Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Branch 3
Hon. Carolyn N. Casino-Damasing
June 9, 2017, Friday, 8:30am
11. Spouses Ma. Luz L. Unlawful Detainer/Damages Court ordered for the issuance
Ancog/Divino P. Ancog v. (Motion for Execution) of writ of execution. The
Ronald Erwin Uy defendant is given 15 days to
remove the structure from the
subject property of
complainant. If the order is not
complied, the defendant
promised to remove the
structure at his own cost.
12. BPI Family Savings Bank Inc. Replevin and/or Sum of Counsel for the prosecution
v. Rammys A. Mamainte, et al. Money/Interests/Damages etc moved for the issuance alias
(Motion for Issuance of Alias summons for the accused. The
Summons) motion was granted. The judge
ordered that if the accused is
not available, substituted
service can be made. If the
latter is not possible, the
prosecution may amend its
pleading.
Regional Trial Court
Branch 39
Hon. Marites Filomena B. Rana-Bernales
June 9, 2017, Friday 2:00pm
1. People v. Alfe S. Bibello Illegal Possession of Bladed Counsel for the accused made a
Weapon manifestation that the accused
(Arraignment) intended to withdraw his plea.
The prayer was granted by the
court.
The proceedings started late because the Public Prosecutor Batbatan was very late. The private
prosecuting attorney is present but the judge said that the private prosecutor must secure a
written authority to prosecute on behalf of the public prosecutor.
Criminal Cases
1. Pp. vs. Olivia E. Babao for Traffic Violation
For Arraignment but the case is reset because the accused cannot be located in the
given address. Private complainant is directed to provide the specific address of the
accused otherwise the case will ordered archived. An order if given to notify private
complainant.
2. Pp. vs. Marcelino Caling for Traffic Violation
For Arraignment but the case is reset because the accused cannot be located in the
given address. Private complainant is directed to provide the specific address of the
accused otherwise the case will ordered archived. An order if given to notify private
complainant.
6. Pp. vs. Rizaldy Naguta y Baa for Direct Assault Upon An Agent of A Person in Authority
After referral to the PMC , a compromise agreement was presented to the Judge for the
settlement of the civil aspect of the crime. The private complainant signified that he is
not willing to proscute and testify. The motion was granted and the case is dismissed .
The bond is ordered cancelled and released. The Judge made a comment that next time
, the private complainant must make an affidavit of desistance.
11. PP. vs Kristel Rose Bonalos y dela Cerna for Malicious Mischief
Preliminary Conference The prosecution submitted its Judicial Affidavit but the opposing
counsel pointed out that the documentary evidences are not attached. The Judge noted that
the documents may be photocopied from the court records with the assistance of the court
staff and attached to the Judicial Affidavit. The case is set for Pre-trial but the parties are
directed to appear before the court on an earlier date for possible settlement via a JDR
proceeding.
13. Pp. vs. Roy Bustamente y Abragan for Violation of Section 266 of NIRC
Pretrial The defense counsel informed the court that they cannot submit their Judicial
Affidavit because their documentary evidence is in their shop which was closed by the building
owner following a case of estafa between the defendant and the building owner.
16. Pp. vs Erwin Bryan See et.al for Falsification of Pubic Document
Hearing Defense asked for more time to comment on the amended information and made a
manifestation that the DOJ granted their appeal and found no probable cause. The judge asked
for an official copy of the decision. Within 10 days , the court will issue a resolution and will
proceed to the arraignment next hearing.
June 14, 2017
Regional Trial Court
10th Judicial Region
Cagayan de Oro City
Branch 39
Hon. Bernales - Presiding Judge
Clerk of Court
Civil Cases
1. Quieting of Title
Judge informed the petitioner and his counsel that the defendant is her aunt so she
would have to inhibited but she assured the parties that the case will be reraffled next
week.
2. The case is reset for hearing because their was a confusion between the 2 defendants.
The 1st defendant filed a motion to dismiss while the 2nd defendant filed an answer. The
judge said she will have to rule on the motion to dismiss first.
3. The case is reset because the defense counsel is not around. His opposing counsel
informed the court that his son has a seizure while he is on his way to the hearing.