Flashcards Studio

On April 14, 2025, Rosa Bautista, a civilian loan borrower, executed a Special Power of Attorney appointing her sister-in-law, Cecilia Bautista, as attorney-in-fact to handle all matters relating to Rosa’s loan with Bank Zenith, including receiving notices, collecting payments, negotiating settlements, and to file and sign pleadings, institute, defend, and appeal in any action arising from the loan. The SPA contains no express limits on acts and no revocation clause. Bank Zenith later files a collection suit against Rosa, and Cecilia, acting under the SPA, signs the verified complaint and appears for Rosa. Rosa then revokes the SPA by a written notice served on Cecilia, but the revocation is not communicated to Bank Zenith or to the court. Decide: (a) whether Cecilia had authority to file the complaint and sign pleadings for Rosa; (b) what is the effect of Rosa’s revocation on Cecilia’s acts and on the ongoing case; and (c) whether Bank Zenith may rely on the revocation to challenge the validity of the pleadings already filed.