Orbeta v.
Sendiong was signed not by respondent, but by his daughter,
Mae Sendiong, by authority of a General Power of
463 scra 180 (2005)
Attorney, which petitioners claim was not specified
FACTS: for the purpose of filing the petition. However, a
perusal of the General Power of Attorney shows
Maximo Orbeta sold to the spouses Juan Sendiong
that Mae Sendiong is empowered, among others,
and Exequila Castellanes a parcel of land, with all
"to execute, sign, authenticate, and enter into any
the improvements existing thereon. Thereafter, a
and all contracts and agreements for me and in my
complaint for for recovery of possession, quieting of
name with any person or entity," and "to bring suit,
title and damages, with a prayer for the issuance of
defend and enter into compromises in my name
a writ of preliminary injunction was filed by the heirs
and stead, in connection with actions brought for or
of Orbeta.
against me, of whatever nature and kind."
In the course of the proceedings, the trial court
The signing of the verification and certification of
declared null and void the sale made by Maximo
nonforum shopping are covered under the said
Orbeta with respect to the conjugal share of his
provisions of the General Power of Attorney. A
spouse, and ordered the spouses Pretzylou and
special power of attorney simply refers to a clear
Genosa Sendiong to restore to petitioners the title
mandate specifically authorizing the performance of
to and possession of their respective shares in the
a specific power and of express acts subsumed
subject land.
therein, and there is a specific authority given to
The respondent, represented by his attorney-in-fact Mae Sendiong to sign her name in behalf of Paul
and daughter Mae A. Sendiong, filed a Petition for Sendiong in contracts and agreements and to
Annulment of Decision with a Prayer for a institute suits in behalf of her father. Neither would
Temporary Restraining Order and Writ of the fact that the document is captioned "General
Preliminary Injunction with the Court of Appeals. Power of Attorney" militate against its construction
Before the Court of Appeals, petitioners argued that as granting specific powers to the agent pertaining
the petition for annulment of judgment was fatally to the petition for annulment of judgment she
infirm as the certification on non-forum shopping instituted in behalf of her father. As Justice Paras
was signed by the attorney-in-fact by virtue of a has noted, a general power of attorney may include
General Power of Attorney. Despite the argument a special power if such special power is mentioned
of the petitioner, the Court of Appeals granted the or referred to in the general power.
petition of the respondent.
The petitioners herein assail the validity of the
decision of the Court of Appeals in granting a
petition for the annulment of a judgment rendered
by a Dumaguete
City Regional Trial Court (RTC).
ISSUE: Whether the attorney-in-fact had the power
to sign the verification and certification?
HELD: YES, The Court ruled that the agent's
signing therein of the verification and certification is
already covered by the provisions of the general
power of attorney issued by the principal.
Petitioners assert that respondent submitted a
"false certification" on non-forum shopping,
primarily on the ground that the said certification
