Republic of the Philippines

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT of MISAMIS ORIENTAL

10th Judicial Region
Branch 18
Cagayan de Oro City

JOHN D. JANDEE, CIVIL CASE No. CV -2018-

Plaintiff, 710
vs.
Collection of Sum of Money.
MARY JANE DELA CRUZ, Attorney’s Fees and Damages
Defendant.
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - -- - - - - --- -/

ANSWER with AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES and COUNTERCLAIMS

Defendant, through counsel, and unto this Most Honorable Court,
stating and most respectfully averring the following Answer, thus:
1. The defendant received the Summons dated December 15, 2019,
ordering the Defendant to file her Answer within fifteen (15)
days vis-a-vis the complaint filed by the plaintiffs;
a. The summons was received by the defendant on December
20, 2019 and should have until January 4, 2020 to file her
Answer;
2. At the outset, all denials found herein are subject to the
defendant’s Affirmative Defenses and Counter-Claims, if
applicable;
3. To begin, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 may be admitted;
ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
4. Paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are denied, the truth of which
are those set forth in our affirmative defenses. Particularly, there
is no loan to speak of as both of the parties are partners in the
business;
a. (State here evidentiary matters)
5. Paragraph 11 is admitted as to the first part but denied as to the
last part for lack of actual knowledge and information sufficient
to form a belief as to the truth of the material averment;
6. Paragraphs 12 and 13 are denied for being false and misleading.
The defendant did not oblige herself to give any financial

Page 1 of 6
 statement to the plaintiff as she does not have any obligation to
produce it to the plaintiff;
ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
7. Paragraphs 14, 15, 16 and 17 are all denied. The truth of it are
those stated in the affirmative defenses herein;
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
The complaint fails to state a cause of action
8. Aside from the bare allegations of the plaintiffs in their
complaint, there is nothing else that can prove the existence of A
loan;
9. “The basic rule is that mere allegation is not evidence and is not
equivalent to proof.”1 “It is hornbook doctrine that mere allegations do
not constitute proof. As held in Real v. Belo, "it is basic in the rule of
evidence that bare allegations, unsubstantiated by evidence, are not
equivalent to proof. In short, mere allegations are not evidence."2;
10.If we peruse the complaint, there are no documentary evidences
attached to prove the bare allegations of the plaintiffs;
11.They also allege that they gave money to the defendant. Again
the plaintiff failed to substantiate this;
12.The plaintiff also fails to show any iota of evidence that the
parties agreed that the defendant “shall solely manage the
business, register the same in her name”;
a. The reason why the plaintiff has no evidence is that the
parties never agreed to such;
13.“It is well to point out that the plaintiff’s cause of action should not
merely be "stated" but, importantly, the statement thereof should be
"sufficient." This is why the elementary test in a motion to dismiss on
such ground is whether or not the complaint alleges facts which if true
would justify the relief demanded.”3;
14.“What is contemplated, therefore, is a failure to state a cause of action
which is provided in Sec. 1(g) of Rule 16. This is a matter of
insufficiency of the pleading. Sec. 5 of Rule 10, which was also
included as the last mode for raising the issue to the court, refers to the
1
Villanueva v. Philippine Daily Inquirer, Inc.,605 Phil. 926, 937 (2009).
2
GSIS vs. Prudential Guarantee and Assurance, Inc. G.R. No. 165585. November 30,
2013.
3
Unicapital, Inc. v. Consing, Jr., G.R. Nos. 175277 and 175285, September 11, 2013,
705 SCRA 511, 526

Page 2 of 6
 situation where the evidence does not prove a cause of action. This is,
therefore, a matter of insufficiency of evidence. Failure to state a cause
of action is different from failure to prove a cause of action. The
remedy in the first is to move for dismissal of the pleading, while the
remedy in the second is to demur to the evidence, hence reference to
Sec. 5 of Rule 10 has been eliminated in this section. The procedure
would consequently be to require the pleading to state a cause of
action, by timely objection to its deficiency; or, at the trial, to file a
demurrer to evidence, if such motion is warranted.”4;
15.“Failure to state a cause of action and lack of cause of action are
distinct grounds to dismiss a particular action. The former refers to
the insufficiency of the allegations in the pleading, while the latter to
the insufficiency of the factual basis for the action. Dismissal for
failure to state a cause of action may be raised at the earliest stages of
the proceedings through a motion to dismiss under Rule16 of the
Rules of Court, while dismissal for lack of cause of action may be
raised any time after the questions of fact have been resolved on the
basis of stipulations, admissions or evidence presented by the
plaintiff.”5;
16.Upon reviewing the complaint, it has failed to substantiate the
presence of a loan and further failed to likewise substantiate
their statement that they gave the defendant money;
a. Therefore, considering the insufficiency of the allegations,
this complaint should be dismissed;
The damages prayed for in the
complaint have no bases and are
unsubstantiated.
17.Considering that there is no contract of loan between the
parties, there is no consequent obligation for the defendant to
pay the plaintiff;
a. As stated above, the parties are partners in a business…
(expound evidentiary matters)
18.If the plaintiffs have “suffered sleepless nights, mental anguish,
serious anxiety, anger, wounded feelings and any similar injuries”,
the same are not due to the acts of the defendant;
19.How the plaintiffs feel toward the defendant is not actionable;

4
Regalado, Remedial Law Compendium, Volume I, Ninth Revised Ed. (2005), p. 182.
5
Macaslang v. Zamora, G.R. No. 156375, May 30, 2011, 649 SCRA 92, 106-107.

Page 3 of 6
 20.Likewise, exemplary damages can not be claimed either. The
allegations are insufficient to prove malice, bad faith, gross
negligence or that the defendant acted in a wanton, fraudulent,
reckless, oppressive or malevolent manner;
21.Lastly, as to the claim for attorney’s fees, the same are uncalled
for and are unreasonable. Further, the plaintiff never annexed
any receipt to prove any payment of such fee;
COUNTER - CLAIMS
22.The present case has caused, and is still causing, untold stress.
The defendant is suffering from sleepless nights, anxiety, fright
and worries. An award for moral damages is fitting and if it
should be quantified, the amount of P 200,000.oo is respectfully
prayed;
23.So as to discourage the public from using the Courts for their
personal motives and gain, like the plaintiffs are doing, an
Exemplary Damage must be adjudged against them in the
amount of P 200,000.oo;
24.Due to this unfounded claim, the defendant was constrained to
engage the services of a lawyer which could probably cost her
P50,000.oo as attorney’s fees plus the appearance fees;
25.The plaintiff must also be adjudged to refund all the expenses of
this suit spent by the defendant;

IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 6, RULE 7 OF THE AMENDED

RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
26.The witness to be presented to prove the respondent’s defenses
and claims are:
a. The defendant herself. She will testify to substantiate the
averments in this Answer, including the defenses and claims;
identify the exhibits, if any; and other relevant and related
matters. Her Judicial Affidavit is also hereto attached, in
support of the allegations contained in this Answer;
In summary, she will testify that the parties are partners in
the business. What the plaintiff gave was her contribution to
the business and not a loan. She will also testify that she can
not give any financial statement as there is no agreement
between the parties. She will also testify to prove damages on
her part.

Page 4 of 6
 b. JEAN GRAY N. WHITE. She will testify to substantiate some
of the averments in this Answer, especially the time when the
parties met each other; She will also corroborate the
testimony of the respondent; She will also testify on other
relevant and related matters. Her Judicial Affidavit is
attached herein, in support of some of the allegations
contained in this Answer;
In summary, she will corroborate the testimony of the
defendant as she is also a business partner and that she was
present when the transaction happened.
27.The documentary exhibits of the defendant to support the
allegations of this Answer are the following:
a. Exhibit “1” – A copy of an official receipt.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed
of this Most Honorable Court that the Complaint be dismissed for lack of
merit and basis and the affirmative defenses and counter-claims be heard
and granted.
Other relief and remedies just and equitable under the law are
likewise prayed for.
Respectfully submitted, January 4, 2020 Cagayan de Oro City,
Philippines.

CHESTER C. CASTAÑOS
PTR No. 4822334 A/12-03-2020(for 2021)
IBP O.R. No. 130424/ 10-07-2020(for 2021)
MCLE Compliance No. VI-0003819/04-14-2022
Roll No. 54917
DELA SERNA & CASTAÑOS LAW FIRM
Ground Floor, Trinidad Building
Yacapin Street, Cagayan de Oro City 9000
Tel. No. (0917) 712 0321 / Email add.: atty.chester@gmail.com

COPY FURNISHED BY PERSONAL SERVICE:

Atty. Juan One Wan By: ________________

Cagayan de Oro City Date: ______________

COPY FURNISHED BY REGISTERED MAIL:

Atty. Torni Torns Reg. rec. no.:___________

Davao City Date: __________

Page 5 of 6
 EXPLANATION (this is optional)

The foregoing Answer is being served unto the counsel of the

plaintiff by registered mail with registry receipt and return card,
personal service thereof not being practicable due distance, time and
budgetary constraints and lack of personnel to go to Davao City to
personally serve this Answer.

CHESTER C. CASTAÑOS

Page 6 of 6