L.
1171. SAGCAL, Michael Arthur C.
1172. SAID, Johaira B.
1173. SALADA, Mary Ann T.
1174. SALAMAT, Aimee Abigail E.
1175. SALANGA, Yolanda A.
1176. SALAVER-VILLALINO, Audrey A.
1177. SALCEDO, R Epicurus Charlo S.
1178. SALCEDO, Vera Shayne G.
1179. SALES, Rodante A.
1180. SALIGUMBA, Dyan Kristine R.
1181. SALLIDAO, Debie K.
1182. SALONGA, Rowena Fatima M.
1183. SALUD, Jose Victorniño L.
1184. SALVA, JR., Nelson C.
1185. SALVADOR , Christopher Sam S.
1186. SALVADOR , Jana Rebekah A.
1187. SALVADORA-ASPERIN, Melamy A.
1188. SALVE, Maria Edbiesa B.
1189. SAMPER, Yvette H.
1190. SAN DIEGO , Larina DG.
1191. SAN DIEGO-QUIJANO, Celine Muriel C.
1192. SAN JUAN , Leika P.
1193. SAN MIGUEL, Melisa L.
1194. SAN PEDRO, Fraulein B.
1195. SAN PEDRO, Kristin C.
1196. SANA , Elias Omar A.
1197. SANCHEZ, Angelo Albert T.
1198. SANCHEZ, Jennifer DL.
1199. SANCHEZ, Maruli Ali G.
1200. SANCHEZ, Olive B.
1201. SANCHEZ, Reinhard C.
1202. SANCHEZ, Richard P.
1203. SANCHEZ, JR., Jacinto C.
1204. SANCHEZ-LLORITO, Livian May
1205. SANDALO, Winlove Apple R.
1206. SANDOVAL, Edouard Y.
1207. SANGALANG, Ela A.
1208. SANIDAD, Dick R.
1209. SANIDAD, JR., Pablito F.
1210. SANTIAGO , Evangeline A.
1211. SANTIAGO , Glendale R.
1212. SANTIAGO , Marco P.
1213. SANTIAGO , Ronacyn P.
1214. SANTIAGO , JR., Eugenio M.
1215. SANTO, Carissa E.
1216. SANTOS , Ayesa Theresa S.
1217. SANTOS , Darwin B.
1218. SANTOS , Deborah B.
1219. SANTOS , Lea D.
1220. SANTOS , Nikki Neil R.
1221. SANTOS , Ryan V.
1222. SANTOS , Sheila A.
1223. SANTOS , Verna Kate B.
1224. SANTOS-MONTEBON, Arlyn S.
1225. SAPALO, Ignacio A.
1226. SAQUING, Claudette Michelle T.
1227. SARMIENTO, Frances Jeanne L.
1228. SAROMINES, Jonathan L.
1229. SARONA, Jazzie M.
1230. SARZA, Maneeka A.
1231. SAURA, III, Ramon A.
1232. SAYAS, Gerard M.
1233. SAYAT, Jenny H.
1234. SAYSON, Frances Lynette V.
1235. SEARES, Raphael Joseph B.
1236. SEDILLA, Jasmin P.
1237. SEGUERRA, Candy P.
1238. SENCIO, Suzanne Margaret T.
1239. SEREDRICA, Rodolfo M.
1240. SERGIO, Oliver Jhones R.
1241. SERILO, Rowena L.
1242. SERRANO, Jennifer J.
1243. SEVILLA, Hanniyah P.
1244. SEÑA, Raymund B.
1245. SIAO, Ronaldo Horacio B.
1246. SILONGAN, Sahara Alia J.
1247. SILVA, Hector C.
1248. SIMUNDAC, Maria Concepcion P.
1249. SINGSON, Wellah R.
1250. SINSON, Katherine G.
1251. SIOSANA, Minerva V.
1252. SISTOZA, Cristian Paulinne H.
1253. SO, Jim Roy D.
1254. SOBREVEGA, Mary Jean Q.
1255. SOLIDEO, Shin Kenneth A.
1256. SOLIMAN, Maria Aurora M.
1257. SOLIS, Rochelle Marie R.
1258. SOLIVEN, Victor Ariel G.
1259. SOLON, JR., Edgardo C.
1260. SOMERA, Aimie D.
1261. SOMERA, Quennie Agnes C.
1262. SONGCO, Christine Dianne V.
1263. SORIANO, Al L.
1264. SORIANO, Octavius G.
1265. SORIANO-AFALLA, Brenda Lyn S.
1266. SOTO, Katherine L.
1267. STA. ANA, Florences G.
1268. STA. ANA, Freznel B.
1269. STA. MARIA, Cicero L.
1270. STA. MARIA, Eunice M.
1271. STA. TERESA, Maria Luz S.
1272. SUAREZ, Marvin C.
1273. SUGANOB, Lynie C.
1274. SULIT, Jam Tristan L.
1275. SULTAN, Abdinsa S.
1276. SUMAGIT, Michael B.
1277. SUMAYOD, Jhoana Marie P.
1278. SUMILE, Barry C.
1279. SURALTA, Maria Doris B.
1280. SUSA , Jose B.
1281. SY, Catherine C.
1282. SY, Khristopher M.
1283. SY, Rachelle T.
1284. SY, Sherwin S.
1285. TABANAY, Ryan D.
1286. TABANDA, Roy Patrick C.
1287. TABERNERO-BUNAG, Vanessa P.
1288. TABIOS, Anna Leah A.
1289. TABIQUE, Katrina C.
1290. TABUNDA, Rod Patrick A.
1291. TACLA, Russell E.
1292. TADEO, Alexie Jane C.
1293. TADEO, Yasmine Lee R.
1294. TADINA-PASIA, Melody F.
1295. TAGALOGUIN, Fritz Z.
1296. TAHIR, Sharina I.
1297. TAJAN, Joy Stephanie C.
1298. TALLUNGAN, Brigida Jeanne T.
1299. TALUCAD, Tatiana Dolores F.
1300. TAMALA, Kenneth O.
1301. TAMAYO, Catherine E.
1302. TAMAYO, Ma. Yvette M.
1303. TAMONDONG, Juan Carlos S.
1304. TAN, Annie U.
1305. TAN, Art Lynson A.
1306. TAN, Eric David C.
1307. TAN, Joyce Melcar T.
1308. TAN, Maria Cristina A.
1309. TAN, Mhedora B.
1310. TAN, Stephanie Michelle C.
1311. TAN, JR., David P.
1312. TANKIANG, III, Eduardo Martin A.
1313. TANQUIENG, Paula Mae B.
1314. TAPALES, Patrick Joseph S.
1315. TAPIC, Charlene Mae C.
1316. TAPIRE, Helen Paulette D.
1317. TAQUED, Gamaliel S.
1318. TAVANLAR, Tomi L.
1319. TAÑGAN, Margret Faye G.
1320. TAÑOLA, Mc Ferlin P.
1321. TE, Meiji Hanna Z.
1322. TEH, Roselle P.
1323. TEMPLORA, Imerson L.
1324. TENAJA, Darwin A.
1325. TENTATIVA, June G.
1326. TERRADO, Marlon C.
1327. TIBAYAN, Irish Kirbee V.
1328. TIOJANCO, Bryan Dennis G.
1329. TIU, Jiecel S.
1330. TO, Joan Mae S.
1331. TOBES, Giselle Jill D.
1332. TOLEDO , Maria Joy O.
1333. TOLENTINO, Lovely V.
1334. TOLOSA, Gretchel L.
1335. TOMAS, Rudolfh M.
1336. TOMBO, Peter Paul M.
1337. TONGCUA, Paulette V.
1338. TORIO, John Ryan P.
1339. TORMON, Alvin A.
1340. TORREMOCHA, Edric P.
1341. TORRES, Ivy Grace O.
1342. TORRES, Maria Melissa G.
1343. TORREVILLAS, Juan Alfonso P.
1344. TRABAJO, III, Aureliano Marcus C.
1345. TRINIDAD , Carlos Vincent C.
1346. TRINIDAD , Chloe Hope B.
1347. TRIVIÑO, Diana Cecilia E.
1348. TRUMPO, Magno T.
1349. TUADLES, Leticia R.
1350. TUAZON, Cecilia M.
1351. TUBILLEJA, Liza T.
1352. TUGADO, Judie Rose P.
1353. TUMALIUAN, Gliricidia C.
1354. TURANO, Earlene Lirio R.
1355. TURANO II, Earl Ligorio R.
1356. TURINGAN, Norman Paul A.
1357. UEDA, Eric O.
1358. UMALI, Ma. Flerida Ruth B.
1359. UNCIANO, Rodel C.
1360. UNTALAN, Maria Rhodora P.
1361. UNTAYAO, Dictador V.
1362. URBANO, Mary Grace M.
1363. URBIZTONDO, Maria Cassandra M.
1364. USON, Anthony B.
1365. UY, Diana Grace L.
1366. UY, Karl Jordan D.
1367. UY, Kenneth T.
1368. UY, Lancaster L.
1369. UY, Michael Dionisio
1370. UY, Rachelle E.
1371. UY, Vismarck S.
1372. VALDEAVILLA, Maria Ermina V.
1373. VALDEZ , Joey N.
1374. VALDEZ , V, Francesco Manuel P.
1375. VALENCIA , Daisy Jane H.
1376. VALENZUELA, Ida Kristina Z.
1377. VALERA , Karla Regina D.
1378. VALERIO, Cristiellane T.
1379. VALEZA, Carlo T.
1380. VALLEJO, Maria Johanna N.
1381. VALMORES, Christopher Rey P.
1382. VARGAS, Michael George Andrew R.
1383. VASQUEZ, Ian Albert M.
1384. VECINA, Leilani P.
1385. VELASCO, Adrian Jay-R A.
1386. VELASCO, Diana A.
1387. VELASCO, Resurrection Florimae C.
1388. VELASCO-LAO, Francesca Marie R.
1389. VELMONTE, Rovelson R.
1390. VELUZ, Trixie Hazel C.
1391. VEN, Arlene A.
1392. VENTURA , Charleen L.
1393. VENTURA , III, Manuel Angelo B.
1394. VERALLO, Ivan B.
1395. VERANO, Toni Joy C.
1396. VERDIDA, Pete Uliver O.
1397. VERGA, Ma. Venarisse V.
1398. VERGARA, Doris R.
1399. VICTORIANO, Joni-Ross
1400. VILLACASTIN, Dandel Rose P.
1401. VILLAHERMOSA , Michelle Ann T.
1402. VILLALON, Rivah J.
1403. VILLANUEVA, Arjay Karlo F.
1404. VILLANUEVA, Elvin B.
1405. VILLANUEVA, James E.
1406. VILLANUEVA, Marc A.
1407. VILLANUEVA, Rafael Archie E.
1408. VILLANUEVA, Tessa Marie S.
1409. VILLAPANDO, Dorothy Grace R.
1410. VILLAR, Wilhenry M.
1411. VILLARAMA, Carlo D.
1412. VILLARIAS, Carlyn L.
1413. VILLAROMAN-FIEL, Madel P.
1414. VILLAROYA, Errol L.
1415. VILLARTA, III, Romeo P.
1416. VILLARUEL, Ma. Carmela S.
1417. VILLASENDA, Emee M.
1418. VILLASTER, Michael Hanz D.
1419. VISTA , Maria Viola B.
1420. VITERBO, Llonil R.
1421. VIVAS, Darlene R.
1422. WAHAB, Johaira C.
1423. WAKAN, Edd Mark O.
1424. WARREN, Luis Anthony K.
1425. WEE, Sonia Bea L.
1426. WONG, Jerlyn M.
1427. YAMBAO, Reslyn M.
1428. YAN, Benjamin C.
1429. YANEZA, Yvette T.
1430. YANTO, Sofia C.
1431. YAP, Anna Marie D.
1432. YAP, Francis Sol S.
1433. YAP , German Lyndon O.
1434. YAP , Yellen B.
1435. YBAÑEZ, Serena Mae S.
1436. YEBRA, Reinier Paul R.
1437. YEUNG, Kurt Glen T.
1438. YLAGAN, Immaculada Concepcion C.
1439. YU, Ma. Karina P.
1440. YU, Margarita F.
1441. YU, JR., Cesar B.
1442. YULDE, Princessita M.
1443. YUMANG, Jose Edmar J.
1444. ZABALA, Reuben U.
1445. ZAFRANCO, Fernan Reagan P.
1446. ZAMBRANO, Jude Francis V.
1447. ZAMORA , Bettina N.
1448. ZANTUA, Maria Felicia T.
1449. ZARAGOZA , Ma. Edelyn A.
1450. ZERRUDO, John Paul C.
1451. ZULUETA, Amber June M.

Congratulations to the new lawyers! It is the time for you to get acquainted once again with the Lawyer's Oath for your oath taking in PICC.

SAMUEL U. LEE vs. KBC BANK, N.V.

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 03:05:00 +0000

SAMUEL U. LEE vs. KBC BANK, N.V.
G.R. No. 164673, January 15, 2010

Carpio, J.:

Facts: idas Diversified Export Corporation (MDEC) obtained a $1,400,000 loan from KBC Bank N.V. (KBC Bank), a Belgian corporation licensed to do business in the Philippines. Samuel U. Lee (Lee), assistant treasurer and director of MDEC, executed a promissory note in favor of KBC Bank and a deed of assignment transferring all of MDEC’s rights over Confirmed Purchase Order No. MTC-548 issued by Otto Versand, a company based in Germany, and covered a shipment of girl’s basic denim jeans amounting to $1,863,050 to KBC Bank. MDEC obtained another loan, amounting to $65,000, from KBC Bank. Maybelle L. Lim (Lim), treasurer and assistant secretary of MDEC, executed a promissory note in favor of KBC Bank and a deed of assignment transferring all of MDEC’s rights over Confirmed Purchase Order No. WC-128 issued by Otto Versand, and covered a shipment of boy’s bermuda jeans amounting to $841,500 to KBC Bank.
MDEC was considered in default in paying the $65,000 loan on 30 January 1998. KBC Bank sent a letter to Otto Versand verifying the validity of Confirmed Purchase Order Nos. MTC-548 and WC-128. Otto Versand sent a facsimile message to KBC Bank stating that (1) it did not issue the purchase orders, (2) it did not order or receive the items covered by the purchase orders, and (3) it would not pay MDEC any amount.

In a complaint-affidavit, Liza M. Pajarillo, manager of the corporate division of KBC Bank, charged Lee and Lim of estafa. In his Resolution, State Prosecutor Josefino A. Subia (State Prosecutor Subia) found the existence of probable cause and recommended that two counts of estafa be filed against Lee and Lim. Accordingly, two informations for estafa against Lee and Lim were filed with the RTC. After finding probable cause, Judge Winlove M. Dumayas (Judge Dumayas) of the RTC issued warrants of arrest against Lee and Lim. Lee and Lim filed a petition for review with the Department of Justice. In his Resolution, Secretary Hernando B. Perez (Secretary Perez) directed the withdrawal of the informations filed against Lee and Lim. Secretary Perez held that the facsimile message constituted hearsay evidence. KBC Bank filed a motion for reconsideration with the Department of Justice. In a motion filed with the RTC, Assistant City Prosecutor Nora C. Sibucao (Assistant City Prosecutor Sibucao) prayed for the withdrawal of the informations filed against Lee and Lim. Judge Dumayas granted Assistant City Prosecutor Sibucao’s motion to withdraw the informations against Lee and Lim. KBC Bank filed with the Court a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. In a Resolution, the Court referred the petition to the Court of Appeals pursuant to Section 6, Rule 56 of the Rules of Court. In his Resolution Secretary Simeon A. Datumanong denied KBC Bank’s 2 August 2002 motion for reconsideration. In its 10 February 2004 Decision, the Court of Appeals set aside Judge Dumayas’ 26 March 2003 Order holding that the Court thereby acquires jurisdiction over the case, which is the authority to hear and determine the case. Hence, this present petition.

Issue: Whether or not the trial court did not abdicate its duty to determine the sufficiency of the prosecution’s reason for withdrawing the informations.

Held: Court is not impressed. Whether the facsimile message is admissible in evidence and whether the element of deceit in the crime of estafa is present are matters best ventilated in a full-blown trial, not in the preliminary investigation.

Once a case is filed with the court, any disposition of it rests on the sound discretion of the court. The trial court is not bound to adopt the resolution of the Secretary of Justice, since it is mandated to independently evaluate or assess the merits of the case. Reliance on the resolution of the Secretary of Justice alone would be an abdication of its duty and jurisdiction to determine a prima facie case. The trial court may make an independent assessment of the merits of the case based on the affidavits and counter-affidavits, documents, or evidence appended to the Information; the records of the public prosecutor, which the court may order the latter to produce before the court; or any evidence already adduced before the court by the accused at the time the motion is filed by the public prosecutor.

Judge Dumayas’ failure to make his own evaluation of the merits of the case violates KBC Bank’s right to due process and constitutes grave abuse of discretion. Judge Dumayas’ order granting the Motion to Withdraw the informations is void.

AGDEPPA vs. HEIRS OF IGNACIO BONETE

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:56:00 +0000

AGDEPPA vs. HEIRS OF IGNACIO BONETE
G.R. No. 164436, January 15, 2010

Nachura, J.:

Facts: In 1979, respondent Dorotea Bonete, widow of the late Igancio Bonete, obtained a loan in the amount of P55,000.00 from Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP)in order to buy farm implements. The loan was secured by a parcel of agricultural land. In 1982, Dorotea received a notice of collection from DBP. Respondents alleged that herein petitioner and counsel, Atty. Littie Sarah A. Agdeppa (Littie Sarah) accompanied Dorotea to DBP and obligated herself to pay the loan. Thereafter, Dorotea was made to sign a document as Little Sarah’s security for the amount which the latter paid to DBP in connection with the said loan. Since 1982, Littie Sarah and her representatives had been gradually easing them out of the subject property and that they were ordered to stop the cultivation of their respective ricefields. Eventually, respondents were forcibly ejected from the subject property.

On this account, respondents inquired from the Register of Deeds and found that the title to the subject property, which was in the name of respondents’ predecessor-in-interest, the late Ignacio Bonete, had already been canceled and transferred to Littie Sarah under TCT No. T-75454 by virtue of a purported deed of sale. According to Dorotea, Littie Sarah took advantage of her by letting her sign a contract, ostensibly as security for the loan from DBP, which later turned out to be a deed of sale. Thus, respondents filed a Complaint for Recovery of Ownership and Possession and/or Annulment of Deed of Sale of the Subject Property before the RTC. Littie Sarah filed a Motion to Dismiss. Respondents filed an Opposition to the Motion to Dismiss. On May 21, 1990, the RTC issued an order dismissing the complaint and held that respondents were not real parties in interest and lacked the personality to sue. Respondents went to the CA which reversed and set aside the RTC Order, and remanded the case to the RTC for further proceedings because Dorotea, being the former owner of the subject property, was a real party in interest. Petitioners filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was denied. Hence, this petition for review on certiorari.

Issue: Whether or not the respondents are real party in interest.

Held: While it is true that respondents committed a procedural infraction before the RTC, such infraction does not justify the dismissal of the case. Misjoinder of parties does not warrant the dismissal of the action.

It bears stressing that TCT No. T-56923, covering the subject property, was issued in the name of Dorotea. This is established by the record, and petitioners themselves admit this fact. However, because TCT No. T-75454, allegedly issued in favor of Littie Sarah, and the purported deed of sale, allegedly executed by Dorotea in favor of Littie Sarah, are not on record. Considering the allegations in the pleadings, it is best that a trial on the merits be conducted.

A liberal construction of the Rules is apt in situations involving excusable formal errors in a pleading, as long as the same do not subvert the essence of the proceeding, and they connote at least a reasonable attempt at compliance with the Rules. The Court is not precluded from rectifying errors of judgment, if blind and stubborn adherence to procedure would result in the sacrifice of substantial justice for technicality. To deprive respondents, particularly Dorotea, of their claims over the subject property on the strength of sheer technicality would be a travesty of justice and equity.

SPS. PATRICIO and MYRNA BERNALES vs. HEIRS OF JULIAN SAMBAAN

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:49:00 +0000

SPOUSES PATRICIO and MYRNA BERNALES vs. HEIRS OF JULIAN SAMBAAN
G.R.No. 163271, January 15, 2010

Del Castillo, J.:

Facts: Spouses Julian and Guillerma Sambaan were the registered owner of a property located in Bulua, Cagayan de oro City. The respondents and the petitioner Myrna Bernales are the children of Julian and Guillerma. Myrna, who is the eldest of the siblings, is the present owner and possessor of the property in question.

Julian died in an ambush in 1975. Before he died, he requested that the property in question be redeemed from Myrna and her husband Patricio Bernales. Thus, in 1982 one of Julian’s siblings offered to redeem the property but the petitioners refused because they were allegedly using the property as tethering place for their cattle.

In January 1991, respondents received an information that the subject property was already transferred to Myrna Bernales. The Deed of Absolute Sale dated December 7, 1970 bore the forged signatures of their parents, Julian and Guillerma.

On April 1993, the respondents, together with their mother Guillerma, filed a complaint for Annulment of Deed of Absolute Sale and cancellation of TCT No. T-14204 alleging that their parent’s signatures were forged. The trial court rendered a decision on August 2, 2001 cancelling the TCT and ordering another title to be issued in the name of the late Julian Sambaan.

Petitioners went to the CA and appealed the decision. The CA affirmed the decision of the lower court. A motion for reconsideration of the decision was, likewise, denied in 2004. Hence, this petition for certiorari.

Issue: Whether or not the Deed of Absolute Sale is authentic as to prove the ownership of the petitioners over the subject property.

Held: It is a question of fact rather than of law. Well-settled is the rule that the Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. Factual findings of the lower courts are entitled to great weight and respect on appeal, and in fact accorded finality when supported by substantial evidence on the record. Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla of evidence. It is that amount of relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion, even if other minds, equally reasonable, might conceivably opine otherwise. But to erase any doubt on the correctness of the assailed ruling, we have carefully perused the records and, nonetheless, arrived at the same conclusion. We find that there is substantial evidence on record to support the Court of Appeals and trial court’s conclusion that the signatures of Julian and Guillerma in the Deed of Absolute Sale were forged.

Conclusions and findings of fact by the trial court are entitled to great weight on appeal and should not be disturbed unless for strong and cogent reasons because the trial court is in a better position to examine real evidence, as well as to observe the demeanor of the witnesses while testifying in the case. The fact that the CA adopted the findings of fact of the trial court makes the same binding upon this court.

Thus, we hold that with the presentation of the forged deed, even if accompanied by the owner’s duplicate certificate of title, the registered owner did not thereby lose his title, and neither does the assignee in the forged deed acquire any right or title to the said property.

CELESTINO A. MARTINEZ III vs. HRET and BENHUR SALIMBANGON

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:42:00 +0000

CELESTINO A. MARTINEZ III vs. HRET and BENHUR SALIMBANGON
G.R. No. 189034, January 11, 2010

Villarama, Jr., J.:

Facts: In the May 14, 2007 elections, petitioner Martinez and private respondent Salimbangon were among the candidates for Representative in the Fourth Legislative District of Cebu Province. On March 29, 2007, Edilito C. Martinez, a resident of Barangay Tambongon, Daan-Bantayan, Cebu, filed his certificate of candidacy for the same position.
On April 3, 2007, Martinez filed a petition to declare Edilito C. Martinez a nuisance candidate. However, the Commission on Elections Second Division issued its Resolution declaring Edilito C. Martinez a nuisance candidate only on June 12, 2007 or almost one (1) month after the elections.

On July 9, 2007, Salimbangon was proclaimed winner in the congressional elections for the Fourth Legislative District of Cebu on the basis of official results showing that he garnered sixty-seven thousand two hundred seventy-seven (67,277) votes as against Martinez who garnered sixty-seven thousand one hundred seventy-three (67,173) votes, or a difference of one hundred four (104) votes.

Martinez filed an election protest before the HRET based on the 300 ballots more or less with only “MARTINEZ” or “C. MARTINEZ” written on the line for Representative which the Board of Election Inspectors did not count for Martinez on the ground that there was another congressional candidate (Edilito C. Martinez) who had the same surname. In its decision dated May 28, 2009, the HRET sustained the BEI in considering the ballots as stray in accordance with Sec. 211 (1) of the Omnibus Election Code. Since the name of Edilito C. Martinez was still included in the official list of candidates on election day (May 14, 2007), the HRET held that five thousand four hundred one (5,401) ballots with "MARTINEZ" or "C. MARTINEZ" only written on the line for Representative were properly denied on the ground that there was no way of determining the real intention of the voter. The HRET dismissed the election protest, affirmed the proclamation of Salimbangon and declared him to be the duly elected Representative of the Fourth Legislative District of Cebu, having won by a plurality margin of 453 votes. Martinez moved for reconsideration of the Decision, but the HRET denied it by Resolution dated July 30, 2009. Hence, this petition for certiorari under Rule 65 which seeks to nullify the decision of HRET dismissing the election protest declaring private respondent as the duly elected Representative of the Fourth Legislative District of Cebu, and the Resolution dated July 30, 2009 denying petitioner's motion for reconsideration thereof.

Issue:
1. What is the legal effect of declaring a nuisance candidate as such in a final judgment after the elections?
2. Should ballots containing only the similar surname of two (2) candidates be considered as stray votes or counted in favor of the bona fide candidate?

Held: The court finds the petition meritorious.
1. Ensconced in our jurisprudence is the well-founded rule that laws and statutes governing election contests especially appreciation of ballots must be liberally construed to the end that the will of the electorate in the choice of public officials may not be defeated by technical infirmities. An election protest is imbued with public interest so much so that the need to dispel uncertainties which becloud the real choice of the people is imperative. The prohibition against nuisance candidates is aimed precisely at preventing uncertainty and confusion in ascertaining the true will of the electorate. Thus, in certain situations as in the case at bar, final judgments declaring a nuisance candidate should effectively cancel the certificate of candidacy filed by such candidate as of election day. Otherwise, potential nuisance candidates will continue to put the electoral process into mockery by filing certificates of candidacy at the last minute and delaying resolution of any petition to declare them as nuisance candidates until elections are held and the votes counted and canvassed.

2. Ballots indicating only the similar surname of two (2) candidates for the same position may, in appropriate cases, be counted in favor of the bona fide candidate and not considered stray, even if the other candidate was declared a nuisance candidate by final judgment after the elections.

MATEO R. NOLLEN, Jr. vs. COMELEC and SUSANA M. CABALLES

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:36:00 +0000

MATEO R. NOLLEN, Jr. vs. COMELEC and SUSANA M. CABALLES
G.R. No. 187635, January 11, 2010

Velasco, Jr., J:

Facts: Respondent Susan M. Caballes and Mateo R. Nollen were candidates for punong barangay of Gibanga, Sariaya, Quezonin the October 29, 2007 barangay elections. Having garnered 456 votes as against the 448 votes Caballes obtained, Nollen was declared as the punong barangay-elect. Dissatisfied with the result, Caballes instituted an election protest with the MTC in Sariaya, Quezon. On June 3, 2008, the MTC rendered a decision declaring protestant Caballes as punong barangay-elect, having garnered 456 votes, or 5 votes more than the 451 votes of Nollen. Nollen filed his notice of appeal and paid the MTC the appeal fee of Php1000 on June 5, 2008. Following the elevation of the MTC’s records to the COMELEC, the First Division of the COMELECon September 22, 2008, dismissed Nollen’s appeal for his failure to pay the appeal fee of PhP3,000 prescribed by Section 3 and 4, Rule 40 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure within the reglementary period of 5 days. Nollen moved for reconsideration, praying for the liberal interpretation of the rules, but stating in the same breath that his PhP 1,000 appeal fee payment was sufficient to perfect his appeal. On October 6, 2008, Nollen paid the amount of PhP3,200 at the COMELEC Cash Division. The COMELEC en banc denied Nollen’s motion for reconsideration stating that, while he timely filed his Notice of Appeal and simultaneously paid the Php1000 appeal fee with the MTC, the appeal would be deemed registered and docketed only upon full payment of the filing fee to the COMELEC. Hence, this petition for certiorari under Rule 64 in relation to Rule 65 seeking to nullify the order of the COMELEC en banc denying his motion for reconsideration.

Issue: Whether or not the appeal of Nollen was filed on time by paying the appeal fee in the MTC.

Held: The petition is meritorious.

Payment of appeal fees in appealed election protest cases is now separately required by the Rules of Court and Sec. 3, Rule 40 of the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, as amended by Resolution No. 02-0130, Series of 2002, a situation not obtaining previously. The Court, thus, deems it right to put things in proper perspective.
As Aguilar stated and COMELEC Resolution No. 8654 reiterated, the payment of the PhP 1,000 appeal fee within five days from the promulgation of the Regional Trial Court or MTC decision technically “perfects” the appeal from the trial court’s decision. Such appeal is not dismissible as a matter of course on account alone of the inadequate payment or nonpayment of the filing fee of PhP 3,200. The legal situation, however, changes if the appellant, in the words of Resolution No. 8654, fails, as directed, to pay the amount within 15 days from receipt of notice from the COMELEC. In the instant case, albeit Nollen paid the PhP 3,200 only in October 2008, or long after his receipt of the June 2008 MTC decision, his appeal may validly be viewed as not fatally belated. COMELEC Resolution No. 8654 is applicable to his appeal, as the appeal was on June 5, 2008, or prior to July 24, 2008 when the more stringent Resolution No. 8486 took effect.

It cannot be overemphasized, however, that the warning given in Divinagracia is inapplicable to the case at bar, since the notice of appeal in the instant case was filed on June 5, 2008. In the strict legal viewpoint, Divinagracia contextually finds applicability only in cases where notices of appeal were filed at least after the promulgation of the Divinagracia decision on July 27, 2009. Since petitioner paid the appeal fee of PhP 1,000 simultaneously with his filing of his notice of appeal on June 5, 2008, the appeal is considered perfected pursuant to COMELEC Resolution No. 8654, taking it beyond the ambit of Divinagracia. Again, petitioner’s failure to pay the remaining PhP 3,200 within the prescribed period cannot be taken against him, since the COMELEC failed to notify him regarding the additional appeal fee, as provided by Resolution No. 8654. Although Nollen, following superseded jurisprudence, failed to pay the filing fee on time, he nonetheless voluntarily paid the remaining PhP 3,200 appeal fee on October 6, 2008. We, thus, credit him for remitting the amount of PhP 3,200, which, applying extant rules and prevailing jurisprudence, cannot be considered as having been belatedly paid. Hence, his petition should be given due course.

PEOPLE vs. MARLON BARSAGA ABELLA

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:31:00 +0000

PEOPLE vs. MARLON BARSAGA ABELLA
G.R. No. 177295, January 6, 2010

Leonardo-De Castro, J.:

Facts: Sometime in December 1999, the accused Marlon Abella, while armed with a knife and under the influence of liquor, entered the house of herein complainant [AAA] (real name of the victim was withheld by the court in its decision to protect her identity), and then and there have sexual intercourse with [AAA], a 38-year old woman of feeble mind (“moderate mental retardation” or intellectual quotient of a 7 to 8-year old child”), against her will. During the pendency of the case, [AAA] gave birth to a child. Accused stated that [AAA] was coached to testify against him in furtherance of the hostility between their families. He claims that [AAA]’s mental disability made he so subservient to her parents that she would believe everything that they tell her. The RTC convicted the accused of the crime of rape. The case was elevated to the CA which affirmed the decision of the lower court. Hence, the decision is under automatic review by this court.

Issues:
1. Whether or not the prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused of the crime charged.
2. Whether or not the testimony of the victim is credible to convict the accused.
3. Whether or not the denial of the accused was not given due credit by the court.

Held: The high court in affirming the decision of the lower court and the CA stated the following:

1. Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code provides that the crime of rape is committed by a man having carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: (1) through force, threat or intimidation; (2) when the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; (3) by means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority; and (4) when the offended party is under 12 years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above be present. In People v. Andaya, [25] it was held that “sexual intercourse with a woman who is a mental retardate with the mental age of a child below 12 years old constitutes statutory rape” with or without the attendance of force, threat, or intimidation.

2. By well-entrenched jurisprudence, the issue of credibility of witnesses is “a question best addressed to the province of the trial court because of its unique position of having observed that elusive and incommunicable evidence of the witnesses' deportment on the stand while testifying which opportunity is denied to the appellate courts” and “[a]bsent any substantial reason which would justify the reversal of the trial court's assessments and conclusions, the reviewing court is generally bound by the former's findings, particularly when no significant facts and circumstances are shown to have been overlooked or disregarded which when considered would have affected the outcome of the case.”

3. It has been stressed, moreover, that the bare denials and uncorroborated alibis of an accused cannot overcome the positive identification of the accused and straightforward recounting of the accused’s commission of a crime. In People v. Nieto, this Court held:

It is an established jurisprudential rule that a mere denial, without any strong evidence to support it, can scarcely overcome the positive declaration by the victim of the identity and involvement of appellant in the crimes attributed to him. The defense of alibi is likewise unavailing. Firstly, alibi is the weakest of all defenses, because it is easy to concoct and difficult to disprove. Unless substantiated by clear and convincing proof, such defense is negative, self-serving, and undeserving of any weight in law. Secondly, alibi is unacceptable when there is a positive identification of the accused by a credible witness. Lastly, in order that alibi might prosper, it is not enough to prove that the accused has been somewhere else during the commission of the crime; it must also be shown that it would have been impossible for him to be anywhere within the vicinity of the crime scene.

PEOPLE vs. MANUEL BAGOS

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 02:18:00 +0000

PEOPLE vs. MANUEL BAGOS
G.R. No. 177152, January 6, 2010

Leonardo-De Castro, J.:

Facts: Manuel Bagos was charged with the crime of rape committed on or about the month of May, 1998 along the river bank of Baling-caguing River, Mabini, Pangasinan against AAA (real name of the victim was withheld by the court in its decision), a 10 year old minor while bathing in the river by grabbing and pulling her to sit in his in his lap, thereafter removed her panty and his pants, inserted his penis to her vagina and have carnal knowledge with her. Accused denied the allegation and stated that the victim’s family accused him of raping [AAA] due to a family misunderstanding. On December 15, 1999, the RTC rendered a decision finding the accused guilty of the crime he was charged for. The CA upheld the decision of the RTC and added an award for exemplary damages. From the CA, the case was elevated to the SC upon filing of the accused-appelant of a notice of appeal on January 8, 2007. On his appeal, accused-appellant contends that the testimony of [AAA] is incredible, unconvincing and inconsistent with human nature. He particularly points out the part of her testimony where accused-appellant allegedly pulled her panty down to her knees, removed his pants while standing, made her sit on his lap while in the water and inserted his penis into her vagina. On appeal, accused-appellant claims that this is incredulous, considering that he had a slight physical defect on his leg and could not have inserted his penis into AAA’s vagina with ease and without ripping her panty if the same had been pulled down only to AAA’s knees. According to accused-appellant, that AAA did not shout for help during the incident was likewise contrary to common experience.

Issue: Whether or not the court erred in convicting the accused-appellant of the crime charged despite the failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Held:
1. Credibility of the victim’s testimony.

When the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, appellate courts will generally not disturb the finding of the trial court unless it has plainly overlooked certain facts of substance and value that, if considered, might affect the result of the case. This is so because the trial court is in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial.

2. Failure of the victim to shout for help.

This Court has noted in several cases that minors could be easily intimidated and cowed into silence even by the mildest threat against their lives. Be that as it may, the absence of struggle or an outcry from the victim is immaterial to the rape of a child below 12 years of age. The law presumes that such a victim, on account of her tender age, does not and cannot have a will of her own.

Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, as in this case, because no woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and have the offender apprehended and punished. The crime of rape is essentially one committed in secrecy, hence it is usually only the victim who can testify with regard to the fact of forced coitus. As a result, conviction may be based solely on the plausible testimony of the private complainant.

I FEEL THE EARTH MOVED!

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 11:47:00 +0000

At about 1:30 in the afternoon today, an earthquake happened in Bacoor, Cavite. I was listening to the call that I was auditing when my officemate stood up from her chair and said “I am little dizzy.” I looked at her and I felt dizzy myself. The intensity is too strong to pass it up as a mere dizziness. We then realize that the earth is moving. Our office is located at the fifth floor. The movement can be felt anywhere from the floor to the ceiling. I felt numb and kept silent. I dare not move a muscle thinking that if I do I might intensify the earth’s movement. It was scary!

After the earthquake subsided I came to thinking what one ought to do during an earthquake. Your actions would depend on where you are when the earthquake happens. You could be indoor or outdoor if that happens. Then I realized that if it happens, regardless of where you are, you are supposed to keep your wit at all times. Presence of mind is the most important defense that you’ll have in case of natural disasters and not for earthquakes alone.

Here is some of what I should do if an earthquake happens in my house, workplace or just outside of my comfort zone.

1. Don’t panic!

2. Fall down to the ground. Cover yourself under a strong table, chair or any pieces of furniture made of strong materials.

3. Cover your head and face with your arms and squat or bend down in one corner of the edifice.
4. Stay away from things that could break or fall in your head like lighting fixtures, windows and walls.
5. Diminish your movement until the quaking has stopped.

6. Say a little prayer or whistle a happy song. It helps ease your nervousness.

7. Do not use the elevator when exiting from the building.

Earthquake can happen any time. Prepare yourself for the worst when it happens. Courage is undermined when you are unprepared.

HEARTBROKEN OVER A FOUNTAIN PEN

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sun, 21 Mar 2010 02:48:00 +0000

When I entered law school at the young age of twenty, I did not know that lawyers or law students are supposed to use a fountain pen. What is it? How does it differ from the usual Pilot sign pen that I use in my pre-law course? Needless to say, I am clueless as to how a fountain pen looks like. Good thing that I am not the only person in the class who was clueless about what a fountain pen is. I asked some of my classmates who were able to buy a set of fountain pen already of how much does it cost. They told me that the cheapest fountain pen they can find in bookstores cost more or less 300 Philippine pesos.

I am just a professional student who solely depends on financial support from my parents. I have limited budget for miscellaneous expenses including fountain pen. If I tell my parents how much a fountain pen cost, they would tell me to go for a Pilot sign pen instead.

I saved up a portion of my allowance daily so I can buy my own fountain pen before our Midterms in school. When I had enough savings, my classmate and I went to National Bookstore located in Recto corner Morayta Street in Manila to buy our first set of fountain pen. I picked a white fountain pen with gold rings on its body and on the lid of its cap. It was my priceless possession at that time.

I don’t remove it from its crystal box when I am not using it. I used it daily in taking notes from class. Fountain pen is a little harder to write because it has a big and round body unlike my old Pilot sign pen. When you write, it is supposed to glide on a smooth paper otherwise the ink will blot which will make your paper messy and dotty.

One day, I left my fountain pen in its box in my study table at home. When I came home from school, I immediately looked for it. It was gone! I remember to have left it just beside my lamp in the study table. I asked everyone in the house if they happen to see my fountain pen. Nobody knew where my fountain pen went. I am worried sick because I really love that pen. I always thought that it would live on to see me through until I graduate from college of law and become a full pledged lawyer. I was about to cry when my little sister came to my side and told me “Ate, I brought your fountain pen in school. It was taken by my classmate and he does not want to return it to me. ” I shouted and scolded her for taking my fountain pen without my permission. The following day, I went to her school and looked for the boy who took my fountain pen. The boy could not produce the fountain pen because he traded it for a toy with his playmate. My heart sunk in despair. There is no way that I can get my fountain pen back. I was really furious with anger against my little sister. I cried all day. I missed my class in school because I was so upset to even dress up and go to school.

As days and years went by, I survived the loss of my first fountain pen. I bought a new set of Parker fountain pen in three colors, that is, blue, brown and black to replace the white one that I previously had. I have forgotten my lost fountain pen. Now, I can only remember how I was heartbroken by a fountain pen and it makes me laugh every time I think of it.

ENGAGEMENT RING: TWO OR THREE MONTHS SALARY RULE APPLIES?

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 02:36:00 +0000

As I was researching for a work-related project, I chanced upon this ‘three months salary rule.” I thought it is the same thing from the three-month rule that I encountered for the first time in a local movie starring Bea Alonzo and John Lloyd Cruz. When I continued reading, I realized that it is different from the three-month rule that I know of.

The three-month rule that the article was talking about involves buying of engagement rings. It is said that if you will propose marriage to your girlfriend, make sure that you are prepared to give her an engagement ring worth two or three months of your salary.

When considering buying an engagement ring, it is difficult to be practical, for the reason that an engagement ring is a representation of love and it is so intricate to put a value to a feeling that is invaluable. Some people believe that a ring mirrors your love and commitment. Hence, the bigger the diamond, the deeper must be your love. Usually the rule of thumb is that the engagement ring should cost around two to three month’s of your salary so it would naturally depend on how much you earn when deciding to purchase one.

Now, what is my take on the three months rule on purchasing an engagement ring? I believe that the rule is a fairy tale. I admit that there is specific set of amount or percentage on how much one should spend on an engagement ring. This decision varies from individual to individual. Somehow, like any huge purchases that you may have had, you begin with establishing a budget first before you begin to start looking. Once your budget is set and you have several options available which are within the boundaries of your established budget you will finally be able to make a wise decision on which ring is right for you and your significant other. Your ultimate goal is to make sure that the ring you purchased is just within your means and living standards.

Whatever engagement ring you prefer will always be a stunning symbol of your affection for each other, and a constant memento of a very special day. So never mind how much you spend on it, it’s your love that will always be priceless.

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com

PEN AND INK

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:35:00 +0000

Went to the store to buy me a pen
The pen wouldn't write so I traded for a hen
The hen wouldn't lay so I traded for a ray
The ray wouldn't shine so I traded for a vine
The vine wouldn't swing so I traded for a ring
The ring wouldn't fit so I traded for a hit
The hit wouldn't run so I traded for a gun
The gun wouldn't shoot so I traded for a flute
The flute wouldn't blow so I traded for a hoe
The hoe wouldn't heave like holes in a sieve
Like folds in a sleeve and I think it's time to leave
So don't underestimate the power of the pen
Because the power of the mind translates into the pen
And if the power of the pen comes from w/in
Like the power of the mind that makes you think
Just think will this pen ever run out of ink?
The pen kept gliding on a piece of paper
The hand was guiding it ''cause sooner or later
Thoughts would emerge every time I get
the urge to write on a pad all the thoughts I ever had
We write the right rhymes so don't try to bite mine
In spite of this you still write to spite
We write the songs that make people sing along
You write for a fee and make a lot of enemies
You dig for the dirt get cash for the trash
How much would it cost for you to kiss my ass?
Because the pen is mightier than the sword
Heavens to Betsy, oh, my Lord!
If you believe, you shall receive
And if you deceive, we will besiege
Because the power of the mind translates
into the pen And if the power of the pen comes from within
Like the power of the mind that makes you think
Just think, will this pen ever run out of ink?
Yeah, use a pencil.

Francis Magalona
1964-2009

I chanced upon this lyric when I was surfing the internet in the office. I was doing nothing and the internet is my favorite past time these days. I thought it was a poem written by someone. It caught my attention and I read through it. At the end of the lyrics, I found the name of the author. It says Francis M. Confusion registered on my face. Am I reading what I think it is? The poem is written by Francis M? I copied the first stanza of the poem and pasted it in the Google search bar and hit enter. The search gave me song lyric hits. I opened the first hit and found that it was in fact a lyric of a song originally created by the late Filipino rapper Francis Magalona. My jaw dropped in amazement. Such a wonderful lyric was written by a Filipino rapper. It was a very powerful lyric and the display of creativity is apparent in its construction. Francis Magalona is a good lyricist and poet. It is just sad that he went away early in his life. There might have been beautiful words put into music by such a wonderful and creative working mind.

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com

INTERNET HACKERS ATTACK!

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:07:00 +0000

I was surprised to have received a call from a friend who is living in Cagayan de Oro one morning. I thought that she just missed me and decided to give a ring that morning. Lo and behold! The purpose of the call was far different from what I expected. The conversation went on like this.

Caller: “Grazee, where are you right now?”
Me: “I am on my way to the hospital because my mother is getting her eye operation today. Why?”

Caller: “Oh well, I and some members of the forum (the one that I am moderating), received an email from you just this morning informing us that you are in London and you were asking money because you were mugged and stuck in the airport or something.” There is a thread created in the forum just for that. Do you have access to the internet right now so you could check and reply on the thread?
Me: How can that be? I just got off from work and I never been out of the country yet. I wont have access to the internet until after lunch.

Caller: I believe your yahoo mail has been hacked and all your contacts were sent an email. Do you have a different email address where I can send you the letter sent to us?
Me. I do. Can you send me the email to my alternative email address? I gave my other email address.

Caller: Okay. I will reply to the thread created in the forum for this issue and tell them that you don’t know anything about it.
Me: Thanks Ate. I would really appreciate it.

When I got home, I immediately checked my email account. Surprise! I can not login. It says “account has been locked for 24 hours because it has been compromised.) I logged in to my alternative email address and found the email forwarded to me by my friend. The email is copied below.

“Hope you get this on time. Sorry i did not inform you about my sudden trip to Kent Dover UK for a program. I am presently stranded here and urgently require your kind favor soon. I hope you come to my aid. Last night, I got mugged at gun point on my way to the hotel where i lodged. They went away with all have got including my wallet where i have all my cash and credit card and also my cell phone. I wasn't injured because I quickly complied.

My traveling documents are been apprehended by the hotel management because of my inability to pay bills. I reported to the police and they only asked me to write a statement about the incident and later referred me to the embassy. I contacted our embassy here but they are not responding effectively to the matter. I am confused and so full of panic right now. For now, I do not have a phone where I can be reached. All i have got here is my mail. I also have limited access to the computer. Please I need you to kindly loan me about (1,820 Pounds) to sort-out my hotel bills and other expenses incurred here and get back home soon as i do not feel safe here anymore. I Promise to refund your money immediately i return home. I will explain full details to you when i get back. I will appreciate any amount you can quickly arrange and send to me via Western Union or Money Gram with the details below.

Receivers Names: (Name withheld for security reasons)
Receivers Address/location: 19 New Dover Road , Canterbury
Dover Kent,CT1 3AH, United kingdom

Write to me the full details of the transfer or scanned copy of the transfer receipt so that i can receive over here quickly. Let me know if you can be of any help soon because you are the only person i can reach at this moment and the next flight back home departs in about few hours.
Get back to me ASAP.

Kind Regards

Grazee”

My jaw dropped in desperation. I logged in to the forum that I am moderating and found out that that the members were worried about me and concerned if the email was sent by me or just a scam. My account was temporarily suspended by the Administrator so it won’t be hacked and damaged by the hacker until I called the Admin and gave an alternative email address to link up my account to. When I called on the Administrator of the forum to explain my side, I was not able to control myself from crying. Paul pacified me and told me to reset all my logins and passwords concerning my online bank accounts including Paypal which the hacker might get hold of and withdraw funds from them. Before I accomplish anything regarding my login and passwords, I posted a reply in the forum which is worded exactly like this.

“Hello Everyone,

I am sorry for the late posts that I am making for this bruhahaha. I just received a call from Daisy early this morning informing me that someone used my email account to send emails to members of the forum asking them to send me money.

First of all, I am not in the UK as of this moment. I just got home from the hospital because my mom has had an eye operation and I brought money to pay for the hospital bills. I received Daisy’s call on my way to the hospital after I got off from my work. When I logged in today to check my emails in yahoo, I can no longer access it. The error message said that “my account has been compromised.” Yahoo locked my account and I can only access it after 24 hours and probably after changing my password and verifying and/or answering some security questions.

The hacker got my real name and is using it to solicit money from members of the forum. I really don’t know why the hacker was able to get hold of your email addresses. I have only been in contact with a few members who became good friends of mine in and out of the forum. I am not really a technically knowledgeable person so I don’t know that my account has been hacked until I was informed through text message by Daisy and some friends of mine who were non-members of the forum that someone is using my identity to solicit money from them.

For this reason, I am coming forward to warn everyone that I am not the person who is asking you money. I don’t need financial help from anyone as of this time. If I do, I would course through my request to Paul first before I will send an email to any one of you. My father would beat me to death if I ask for someone’s help, especially if it concerns money, without asking him first. I am a member of the forum in good standing. I have never taken advantage of anyone from this forum and I don’t intend to do so in the future.

Now, my problem is how to secure my email account should I recover it. The hacker most probably have read my emails and got hold of my login and passwords to my online bank accounts including my Paypal account. This is a nightmare for me and I don’t know what to do.

Again, I am really sorry if I caused you trouble and anxiety. Thank you and God bless you all.”

Has anyone experienced the same problem with your email account being hacked by someone? It is so disappointing that your security is breached without you even knowing it, until your friends tell you about it. Some of these hackers get your email addresses from social networking sites that you might be a member of. I am a member of Facebook, Friendster, Myspace and some other forums and online networks. It never occurred to me that I could be a victim of an identity theft in the internet. It is unbelievable how these low-life people could use your account to defraud others. What if the people she was able to send an email responded to her plea of sending her money? She could have enriched herself to my expense! Grrrr…….

Now, what did I learn from this sad event in my life? I should create a bogus email address to link up with my social networking sites, change my passwords regularly, never store sensitive information in your email account and maintain several email accounts as your backup email should one been hacked. I hope you get to learn from my experience and share your learning to others.

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com

NATIONAL HISTORICAL INSTITUTE VERSUS ARNEL PINEDA

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Wed, 17 Mar 2010 00:30:00 +0000

The controversy arose from the wrongful rendition of Journey’s front man, Arnel Pineda, of the Philippine National Anthem during the fight of Manny Pacquiao against Joshua Clottey at the Cowboys Stadium in Arlington , Texas on March 13, 2010. The spokesperson of the NHI claimed that Arnel Pineda sung the national anthem differently from the established beat and sound that it’s supposed to have been sung. Some artists who previously sung the same song in some of the previous fights of Manny Pacquiao came to Arnel Pineda’s defense. They said that it was not their intention to rewrite the rhythm and sound of the national anthem. What is important is that they sung it straight from their heart and with conviction.

As an ordinary citizen, I would say that NHI was just over reacting on the issue. When we were in school I don’t remember singing the national anthem in a marching beat. It was usually melancholic and slow. I agree with some of the stars that it is not how you sing it but what you felt when you were singing it. If it is their concern that the national anthem be sung based on its original beat and hymn, they should have sent someone who is trained to do that to sing in the fight. They give utmost importance to the correct execution of the song but they failed to do their part in doing so. This is just a media publicity for the NHI which does not reflect very well on the agency.

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com

CONTAINER VAN AND PUV COLLISION IN BACOOR, CAVITE

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 03:39:00 +0000

Earlier this morning, on my way home from work, I witnessed the collision of a container van to a passenger jeepney along Aguinaldo Highway just in front of SM City Bacoor. It created a huge and long early morning traffic. The van hit the jeepney on its side near its tail. Vehicles going to Manila were stuck in traffic. The van almost occupied three-fourths of the street giving little access for motorists. The driver is suspected to have been drunk while driving. The jeepney has no passengers yet because it just came out of the garage. I was able to take some pictures using my mobile phone when the bus that I was on board passed on the right side of the van.

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com

RUFFA AND KRIS's RECONCILIATION - ANOTHER SOAP OPERA?

noreply@blogger.com (Grazee's Lucid Interval) — Tue, 16 Mar 2010 02:45:00 +0000

The two well-known actresses and TV personalities, Kris Aquino and Ruffa Gutierrez, reconciled publicly on TV following their disputes originating from last week’s episode of the TV show “The Buzz.” Before today’s episode of the same show, Kris Aquino already released a public apology statement to Ruffa and her family for causing distress and pain. Ruffa later issued a statement accepting the apology of Kris Aquino and apologized to the latter as well for over-reacting.

What is my reaction to this kind of hullabaloo between two pretty actresses? This is a well-staged publicity for both of them.

They claim to have known each other and have been friends for 23 years; at least Kris said that in one of her interviews after that TV spectacle was aired on national television. If they were really friends, they should know when is the other person joking or serious about something. As I’ve watched the verbal exchanges that they had in the show, I can tell that Kris was only being playful and teasing Ruffa on the set. She might have exaggerated the teasing a bit which probably infuriated Ruffa, as seen from her facial expressions.

Oh well, this non-sense could have died after the taping if not for the call received by Ruffa from her mother. Of course Annabel Rama can not help herself from scrubbing in the issue, making it worst than it’s supposed to be. She called on the people not to vote on Kris’s brother, Nonoy Aquino, who is seeking the presidential post in the coming national election.

What do they get from this TV manipulation? It gave them an extra media exposure for Ruffa and another crying-on-TV episode for Kris. What do you think?

View my Guestbook
Free Guestbooks by Bravenet.com