Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

National Capital Judicial Region
Branch 22, Makati City

EDWARD X. CULLEN,
Plaintiff,
-versus-

Civil Case No. 1234454

For: Declaration of Nullity
of Marriage under Article 36
of the Family Code

ISABELLA W. SALVADOR-CULLEN
Defendant.
X==================================X
TRANSCRIPT
of the stenographic notes taken
during the
pre-trial and held at the Sala
of this Court on 9 January 2016, at
4:00 P.M.
before the HON. MARJORIE
UYENGCONOLASCO, Presiding Judge.
PRESENT:
FOR THE COURT:
Ms. JOANNA MARIN
Branch Clerk of Court
Ms. CLEMENTINE VILLANUEVA
Stenographer
APPEARANCE:
Atty. ALEJANDRO UNTALAN
Plaintiff Counsel
Atty. BERNHARD FULGENCIO

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

Defense Counsel
Atty. ADRIAN TADENA
Counsel from the Office of the Solicitor General
X---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
(AFTER THE CASE WAS CALLED)
COURT:
Appearances?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor. I am Atty. Alejandro
Untalan for the plaintiff Mr. Edward X. Cullen
COURT:
Good afternoon. Where is the petitioner?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Hes here Your Honor.
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Good afternoon, Your Honor. I am Atty. Bernhard
Fulgencio representing the respondent Ms. Isabella W.
Salvador-Cullen
COURT:
Is the respondent present?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes, Your Honor.
COURT:
Alright. And for the State?
ATTY. TADENA:
Good afternoon, Your Honor. I am Atty. Adrian
Tadena
General.

representing

the

office

of

the

Solicitor

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

COURT:
Why are you so interested in this case?
ATTY. TADENA:
Because the case is controversial your Honor.
COURT:
Ok. For today I will recognize the OSG. The
lawyer from the OSG is appearing instead of the trial
prosecutor. This case is scheduled for pre-trial today.
The case already underwent before the branch clerk
of court and we have the minutes for the preliminary
conference. Do you have anything to add to what was
taken up during the preliminary conference?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
For the petitioner, none.
COURT:
How about the stipulations? I see that the
minutes of the preliminary conference did not
enumerate any stipulation of facts, just the general
statement that the parties guided by their pre-trial
briefs, agreed upon the facts proposed by the
petitioner in his pre-trial brief. The petitioner
disagreed with the proposed stipulation of the
respondent in her pre-trial brief. Yun lang. Let us
clarify this portion ha. Next time when you make the
minutes of the preliminary conference, it should
contain the stipulations not just a reference to the
pre-trial brief or other documents. Let us clarify from
the respondent. Atty. Fulgencio, it is stated in the
minutes that the respondent is admitting the
proposed stipulation of facts of the petitioner. All of
them?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

You are referring to item 3 of the petitioners

pre-trial brief?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
All of these are admitted?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor. In item 3 from paragraph 4 to
paragraph 22.
COURT:
Now for the respondents proposals for
stipulations, the petitioner has not admitted or is not
willing to admit any of the proposals for stipulations?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
For the petitioner your Honor, the stipulation of
facts stated in the pre-trial brief of respondents are
simply the issues of the case.
COURT:
These are not stipulation of facts. What you
have here are not stipulations of facts. These are
actually the issues to be resolved during the trial and
naturally the petitioner is not expected to stipulate on
these. Otherwise, tapos na. Remember when you
make proposals for stipulation of facts, you are
referring to facts. You want the other party to admit.
Can you have a revised stipulation of facts from the
respondents side? What will be your proposals?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
The respondent proposes to stipulate that he
has without knowledge or information to formulate
with regards to paragraph 2.10 of the petitioners
petition.
COURT:
You want the petitioner to admit that? Atty.
Untalan, youve heard the proposal for admission.

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

ATTY. UNTALAN:
Admitted.
COURT:
Youre admitting that the respondent has no
personal knowledge?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
No Your Honor.
COURT:
Yun nga eh. And again I remind you. When you
make your proposal, it must be something that you
know the other party might be able to admit or
stipulate. Otherwise, its useless. Kung ikaw ang nasa
petitioners side, what will be matters, relevant matter
pertaining to your defense which might be admitted
by the other party. The respondent is contesting the
nullity di ba? Why?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
The respondent is contesting the nullity because
she and the petitioner are not psychologically
incapacitated.
COURT:
Not psychologically incapacitated, you have that
theory, your objective and then from there you break
it down. This is your premise. This is your defense.
This petition should be contested because neither of
the parties are psychologically incapacitated. What is
your support for that? What will be your supporting
facts and evidence? You break it down and then
based on this find these facts which might be
stipulated upon by the other party. Thats how you
make proposals for stipulations. You have to make it
subtle. Meaning to say, hindi pwede yung blatant na
ganito kasi for sure hindi yan iaadmit ng kabila like
your proposal that the parties are not psychologically
incapacitated. Obviously the petitioner will deny that
because the petitioner precisely filed this case on the
ground that both of them are psychologically
incapacitated so if this is your theory and your
defense
that
they
are
not
psychologically

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

incapacitated, what will be your supporting facts and

evidence regarding that? Thats how you get your
stipulations. What are your proposals for stipulations
again?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We propose to stipulate that the respondent had
a constant communication with the petitioner when
she was out of the country training at Stanford.
COURT:
Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner denies that.
COURT:
Why is the petitioner denying this?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Because on the petition, the respondent even
when she is in the Philippines the respondent fails to
communicate or to answer the calls of the petitioner
when the petitioner calls.
COURT:
What else? Any other proposal for stipulation?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
The respondent proposes that she was able to
provide support for her family also when she was
training outside of the country at Stanford.
COURT:
Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner deny the proposal for stipulation
COURT:
Why?
ATTY. UNTALAN:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

In the petition, since the petitioner is the father,

he already alleged that he provides for the family.
COURT:
So there was absolutely no participation on the
part of the respondent in providing support?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Are you sure of that?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Will you be able to prove that the upkeep and
support of the family was shouldered by the
petitioner alone with no participation on the part of
the respondent?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor. The petitioner has a means
because he is employed as a call center agent.
COURT:
Alright. Any other proposal for stipulation?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, the respondent would also like to
propose that during the time when she was in
Cagayan she also had constant communication with
the petitioner.
COURT:
Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner denies the proposed stipulation
because it is the attitude of the respondent that she
will live the house, their conjugal dwelling not to
communicate with the husband or with the family
when shes outside the area.

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

COURT:
What else?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
The respondent would also like to propose that
her training in Stanford was with the consent of the
petitioner; that the petitioner gave his consent to the
respondent in order for her to go to Stanford and
conduct her training.
COURT:
The respondents training in Stanford was with
the consent of the petitioner?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor
COURT:
Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner denies. The respondent failed to
get the permission of the petitioner for her study in
Stanford.
COURT:
You mean to say the respondent left for Stanford
without the prior consent of the petitioner?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
How was she able to leave without getting the
consent of the petitioner? There was really no
consent given?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Although the petitioner knows that the
respondent will be leaving for abroad, he has to idea
that the respondent will study in Stanford.
COURT:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

So the petitioner is willing to admit that he

knows that the petitioner was leaving for abroad?
Correct?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
What else? Any other proposal for stipulation?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, in relation to the custody of
Renesmee Cullen, the respondent respectfully
proposes that she earns P150,000.00 a month.
COURT:
Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner denies the stipulation because
the respondent has no job or she has the means to
get that earning and is in school studying for the
furtherance of her profession.
COURT:
What else?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your
Honor,
the
respondent
respectfully
proposes that, also with regards to the custody of
Renesmee Cullen, that Renesmee Cullen is her
dependent under her tax records from which the
petitioner have made his waiver to make Renesmee
the respondents dependent.
COURT:
So Renesmee is the respondents dependent in
the tax records?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

Admitted or denied?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner denies the proposed stipulation
because their child Renesmee, their tax declaration
they declared as joint dependent, as their dependent.
COURT:
Does the respondent agree to that? That
Renesmee is a joint dependent or the dependent of
both the petitioner and the respondent?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
No Your Honor.
COURT:
What else? Any other proposals?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, the respondent wants to propose
that fact that her work hours is from 8pm to 5pm.
COURT:
You think the petitioner will be willing to admit
that given that earlier they already stated that or
they denied your proposal for stipulation regarding
the P150,000.00 monthly income on the ground that
apparently the respondent had no job. So if its the
petitioners contention that the respondent had no
job, you think that the petitioner will be willing to
stipulate that the respondents working hours are as
you said 8pm to 5pm ba? Or you want to withdraw
that proposal?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
I would like to withdraw that proposal. (26:32)
COURT:
Do you have any other proposal for stipulation?
Earlier you said that you were admitting everything,
the proposals for stipulations of the petitioner, all of
item 3 number 4 to 22. It also contains the fact of the
marriage of the petitioner and that the petitioner and

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

the respondent has a common child, Renesmee and

the custody is with the petitioner. We have no issue
regarding the custody over the child?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We have, your Honor.
COURT:
What is your issue regarding that? You want the
custody to be transferred to the respondent?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
How about the support? Who supports the child?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We also like to ask for a respective support from
the petitioner.
COURT:
But the child is with the petitioner. You mean to
say even if the child is with the petitioner you are
asking support from the petitioner?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Why? What will be your basis?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Because the petitioner is the father of
Renesmee. He also has the obligation to support the
child.
COURT:
But who is supporting the child right now?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
It is the petitioner.
COURT:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

The petitioner is the one supporting and custody

is also with the petitioner. What will be your legal
basis for asking for support for a child who is being
supported and under the custody of the petitioner?
There will be no basis for that. It will be different if for
example the child is with you and you allege that the
petitioner is not providing any support but obviously
since the child is with the petitioner thats not
disputed that the present situation is that the child is
in the custody of the petitioner so obviously the one
supporting the child is the petitioner so what will be
the basis for the respondent to ask for support?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Therefore, your honor, we would just like to
withdraw the request for support only for the custody.
33:18
COURT:
So with those additions the other matters in the
minutes
of
the
preliminary
conference
are
satisfactory to both the petitioner and respondent?
ATTY. UNTALAN and ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
How about the State? Mr. OSG?
ATTY. TADENA:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
The State does not have any proposals for
stipulation or any evidence to be presented?
ATTY. TADENA:
None Your Honor.
COURT:
But you will choose to
examination on the witnesses?

conduct

cross

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

ATTY. TADENA:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Both the petitioners and the respondents
witnesses?
ATTY. TADENA:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
All of the exhibits mentioned in the preliminary
conference for both the petitioner and the respondent
were already marked? Already here? Complete?
CLERK OF COURT:
Yes Your Honor.
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
With respect to the respondent we would like to
submit these two pieces of evidence which were
previously
provisionally
marked
during
the
preliminary conference.
COURT:
What are these exhibits?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Exhibit #5 Completion Certificate from Cagayan
Provincial Hospital and Exhibit #9.
COURT:
Youre submitting the originals or certified copies
only?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We are submitting the originals your Honor with
the Clerk of Court.
COURT:
Alright. Please have it noted. And you want a
transfer of the markings on the photocopies to the
originals?

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor
COURT:
Alright. Kindly transfer the markings Ms. Clerk of
Court. Cancel the provisional marking on the
photocopy and have it noted that it was transferred to
the original
(THE CLERK OF COURT DOES THE MARKINGS)
COURT:
How about for the petitioner? All the exhibits are
originals or certified copies?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.

COURT:
No additional exhibits to be submitted today?
None?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
None Your Honor.
COURT:
How about the respondent?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
None Your Honor.
COURT:
All of your exhibits were attached to the judicial
affidavits of your witnesses?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, with respect to the respondent, we
will submit later on the attachments for the judicial
affidavit.

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

COURT:
But you were able to submit the judicial
affidavits? Not yet?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We were able to submit the judicial affidavits.
COURT:
Ah eto Exhibit 1 to 2. You mean to say exhibits 3
to 11 were not attached to the judicial affidavit of
Isabella and Chezmos?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Why not?

ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Because of technical difficulties Your Honor in
procuring the copies. We were not able to completely
attach all of these to the judicial affidavits.
COURT:
But these exhibits were already marked so you
have them. Its just a matter of attaching them to the
judicial affidavits.
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
We were not able to...We decided Your Honor to
submit it once we have gathered all the evidence
such as this evidence that I have given to the Clerk of
Court for markings Your Honor.
COURT:
But today is already the pre-trial so you should
have at least made sure that during the pre-trial
these exhibits were already attached to the judicial
affidavits. If you have a complete set then you can
attach it. Do you have a complete set?

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, we have the complete set with the
Clerk of Court.
COURT:
No, attached to the judicial affidavits.
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Not yet Your Honor.
COURT:
What can the petitioner say about this?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
The petitioner would like to move that the
evidence or exhibits mentioned in the petition which
were not attached in the judicial affidavits be
expunged from the records of the court.
COURT:
What will be your basis for that?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Because under the judicial affidavit rule, it is
stated that if the if the testimony of the witnesses
refers to a document he may attach that document
as an exhibit and if he wants to retain the original, he
can.
COURT:
So what is the effect if the exhibits are not
attached to the judicial affidavit?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
It will not form part of the judicial affidavit.
COURT:
What is the reason again Mr. Fulgencio for failure
to submit the attachments?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

Your Honor, there was a delay in procuring the

copies of these two exhibits that have previously
have the clerk of court mark. That is the reason for
our delay in submitting the evidence.
COURT:
Is that reason acceptable to the petitioner? Yes
or no? Do you think its a valid cause Atty. Untalan?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
For the petitioner, we are not willing to accept.
COURT:
Its not a valid cause? So if that happens to you,
you will not consider it as a valid cause?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Your Honor, I would like to manifest something. I
would like to manifest that early on we have an
agreement with the lawyers of the petitioner
regarding our late submission of these exhibits to be
attached to the judicial affidavits. And earlier on they
assented to our request.
COURT:
Do you confirm that? There was this gentlemens
agreement.
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Before this court has come into session, the
opposing counsel approached me that they cannot
provide the documents because of some reason and I
told him that we will oppose his motion to accept
those documents or reason and he will be the one to
explain to the court to give a valid reason.
COURT:
Do you have a recommended fine or I will ask
the State? State na lang.
ATTY. TADENA:
P1,000.00

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

COURT:
I am adapting the recommendation made by the
OSG lawyer so a fine of P1000.00 will be imposed
upon the respondent and it will be paid at the same
time the compliant judicial affidavit will be submitted.
When will the compliant judicial affidavit be
submitted?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
By Monday Your Honor.
COURT:
Through LBC?
ATTY. FULGENCIO:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
No other matters to be changed in the minutes
of the preliminary conference? Petitioner and
respondent, none?
ATTY. FULGENCIO and ATTY. UNTALAN:
None Your Honor.
COURT:
Can we now adapt the minutes of the
preliminary conference with the modifications and
clarifications made today for purposes of pre-trial?
ATTY. FULGENCIO and ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Can we now terminate pre-trial? We will just set
the trial dates. The petitioner will be presented next
week?
ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
And the second witness the week after?

CIVIL CASE NO. 1234454

TSN 9 January 2016
C.S.M. Villanueva

ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
For the defendant, February 6 and the second
witness February 13.These are the trial dates that we
have. So can we now terminate pre-trial?
ATTY. FULGENCIO and ATTY. UNTALAN:
Yes Your Honor.
COURT:
Pre-trial is now terminated. Set this case for the
initial presentation of...actually can we change the
headings of this case? Instead of petitioner and
respondent, lets change it to plaintiff and defendant
to make it uniform. Edward Cullen will testify on
January 16. Any other matters or manifestations from
counsels?
ATTY. FULGENCIO and ATTY. UNTALAN:
None Your Honor.
X-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------X
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that the foregoing
transcript is
true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and
ability.
Makati City, Philippines, 9 January
2016.

CLEMENTINE S.M. VILLANUEVA

St
enographer