SAMPLE FORMAL ENTRY OF APPEARANCE

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

4^th Judicial Region

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

Branch 38

 Biñan, Laguna

AAA

Plaintiff,
	Civil Case No. B-9678
-versus-
	For: NULLITY OF MORTGAGE AND FORECLOSURE
BBB,
Defendant.

x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

FORMAL ENTRY OF APPEARANCE FOR BBB (DEFENDANT)

The DEFENDANT, by and through the undersigned counsel and unto this Honorable Court, most respectfully avers that:

1.                  Due to heavy workload on other equally important cases, counsel on record, Atty. LLL hereto delegates this case to the undersigned counsel, Atty. MMM;

2.                  The undersigned counsel now represents the Defendant BBB.  Hence, it is requested that all notices, pleadings orders, decision and other processes of this Honorable Court in the case at bar be furnished at the same address herein stated.

P R A Y E R

          WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is most respectfully prayed that the formal entry of appearance of the undersigned counsel for the Defendant be noted.

          Other reliefs that are just and equitable are also likewise prayed for.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

Makati City for City of Biñan, Laguna, 18 June 2014.

By:

ATTY. MMM

123 Strawberry St., Caramel Village, Makati City

Contact No. 02-8118990

IBP No. 9111189 / 01-15-2014 / Makati City

PTR No. 8212135 / 01-15-2014/ Makati City

Roll of Attorney’s No. 80527

MCLE Compliance No. V-0054010

Copy Furnished:

PPP, QQQ, & ASSOCIATES

Atty. PPP

Counsel for the Plaintiffs

Suite 109, Butternut Tower

Sansrival Village, Alabang

Muntinlupa City

RENVOI OF CASE RECORDS

            “Basically, a case once raffled to a branch belongs to that branch unless reraffled or otherwise transferred to another branch in accordance with established procedure. When the Presiding Judge of that branch to which a case has been raffled or assigned is transferred to another station, he leaves behind all the cases he tried with the branch to which they belong. He does not take these cases with him even if he tried them and the same were submitted to him for decision. The judge who takes over this branch inherits all these cases and assumes full responsibility for them. He may decide them as they are his cases, unless any of the parties moves that his case be decided by the judge who substantially heard the evidence and before whom the case was submitted for decision. If a party therefore so desires, he may simply address his request or motion to the incumbent Presiding Judge who shall then endorse the request to the Office of the Court Administrator so that the latter may in turn endorse the matter to the judge who substantially heard the evidence and before whom the case was submitted for decision.

This will avoid the "renvoir" of records and the possibility of an irritant between the judges concerned, as one may question the authority of the other to transfer the case to the former.” (People of the Philippines vs. Ocfemia, G.R. No. 185383, September 25, 2013.)

CARP AND ZONING ORDINANCE

LAND ALREADY RE-CLASSIFIED UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE IS NOT COVERED BY THE CARP 

“Lands already classified and identified as commercial, industrial or residential before June 15, 1988 -- the date of effectivity of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) -- are outside the coverage of this law.  Therefore, they no longer need any conversion clearance from the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR).” (Junio vs. Garilao, G.R. No. 147146.  July 29, 2005).

                  “Lands previously converted by government agencies, other than DAR, to non-agricultural uses prior to the effectivity of the CARL (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law) were outside the coverage of that law.” (Natalia Realty v. Department of Agrarian Reform, 225 SCRA 278, August 12, 1993.

                  “To be exempt from CARP, all that is needed is one valid reclassification of the land from agricultural to non-agricultural by a duly authorized government agency before June 15, 1988, when the CARL took effect.” (Buklod nang Magbubukid sa Lupaing Ramos, Inc. v. E.M. Ramos and Sons, Inc. G.R. Nos. 131481 & 131624, March 16, 2011)