porman v. pinchoto-porman

8/6/2019 Porman v. Pinchoto-porman

1/9

Page 1 of9

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

REGIONAL TRIAL COURT

FOURTH JUDICIAL REGION

BRANCH _____, ANTIPOLO CITY

ENRICO J. PORMAN,

Petitioner,

-versus- CIVIL CASE NO.

FOR: DECLARATION OF ABSOLUTENULLITY OF MARRIAGE

DONNA PINCHOTO-PORMAN,

Respondent.

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

P E T I T I O N

PETITIONER, through the undersigned counsel, to this Honorable Court,

respectfully avers THAT:

1.

Petitioner is of legal age, a Filipino citizen, married and presently

residing at No. 214 Olive Street, Apple Village II, ValleyGolf, Antipolo City,

Province ofRizal.

2. Respondent is likewise of legal age, a Filipino citizen, married andpermanently residing at No. 217 Smith Street, Point Place, Wisconsin, USA. Her

last known address in the Philippines was at No. 231 Daang Matuwid, Pasig City,

Metro Manila, where she may be served with summons and other judicial

processes of this Honorable Court.


2/9

Page 2 of9

3. Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife, having been marriedon May 8, 1985 in Antipolo under civil rites which were solemnized by then

Mayor Rudolfo B. Distrito as evidenced by their Marriage Contract. Copy of

which is attached with this document and as an integral part as ANNEX A.

4. Out of their marriage, petitioner and respondent begot two children,who are presently living with the responding in the United States as evidenced by

their Certificates of Live Birth. Copies of which are attached with this document

and made integral parts as ANNEXES B and C, respectively.

5. Petitioner, the second of seven children, was brought up byrespectable and conservative parents. Although petitioner looked up to his father,

the late Colonel Reginaldo R. Porman of the Philippine Navy, who was

remembered as an intelligent, soft spoken man and a simple person, petitioner

shared his feelings and emotions more with his Mother, Katrina Sirgudo-Porman.

She was known to be the disciplinarian in the family and was seen to be a stern and

strong-willed woman. She decided to be a plain housewife so that she can raise her

children rather than pursue a career in home economics.

6. Respondent, the eldest of four children, also comes from a simple butrespectable family. She was raised by a religious and strict mother, the late Mirgina

Hindigo-Pinchoto, who chose to stay at home so that she can take care of her

family and her husband. Although respondent related well with her mother, she

considered herself to be closer to her father, the late Roberto B. Pinchoto. He was a

known local furniture maker and salesman and was a good provider for his family.

7. The parties were introduced to each other sometime in April, 1980 bya classmate. Petitioner, then, was already employed with the Philippine Navy with

the rank of 2nd

Lieutenant after graduating from the Philippine Military Academy


3/9

Page 3 of9

in 1979. On the other hand, respondent has just graduated, with the honor of

Magna Cum Laude, from St. Paul College, in Quezon City after completing the

course in Bachelor ofScience in Nursing.

8. After they were introduced, petitioner began courting respondent andby January of 1981, the two were going steady and began an intimate relationship

which they maintained and continued for three years. However, they had to be

physically separated from time to time because of petitioners assignments which

took him to different provinces in the Philippines.

9. Sometime in 1985, the parties decided to get married under civil ritesbefore respondent left for the United States. She came back to the Philippines a

year later for their church wedding which was held on December 19, 1986.

10. After the church wedding, the parties began to live together ashusband and wife, initially in Fort Del Pilar, where their first child was born.

However, this set-up only lasted for two years because petitioners assignment to

Palawan. This assignment took him away from his family until 1989.

11. After the assignment, petitioner was sent by the PhilippineGovernment to pursue and official schooling in Virginia, USA. He was later joined

by his wife and their daughter.

12. After his foreign studies, petitioner returned to the Philippines onlywith his daughter. Respondent was left behind in the USA in order to pursue a

career in nursing which petitioner agreed to. This temporary arrangement was in

order for them to acquire a house and lot to become their home. Respondent had a

better chance of earning more money at that time by working as a registered nurse

abroad, compared to petitioner, who was just starting a military career with the

Philippine Navy.


4/9

Page 4 of9

13. The parties long separation, in addition to their psychologicalincapacity to deal with their married life, had contributed to their failed marriage

until they finally decided to separate in 2003 with no hope of reconciliation.

14. At the time of the celebration of their marriage and subsequent to it,the parties were both mentally or psychically ill to such an extent that they could

not have known the essential marital obligations of living together, observing love,

respect and fidelity and rendering mutual help and support they were assuming or,

as shown by the following circumstances, among others:

(a) Due to their constant physical separation, before and during theirmarriage, the parties never really had the chance to know each other as a

person, even if they wanted to.

(b)Petitioner thought he loved his wife when he married her, however, as per the above, he never really exerted any serious effort in getting to

know her, not only in view of their frequent separation, but also because

petitioner was so engrossed in pursuing his career path. He was obsessed

in making a difference in the military and wanted to serve his country

more than anything else than to make his marriage work.

(c) For her part and from the very beginning, respondent was focused inpursuing her career as a registered nurse in the USA. She aimed to get

rich quickly and have a comfortable life with no sign that she was going

to share her success with petitioner.

(d)Before their marriage, the parties already manifested their own self-centeredness and determination to pursue their respective goals and

objectives in life, without regard to each others feelings, dreams and

aspirations as a married partner.


5/9

Page 5 of9

(e)Thus, after the marriage, these manifestations expressed themselves inthat the parties began to be so absorbed in themselves and in their

respective careers that it became an obsession. Little by little, because of

the distance, long periods of physical separation and absence of intimacy,

they unconsciously shut-out each other from their lives until they began

to live separate lives, independently from each other.

(f) Respondent was extremely domineering and wanted to be the center ofattention. She took advantage of her enormous physical asset in creating

a self-image of confidence and importance. She always projected that she

was in control of ever situation.

(g)Petitioner, on the other hand, as a result of his upbringing and pushed byhis training as a military officer, also wanted to impose an image of a

strong personality and superiority. But despite his strong portrayal of

himself, he found himself being dominated by respondent. Her behavior

was influenced by her own upbringing and has changed drastically since

she went to live and work in the United States, as she has displayed the

attitude of and embraced the American culture.

(h)After his visit in the United States in 1998, petitioner tried to makerespondent understand that it was important for her to change her ways,

embrace back the Filipino culture and mentality in order for their

marriage to work. However, respondent ignored his pleas. She even

became more impossible and unreasonable when they disagreed on trivial

matters. She also became totally uncontrollable and difficult to

understand.


6/9

Page 6 of9

(i) Despite what appears to be a hopeless situation, petitioner did not giveup easily as he wanted to make their marriage work. However, all his

resolve to save such disappeared when respondent told him that she had

fallen out of love with him and could no longer pretend to be happy with

him.

15. The parties had been separated from each other since 2003 andrespondents confession that she was no longer happy with the petitioner had

made reconciliation between the parties highly improbable.

16. The root cause of the psychological incapacity of the parties to handlethe essential marital obligations is medically or clinically defined and was in

existence at the time of the celebration of their marriage.

17. Prior to the filing of the instant case, petitioner submitted himself toclinical psychological tests and assessments which were conducted by a qualified

and expert Clinical Psychologist, Felina Domindo Fez, M.A.. Dr. Fez concluded

in her Psychological Report (dated November 8, 2010) that, on the clinical point

of view, both petitioner and respondent are suffering from a severe psychological

disorder known as Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Such is mainly

characterized by grandiosity, need for administration and lack of empathy. A copy

of the report is attached to this document and made an integral part as ANNEX

D.

18. Dr. Fez also concluded in herReport that such personality aberrationof petitioner and respondent is also deemed to be serious, grave, permanent, and

chronic in proportion and is incurable by any form of clinical intervention. The

said disorder started early in the lives of the parties and had become deeply


7/9

Page 7 of9

ingrained in their system and formed an integral part of their structure, thereby

making them inflexible, maladaptive, and functionally impaired.

19. After administering a series of tests and clinical interviews, Dr. Fezhas determined that the root cause of the psychological incapacity of petitioner to

comply with his marital obligations can be traced to the factors present in his life

was back in his formative years. This greatly affected his functioning and

adjustment as a result mainly of the upbringing he received from his parents, who

provided him with too much emotional needs, attention, and consideration. In

turn, he developed a strong tendency of getting what he wanted and wished for

without giving back the same concern to others.

20. On the other hand, Dr. Fez saw that the root cause of the respondentspsychological incapacity to handle her marital obligations has emanated from the

factors in her environment, more particularly to the familial set-up she had and the

way she was brought up by her parents. Dr. Fez saw that her parents tolerated her

in everything she was doing coupled by the lack of proper discipline over her.

This made her acquire a strong disposition and thinking that she can subject

everyone under her control and authority.

21. The psychological incapacity of both parties is characterized by juridical antecedence as it already existed even prior to the time of the

solemnization of their marriage and subsisted throughout their married life. It is

also considered to be grave and serious enough to bring about the parties evident

disability from assuming the essential obligations of marriage, as the parties

marital union was not founded on mutual love, trust, respect, and commitment.

This caused them to have a miserable life together.


8/9

Page 8 of9

22. Based on the physical manifestations and symptoms exhibited by bothpetitioner and respondent during their marriage to each other, it is clear that they

were both mentally or psychically ill to such an extent that they could have not

known the obligations they were assuming, or knowing them, could not have

given valid assumption of such.

23. On account of the psychological incapacity of both parties to complywith the essential marital obligations of living together, observing mutual love,

respect, fidelity, rendering mutual help and support, the marriage of the parties

should be declared null and void ab initio under Article 36 of the Family Code.

24. The parties did not acquire any property during their marriage, andtheir property relations is governed by the system of absolute community

property.

P R A Y E R

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully prayed of this

Honorable Court that after due notice and hearing, judgment be rendered:

1. Declaring the marriage of petitioner ENRICO J. PORMAN torespondent DONNA PINCHOTO-PORMAN as NULL AND VOID AB INITIO on

the ground of psychological incapacity of both parties to handle the essential

marital obligations under Article 36 of the Family Code.

2. Ordering the Civil Registrar General of Antipolo and NationalStatistics Office to delete and expunge from their respective Book of Marriages the


9/9

Page 9 of9

entry and record of the marriage between the petitioner and respondent and other

related documents appertaining thereto.

Petitioner prays for such reliefs as may be just and equitable in the premises.

Cainta, Rizal for Antipolo City, May 29, 2011.

THE GALIT LAW OFFICE

Counsel for the petitioner#29 Justice Avenue,

Cainta, Rizal 1900

Email:[email protected]

Contact No. 6552956-59

By:

Emmanuel P. Galit

S.C. Roll of Attorneys No. 45631

IBP Lifetime Membership No. 35795

MCLE Compliance No. III

0007569, 22 March 2011

porman v. pinchoto-porman

Documents