Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

8th Judicial Region
BRANCH ____
Tacloban City
SPS. BAYANI BOB MONTECASTRO
____________
and HELEN MORENO MONTECASTRO,
Plaintiffs,

CIVIL

CASE

No.

FOR:
VIOL. OF ART. 19 & 20

(FAIR
DEALING), ART. 26 (RIGHT
TO
-v e r s u sthe
WILLIAM B. PLACA, SR.,
Philippines,
Barangay Chairman,
Brgy. 88, San Jose, Tacloban City
In his official and private capacity,
Defendant.

PEACE OF MIND), ART. 32

(LIBERTY OF ABODE) AND
ART. 33 (DEFAMATION), of
Civil

Code

of

the

and Damages

xx----------------------------------------------xx

COMPLAINT
PLAINTIFFS, by counsel, unto this Honorable Court most
respectfully aver: THAT
I. Plaintiffs SPOUSES BAYANI BOB MONTECASTRO and
HELEN MORENO MONTECASTRO are both of legal age, married, and
with postal address at Costa Brava, Brgy. 88, San Jose, Tacloban City,
where they may be served with court notices; the defendant WILLIAM
B. PLACA, SR. is of legal age, Filipino and a resident and at the same
time the Barangay Chairman of Brgy. 88 San Jose, Tacloban City, at
which place he may be served with summons and notices.

Both

plaintiffs and defendant have the capacity to sue and to be sued.

2. This case is principally on the abuse of rights based upon
the famous maxim: suum jus summa injuria (the abuse of right is
the greatest possible wrong).1
1

Jose Arlegui vs. CA, GR No. 126437, March 6, 2000

3. Defendant WILLIAM B. PLACA SR. is a public official and the

dispute relates to the performance of his official functions; hence,
pursuant to Sec. 408(b) of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, this
matter is beyond the authority of the Lupon Tagapamaya to bring
together the parties for a barangay conciliation proceeding.
4. About a year ago, defendant Barangay Chairman William B.
Placa Sr. constructed concrete pavement on the barangay road in
Costa Brava, Brgy. 88, San Jose, Tacloban City, but stopped building the
concrete pavement just in front of plaintiffss driveway, telling them to
cement the remaining portion of the road at their own personal
expense. It must be remembered that plaintiffs spent their own money
for the filling materials laid on this barangay road prior to the
construction of concrete pavement. The pictures2 of the unfinished
construction of barangay road concreting are hereto attached. At the
background is an unhampered construction of a wall by their
neighbors, Sps. Felipe and Erlinda Mailim. (in the first picture), and the
finished wall blocking the passage to the seashore (in the rest of the
pictures).
5. On February 7, 2005 plaintiff Helen Montecastro made a
courtesy call on Mr. Placa to inform him that plaintiffs will proceed to
construct the concrete road fronting their driveway at their personal
expense, per his previous advice. Defendant said that he will prepare a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) wherein plaintiffs will donate the
said work to the barangay, but he warned them not to build a fence,
saying: Ayaw la kamo pag-kodal!
6. Plaintiffs waited for almost a week but defendant failed to
show up with his MOA; the unreasonable delay of his inaction has so
much inconvenienced the plaintiffs who are deprived of an access to
their driveway since the unfinished construction of the road by the
barangay has practically rendered their driveway useless.

Annex A Pictures of unfinished barangay road concreting at Costa Brava

3
7. So, at about 8:00 AM of February 12, 2005, plaintiffs decided
to hire some masons to lay filling materials on the road in preparation
for the concreting of the road, as shown in the pictures3 hereto
attached.
8. Then, at about 11:30 AM of the same date, defendant Placa
showed up in front of plaintiffss house, and told their masons to stop
working and demanded to see the plaintiffs. When plaintiffs confronted
Mr. Placa, he handed to plaintiffs a copy of his MOA, for the plaintiffs to
read the unilateral conditions he has prescribed in his MOA, and for
them to sign the same.
9. When plaintiffs read the conditions, they felt aggrieved and
irritated by such conditions because they are going to spend their
personal funds for the cement work on the road, then donate it to the
barangay, but in return, plaintiffs are being restricted to use it as
parking area, stockpiling of sand and gravel, or any material that will
obstruct the free flow of passage to and from the seashore or the
wharf.
10. Plaintiffs told defendant that they have no quarrel with him
on these restrictive conditions, but they likewise showed him a copy of
a Notice of Violation4 from the Tacloban City Engineers Office and
reminded him that it was unfair for him to be too strict with them while
he was lenient with their neighbor Erlinda Mailim, who erected a
concrete wall across the barangay road, permanently blocking the
passage to the seashore, and yet he did nothing to stop such illegal
construction despite this Notice.
11. Defendant was slighted by this comparison, and then started
to malign plaintiff HELEN MONTECASTRO in the presence of her
husband plaintiff BAYANI MONTECASTRO, their masons and personal
driver, calling her: Buwa-on ka! (youre a liar), and further insulted
her, saying: Taga Marabut ka man, uli didto ha Marabut ngan
didto kamo pag-ukoy, kay nagsisinamok ka dinhe ha amon
barangay! (Youre from Marabut, so go home to Marabut and stay
3
4

Annex B to B-2 Pictures of laying filling materials on the unfinished barangay road concreting
Annex C Notice of Violation issued by City Engineers Office dated 19 March 2004

4
there, because you are a trouble maker in our barangay). Mga ingrato
kamo, magmamalahimo ako nga mapaiwas kamo didi nga
barangay! (You are ingrates, and I will work for your removal in this
barangay). Such oral defamation by defendant is a blatant discourtesy
of a public official in the course of his official duty and a constitutional
violation of plaintiffs right to peaceful abode under Art. III, Sec. 6 of
the 1986 Philippine Constitution. The affidavits of their masons5 and
personal driver6 will corroborate this fact.
12. A few minutes later, defendant arrived at the scene, tagging
along some three or four policemen, who confronted plaintiffs about
the alleged complaints of Mr. Placa that they employed laborers to
construct an illegal fence and concrete road, and that they uttered
unsavory remarks against the barangay chairman, who merely
requested them to sign a MOA. This complaint of Mr. Placa was
entered in the Police Blotter7 of San Jose PNP as Entry No. 1141,
dated 12 February 2005. But he falsified the time of the incident, as it
actually happened at about 12:00 noon, and not 2:30 PM as recorded
in the police blotter. As a barangay official, he must be free of a whiff of
impropriety not only with respect to his performance as a barangay
official but with respect to his behavior as a private individual.
13. Plaintiffs were intimidated by the presence of the policemen
tagged along by Mr. Placa to their place; they were also extremely
ashamed of the neighborhood, as they felt they were being eyed as
criminals.
14. Not contented with this scandalous scene he made against
the plaintiffs, the defendant likewise filed another harassing lettercomplaint8 again on February 14, 2005 with the Office of the City
Engineer, alleging that there is an illegal construction of concrete
fence and concrete road at Costa Brava made by Sps. Helen and Bob
Montecastro without securing a permit from him, and ask that the
construction be stopped as it may cause an obstruction to the
neighborhood.
5

Annex D Joint Affidavit of Segundino Edara, Aron Abelgas, Niel Escala and Nestor Bulcase
Annex E Affidavit of Leodegario Villegas
7
Annex F Police Blotter, Entry No. 1141 dated 12 February 2005
8
Annex G Letter-Complaint dated 14 February 2005
6

15. A certain Engr. Gabriana from the City Engineers Office came
to inspect the place on that same date, but he did not find anything
illegal to stop any on-going construction work, but instead told the
plaintiffs to settle the matter amicably with the barangay chairman.
However, plaintiffs commented that this is an unfair dealing by the
defendant on them and cited as a good example the illegal wall of
Erlinda Mailim subject of Notice of Violation by their office which Mr.
Placa did not make any protest nor stop the illegal construction
inasmuch as it was his duty to do so since it was already declared
illegal by the City Engineers Office.
16. Making good with his threat to drive away the plaintiffs from
the place, defendant Placa urged his barangay council on the eve of
February 12, 2005 to pass a barangay resolution declaring plaintiffs as
persona non grata, and submit it to the City DILG office for a possible
eviction of the plaintiffs in the neighborhood. But the barangay council
decided that the defendant send a summons to the plaintiffs to appear
before the barangay council on February 16, 2005 at 9AM, and to
explain why they should not be declared as persona non grata.
Plaintiffs refused to receive the summons of the defendant, but it
certainly vexed and troubled the plaintiffs.

The affidavit of Deputy

Chief Tanod Losanto Castillo9 will corroborate this fact.

17. Still not contented with one baseless complaint with the City
Engineers Office, he concocted again another complaint on February
15, 2005 and the City Engineer Felix Ripalda was gullible enough to
hurriedly make his February 16, 2005 letter of violation 10 to my
husband, repleading the complaint of Mr. Placa that aggregates
owned by (you) is presently stockpiled along the barangay road
adjacent to your house which had totally obstructed the passageway
of the same constitutes a violation of existing City Ordinance 98 -08
prohibiting construction and installation of any structure and devices
along the streets of the City of Tacloban.
18. On February 17, 2005, my supervising Engr. Florencio
Leoncio11 confronted the rude inspector sent by City Engineer Ripalda,
9

Annex H Affidavit of Losanto Castillo

Annex I Letter of City Engr. Felix Ripalda dated 16 February 2005
11
Annex J Affidavit of Engr. Florencio Leoncio
10

6
who forced him to receive this letter. But Engr. Leoncio told him to look
around and see if there was indeed any stockpile of aggregates made
by us, but there was none. Embarrassed, the rude inspector left hastily,
but dropped the letter on the ground.
19. On the following day,

February 19, 2005 at 11:00 AM, a

stockpile of land soil was laid on the other side of the road by our
neighbors (Maiim), including some barrels of inflammable diesel. But
there was no word of protest from Mr. Placa. We took pictures12 of this
scenario.
20. As we could no longer bear the series of vexation,
harassment, oppression and threat and abuse of authority and unfair
treatment of Mr. Placa upon us, we sought the assistance of a lawyer to
protect our civil rights as well as to file appropriate criminal and
administrative charges against this erring public official. Our lawyer
said that such nasty scheme is laying a basis for extortion, considering
that I and my husband are balikbayans from the USA.
17. As plaintiffs have been vexed, harassed, oppressed and
tormented by the series of abuses of their civil rights by defendant
Barangay Chairman Placa, they sought the assistance of a lawyer to
protect and vindicate their civil rights as well as to file appropriate
criminal and administrative charges against this erring public official.
18. This fascistic and unfair dealing of defendant on the plaintiffs,
taking

advantage

of

his

position

as

Barangay

Chairman,

has

unjustifiably annoyed, vexed, irritated, tormented, disturbed and

intimidated the plaintiffs, so much so that they could no longer live at
peace in their own house for fear of another unfounded search or
inspection, reprisal or arrest by law enforcement groups through the
machination of this scheming barangay official, and their liberty of
abode threatened by his move to declare them as persona non grata.
19. The foregoing acts of defendant, constituting an abuse of the
civil rights of plaintiffs in violation of Articles 19 & 20 (fair dealing),
Article 26 (right to peace of mind), Article 32 (liberty of abode) and
12

Annex K Pictures of stockpile and barrels of diesel by the Mailim

7
Article 33 (defamation) of the Civil Code of the Philippines, has
prejudiced the plaintiffs, who are entitled to moral damages in the
amount of not less than ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS
(P100,000.00).
20. In order to vindicate their civil rights and interests violated by
the

abuses

of

defendant

barangay

chairman,

plaintiffs

were

constrained to hire the services of counsel and agreed to pay the

acceptance fee of THIRTY THOUSAND PESOS (P30,000.00) and
appearance fee of ONE THOUSAND PESOS (P1,000.00) and will incur
litigation

expenses in the amount of not less than

TWENTY

THOUSAND PESOS (P20,000.00).

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that, after due notice and
hearing, judgment be rendered in favor of plaintiffs, finding the
defendant guilty of abuse of right and ordering the defendant to pay
the plaintiffs just and reasonable damages, as follows:
1. Moral damages of not less than P100,000.00
2. Attorneys

fees

of

P30,000.00

plus

appearance

fee of

P1,000.00 per hearing;

3. Cost of litigation of not less than P20,000.00
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

February 21, 2005 at Tacloban

City.

LEO S. GIRON
Counsel for the Plaintiffs
253 Avenida Veteranos, Tacloban City
Roll No. 37979
IBP Lifetime No. 00733
PTR No. 5803034; 1-3-05; Tacloban City

Republic of the Philippines

Province of Leyte
City of Tacloban

)
) SS
)

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING
We, SPOUSES BAYANI BOB MONTECASTRO and HELEN
MORENO MONTECASTRO, both of legal age and with post office
address at Brgy. 88, Costa Brava, San Jose, Tacloban City, after having
been first sworn according to law, hereby state:
We are the plaintiffs in the above-entitled case; We have caused
the preparation of the foregoing Complaint; We have read it and the
allegations therein are true and correct of our own personal knowledge
or based on relevant and authentic records.
That We have not theretofore commenced any action or filed
any claim or pleading involving the same or similar issues or subject
matter in the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, lower courts or
administrative bodies and quasi-judicial agency and to the best of our
knowledge, no such other action or claim is pending therein; and if
there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statement of
the present status thereof; and, if we should thereafter learn hereafter
that the same or similar action or claim or pleading has been filed or is
pending with the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, lower courts,
administrative bodies or quasi judicial agency; we shall undertake to
report that fact within five (5) days from knowledge thereof to the
court wherein this aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been
filed.
That we shall be filing simultaneously this civil case with a
criminal complaint for COERCION under Article 287 of the Revised
Penal Code against the respondent Barangay Chairman William B.
Placa, Sr.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we have hereunto set our hands this
__________ at Tacloban City, Philippines.
HELEN MORENO MONTECASTRO
MONTECASTRO
Affiant

BAYANI
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED
AND
SWORN
to
before
________________________ at Tacloban City, Philippines.
Doc.No. ____
Page No. ____
Book No. ____
SERIES OF 2005

BOB

me

this