8/23/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly in life [was] to have all the material things she wanted. She became demanding and domineering towards the opposite sex and used the resentment and hatred she had towards her stepfather as her revenge towards him. Dr. Lopez concluded that [Linda's] psychological incapacity is an integral part of her personality, which has its juridical antecedence having existed even prior to the marriage. It is grave, permanent and incurable and which incapacitated her from performing her essential marital obligations.[11] (Emphasis supplied) On the other hand, Dr. Lopez found that while Anacleto was emotionally affected and disturbed by the nature of his marital life with Linda, he showed no indication that he too suffers from psychological incapacity to comply with his essential marital obligations.[12] RTC Ruling On October 20, 2009, the RTC issued a Decision the dispositive portion of which reads: In sum, the totality of the evidence presented does not show psychological incapacity on the part of [Linda]. As discussed in [Republic v. Court of Appeals and Molina[13]] x x x "the burden of proof to show the nullity of the marriage belongs to [Anacleto]. Any doubt should be resolved in favor of the existence and confirmation of the marriage and against its dissolution and nullity." With the above findings, the Court does not find sufficient ground to declare the marriage null and void. WHEREFORE the [RTC Petition] is denied. The above entitled case is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED.[14] (Emphasis supplied) The RTC found the evidence on record insufficient for purposes of establishing the gravity and juridical antecedence of Linda's personality disorder.[15] Anacleto filed a motion for reconsideration, which the RTC denied for lack of merit in its Resolution[16] dated July 6, 2010. Aggrieved, Anacleto filed an appeal under Rule 41 of the Rules, assigning this lone error: THE [RTC] ERRED IN TOTALLY DISREGARDING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL FINDINGS OF [DR. LOPEZ], [ANACLETO'S] EXPERT WITNESS, IN CONNECTION WITH THE PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY OF [LINDA] IN FULFILLING HER MARITAL OBLIGATIONS.[17] CA Ruling elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/65268 3/6