REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Region
City of Manila, Branch 253

LINDA MANANSALA CRUZ

Plaintiff,

versus

SCA- No. 142625

CESAR CRUZ
Defendant,

PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM

Plaintiff, by counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully states:

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

On October 28, 2007, the plaintiff filed a complaint for legal separation against the
defendant on the grounds of habitual alcoholism, repeated physical violence or grossly abusive
conduct and abandonment without justifiable cause for more than one year to the plaintiff. All of
the acts are valid cause of legal separation according to Article 55 of the Family Code in the
Civil Law of the Philippines. The plaintiff claims that the court should acknowledge the legal
separation as the best option for their ineffective marriage. She also claims moral damages,
exemplary damages and attorneys fees against the defendant. The defendant remains silent on
the allegations made against him.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

In this action, the plaintiff seeks the grant of the Court for Legal Separation against her
husband.

This case stresses the actions of the defendant that sufficiently establish the grounds for
Legal Separation. At the trial, Plaintiff Linda Manansala Cruz gave her version of the events. She
was a 30 year-old woman back then and she worked as a sales clerk in SM Manila while Cesar
Cruz graduated with a two-year vocational course in STI, Manila but he did not work since then.

On September 23, 2006, Diana celebrated her birthday party where Plaintiff Linda and
Defendant Cesar have met each other. Their acquaintance led to two weeks of courtship and two
months of being boyfriends and girlfriends. On January 5, 2007, the two had exchanged marital
vows led by Judge Socorro. Then, the defendant Cesar decided to settle in his mothers house.
They were not able to produce a child due to the lack of interest of Cesar during sexual
intercourse with her. Moreover, he also told Linda that they were too young to have a big
responsibility in having a child. Five months have passed since their marriage, the defendant
intoxicated in alcohol have slapped Linda in the face when she refused to buy additional three
bottles of San Miguel pale pilsen. He developed a habit of drinking beers with his barkada and he
hit her a number of times when he is drunk. After sometime, the defendant took his mothers
proposal to pay for our room near SM San Lazaro at 78-B Elena St., San Lazaro, Manila together
with a condition not to hit the Linda anymore. Surprisingly, the defendant have changed and
found a Job but later on he admitted to her that he just pretended to work so he can get away
from the plaintiff. The defendant left his wife in their apartment and has not returned ever since
because he lived again in his mothers house.

ISSUE
1. Whether or not the plaintiff have presented sufficient evidence to prove the grounds for Legal
Separation.
2. Whether or not the plaintiff is entitled to damages and attorneys fees.

ARGUMENTS
I.
DEFENDANT CESAR HAVE COMMITTED REPEATED PHYSICAL VIOLENCE AND
GROSSLY ABUSIVE CONDUCT TO PLAINTIFF LINDA.
The plaintiff is entitled for protection because of the repeated physical violence inflicted
to her by Cesar.
Article 55 of the Family Code of the Philippines, which states that repeated physical
violence or grossly abusive conduct directed against the petitioner, a common child, or a child
of the petitioner is a ground for legal separation. This provision clearly applies in this case
because Cesar inflicted several violence to his wife especially when he is under the influence of
alcohol. He also reiterated that his wife should serve his vices and even hassle her efforts to work
for their living.
The evidentiary facts clearly stated that Linda suffered from several abuses of her
husband who is always intoxicated to liquors. The first was the slapping of her face when she
refuses to buy more beers in the store. Then second was when he held Lindas hands tightly upon
begging him to let go of her hands. Third was when he hit and pulled her forcefully in bed that it
almost broke her arms. The incidents went oftentimes that it caused fear to the plaintiffappellant. The physical violence was committed from the time that the husband and wife stayed
in mothers house of the defendant-appellee until they settled in apartment in San Lazaro Manila.

In U.S. vs. Mendoza, 38 Phil., 691, 693, the maltreatment is deducted from the intention
of the defendant-appellee to do harm towards the appellant. As stated,
Nothing is more difficult to discover than intention, this being a mental act; we are only
able to deduce it from the external acts performed by the agent, and when these acts have
naturally given a definite result, courts should not without clear and conclusive proof,
hold that some other result was intended.

Considering that the defendant stands 58 compared to Lindas height of 5, the violence
repeated to the extent that it becomes extremely difficult for the appellant to protect herself. It
would continuously demean the appellant. Moreover, perpetuates violence against women.
Therefore, the Legal separation must be granted by the court to serve as a basis of a
protection. By being away from the defendant, he would no longer inflict violence to the
plaintiff. The plaintiff should also be freed from the irresponsible husband who gives nothing but
pain and suffering. Linda should bring back the self-respect that was deprived from her when she
cannot protect herself from the several blows of a drunken husband.

II.

THE DEFENDANT ABANDONED THE PLAINTIFF WITHOUT JUSTIFIABLE CAUSE

FOR MORE THAN ONE YEAR.

The defendant-appellee has left his wife in their apartment. Then, returned to his mothers
house. This is a clear justification of abandonment without justifiable cause provided in the
Article 55 of the Family Code of the Philippines. Hence, the defendant is the one who violates
the importance of their marriage provided in the Article 68 of the Family Code of the Philippines
which states that;
Article 68. The husband and wife are obliged to live together, observe
Mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render mutual help and support.

Despite the abuses committed to the plaintiff appellee, she still hopes for their
relationship to be intact. Yet, the defendant-appellee shows his guilt in ending their relationship
by staying away from Linda. The effect of Legal Separation as provided in the Article 106 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines
The spouses shall be entitled to live separately from each other, but marriage
bonds shall not be severed.

Cesar, Defendant-appellee lived separately from his wife even with the absence of the
grant of Legal Separation by the Court. In line with the case of Arroyo v. Vasquez de Arroyo
For though in particular cases the repugnance of the law to dissolve the
obligations of matrimonial cohabitation may operate with great severity
upon individuals, yet it must be carefully remembered that the general
happiness of the married life is secured by its indissolubility. When people
understand that they must live together, except for a very few reasons
known to the law, they learn to soften by mutual accommodation that yoke
which they know they cannot shake off; they become good husbands and
good wives from the necessity of remaining husbands and wives; for
necessity is a powerful master in teaching the duties which it imposes ..."

The matrimonial cohabitation was dissolved due to the abandonment of Cesar. This
implies that Cesar has no willingness to keep and strengthen their marriage. There is no perfect
relationship but in the union made by marriage, the two people must observe mutual love and
respect from which Cesar have not observed. Linda must regain her independence from their
relationship. He has inflicted wounds not only to physical aspects but also to the emotional
aspect of Linda. One who has not given his obligation was the one who abandoned the union. He
had inflicted violence, uttered words that were demeaning to Linda, maintained his
unproductiveness, and drowned to alcohol. He, being an irresponsible husband, have given up to
the relationship for his selfish motive. He have not given effort to change but he even defrauded
Linda in making her believe that he had worked, were in fact he had not.

III.
PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO DAMAGES AND ATTORNEYS FEES

For having defrauded and injured Linda physically and emotionally, Cesar Cruz should
be held liable for moral damages and attorneys fees.

RELIEF
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed of this Trial Court
that judgment be rendered in favor of the plaintiff and that after judgment;

a.
The plaintiff shall be legally separated to the defendant to avoid further violence
and injuries.
b.
The defendant shall be ordered to pay P 50,000.00 for the Moral Damages and
P50,000.00 for Attorneys Fees and P3,000 per court appearance.

Such other reliefs and remedies under the premises are likewise prayed for.

Manila City, Philippines, this 28th day of October 2007.

Atty. Leona Santicruz-Espejo

Counsel for the Plaintiff
PTR No. 18909595:1-04-07:B.C.
IBP No, 693095:1-04-07:B.C.
Roll No. 42481:5-10-97: Manila
No. 143 Mapagmahal St., Paco, Manila Philippines