In August 2018, a post circulated on social media that shows that the Tallanos are not the only scam of it’s kind in town. The post claimed:
“About the Tallano family owning the country, it is an AESOP FABLE STORY. THE TRUE OWNER OF THE ENTIRE PHILIPPINES under OCT 01-4, ALL 76 MILLION HECTARES, IS THE ANACLETO MADRIGAL ACOPIADO FAMILY.
THE LATE FERDINAND E. MARCOS WAS AT ONE TIME THEIR LAWYER.
ALL THE GOLD CERTICATES AND CERTIFICATE OF DOLLAR AND MONEY DEPOSITS OF THE MARCOSES ARE NOW FROZEN BY ALL BANKS WORLD WIDE WHERE THEY WERE DEPOSITED, INCLUDING WHAT THEY CLAIM TO BE THE ALLEDGED MARCOS GOLD.”
As it happens, I came acros this claim whilst doing my research into the Tallano fraud. It is, prehaps, best answered by the Supreme Court of the Philippines, case G.R. No. 162704. April 6, 2005:
“Acopiado alleges that the parcel of land subject of litigation between petitioners Memoria G. Encinas and Adolfo A. Balboa and the respondent National Bookstore, Inc. actually belongs to him. In his Petition-In-Intervention, Acopiado claims that by virtue of a decision “by the Supreme Court, Third Division, United States of America (Philippine Island)…rendered in R.G. No. 571,”cralaw the subject land is included in the vast estate consisting of 271,276 hectares which was adjudicated to his predecessor, Don Gregorio Madrigal-Acopiado. Acopiado likewise recounts that the ownership of the Acopiado family over the alleged vast estate, including the subject land, has since been affirmed by Philippine courts, particularly the Pasay City Court of First Instance. Attached to the Petition-In-Intervention are several purported court decisions and orders allegedly affirming Acopiado’s own title, including “a machine copy of the certified copy” of the decision of “the Supreme Court, Third Division, United States of America (Philippine Island) in R.G. No. 571.” According to the petitioners, the decision was rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court on 6 November 1911.
Upon examination of the alleged U.S. Supreme Court decision, it is evident that said “decision” which is the source and basis of Acopiado’s claim is a naked fraud, and a laughable one at that. This conclusion can be elicited from the following:
1) There was and has never been such entity as “the United States Supreme Court, Third Division.” The U.S. Supreme Court decides all cases en banc and, unlike the Philippine Supreme Court, it does not consist of divisions.
2) The case designation number, “R.G. No. 571,” is obviously incorrect. The U.S. Supreme Court does not designate its case numbers in such a manner.
3) The decision was purportedly penned by “Rigineo Benitez,” and concurred in by “C. Inrickner, S. Del Rosario, S. Hurd, A. Crossfield, and I. Paredes.” There have never been U.S. Supreme Court Justices bearing any of these surnames.cralaw
4) There is a note at the end of the attached decision that “This is an English Translation copied from an [sic] Spanish Original True Copy.” U.S. Supreme Court decisions have never been promulgated in Spanish, for obvious reasons.
All the foregoing are evident from a cursory glance of the alleged decision. A brief perusal of its contents similarly discloses even more outrageous fakery. The alleged decision was apparently occasioned by an appeal from a decision of a Court of First Instance. However, it would have been outright impossible for the U.S. Supreme Court to have taken cognizance of and decided an appeal from a decision of a mere Court of First Instance, not passed upon at all by the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
It is downright insulting to assert a claim before this Supreme Court, and belatedly at that, sourced as it was from an obvious and incompetent forgery and conceived by one with so primitive a sense of what normative standards would pass judicial muster. Accordingly, there is no reason to admit the Petition-In-Intervention, except perhaps as a specimen on how not to deceive the Supreme Court.
At the same time, the Court notes that Acopiado has likewise attached a purported Transfer Certificate of Title purportedly covering his claimed properties, allegedly issued after the “U.S. Supreme Court, Third Division” adjudicated the properties in his favor as well as a decision and two court orders supposedly issued by the Pasay City RTC which allegedly affirm his “title.” The Transfer Certificate of Title is suspicious in itself, considering that its technical description refers to “a parcel of land situated in Quezon City” despite the fact that Quezon City was not yet in existence as of the date of issuance of the title which is 10 August 1934.cralaw
Of greater concern for this Court are the judicial decisions and orders attached to the Petition-In-Intervention. It is uncertain whether these court issuances are themselves fake, or merely rendered on false premises. It is of paramount interest to this Court to prevent the proliferation of fake judicial decisions as well as ensure that appropriate sanctions befall the authors of the frauds. Hence, it is proper that the National Bureau of Investigation be called upon to investigate the matter and the counsel for Acopiado be called to task.
The Motion For Intervention is DENIED for utter lack of merit. Let the National Bureau of Investigation be furnished with copies of the Motion For Intervention and the Petition-In-Intervention, together with the attachments thereof, for appropriate study, investigation and report on the possible criminal liability of Roberto P. Madrigal-Acopiado and his attorney-in-fact Datu Mohaldin R.B. Sulaiman within thirty (30)-days from receipt of this Resolution.
Atty. Ricardo T. Catimag is hereby required to show cause why he should not be cited for contempt of court for his participation in the submission of the questioned pleadings to this Court, within ten (10) days from receipt of this Resolution.”
Same MO as the Tallanos.