Petition for Relief

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REGIONAL TRIAL COURT 11TH JUDICIAL REGION BRANCH 1 BAGUIO CITY  BAGUIO CITY FINANCING CIVIL CASE NO. 21,274-C-B-2008 CORPORATION, Plaintif-Petitioner  -v!"#"FOR$ SU% OF %ONEY, ETC.  JERE%IAH JERO%E R. CRU& Dependant-Respondent  x----------------------------------x PETITION FOR RELIEF FRO% JUDG%ENT

COMES COME S NOW, NOW, pet petiti itioner oner thr through ough the the und under ersi sig gned ned authorized legal representative in the above title case, unto this Honorable Court, most respectull! states and alleges that" #$ On Sept Septem embe berr #%, #%, &'#( &'#(,, her herein ein plai plaint nti) i)-p -pet etit itio ione nerr recei eceive ved d the or orde derr o the Honor onorab able le Co Cour urtt date ated September #', &'#( den!ing the plainti)*s Notice o  +ppeal or having been led out o time &$ With ith the the .ind .ind indu indulg lgen ence ce o the the Hono Honorab rable le Co Court urt,, the the petitioner see.s or the relie rom /udgment 0 to set asid aside e the the said said or orde derr that that the the appe appeal al be give given n due course on the ollo1ing grounds" a$ 2he deenda deendant nt stands stands to be un/ust un/ustl! l! enriched enriched b! ONE H3N45E4 SE6EN27 E89H2 2HO3S+N4 +N4 E89H2 H3N45E4 S8:27 S8: ;ESOS < =>?#'' @;H; #AB,B #AB,B$= $=>D >D re repr prese esenti nting ng the re remai maining ning unpaid unpaid ;age # o B

balance o the loan amount the deendant secured rom the plainti)-petitioner$ 2his is exclusive o the interest charge as o October #(, &''B$ 3p to the present, the deendant borro1er has not made an! pa!ment on the account b$ 2he plainti) admits 1ith all humilit! that it has been incurring court procedural lapses in the absence o a legal guidance subseuent to the resignation o its in-house counsel$ While plainti)  .eeps on searching or a la1!er*s services on a permanent basis, it could hardl! nd an applicant, as o this petition, 1ho 1ould be 1illing to accept the 1or.load o the legal department and be engaged on a regular emplo!ment capacit! c$ 2he plainti) believes that it should not be deprived 1ith propert! in the aoresaid substantial amount 1ithout being completel! heard in a court that it believes to be the proper venue to compel pa!ment rom a borro1er 1ho 1as given a loan privilege in times o her needs but no1 remains uncooperative in settling her obligation d$ 2he petitioner committed a negligence 1hen it led or an appeal out o time$ 2rue enough, it 1as borne out o excusable neglect as the legal representative is not an adroit in procedural la1$ 8n the attached +Fdavit o Merit denominated as +NNE: G+, an explanation o the excusable negligence is humbl! presented begging or the .indness o the court to loosen the tight rope o  technicalit! in a situation 1here the plainti)  painsta.ingl! still continues to nd a 1illing applicant or the position o in-house corporate counsel$ ;lainti) could have timel! and properl! led the remed! had an applicant-la1!er made good o her nod to serve as corporate counsel but ;age & o B

retracted the commitment 1hen she 1as expected to report$ +ttached is an aFdavit mar.ed as +NNE: GI attesting to said act e$ 2he act that the plainti), through the representative, led a Notice o +ppeal 1as to let the Honorable Court be apprised o its determined and uns1erving resolve to see. a redress or its right violated b! a loan borro1er$ Such action 1as never to place an! hint o moc.er! on the court or the plainti) is convinced 0 given the attitude o the borro1er deendant o being elusive o her obligation, the court is its onl! hope$ 4eendant has caused so much o the diFcult! in recovering 1hat she is supposed to return 0 that petitioner had to see. rst the court*s assistance beore obligations can be compelled$ $ 2he plainti)-petitioner understands that the Honorable Court is not oblivious o the ollo1ing rulings o the Supreme Court$ With all due respect, plainti) humbl! reminds i onl! to la! the solid grounds 1h! the petitioner is entitled to the relie  pra!ed or, viz" 8n E'()*+ A'+"+ v". T+(" V*''(+!,  (' /G.R. N+. L-22, J#' 23, 1105, the Supreme Court is not agreeable on technicalit!*s departure rom its proper oFce, to uote" “A litigation is not a game o technicalities  xxxxx. It is, rather, a contest in which each contending party ully and airly lays eore the court the acts in issue and then, rushing aside as wholly tri!ial and indecisi!e all imperections o orm and technicalities o   procedure, as"s that #ustice e done upon the merit. xxxxx $echnicality, when it deserts ;age = o B

its proper o%ce as an aid to #ustice and ecomes its great hindrance and chie  enemy, deser!es scant consideration rom courts& ' underscoring supplied (.

8n another case, the Supreme Court held" “Procedural technicality should not pre!ail o!er sustanti!e rights o a party to appeal ')*A !. +A,  /+RA 012, as cited in 3nited 4eature /yndicate !s. 5unsingwear +reation, 6.R. )o. 710, )o!emer 1, 181(.

8n another instance, the Supreme Court ruled" “It was urther emphasi9ed that we allowed the :ling o an appeal in some cases where a stringent application o the rules would ha!e denied it, or when to do so would ser!e the demands o sustantial #ustice and in the exercise o our e;uity #urisdiction '/errano !. +ourt o Appeals, 01 /+RA 71, as cited in 3nited 4eature /yndicate !s. 5unsingwear  +reation, 6.R. )o. 710, )o!emer 1, 181(.

 2here are a string o cases 1ith similar accommodations to appeals not led on time$ ;etitioner sees no need to express them all in this petition as it hopes the oregoing cases and explanations 1ould suFce to dra1 the compassion o the court$ PRAYER

WHE5EJO5E, in the light o the oregoing premises, petitioner respectull! pra!s to the Honorable Court that the herein petition or relie rom /udgment be granted 0 that the ;age % o B

order dated September #', &'#( be set aside and permit the appeal to ta.e its course$ Other relies or remedies deemed euitable and /ust are li.e1ise pra!ed or$ 5espectull! submitted this #' th September, &'#(, Iaguio Cit!, ;hilippines$ DOLORES BALAGAT

5epublic o the ;hilippinesD Cit! o Iaguio D s$s$ x--------------------------------x VERIFICATION 6 CERTIFICATION OF NON-FORU% SHOPPING

8, 4OKO5ES I+K+9+2, Jilipino, o legal age, and 1ith oFce address at &nd Jloor Iaguio Central Warehouse Club, Iaguio Cit!, ;hilippines, ater having been s1orn to in accordance 1ith la1 do hereb! depose and state"  2hat 8 am the authorized representative o Iaguio Cit! Jinancing Corp$ 2hat 8 have caused the preparation o the oregoing ;E2828ON JO5 5EK8EJ J5OM L349EMEN2 and have read the allegations contained therein 2hat allegations in said petition are true and correct o m! o1n .no1ledge and based on authentic records 8 hereb! certi! that 8 have not commenced an! other action or proceeding involving the same issues in an! court, tribunal or uasi-/udicial agenc! and, to the best o m! .no1ledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein 8 8 should thereater learn that a similar action or proceeding has been led or is pending, 8 herb! underta.e to ;age ( o B

report that act 1ithin ve @(D da!s thererom to the court or agenc! 1here the original pleading and s1orn certication contemplated herein have been led 8 executed this verication?certication to attest to the truth o the oregoing acts and to compl! 1ith the provisions o +dm$ Circular No$ '%->% o the Honorable Supreme Court$ 8N W82NESS WHE5EOJ, 8 have hereunto aFxed m! signature this #' th o September, &'#(, in the Cit! o Iaguio, ;hilippines$ DOLORES BALAGAT +Fant?;etitioner 84 No$ #&=%(A

S3ISC58IE4 +N4 SWO5N to beore me this #'th o  September, &'#( at Iaguio Cit!, ;hilippines$ NOTARY  PUBLIC

4oc No$   ;age No$   Ioo. No$   Series o &'#$

CHRISTINE JOY D. PRESTOZA

PTR No. 38492 / 1-4-16 / Baguio City Roll of Attorney No. 68352 / 1-4-16 / Baguio City BP !ifeti"e #e"$er%&i' No. (3923 / Baguio-Benguet #C!) Co"'lian*e No. -((6 / 1-1(-16 Roo" 2(1+ 4t& ,loor+ PA Builing+ ''er 0e%%ion Roa+ Baguio City (4 442-93(2 / (99395892(1 TN No. 654-(((-245

EPLANATION Cop! o the petition 1as served b! registered mail due to time and distance constraints and or luc. o the undersinged*s sta) 1ho can serve the same in person$ DOLORES BALAGAT

Cop! urnished thru 5egistered Mail" +227$ LOSE;H I58+N +2ENSO5 ;age  o B

4eendant Counsel Evangelio Ka1 OFce Ermel!n Complex, +gton St$,  2oril, IaguioCit!

5epublic o the ;hilippinesD Cit! o Iaguio x--------------------------------x

Ds$s

AFFIDAVIT OF %ERIT

8, 4OKO5ES, o legal age, 1ith oFce address at & nd Jloor 4CWC, Iaguio Cit!, ater having been s1orn to in accordance 1ith la1 do hereb! depose and state"  2hat 8 am the authorized legal representative o Iaguio Cit! Jinancing Corporation @ICJD  2hat relative to the court proceedings o Civil Case No$ &#,&A%-C-I-&''B or S3M OJ MONE7, 4+M+9ES, and +22O5NE7*s ees led b! Iaguio Centur! Jinancing Corp$ against LE5EM8+H LE5OME 5$ C53, 8 led on behal o the corporation a Notice o +ppeal rom the dismissal order dated +ugust #B, &'#( o the 5egional 2rial Court, Iranch #, Iaguio Cit!  2hat such notice o appeal 1as made as a remedial recourse and to apprise the Honorable Court o the 4JC*s ;age A o B

determined and uns1erving resolve to see. recover! o  unpaid loan account o an elusive loan borro1er in the aoresaid civil case  2hat said Notice o +ppeal 1as dismissed b! the court a uo being led out o time  2hat the deerred Notice o +ppeal 1as subseuent to the ling o a motion or an extension o time to le a motion or reconsideration that the latter motion or an extension o  time 1as not previousl! .no1n to the best o m! .no1ledge as a prohibited pleading, being a representative and not a ull-edged la1!er 1ith limited exposure to the legal proession  2hat such excusable negligence could not have been avoided 1ith ordinar! oresight the technicalit! involved and procedural conseuences per 5ules o Court reuire the acumen o a la1!er allo1ed to practice b! la1  2hat the ling o said notice o appeal 1as made out o  apprehensions o the dismissal order 0 being 1ar! o losing the right to claim in a legal action that the belated appeal can still be given its due course in the interest o euit! and  /ustice as supported b! a string o /urisprudence  2hat this aFdavit o merit is executed to support the plainti)*s petition or a relie rom an adverse /udgment on the above case$ 8N W82NESS WHE5EOJ, 8 have hereunto aFxed m! signature this #' th da! o September, &'#, in the Cit! o Iaguio, ;hilippines$

DOLORES BALAGAT +Fant 84 No$ #&=%(A

S3ISC58IE4 +N4 SWO5N to beore me this #' th da! o  September, &'#( at Iaguio Cit!, ;hilippines$

;age B o B

NOTARY PUBLIC CHRISTINE JOY D. PRESTOZA

4oc No$   ;age No$   Ioo. No$   Series o &'#$

PTR No. 38492 / 1-4-16 / Baguio City Roll of Attorney No. 68352 / 1-4-16 / Baguio City BP !ifeti"e #e"$er%&i' No. (3923 / Baguio-Benguet #C!) Co"'lian*e No. -((6 / 1-1(-16 Roo" 2(1+ 4t& ,loor+ PA Builing+ ''er 0e%%ion Roa+ Baguio City (4 442-93(2 / (99395892(1 TN No. 654-(((-245

;age > o B