A.

Sample - Offer of Evidence and Opposition/Comment to Offer

1. Formal Offer of Evidence

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Br. 20
First Judicial Region
Vigan City, Ilocos Sur
SPOUSES PIERRE Y. ESTEFAN AND
KRISTINE W. ALONZO
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 000011
- versus -

SPOUSES ANTONIO T. RESURRECCION AND

MARITES M. DE FIESTA
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x

FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE Commented [FG1]: Variably and acceptably

denominated by others as Formal Offer of
THE PROSECUTION, by the undersigned public and private prosecutors, respectfully offer their Documentary Exhibits; please note that this
documentary exhibits in support of their case-in-chief: applies to criminal and civil cases. In criminal
cases, the private prosecutor has no personality
to formally offer the evidence, thus, the offer is
1. Exhibit A, the sworn statement of Alang Kaso, the private complainant, and Exhibit A-1, his
made in the name of the prosecution.
signatureto prove that on the date and time stated in the affidavit, the accused issued a post-dated check
in the amount of One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00) which, on presentment for payment, was dishonored
for lack of insufficient funds; to prove authorship and the authenticity of the sworn statement; and as part
of the testimony of the private complainant.

2. Exhibit B, the post-dated check dated 30 June 2004, issued by the accused in the amount of
One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00); Exhibit B-1, the dorsal side of the check with notation DAIF; Exhibit
B-2, the signature of accused on face of the checkto prove the issuance of the check, the amount stated,
the reason for dishonor and the identity of the issuer. The marked copies of Exhibits A and B are already
part of the record.

WHEREFORE, the prosecution respectfully prays that the foregoing Exhibits be ADMITTED as proof
of the facts therein stated and in support of its case-in-chief and for all other relevant purposes.

Quezon City; 7 July 2007.

ELLIOT NESS ATTICUS FINCH

Public Prosecutor Private Prosecutor Commented [FG3]: This is a common mistake for
any legal document submitted by a private
Copy furnished: prosecutor. It is important to remember that the
private prosecutor has no personality to do
MITCH MCDEERE anything in a criminal case as everything is under
the control and direction of the public prosecutor.
Counsel for Accused
Thus, every legal document must be signed by
both the public prosecutor and the private
prosecutor. Note that it would also be
acceptable to have the Offer that is prepared
by a private prosecutor signed by the public
prosecutor to show his conformity thereto.
 2. Comment/Opposition to Offer

Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Br. 20
First Judicial Region
Vigan City, Ilocos Sur
SPOUSES PIERRE Y. ESTEFAN AND
KRISTINE W. ALONZO
Plaintiff,
Criminal Case No. 000011
- versus -

SPOUSES ANTONIO T. RESURRECCION AND

MARITES M. DE FIESTA
Accused.
x ------------------------------------------ x

COMMENT ON THE PROSECUTIONS

FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE

THE ACCUSED, by counsel, respectfully oppose the Prosecutions Offer of Evidence for the following
reasons:

1. Exhibit A, the sworn statement of Alang Kaso, the private complainant, and Exhibit A-1, his
signature are INADMISSIBLE because the private complainant was never presented to authenticate the
document or subjected to cross-examination, thus, the document is hearsay and inadmissible.

2. Exhibit B, the post-dated check dated 30 June 2004, issued by the accused in the amount of
One Million Pesos (P1,000,000.00); Exhibit B-1, the dorsal side of the check with notation DAIF; Exhibit
B-2, the signature of accused on face of the check are INADMISSIBLE for violation of the Best Evidence
Rule as the original check was never presented; and no basis for the presentation of secondary evidence
laid.

ACCORDINGLY, the ACCUSED respectfully submits that the Prosecutions Exhibits are
INADMISSIBLE and must, thus, be EXCLUDED.

Quezon City; 7 July 2007.

(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE

Counsel for the Accused
[Address]

Copy furnished:

ELLIOT NESS
Public Prosecutor

ATTICUS FINCH
Private Prosecutor
 B. Pre-trial Brief Commented [FG5]: Rule 18, section 6.
Checklist:
Republic of the Philippines 1. Proposed terms for amicable settlement
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT Br. 20 2. Alternative modes of dispute resolution
First Judicial Region 3. Summary of admitted facts
4. Proposed stipulation of facts and issues
Vigan City, Ilocos Sur
5. Documents to be presented
SPOUSES PIERRE Y. ESTEFAN AND 6. Names of witnesses and substance of
KRISTINE W. ALONZO their testimony
Plaintiff, 7. Resort to discovery
CIVIL CASE NO.___________ 8. Available trial dates
- versus
FOR: COLLECTION OF SUM OF MONEY
SPOUSES ANTONIO T. RESURRECCION AND
MARITES M. DE FIESTA
Accused.
x ------------------------------------- x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF Commented [FG6]: NOTE: There is no need to

attach a Notice of Hearing for a Pre-Trial Brief.
Also, pre-trial is now mandatory in criminal
DEFENDANT, by counsel, respectfully submits her Pre-Trial Brief, as follows: cases under Rule 118, 2000 Rules on Criminal
Procedure as well as under RA 8493 (The Speedy
Trial Act), although neither the law nor the Rules
I. WILLINGNESS TO ENTER INTO AN AMICABLE SETTLEMENT
require the submission of a Pre-Trial Brief in
AND POSSIBLE TERMS OF ANY SUCH SETTLEMENT criminal cases (in practice, courts also do not
require the submission of a pre-trial brief in
1.1. Subject to a concrete proposal that is fair and reasonable and a reciprocal manifestation of criminal cases). Consequently, the requirement of
openness from plaintiff, defendant is open to the possibility of amicably settling this dispute. a pre-trial brief and the consequences for failure
to submit one (e.g., non-suit or dismissal) appear
[1 & 2] 1.2. Pursuant to Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, defendant respectfully to pertain exclusively to civil cases.
submits that the desired terms of any amicable settlement would involve, first, a clarification of the actual Commented [FG7]: This is a new requirement
extent of any obligation due and owing to plaintiff inasmuch as there is nothing to indicate defendants imposed by the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure.
obligations to plaintiff and, second, a schedule of payments.

II. BRIEF STATEMENT OF CLAIMS AND DEFENSES

2.1. Plaintiff seeks principally to recover the amount of Twenty Two Million Eight Hundred Eighteen
Thousand Nine Hundred Forty Eight Pesos and Thirty Centavos (PHP22,818,948.30) with interest at twelve
percent (12%) arising allegedly from unpaid orders delivered to defendant variously in 1989.

2.2. Defendant resists plaintiffs claims based on a failure to state a cause of action because of :

2.2.1. Plaintiffs lack of personality to sue and, therefore, not being the real party
in interest under Rule 3, section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure;

2.2.2. Extinguishment of the alleged claim made by the entity Regency Furniture.

2.3. Defendant also interposed a compulsory counterclaim for Two Million Pesos
(PHP2,000,000.00) for moral damages and Two Million Pesos (PHP2,000,000.00) for exemplary damages
and One Hundred Thousand Pesos (PHP100,000.00) as attorneys fees.

III. FACTS AND OTHER MATTERS ADMITTED BY THE PARTIES

 [3] 3.1. Defendant admits only those facts stated in her Answer, i.e., her personal circumstances,
receipt of the demand letter dated January 5, 1997 and her reply to the demand letter.

3.2. Subject to a concrete proposal for stipulation of additional facts from plaintiff during pre-trial
or even thereafter, defendant admits no other facts stated in the Complaint.

IV. ISSUES TO BE TRIED

[4] 4.1. Defendant submits that the following issues put forward by plaintiff are subject to proof:

4.1.1. Plaintiffs personality to seek legal relief;

4.1.2. Plaintiffs entitlement to the amount claimed;

4.2. Defendant submits that the following issues she put forward are subject to proof:

4.2.1. Plaintiffs bad faith in filing this suit;

4.2.2. Defendants entitlement to the claims made in her Compulsory Counterclaim
as a result of plaintiffs bad faith;

V. EVIDENCE

[6] 5.1. Defendant intends to present the following witnesses:

5.1.1. Defendant herself, who will testify on the true circumstances leading to the
filing of this suit against her;

5.1.2. An employee of Topless Enterprises with personal knowledge as to the true

circumstances behind the alleged obligations due and owing in favor of plaintiff.

[5] 5.2. Defendant reserves the right to present any and all documentary evidence which shall
become relevant to rebut plaintiffs claims in the course of trial as well as any other witnesses whose
testimony will become relevant to belie plaintiffs witnesses, if necessary.

VI. RESORT TO DISCOVERY

[7] 6.1. Considering the relatively simple issues presented, defendant does not intend to avail of
discovery at this time.

6.2. Subject, however, to a concrete and reasonable request for discovery from plaintiff, defendant
reserves the right to resort to discovery before trial.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Quezon City; 13 April 2007.

(Sgd.) MITCH MCDEERE

Counsel for Defendant
[Address]

Copy furnished:

Atty. MA BOLA
Counsel for Plaintiff