Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 4K views

    Junsan Case Comments Opposition To Motion For Reconsideration

    Uploaded by

    Paul Espinosa
    This document is a response opposing a motion for reconsideration filed by the complainant Fernando Junsan. It summarizes that the respondents, who are siblings of the complainant, are legitimate heirs of their late father and entitled to portions of the inherited property. It argues that the respondents did not commit fraud or falsification by stating they were heirs, as this was already recognized by the complainant. The motion for reconsideration to charge the respondents with falsification is baseless since they truthfully declared being legitimate heirs and did not fabricate any information. The response requests that the motion for reconsideration be denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Junsan Case Comments Opposition To Motion For Reconsideration

    Uploaded by

    Paul Espinosa
    4K views3 pages
    This document is a response opposing a motion for reconsideration filed by the complainant Fernando Junsan. It summarizes that the respondents, who are siblings of the complainant, are legitimate heirs of their late father and entitled to portions of the inherited property. It argues that the respondents did not commit fraud or falsification by stating they were heirs, as this was already recognized by the complainant. The motion for reconsideration to charge the respondents with falsification is baseless since they truthfully declared being legitimate heirs and did not fabricate any information. The response requests that the motion for reconsideration be denied.

    Original Description:

    sa

    Original Title

    Junsan Case Comments Opposition to Motion for Reconsideration

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document is a response opposing a motion for reconsideration filed by the complainant Fernando Junsan. It summarizes that the respondents, who are siblings of the complainant, are legitimate heirs of their late father and entitled to portions of the inherited property. It argues that the respondents did not commit fraud or falsification by stating they were heirs, as this was already recognized by the complainant. The motion for reconsideration to charge the respondents with falsification is baseless since they truthfully declared being legitimate heirs and did not fabricate any information. The response requests that the motion for reconsideration be denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    4K views3 pages

    Junsan Case Comments Opposition To Motion For Reconsideration

    Uploaded by

    Paul Espinosa
    This document is a response opposing a motion for reconsideration filed by the complainant Fernando Junsan. It summarizes that the respondents, who are siblings of the complainant, are legitimate heirs of their late father and entitled to portions of the inherited property. It argues that the respondents did not commit fraud or falsification by stating they were heirs, as this was already recognized by the complainant. The motion for reconsideration to charge the respondents with falsification is baseless since they truthfully declared being legitimate heirs and did not fabricate any information. The response requests that the motion for reconsideration be denied.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    Republic of the Philippines

    Department of Justice
    National Prosecution Services
    OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR
    Iloilo Hall of Justice
    Iloilo City

    FERNANDO JUNSAN
    Complainant,

    NPS DOCKET NO.

    VI-10 INV14F 0044

    -versus FOR: Estafa through Falsification


    of Public Document
    HENRIC PUERTOLLANO,
    ENRIQUETA PUERTOLLANO,
    TERESITA JUNSAN,
    JUANITA JUNSAN,
    NEMESIO JUNSAN,
    DIONISIO JUNSAN,
    MILAGROS JUNSAN,
    MOISES JUNSAN,
    JOSEFINA JUNSAN,
    MYRNA JUNSAN,
    ANTONIO JUNSAN,
    Respondents.
    x---------------------------------------x
    COMMENTS/OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION
    F O R R E C O N S I D E R AT I O N F I L E D BY T H E
    COMPLAINANT
    RESPONDENTS TERESITA, JUANITA, NEMESIO,
    DIONISIO, MILAGROS, MOISES, JOSEFINA , MYRNA and ANTONIO,
    all surnamed JUNSAN, though the undersigned counsel, unto the Honorable
    City Prosecutor , respectfully file their comments/opposition to the motion
    for reconsideration filed by the Complainant, on the resolution of the
    Honorable City Prosecutor dismissing the instant complaint and state as
    follows:
    1. That, Respondents all surnamed JUNSAN have received through
    the undersigned Counsel the Resolution of the Honorable City Prosecutor
    dated December 12, 2014, dismissing the instant complaint against them ;

    2. That, thereafter, the Respondents have received on January


    20,2015, the motion for reconsideration of the same resolution filed by the
    Complainant through Counsel ;
    3. That, the Respondents would like to reiterate and respectfully
    invite the attention of the Complainant that they are all legitimate heirs of
    their late parents and as such anyone of them is entitled to a share in the
    property and they can sell the aliquot portion of their shares being co-heirs
    and subsequently co-owners;
    4. That, the Respondents JUNSAN siblings have never committed
    any acts of fraud or falsification because they just declared that they are
    legal and absolute heirs of the late Santiago Junsan- their father , the fact has
    been recognized already by the Complainant as the eldest of all the siblings;
    5. That, the allegations in the Motion for Reconsideration of the
    Complainant, number 2 paragraph 2, sentence 3 contained in page two of the
    aforementioned pleading which says that the brothers and sisters declared
    that they are the only heirs of their late father is fictitious since the face of
    the document would reveal that, they declared only in paragraph 1 after
    WITNESSETH: that they are legal and absolute heirs of the late Santiago
    Junsan. They have never indicated in the document the word ONLY
    contrary to the false allegations of the complainant. The document
    denominated as Annex 1- DEED OF ADJUDICATION WITH SALE
    with emphasis of underline provided by the respondents is herein attached
    and form an integral part of this comment;
    6. That, the Respondents JUNSAN siblings would like to reiterate
    again that prior to the execution of the questioned document attached as
    Annex 1, there was a prior document labelled as Annex 2 DEED OF
    EXTRAJUDICIAL ADJUDICATION AND PARTITION, which was
    executed by all siblings including the complainant . The validity and due
    execution of the public document has never been questioned by the
    Complainant who was a party to the document. In this document there was
    already a partition agreement between the complainant and the respondents
    and this explained the fact that, the respondents have the right to sell the
    portion of their inherited property;
    7. Thus, with the foregoing arguments, the Complainants motion for
    reconsideration to charge the respondent with the crime of falsification is
    baseless and untenable because they have never fabricated an information
    about their being legitimate heirs. They have not committed any form of
    fraud, false pretense or any insidious machinations or fabrication of
    information since all their declarations are truthful narrations of the fact that
    they are legitimate heirs of their deceased father;

    PRAYER
    WHEREFORE PREMISES considered, it is respectfully
    prayed unto this Honorable City Prosecutor that,the motion for
    reconsideration of the Complainant be DENIED, as it has no legal and
    factual basis;
    The Respondents also pray for other reliefs and remedies as
    may be just and equitable under the premises.
    RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED to the KIND CONSIDERATION OF THE
    HONORABLE CITY PROSECUTOR.
    Iloilo City, Philippines, February 4, 2015.
    ATTY. SALEX E. ALIBOGHA
    Counsel for the Respondents JUNSAN SIBLINGS
    Roll of Attorneys No. 46424
    IBP Lifetime No. 657901,1-4-06,Iloilo City
    PTR No.4812357 ,1-5-15, Iloilo City
    MCLE Exemption Compliance No. IV-001388, August 28,2013
    Address of Counsel:
    A1 Passers Review Center
    nd
    2 Floor, Sommerset Building, Panaderia ni Pa-a
    Lopez Jena St., Jaro,Iloilo City,Philippines, 5000
    Telephone No. (033)-320-2728
    COPY FURNISHED:
    TIROL AND TIROL LAW OFFICES
    COUNSEL FOR THE COMPLAINANT FERNANDO JUNSAN
    156 BURGOS STREET, ILOILO CITY
    RECEIVED PERSONALLY BY:
    _____________________________
    DATE AND TIME RECEIVED:

    You might also like