Scribd
Upload
261 views3 pages

Motion To Expunge

This document is a comment and opposition filed by the plaintiff Jose Rizal against the defendant Andres Bonifacio's urgent motion to extend the period to file an answer or other responsive pleading. The plaintiff argues that the defendant's motion should be denied because it did not include a notice of hearing as required by the Rules of Court. Motions must be set for hearing and include notice to ensure the opposing party has a chance to agree or object. Without this, a motion is just a scrap of paper and presents no issue for the court to decide. The plaintiff prays that the defendant's motion be denied for failure to comply with legal requirements.

Uploaded by

Saning Diaz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
261 views3 pages

Motion To Expunge

This document is a comment and opposition filed by the plaintiff Jose Rizal against the defendant Andres Bonifacio's urgent motion to extend the period to file an answer or other responsive pleading. The plaintiff argues that the defendant's motion should be denied because it did not include a notice of hearing as required by the Rules of Court. Motions must be set for hearing and include notice to ensure the opposing party has a chance to agree or object. Without this, a motion is just a scrap of paper and presents no issue for the court to decide. The plaintiff prays that the defendant's motion be denied for failure to comply with legal requirements.

Uploaded by

Saning Diaz
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Republic of the Philippines

National Capital Judicial Region


REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Gapan City
Branch

Jose Rizal
Plaintiff,

-versus- For: SUM OF MONEY


AND/OR
DAMAGES WITH PRAYER FOR THE
ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF
PRELIMINARY ATTACHMENT

ANDRES BONIFACIO
Defendant.
x-------------------------------------------------------------x

COMMENT AND/OR OPPOSITION TO EXPUNGE


THE URGENT MOTION TO EXTEND PERIOD TO FILE ANSWER
AND/OR OTHER RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS

PLAINTIFF, through the undersigned counsel, and unto this


Honorable Court, most respectfully states that:

1. On March 5 2008, Plaintiff received a pleading


titled“URGENT MOTION TO EXTEND PERIOD TO FILE ANSWER
AND/OR OTHER RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS” dated March 2, 2008
filed by the Defendant.

2. Upon careful perusal of the “URGENT MOTION TO


EXTEND PERIOD TO FILE ANSWER AND/OR OTHER
RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS” filed by the defendant, it is evident that
there is no notice of hearing;

3. Under the Section 4 of Rule 15 of the Rules of court, it is


explicitly stated that a motion must be set for hearing, to wit:

“Section 4.  Hearing of motion. — Except for motions


which the court may act upon without prejudicing the
rights of the adverse party, every written motion shall be
set for hearing by the applicant.

Every written motion required to be heard and the


notice of the hearing thereof shall be served in such a
manner as to ensure its receipt by the other party at least
three (3) days before the date of hearing, unless the court
for good cause sets the hearing on shorter notice.”

4. It is a basic rule that a motion must contained a notice of


hearing, otherwise it is treated as a mere scrap of paper. In the case
of Fajardo v. Court of Appeal dated March 20, 2001, G.R. no.
140356, to wit:

A motion without notice of hearing is pro forma, a mere


scrap of paper. It presents no question which the court
could decide. The court has no reason to consider it and the
clerk has no right to receive it. The rationale behind the rule
is plain: unless the movant sets the time and place of
hearing, the court will be unable to determine whether the
adverse party agrees or objects to the motion, and if he
objects, to hear him on his objection. 11 The objective of the
rule is to avoid a capricious change of mind in order to
provide due process to both parties and ensure impartiality
in the trial

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, defendants respectfully pray that this

Honorable Court to deny the urgent motion to extend period to file

answer and/or other responsive pleadingsfor failure to comply with

formal requirements of law of a valid motionas required by law.

Plaintiff prays for such other reliefs as may be deemed just

and equitable.
By:

George Estregan
Counsel for Petitioner
Roll No. gvhub
IBP No. 072370082/
PTR No. 3456777/

EXPLANATION

This is to certify as an Officer of the Court that a copy of


comment and/or opposition was served, not by personal service but
by registered mail as herein-below indicated by reason of time,
distance, lack of manpower and urgency.

You might also like