Republic of the Philippines

Name of Court
City where the court is located
JUAN DE LA CRUZ,
Defendant-Petitioner,
- versus

Civil Case No. 10101010

For: Unlawful Detainer

PEDRO DE LA CRUZ,
Plaintiff-Respondent.
x-----------------------------------------------x
MEMORANDUM
COMES NOW PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, through undersigned counsel
unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully submits the instant MEMORANDUM and
avers that:
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff-Respondent, PEDRO DE LA CRUZ, is 50 years old, Filipino,
married with residence at 10 Quezon Street, Quezon City, where he may be
served with legal processes and notices issued by this Honorable Court;
2. Defendant-Petitioner, JUAN DE LA CRUZ, is 45 years old, Filipino, single,
with residence at 20 Mabini Street, Quezon City, where he may be served with
legal processes and notices issued by this Honorable Court;
PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
3. On 24 February 2015, a Complaint for Ejectment was filed by PlaintiffRespondent against Defendant-Petitioner;
4. On 30 May 2015, an Answer was filed by Defendant-Petitioner;
5. On 15 August 2015, a decision was rendered by Metropolitan Trial Court,
Branch 25 of Quezon City in favor of Plaintiff-Respondent;
6. On 20 August 2015, a Motion for Reconsideration was filed by DefendantPetitioner but was denied;

7. On 30 August 2015, a Petition for Review was filed by Defendant-Petitioner

to which a Comment was filed by Plaintiff-Respondent on 15 September
2015;
8. On 30 November 2015, the Honorable Court ordered all parties to submit their
respective Memoranda fifteen (15) days from notice, otherwise the petition
shall be submitted for decision, hence the instant Memorandum;
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
9. Plaintiff-Respondent is the registered owner of a parcel of land located at 69
Quezon Street, Quezon City in which the Defendant-Petitioner is the current
occupant;
10. Records reveal that the property in question was bought by PlaintiffRespondent from the original owners Spouses Gerry and Carla Francisco, two
(2) years ago, which was immediately registered with the Register of Deeds of
Quezon City;
11. Defendant-Petitioner is the current occupant for over ten (10) years by virtue
of a verbal agreement from the original owners;
12. Despite repeated verbal and written demands as well as seeking the
intervention of the local barangay in the area, Defendant-Petitioner has
refused to vacate the premises prompting the Plaintiff-Respondent to secure
the services of counsel and file the appropriate legal action before a court of
law;
ISSUE OF THE CASE
13. WHETHER OR NOT THE HONORABLE TRIAL COURT ACTED
CORRECTLY IN DECIDING THIS CASE ON THE BASIS OF EVIDENCE
PRESENTED ESTABLISHING OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY.
ARGUMENTS
14. The court committed no error in deciding that an unlawful detainer action be
enforced upon herein Defendant-Petitioner despite the assailed contention of
the former;
DISCUSSION
15. This is the part where an extensive discussion the partys argument is made
utilizing statutory support as well as precedents and doctrinal statements
found in applicable jurisprudence. When citing provisions of law, it is
suggested that you copy the text of the law for emphasis. The same is true for
jurisprudence especially when citing cases. It is best advised that you
incorporate into your discussion the statements made by the court in previous

rulings. For more emphasis, you may copy an excerpt, with proper citations
and place it as a separate paragraph;
PRAYER
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed that the Honorable
Court, that:
1. Defendant-Petitioners prayer for a writ of injunction be DENIED for
having no cause of action;
2. The Petition be DISMISSED for lack of merit; and
3. Other remedies, just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed
for.
Respectfully submitted. Quezon City, 15 January 2016.
Signature of Counsel