- The petitioner failed to incorporate in his petition a written explanation why the preferred mode of personal service and filing as prescribed under Section 11, Rule 13 of the Revised Rules of Court was not availed of;
- Copies of the pertinent and relevant pleadings and documents, which are necessary for proper resolution of the case, were not attached to the petition, viz.:
- Complaint[;]
- Motion to Dismiss and the corresponding Comment thereon;
- Motion for Reconsideration of the MTC's October 5, 2007 Order and the respondents' separate Opposition thereto;
- Notice of Appeal/Appeal Memorandum; [and]
- Appellees' Memorand[u]m
- It is not shown that the purported representative of petitioner has the required authority to sign the verification and certificate of non-forum shopping in the latter's behalf.3
With the death of Hugo Regalado on April 23, 2008, the authority of Jose Ramilo O. Regalado to represent the former in this case had ceased effective said date. Elemental is the rule that one of the causes of the termination of an agency is the death of the principal. Apparently, when the instant petition was filed on June 4, 2008, Jose Ramilo O. Regalado had no more authority to sign the verification thereof in behalf of deceased petitioner Hugo Regalado. In effect, the petition was without proper verification. In the absence of verification, the instant petition is deemed as an unsigned pleading, and, as such, it is considered as a mere scrap of paper and does not deserve the cognizance of this Court.7
SEC 16, Death of party; duty of counsel. - Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to inform the court within thirty (30) days after such death of the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal representative or representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with this duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.
The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.
If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one so named shall fail to appear within the specified period, the court may order the opposing party, within a specified time, to procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of the deceased and the latter shall immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs.
Endnotes:
* Additional member in lieu of Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio per raffle dated January 10, 2011.
1 Rollo, pp. 4-5.
2 Id. at 6-8.
3 Supra note 1.
4 Rollo, pp. 30-34.
5 See the October 15, 2010 Resolution of the CA, supra note 2.
6 Rollo, pp. 55-58.
7 Supra note 2, at 7.
8 SEC. 19. Indigent litigants exempt from payment of legal fees. ” INDIGENT LITIGANT (A) WHOSE GROSS INCOME AND THAT OF THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILY DO NOT EXCEED AN AMOUNT DOUBLE THE MONTHLY MINIMUM WAGE OF AN EMPLOYEE AND (B) WHO DO NOT OWN REAL PROPERTY WITH A FAIR MARKET VALUE AS STATED IN THE CURRENT TAX DECLARATION OF MORE THAN THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P300,000.00) SHALL BE EXEMPT FROM THE PAYMENT OF LEGAL FEES.
The legal fees shall be a lien on any judgment rendered in the case favorable to the indigent unless the court otherwise provides.
To be entitled to the exemption herein provided, the litigant shall execute an affidavit that he and his immediate family do not earn a gross income abovementioned nor they own any real property with the fair value aforementioned, supported by an affidavit of a disinterested person attesting to the truth of the litigant's affidavit. The current tax declaration, if any, shall be attached to the litigant's affidavit. Any falsity in the affidavit of the litigant or disinterested person shall be sufficient cause to dismiss the complaint or action or to strike out the pleading of that party, without prejudice to whatever criminal liability may have been incurred.
9 Petitioner submitted the following:
1) Affidavit executed by petitioner attesting that he and his immediate family earn about P1,000.00 per month; and that he does not own any real property.
2) Affidavit of a disinterested third person attesting to the truth of petitioner's affidavit; and
3) December 11, 2007 Order of the 2" Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Pontevedra-Panay, Pontevedra, Capiz, granting the original complainant Hugo C. Regalado's plea to sue and pursue the action as pauper litigant. (See Rollo, pp. 61-65.)
The CA also granted petitioner's plea to sue as pauper litigant as evident in its September 24, 2009 Resolution.
10 Under Sec 1. Rule 87, the actions that survive against the decedent's representatives are as follows:
(1) actions to recover real or personal property or an interest thereon, (2) actions to enforce liens thereon,
(3) actions to recover damages for an injury to a person or a property.
11 Spouses Dela Cruz v. Joaquin, G.R. No. 162788, July 28, 2005, 464 SCRA 576, 584; Riviera Filipina Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 430 Phil. 8, 31 (2002); Torres Jr. v. Court of Appeals. 344 Phil. 348, 366 (1997); Vda. De Salazar v. Court of Appeals, 320 Phil. 373, 377 (1995).
12 Spouses Dela Cruz v. Joaquin, supra; Heirs of Hinog v. Melicor, G.R. No. 140954, April 12, 2005, 455 SCRA 460, 478; Torres Jr. v. Court of Appeals, supra.
13 Vda. De Salazar v. Court of Appeals, supra, at 377; De Mesa, et al. v. Mencias, et al., 124 Phil. 1187, 1195 (1966).
14 Branch 17, Roxas City.