REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

COURT OF APPEALS
3rd DIVISION
MANILA

CONOR MCGREGOR
Petitioner,

-versus-

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

BRANCH 143 OF TAGUIG CITY
Respondent,

GEORGE PIERRE,
JAMES MICHAEL,
AND RODERICK
CRUZ
Private Respondents.
x---------------------------------------x

PETITION FOR CERTIORARI

Petitioner, thru counsel, respectfully avers that:

1. This is a petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the

1997 Rules of Civil Procedure assailing the resolution
of the Regional Trial Court Branch 143 of Taguig City
dated November 20, 2017 granting the Motion for
Execution Pending Appeal of the private respondents,
herein attached as Annex A;

2. That the petitioner was able to timely filed its

Opposition for Motion of Execution Pending Appeal.
Unfortunately, the public respondent granted the said
motion;

3. That the petitioner is now assailing the propriety of the

decision of the Regional Trial Court Branch 143 of
Taguig City considering that there is no plain, speedy,
and adequate remedy available in the ordinary course
of law. Hence, this petition for certiorari;

4. That the public respondent committed grave abuse of

discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in granting
the Motion for Execution Pending Appeal of the private
respondents;

5. The private respondents failed to accompany their

Motion for Execution Pending appeal with supporting
affidavits and other papers as required by Rule 15,
Section 3, to wit:
Section 3. Contents. A motion shall state the
relief sought to be obtained and the grounds upon which
it is based, and if required by these Rules or necessary to
prove facts alleged therein, shall be accompanied by
supporting affidavits and other papers.

6. Such failure of the plaintiffs to accompany supporting

affidavits and other papers is a failure to prove their
allegations that they are of old age and are suffering
from colon cancer as may be warranted by
jurisprudence to grant their Motion for Execution
Pending Appeal.

7. That despite of the lack of these relevant and

indispensable documents and supporting affidavits, the
public respondent wrongfully granted the Motion for
Execution Pending Appeal of the herein private
respondents, thus resulting to grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction;

8. That there is no appeal recognized by the courts of law

from a judgement of execution, as enunciated in Sec.
1, Rule 41, Rules of Court, to wit:
Section 1. A party desiring to assail an order of execution
may instead file an appropriate special civil action under
Rule 65 of the Rules of Court xxx No appeal may be taken
from an order of execution;

9. That a certified true copy f the decision herein sought

to be reviewed is here attached as Annex A, together
with copies of all pleadings and documents relevant
and pertinent thereto.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that a writ of

certiorari be issued, ordering the proceedings herein
complained to be forthwith certified upon for review, and
after due hearing, let judgement be rendered annulling or
modifying the proceedings of the Regional Trial Court
Branch 143 of Taguig City as the law requires, with costs.

Incidental reliefs as law and justice may require are

likewise prayed for.

Taguig City; 16 November 2017.

ROY JOSEPH C. PARIAN

Counsel for Defendant
IBP No. 00001 January 5, 2009 Quezon City PTR No.
00001 January 6, 2009 Makati City Roll No. 00001
MCLE Compliance No. II 00001
Date issued June 16, 2008
 THADDEUS TALIO
Counsel for Defendant
IBP No. 00001 January 5, 2009 Quezon City PTR No.
00001 January 6, 2009 Makati City Roll No. 00001
MCLE Compliance No. II 00001
Date issued June 16, 2008

CHRISTOPHER REYES
Counsel for Defendant
IBP No. 00001 January 5, 2009 Quezon City PTR No.
000001 January 6, 2009 Makati City Roll No. 00001
MCLE Compliance No. II 00001
Date issued June 16, 2008

MARICON LORENZO
Counsel for Defendant
IBP No. 00001 January 5, 2009 Quezon City PTR No.
000001 January 6, 2009 Makati City Roll No. 00001
MCLE Compliance No. II 00001
Date issued June 16, 2008