Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 117 views

    Motion To Expunge

    Uploaded by

    Saning Diaz
    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.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Motion To Expunge

    Uploaded by

    Saning Diaz
    117 views3 pages
    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.

    Original Description:

    Sample of Motion

    Original Title

    motion to expunge

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    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.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    117 views3 pages

    Motion To Expunge

    Uploaded by

    Saning Diaz
    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.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 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