Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty.

den MIRROR WEEK NOTES ages % of %&'

C()(L PROC*DUR* +*N*RAL PR(NC(PL*S

%. Define ,ivil ro,ed-re. ANS.*R/ a. The method of conducting a judicial proceeding b. to resolve disputes involving private parties c. for the purpose of enforcing rights or obtaining redress for the invasion of rights.
01* RUL*- 2A3(N+ PO.*R O4 01* SUPR*2* COUR0

!. .5at are t5e meas-res w5i,5 ens-re t5e inde enden,e of t5e ,o-rts 6 ANS.*R/ a. The Judiciary shall enjoy fiscal autonomy. b. Appointments to the judiciary shall be made from the nominees of the Judicial and Bar Council, which appointments do not need any Commission on Appointment confirmation. c. Salaries of members of the judiciary shall be fi ed by law and not to be decreased during their continuance in office. d. !embers of the judiciary shall hold office during good behavior until they reach the age of "# years or become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. e. $nly the Supreme Court shall have the power to discipline judges of lower courts, or order their dismissal. f. !embers of the Supreme Court may be removed from office only upon reaching the age of "# years, incapacity or through impeachment. g. !embers of the judiciary shall not be designated to any agency performing %uasi& judicial or administrative functions. h. Supreme Court jurisdiction shall not be reduced without its consent.
01* RUL*S O4 COUR0

#. 2ay t5e S- reme Co-rt s-s end t5e a briefly.

li,ation of t5e R-les of Co-rt 6 *7 lain

ANS.*R' (es. )t is within the power of the Court to temper rigid rules in favor of substantial justice. *hile it is desirable that the +ules of Court be faithfully and even meticulously observed, the Courts should not be so strict about procedural lapses that do not really impair the proper administration of justice. #A. +ive e7am les on w5ere t5e S- reme Co-rt s-s ended t5e a R-les of Co-rt/ li,ation of t5e

ANS.*R/ ,- The Court of Appeals may entertain a second motion for reconsideration of its decision although the filing of such motion violates a prohibition thereof. .- The Supreme Court allowed the submission of a certified true copy of the Special $rder granting e ecution pending appeal as substantial compliance with the re%uirement of Section ,, +ule /0 of the +ules of Court that the petition 1be accompanied by a certified true copy of the judgment or order subject thereof.2 3- A petition for review of a CSC +esolution under +ule 40 with the Court of Appeals, although an inappropriate remedy or wrong mode of appeal pursuant to Circular 5o. .&6# was reinstated. The Circular should be so interpreted and applied as to attain, not defeat the ultimate purpose of the rules of procedure to achieve substantial justice.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ! of %&'

4- A dismissal of a petition by the Court of Appeals on the ground that the %uestioned orders submitted by the petitioner were unsigned duplicate copies, not clearly legible duplicate original certified true copy was reinstated by the Supreme Court. #C. +ive t5e reason for allowing s-s ension of t5e r-les. ANS.*R' The rules on procedure are merely tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice. Strict adherence to procedural rules is not the end&all and be&all of litigation, although strict adherence to procedural rules must at all times be observed. Adjective law is not to be ta7en lightly, for without it, the enforcement of substantive laws may not remain assured. 5evertheless, technical rules of procedure are not ends in themselves, but primarily devised and designed to help in the proper and e pedient administration of justice. )n appropriate cases therefore, the rules may have to be so construed liberally in order to meet and advance the cause of substantial justice. &. .5at is t5e e7tent of 8-di,ial ower 6 ANS.*R' )t includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable. 8Article 9))), Section ,, ,6:" ;hilippine Constitution'. .5at is a 9-asi-8-di,ial f-n,tion6 ANS.*R' A power that rests in judgment or discretion, so that it is of judicial nature or character, but does not involve the e ercise of functions of a judge, or is conferred upon an officer other than a judicial officer.
C()(L PROC*DUR*: (N +*N*RAL

'.A State (N OU0L(N* 4OR2 t5e ,ivil ro,ed-re in general. ANS.*R/ A. )n <eneral' The criteria for invo7ing judicial process ,. Actions in general a. )s there a cause of action = b. >oes the right of action subsist = >o the following e ist = ,- ?stoppel .- @aches 3- ;rescription 4- Aorum shopping 0- +es judicata .. Are there available ade%uate reliefs and remedies= a. )s there a need for provisional remedies = B. *ho are the parties to a suit = ,- ;arties in general .- Criteria for invo7ing judicial process a. Threshold re%uirements ,- @egal capacity .- +eal party in interest 3- Locus standi 3- Joinder of parties a. Binds of parties b. Joinder of initial parties ,- Compulsory joinder .- ;ermissive joinder c. )mpleader ,- Third&fourth, etc. party d. Special joinder devices ,- Class suit .- )ntervention

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages # of %&'

3- )nterpleader C. >etermine application of doctrine of preconditions, prior resort, alternative modes of dispute resolution, ,. Compromise .. Katarunggang Pambarangay 3. ? haustion of administrative remedies 4. Arbitration and alternative modes of dispute resolution >. Selection of court ,. >ifferent 7inds of civil actions a. $rdinary and special b. In rem, in personam, quasi-in rem c. +eal, personal d. @ocal and transitory .. Cierarchy of courts 3. Jurisdiction 4. 9enue 0. Summary procedure ?. ;leadings and motions ,. ;leadings in general a. Aormal +e%uirements b. !anner of ma7ing allegations in pleadings .. The complaint a. Joinder of causes of action ,- ;ermissive .- Compulsory 3. Ailing and service of pleadings and other papers 4. !otions in general a. Ailing, service and hearing of motions A. >epositions and discoveries 4(L(N+ O4 01* AC0(ON. A. Commencement of the action B. >oc7et fees C. +affle of cases A40*R 4(L(N+ O4 01* SU(0 A. $btaining jurisdiction over parties ,. Summons in general .. !ethods of service B. !otions that may be filed by the plaintiff ,. To withdraw complaint or to dismiss .. To amend or supplement the complaint A40*R S*R)(C* O4 SU22ONS BU0 B*4OR* ANS.*R A. ;laintiffDs notices, motions and others ,. To withdraw complaint .. To amend or supplement the complaint 3. To declare in default 4 $pposition to defendantEs various motions B. >efendantDs motions and pleadings after service of summons but before answer ,. !otions a. Aor bill of particulars b. To e punge the complaint or portions thereof c. To dismiss d. Aor e tension of time to file answer e. @ift order of default .. ;leadings a. Answer b. Counterclaim c. Third&;arty complain d. Cross&claim

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages & of %&'

3. $thers a. >epositions and discoveries b. $ppositions to plaintiffEs various motions A40*R D*4*NDAN0;S ANS.*R A. ;laintiffEs motions and pleadings after answer ,. !otions a. To withdraw complaint b. To amend or supplement the complaint c. To e punge the answer or any part d. Aor judgment on the pleadings e. Aor summary judgment f. To set pre&trial .. ;leadings a. +eply b. Answer to counterclaims 3. $thers a. ;re&trial brief b. >epositions and discoveries B. >efendantEs motions and pleadings after answer ,. !otions a. $ppositions to plaintiffEs various motions .. $thers a. ;re&trial brief b. >eposition and discoveries PR*-0R(AL A. ;laintiffEs motions ,. To present evidence ex-parte and render judgment B. >efendantEs motion ,. !otion to dismiss C. Common motions ,. To postpone .. Aor consolidation or severance 3. Aor trial by commissioner ?. ? panding the scope of the suit ,. Joinder of claims or causes of action .. Joinder of parties D*POS(0(ONS AND D(SCO)*R(*S A. >epositions B. )nterrogatories to parties C. Admission by adverse party >. ;roduction or inspection of things or documents ?. ;hysical and mental e amination of persons 0R(AL. A. Trial ,. $rder of trial B. Common motions ,. To postpone .. To amend to conform to evidence A40*R 0R(AL: B*4OR* <UD+2*N0 A. Common motion ,. To submit memorandum B .>efendantDs motion .. Aor judgment on demurrer to evidence <UD+2*N0

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ' of %&'

A40*R <UD+2*N0. A. Common motions ,. Aor reconsideration .. Aor new trial B. $thers ,. 5otice of appeal .. ;etition for relief from judgment APP*AL A. )n general ,. ;reliminary concepts .. !odes and periods of appeals B. Appeals from judgments or final orders of municipal trial courts ,. )n general .. ;rocedure for appeals of judgments of municipal trial courts in e ercise of original jurisdiction 3. ;rocedure for appeals of decisions of municipal trial courts in e ercise of delegated jurisdiction C. Appeals from decisions of the +egional Trial Courts ,. )n general .. ;rocedure for ordinary appeals of decisions of the +egional Trial Court in e ercise of its original jurisdiction to the Court of Appeals 4. ;etition for review from decisions of the +egional Trial Court in the e ercise of its appellate jurisdiction to the Court of Appeals 0. ;etition for certiorari to the Supreme Court >. Appeals from decisions of the Court of Ta Appeals and %uasi&judicial agencies ,. )n general .. ;etition for review to the Court of Appeals 3. ;etition for certiorari to the Supreme Court ?. Appeals from decisions of the Court of Appeals ,. )n general .. Appeal by certiorari to the Supreme Court *=*CU0(ONS AND SA0(S4AC0(ON O4 <UD+2*N0S A. )n general ,. Concepts .. Binds of e ecution a. ? ecution as a matter of right b. >iscretionary e ecution 3. Cow e ecution is effected, in general 4. ;roperties e empt from e ecution B. ;rocedure for e ecution ,. )n case of death of party .. Aor judgments for money 3. $f judgment for specific act 0. $f special judgments C. ? ecution sales ,. Sales on e ecution .. Conveyance of property sold on e ecution 3. +edemption of property sold on e ecution >. +emedies of judgment creditor in aid of e ecution ?. Satisfaction of judgment 'B. .5at are t5e elements of a ,a-se of a,tion 6 ANS.*R' The elements of a cause of action are' a. A legal rig5t in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or it createsF b. A correlative obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not to violate this rightF

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages > of %&'

c. An act or omission on the part of such defendant violative of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action for recovery of damages. 'C. +ive a s5ort definition of ,a-se of a,tion. ANS.*R/ A cause of action is the fact or combination of facts which affords a party a right to judicial interference in his behalf. )t is the reason why the litigation has come about. >. Disting-is5 ,a-se of a,tion from rig5t of a,tion. ANS.*R/ a. Ca-se of a,tion consists of a right belonging to one person and a wrongful act by another which violates that right *C)@? rig5t of a,tion is the right to commence and maintain an actionF b. Ca-se of a,tion is a formal statement of the operative facts which give rise to such remedial right *C)@? rig5t of a,tion is a remedial right belonging to some personF c. Ca-se of a,tion is a matter of right and depends on substantive law *C)@? rig5t of a,tion is a matter of statement and is governed by the law on procedure. d. A ,a-se of a,tion is not affected by the running of the statute of limitations, estoppel, etc., *C)@? a rig5t of a,tion is so affected. ?. 05e owner of an estate fen,ed 5is ro erty: as a res-lt of w5i,5 t5e tenants of t5e a artment ad8oining t5e ro erty lost t5eir assageway. 05ere was no rig5t of way en8oyed by t5e tenants. Conse9-ently: t5e tenants left. Co-ld t5e a artment owner re,over damages from t5e estate owner 6 ANS.*R' 5o. The mere fact that the apartment owner suffered losses does not give rise to a right to recover damages. To warrant the recovery of damages there must be both a right of action for a legal wrong inflicted by the defendant and damage resulting to the plaintiff therefrom. *rong without damage, or damage without wrong, does not constitute a cause of action, since damages are merely part of the remedy for the injury caused by a breach or a wrong. )n order that a plaintiff may maintain an action for the injuries of which he complains he must establish that such injuries resulted from a breach of duty which the defendant owed to the plaintiff, a concurrence of injury to the plaintiff and legal responsibility by the person causing it. ?A. Define in8-ry. ANS.*R/ The illegal invasion of a legal right.

?B. Define damage. ANS.*R/ The loss, hurt or harm which results from the injury, damages are the recompense or compensation awarded for the damage suffered. @. 4ernando filed a ,om laint for re,overy of ro erty against t5e ,5ildren of Remigio. 05e ,om laint alleged t5at 4ernando bo-g5t t5e ro erty from Ale8andro: b-t was -nable to effe,t t5e immediate transfer of title in 5is favor in view of 5is foreign nationality at t5e time of t5e sale. As an ass-ran,e of 5is good fait5 Ale8andro t-rned over t5e owner;s d- li,ate ,o y of t5e title to 4ernando and in addition e7e,-ted a lease ,ontra,t in favor of 4ernando for &" years. S-bse9-ently: Ale8andro sold t5e ro erty to 5is brot5er Remigio wit5 t5e -nderstanding t5at t5e ro erty is to be 5eld in tr-st for 4ernando and t5at Remigio wo-ld e7e,-te t5e do,-ment of sale in favor of 4ernando - on t5e latter;s demand. Anot5er lease ,ontra,t: t5is time between 4ernando and Remigio was e7e,-ted in favor of 4ernando to safeg-ard 5is interest over t5e ro erty. No rents were ever aid by 4ernando nor were t5ere demands made - on 5im. Remigio was Ailled and d-ring 5is waAe: 4ernando reminded 5is ,5ildren of t5e agreement and t5ey romised to transfer t5e s-b8e,t ro erty to 4ernando w5o by t5is time 5as

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ? of %&'

a,9-ired 4ili ino ,itiBens5i by nat-raliBation. 05e ,5ildren never made good t5eir romise and in fa,t t5ey transferred t5e ro erty in t5eir names. U on re,ei t of t5e ,om laint t5e defendants filed a motion to dismiss ,laiming among ot5ers t5at t5e ,om laint states no ,a-se of a,tion. At t5e time of t5e filing of t5e ,om laint Ale8andro was already dead. R-le on t5e motion. ANS.*R' !otion denied. Aernando relies simply on the allegation that he is entitled to the property by virtue of a sale between him and Alejandro who is now dead. $bviously, Aernando will rely on parol evidence which, under the circumstances obtaining, cannot be allowed without violating the G>ead !anEs StatueG found in Sec. .3, +ule ,3# of the +ules of Court. Clearly then, from a reading of the complaint itself, the anne es attached thereto and relevant laws and jurisprudence, the complaint indeed does not spell out any cause of action.
DO*S 01* R(+10 O4 AC0(ON S0(LL SUBS(S0 6

?ST$;;?@ C. .5at is meant by t5e do,trine of esto el 6

ANS.*R' An admission or representation is rendered conclusive upon the person ma7ing it and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person ma7ing it, and cannot be denied or disproved as against the person relying thereon. A party having performed affirmative acts upon which another person based his subse%uent actions, cannot therefore refute his acts or renege on the effects of the same, to prejudice of the latter. CA. +ive an e7am le of esto el.

ANS.*R' The trial court referred the matter of a computation of the e cess payments to S<9. The !anifestation and Hrgent !otion to Set ;arameters of Computation filed by the petitioner is indicative of his conformity with the order of the referral. )f the petitioner thought that the order was wrong, he should have ta7en recourse to the Court of Appeals. The petition cannot be allowed to ma7e a moc7ery of judicial processes, by changing his position from one of agreement to disagreement, to suit his needs. )f the parties ac%uiesed in submitting an issue for determination by the trial court, they are estopped from %uestioning the jurisdiction of the same court to pass upon the issue. Jurisdiction over the person must be seasonably raised, i.e., that it is pleaded in a motion to dismiss or by way of an affirmative defense. 9oluntary appearance shall be deemed a waiver of this defense. Cowever, assertion of affirmative defenses shall not be construed as estoppel or waiver of the defense of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant. ?stoppel by jurisdiction must be une%uivocal and intentional. @ACC?S C. .5at is la,5es 6 ANS.*R' @aches is negligence or omission to assert a right within a reasonable time, warranting the presumption that the party entitled to assert it has either abandoned or declined to assert it. CA. .5at are t5e essential elements of la,5es6 ANS.*R' 8,- conduct on the part of the defendant, or of one under whom he claims, giving rise to the situation complained ofF 8.- delay in asserting complainantDs right after he had 7nowledge of the defendantDs conduct and after he has an opportunity to sueF 83- lac7 of 7nowledge or notice on the part of the defendant that the complainant would assert the right on which he bases his suitF and

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @ of %&'

84- injury or prejudice to the defendant in the event relief is accorded to the complainant. CB. (s t5ere a 5ard and fast r-le on w5at ,onstit-te la,5es6 ANS.*R' 5o absolute rule on what constitute laches. )t is a creation of e%uity and applied not really to penaliIe neglect or sleeping upon oneDs rights but rather to avoid recogniIing a right when to do so would result in a clearly ine%uitable situation. The %uestion of laches, we said, is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and each case must be decided according to its particular circumstances. The doctrine of laches or stale demands does not apply against minors whose property was held in trust by predecessor of persons invo7ing it. CC. Disting-is5 res,ri tion from la,5es. ANS.*R/ ,- Pres,ri tion is concerned with the fact of delay *C)@? la,5es is concerned with the effect. .- Pres,ri tion is a matter of time *C)@? la,5es is principally a %uestion of the ine%uity of permitting a claim to be enforced, this ine%uity being founded on some change in the condition of the party or the relation of the parties. 3- Pres,ri tion is statutory *C)@? laches is not. La,5es applies in e%uity *C)@? prescritpion applies at law. #D Pres,ri tion is based on fi ed time, while la,5es is not. CD. (s la,5es a li,able w5ere t5e a,tion is filed wit5in t5e res,ri tive eriod6

ANS.*R' 5o laches if case filed within prescriptive period. The doctrine of laches is inapplicable where the action was filed within the prescriptive period provided by law. Thus, laches does not apply in a case where petitionerDs possession of the subject lot has rendered their right to bring an action for %uieting of title imprescriptible and, hence, not barred by laches. !oreover, since laches is a creation of e%uity, acts or conduct alleged to constitute the same must be intentional and une%uivocal so as to avoid injustice. @aches operates not really to penaliIe neglect or sleeping on oneDs rights, but rather to avoid recogniIing a right when to do so would result in a clearly ine%uitable situation. ;+?SC+);T)$5 %". +ive ,ertain instan,es w5en a,tions res,ribe. ANS.*R' a. An action for reconveyance of a parcel of land based on implied or constructive trust prescribes in ,# years, the point of reference being the date of registration of the deed or the date of the issuance of the certificate of title of the property. b. A suit for reformation of an instrument may be barred by lapse of time. The prescriptive period for actions based upon a written contract and for reformation of an instrument is ten 8,#- years under Article ,,44 of the Civil Code. ;rescription is intended to suppress stale and fraudulent claims arising from transactions where facts had become so obscure from the lapse of time or defective memory. %"A. .5at is t5e res,ri tive eriod for t5e availment of t5e remedies of a,,ion -bli,iana or a,,ion reinvendi,atoria 6 ANS.*R' The remedies of accion publiciana or reinvendicatoria must be availed of within ten 8,#- years from dispossession. This is so, because under Art. 00084-, of the Civil Code the real right of possessions is lost after the lapse of ,# years. %%. +ive instan,es w5ere a,tions do not res,ribe.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C of %&'

ANS.*R' a. *here a person is in possession, his action to %uiet title does not prescribe. <enerally, an action for reconveyance based on an implied or constructive trust, such as the instant case, prescribes in ,# years from date of issuance of decree of registration. Cowever, this rule does not apply when the plaintiff is in actual possession of the land. b. An action for the nullification of a Certificate of Sale could not be instituted as this is tantamount to invalidating a privious declaration of the validity of an auction sale. The Certificate of Sale is just a certification of what was done during th auction sale. @A* $A TC? CAS? %!. .5at is t5e law of t5e ,ase 6 ANS.*R' 1Hnder the Jlaw of the caseD concept, a. whatever is once irrevocably established as the controlling legal principle or decision b. continues to be the law of the case between the same parties in the same case, c. whether correct on general principles or not, so long as the facts on which such decision was predicated continue to be the facts of the case before the court. Such stability and conclusiveness given to final judgments of courts of competent jurisdiction are said to be grounded on reasons of public policy, judicial orderliness and economy as well as protection of the time and interests of the litigants. 2 LITIS PENDENTI %#. .5at is meant by litis endentia as a gro-nd for dismissal of a,tions 6 ANS.*R' Litis pendentia is a @atin term which literally means G a pending suit.G )t is variously referred to in some decisions as lis pendens and auter action pendant! *hile it is normally connected with the control which the court has on a property involved in a suit during the continuance proceedings, it is more interposed as a gound for the dismissal of a civil action pending in court. 8Sec. ,, par. KeL, +ule ,/, +$C-. Litis pendentia as a ground for the dismissal of a civil action refers to the situation wherein another action is pending between the same parties for the same cause of action 8Sec. , KeL, +ule ,/, +$C-, and that the second action becomes unnecessary and ve atious. %#A. .5at re9-isites m-st ,on,-r before litis enden,ia ,an be invoAed6 ANS.*R' Aor litis pendentia to be invo7ed the concurrence of the following re%uisites are necessary' ,- identity of parties or at least represention of the same interest in both actionsF .- identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs must be founded on the same facts and the same basisF and 3- identity in the two cases should be such that any judgment that may be rendered the other action will, regardless of which party is successful, amount to res "udicata on the other action under consideration. )t has been held that where a litigant sues the same party against whom the same action or actions, for the alleged violation of the same right, and th enforcement of the same relief isMare still pending, the defense of litis pendentia in one case is a bar to the otherF and a final judgment in one would constitute res judicata and thus, would cause the dismissal of the rest. %#B. Disting-is5 litis enden,ia as a gro-nd for dismissal from res 8-di,ata. ANS.*R' )n litis pendentia there is no judgment yet as both of the cases are still pending *C)@? in res "udicata there is already a judgment on the first case. %#C. (s enden,y of anot5er ,ase a-tomati, litis endentia. ANS.*R/ No. Litis pendentia does not e ist solely because other action 8s- is pending between the same parties. )t must be shown that the institution of the later action8s- was unnecessary and intended to harass the defendant.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %" of %&'

%&. 05e 2C0C rendered a De,ision granting t5e e8e,tmnt s-it filed by t5e laintiff against t5e defendants over a ar,el of land ,laiming t5at t5e defendants were o,,- ying t5e land - on 5is mere toleran,e. .5ile an a eal was ending before t5e R0C: laintiff filed a motion for immediate e7e,-tion of t5e 2C0C 8-dgment w5i,5 was granted. 05e writ of demolition will be e7e,-ted over t5e 5o-se owned by t5e defendants. 1owever: t5e Co-rt of A eals later reversed t5e R0C order granting t5e e7e,-tion ending a eal: w5i,5 was affirmed by t5e S- reme Co-rt. 2eanw5ile: t5e defendants also filed before t5e R0C a new a,tion for 9-ieting of title involving t5e same ar,el of land b-t not t5e 5o-se. 05e defendants also filed before t5e R0C a new a,tion for 9-ieting of title involving t5e same ro erty. S5o-ld t5e a,tion for 9-ieting of title 8-stify t5e s-s ension of t5e e8e,tment s-it 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' (es, on e%uitable considerations as an e ception to the general rule that a pending civil action invlving ownership of the same property does not justify the suspension of the ejectment proceedings. The ejectment suit is one of unlawful detainer and not of forcible entry. The ejetmnet of the defendants would mean a demolitionof their house, a matter that is li7ely to create confusion, disturbance, inconveniences and e penses. 5ecessarily, the affirmance of the !CTC decision would cause the plaintiff to go through the whole gamut of enforcing it by physically removing the defendants from the premises. The plaintiff is claiming ownership only of the land, not of the house. 5eedlessly, the litigants as well as the courts will be wasting much time and effort by proceeding at a state wherein the outcome is at best temporary, but the result of enforcement is permanent, unjust and propbably irreparable. #ES $%DI& T %'. .5at is res 8-di,ata as a gro-nd for a motion to dismiss 6 ANS.*R' )t posits that when a right of fact has been judicially tried and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, or an opportunity for trial has been given, the judgment of the court, so long as it remains unreversed, should be conclusive upon the parties and those in privity with them in law or estate. %'A. +ive t5e as e,ts of res 8-di,ata. ANS.*R/ The two aspects of res "udicata are' Airst' The effect of a judgment as a bar to the prosecution of a second action upon the same claim, demand or cause of action. Second' The second precludes the relitigation of a particular fact or issue in another action between the same parties or their successors&in&interest, on a different claim or cause of action. %'B. +ive t5e re9-isites of res 8-di,ata as a gro-nd for a motion to dismiss.

ANS.*R' +e%uisites of res "udicata as a ground for a motion to dismiss' ,- The judgment sought to bar the new action must be finalF .- The decision must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction over the subject matter and the partiesF 3- The disposition of the case must be a judgment or on the merits. 4- There must be between the first and second action, the three identities' a- )dentity of parties, b- )dentity of subject matter, and c- )dentity of causes of action. %'C. .5en is t5ere a 8-dgment on t5e merits. ANS.*R/ A judgment which determines the rights and liabilities of the parties based on he ultimate facts as disclosed by the pleadings or issues presented for trial. )t is not necessary

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %% of %&'

that there should haveen a trial, actual hearing or arguments on the facts of the case. Aor as long as the parties had full legal opportunity to be heard on their respective claims and contentions, the judgment is on the merits. %'D. (s absol-te identity of arties re9-ired in res 8-di,ata6 ANS.*R' Substantial identity of parties only re%uired. Aor purposes of res "udicata, only substantial identity is re%uired and not absolute identity. ;arties in both cases need not be physically identical provided hat there is privity between the parties or their successors&in&interest subse%uent to the commencment of the previous cause of action, litigating for the same thing, title, or capacity. %'*. (s res 8-di,ata defeated by minor differen,e of arties6 ANS.*R' #es "udicata is not defeated by a minor difference of parties, as it does not re%uire absolute but only subsantial identity of parties. But there is substantial identity only when the 1additional2 party acts in the same capacity or is in privity with the parties in the former action. Co&owners are not parties inter se in relation to the property owned in comon. A subse%uent action by a co&heir, who did not join the earlier dismissed action for recovery of property, should not be barred by prior judgment. 5eiher will conclusiveness of judgmnt apply because there was no identity of parties. %'4. agreement6 (s t5ere res 8-di,ata among arties w5o did not sign t5e ,om romise

ANS.*R' 5o res "udicata upon parties who did not sign the compromise agreement because there is no identity of parties. A judgmnt upon a compromise has all the force and effect of any other judgment, hence conclusive only upon parties thereto and their privies. %'+. (s t5ere res 8-di,ata w5ere ,a-ses of a,tion are different6 ANS.*R' 5o res judicata where causes of action are different. The causes of action are different between an unlawful detainer case and another case which concenrns the validity of the e ecution proceedings, specifically the validity of the auction sale of properties to satisfy the money judgmntin the ejectmnt case. The two cases fail the test of identity of causes of action, i.e. whether the same facts or evidence would support and establish the causes of action in each case. %>. S o-ses de la Cr-B owned a residential lot w5i,5 was leased to Dominga w5ere s5e b-ilt a two-story 5o-se w5ere 5er family lived. 05e lessess religio-sly aid 5er mont5ly lease ental -ndtil <-ne %C?C w5en t5e lessor sto ed ,olle,ting t5e same. (n <-ne %C?C 05eresa informed Dominga t5at s5e -r,5ased t5e lot from t5e revio-s owners. S5e wanted to taAe immediate ossession of t5e ro ertysin,e s5e 5ad no ot5er residential lot and s5e intended to maAe -se of t5e lot for t5e ,onstr-,tion of 5er own 5o-se. 05eresa gave Dominga t5ree E#D mont5s noti,e to va,ate and to demolis5 t5e im rovements w5i,5 t5e latter 5ad b-ilt on t5e lot. As a res-lt of DomingaFs fail-re to va,ate: 05eresa filed an e8e,tment ,ase based on 5er alleged need for t5e ro erty. 05e ,o-rt dismissed t5e ,ase and 5eld t5at t5e defendant 5as not been in arrears in t5e ayment of t5e mont5ly rentals and noted t5at t5e laintiff never tried to ,olle,t. 05at de,ision 5ad long be,ome final and e7e,-tory. (n %C@!: 05eresa filed a se,ond e8e,tment ,ase: t5is time against Almario w5o s-,,eeded 5is mot5er Dominga. 05e ,ase was again dismissed as t5e rentals - to and in,l-ding 4ebr-ary %C@! 5ad been aid in f-ll. 05e de,ision 5ad also be,ome final and e7e,-tory. (n %C@C: 2ariano: t5e new owner of t5e ro erty filed anot5er e8e,tment ,ase against Almario insisting t5e same remises s-b8e,t of t5e first two e8e,tment ,ases. Almario again revailed. (n %CC!: 2ariano filed t5e fo-rt5 e8e,tment s-it alleging t5at 5e is lwasing t5e ro erty to Almario: t5at t5e lessee 5as violated t5e terms of t5e lease agreement by not

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %! of %&'

aying rentals sin,e De,ember: %C@? w5i,5 5as a,,-n-lated to P%?:'>&.&'. 05at 5e 5as made several demands - on Almario to ay 5is arrears and to va,ate t5e remises t5e latest of w5i,5 is t5ro-g5 a <an-ary %>: %CC! letter. Almario is now raising t5e do,trine of res 8-di,ata ,ontending t5at t5is latest e8e,tment s-it is barred by t5e final and e7e,-tory de,isions in revio-s ,ases. R-le on AlmarioFs defense. ANS.*R: There is no res "udicata because of the lac7 of identity of causes of action between the latest and previous cases. The first ejectment case had for a cause of action based on the need for the premises. The second ejectment case involved a different cause of action, that is, for non&payment of rentals up to Aebruary ,6:.. The third case had for cause of action the need for the premises and non& payment of rentals from 5ovembefr ,6:" up to !ay ,6::. )n the latest ejectment suit the cause of action is the non&payment of rentals from >ecember ,6:" accumulating to ;,",#/4./0. Clearly, the cause of action and the circumstances present in the instant case are not the same but differ mar7edly from those in previous suits cited. +eliance on the doctrine of res "udicata is misplaced. %?. .5at are t5e ,on,e ts of res 8-di,ata 6 ANS.*R/ a. Bar by former judgmentF b. Conclusiveness of judgment. 8+o as v. <alindo, ,#: ;hil. 0:"%?A. Dis,-ss t5e ,on,e t of bar by former 8-dgment/ ANS.*R/ Assuming that the court which rendered the judgment has jurisdiction, said judgment is, ,- with respect to the matter directly adjudged, .- or as to any other matter that could have been raised in relation thereto, 3- conclusive between the parties and their successors in interest by title a- subse%uent to the commencement of the action or special proceeding, b- litigating for the same thing and under the same title and in the same capacity. 8Sec. 4" KbL, +ule 36, +$C arrangement and numbering suppliedThere is Gbar by prior judgmentG when, between the first case where the judgment was rendered, and the second case which is sought to be barred, there is identity of parties, subject matter and cause of action. The judgment in the first case constitutes an absolute bar to the subse%uent action. )t is final as to the claim or demand in controversy, including the parties and those in privity with them, not only as to every matter which was offered and received to sustain or defeat the claim or demand, but to any other admissible matter which might have been offered for that purpose and of all matters that could have been adjudged in that case. %?B. +ive an e7am le of bar by former 8-dgment/ ANS.*R/ A judgment rendered upon a promissory note is conclusive as to the validity of the instrument and the amount due upon it, although it be subse%uently alleged that perfect defenses actually e isted of which no proof was offered, such as forgery, want of consideration or payment. )f such defenses were not presented in the action and established by competent evidence, the subse%uent allegation of their e istence is of no legal conse%uence, The judgment is conclusive, so far as future proceedings a law are concerned, as though the defenses never e isted. %?C. Dis,-ss t5e ,on,e t of ,on,l-siveness of 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ That only is deemed to have been adjudged in a former judgment or final order which appears upon its face to have been so adjudged, or which was actually and necessarily included therein or necessary thereto are conclusive between the parties. 8Sec. 4" KcL, +ule 4", +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %# of %&'

The rule of conclusiveness of judgment precludes the relitigation of a particular fact or issue in another action between the same parties based on a different claim or cause of action. The judgment in the prior action operates as estoppel only as to those matters in issue or points controverted, upon the dtermination of which the finding of judgment was rendered. The previous judgment is conclusive in the second cased only as to those matters actually and directly controverted and determined and not as to matters merely involved therein. %?D. +ive e7am les of ,on,l-siveness of 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ )n an action to recover several installments due and unpaid on a promissory note without an acceleration clause, the judgment declaring the promissory note to be genuine is conclusive between the parties or their successors&in&interest in a subse%uent action to recover succeeding installments due and unpaid. The negligence of the shipping line which issue had already been passed upon in a case filed by one of the insurers, is conclusive and can no longer be relitigated in a similar case filed by another insurer against the same shipping line on the basis of the same factual circumstances. %?*. Disting-is5 bar by former 8-dgment from ,on,l-siveness of 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ ,- There is bar by former 8-dgment if all the identities 8parties, subject matter and cause of action- are present '(ILE in ,on,l-siveness of 8-dgment there is no identity of causes of action between the two cases, all other re%uisites being present. .- As to effect, in bar by former 8-dgment, the first judgment constitutes an absolute bar to all matters directly adjudged as well as matters that may have been adjudged *C)@? in ,on,l-siveness of 8-dgment, the first judgment is conclusive only on matters actually litigated and adjudged in the first action. %@. Disting-is5 from ea,5 ot5er/ res 8-di,ata: law of t5e ,ase and stare de,isis. ANS.*R' Res 8-di,ata simply means finality of judgments, or that issues decided ion a case, once a decision has become final and e ecutory cannot be litigated again by the same parties in a subse%uent action involving the same subject matterF *C)@? Law of t5e ,ase means that legal conclusions announced on a first appeal, whether on the general law or the law as applied to the concrete facts, not only prescribe the duty and limit the power of the trial court to strict obedience and conformity thereto, but they become and remain the law of the case in all stages, whether in the lower court or in the appellate court on a subse%uent appeal *C)@? Stare decisis means the doctrine that when the court has once laid down a principle of law as applicable to a certain state of facts, it will adhere in principle and apply it to all future cases where the facts are substantially the same. A$+H! SC$;;)5< %C. .5at is for-m s5o ing6

ANS.*R' *hen, as a result of an adverse opinion in one forum, a party see7s a favorable opinion 8other than by appeal or certiorari- in another, or when a party repetitively avails himself of 1several judicial remedies in different courts, simultaneously or successively, all substantially founded on the same transactions and the same essential facts and circumstances, and all raising substantially the same issues either pending in, or already resolved adversely by, some other court.2 Aorum shopping e ists when the elements of litis pendentis are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another. %CA. Dis,-ss t5e nat-re of for-m s5o ing.

ANS.*R' Aorum shopping is a practice which derogates and ridicules the judicial process, plays havoc with the rules or orderly procedure, and is ve atious and unfair to the other parties of the case. )t is both contumacious and an act of malpracticeE it is Gproscribed and condemned as trifling with the courts and abusive of their processes, prosecution for contempt and ground for

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %& of %&'

summary dismissal of the actions involved, without prejudice to appropriate administrative action against the counsel.G %CB. +ive t5e test for determining w5et5er t5ere is ro5ibited for-m s5o ing.

ANS.*R' *here the elements of litis pendentia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res "udicata on the other. *here there e ists between the two cases' ,- identity of parties, or at least such parties as represent the same interests in both actions, as well as .- identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts, and the 3- indentity on the two preceding particulars is such that any judgment rendered in the other action, will regardless of which party is successful amount to res ad"udicata in the action under con sideration' all the re%uisites, in fine, of auter action pendant! %CC. +ive e7am les w5ere t5ere is for-m s5o ing.

ANS.*R/ ,- There would be forum shopping if all of the respondents acting as one group, filed identical special civil actions in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court. There must be identity of parties, of interests represented, rights asserted and relief sought in different tribunals. .- A lawyer filed nine judicial remedies in different courts, attac7ing the jurisdiction of the metropolitan trial court in one case. %CD. +ive e7am les of no for-m s5o ing.

ANS.*R/ ,- *here two groups of respondents appear to have acted independently of each other when they sought relief from the appellate court, there is no forum shopping. however, the adverse party can always as7 for the consolidation of the two cases. .- *here the reliefs sought in the opposition in the Court of Appeals and the petition before the Supreme Court are not identical. !". On Se tember >: %CC': 1-bert .ebb filed a etition for ,ontem t in Criminal Case No. C'-&"& against <essi,a Alfaro and )iva Prod-,tions: (n,.: ,om laining t5at t5eir a,ts ,on,erning t5e romotion: advertising and marAeting of G05e <essi,a Alfaro Story:G in t5e rint and broad,ast media and: even on billboards as well as t5e s,5ed-ling of t5e remiere of t5e movie on Se tember %%: %CC' and its reg-lar -bli, e75ibition starting Se tember %#: %CC' ,onstit-tes ,ontem t wit5in t5e ,ontem lation of Se,tion #: R-le ?% of t5e R-les of Co-rt. On Se tember @: %CC' after a f-ll 5earing: t5e ,o-rt iss-ed an order restraining t5e remiere and s5owing of t5e movie. On t5e same day: 1-bert instit-ted a ,ase for (n8-n,tion wit5 Damages before t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt of 2aAati: w5i,5 iss-ed e7- arte an order en8oining )iva and Alfaro from f-rt5er ro,eeding: engaging: -sing or im lementing t5e romotional: advertising and marAeting rograms for t5e same movie and from s5owing or ,a-sing it to be s5own or e75ibited in all t5eaters in t5e entire ,o-ntry -ntil after t5e final termination and logi,al ,on,l-sion of t5e trial in t5e ,riminal a,tion ending before t5e Parana9-e R0C. .as t5ere for-m-s5o ing 6 ANS.*R' (es. *hile there is no identity of causes of action, *ebb sought e actly identical reliefs when a prayer for the injunctive writ was li7ewise prayed for in the !a7ati Court. !%. G+G filed an a,tion against G.G for 9-ieting of title. D-ring t5e enden,y of t5e a,tion: G+G filed anot5er s-it also against G.G to e8e,t 5im from t5e ro erty s-b8e,t of t5e a,tion for 9-ieting of title. (s t5ere for-m-s5o ing 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %' of %&'

ANS.*R' 5o. Aor forum shopping to e ist, both actions must involve the same transactions, essential facts and circumstances and the actions must raise identical causes of action, subject matter, and issues. An action for %uieting refers to ownership while the action for ejectment concerns possession. Surely there are different causes of action
.1O AR* 01* PAR0(*S 6

!!. .5o are arties in an a,tion 6 ANS.*R' ;arties when used in connection with the subject matter of an action, is understood to include all those a. who are directly interested in the subject matter, and b. who, therefore, have a right ,- to ma7e a defense, .- control the proceedings, 3- e amine and cross&e amine the witnesses, or 4- appeal from the judgment. ;ersons not having these rights are regarded as strangers to the action. 84" C.J. ,4&,0, numbering and arrangement supplied!#. .5o may be arties to a s-it 6 ANS.*R/ a. $nly ,- natural or .- juridical persons or 3- entities authoriIed by law b. may be parties in a civil action. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule 3, +$C!#A. +ive t5e ,riteria for invoAing 8-di,ial ro,ess.

ANS.*R/ A party may consider himself aggrieved by another but the court may not recogniIe him as capable of pursuing his claim if he does not meet certain re%uirements. Aor a person to invo7e judicial assistance he must have legal capacity, li7ewise a real party in interest with locus standi! Aor e ample, one who has no right or interest to a property cannot invo7e the jurisdiction of the court as party&plaintiff in the action for it is ordained that easy action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest. )f the criteria for invo7ing judicial process is not met then, the complaint filed by such incapacitated plaintiff may be subject to a motion to dismiss on the ground that the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue. 8Sec. , KdL, +ule ,/, +$C-. $n the other hand if the ground is not raised in a motion to dismiss it may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer and, in the discretion of the court, a preliminary hearing may be had thereon as if a motion to dismiss had been filed. 8,st par., Sec. /, +ule ,/, +$C!&. GAG 5-sband of GB:G instit-ted an a,tion for e8e,tment in t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt of t5e National Ca ital <-di,ial Region in 5is name against GCG to re,over t5e owners5i and ossession of a ar,el of land w5i,5 was t5e ara 5ernal ro erty of GB.G GCG filed a motion asAing t5at GBG be made a arty in t5e a,tion. 05e ,o-rt denied GC;sG motion and ro,eeded wit5 t5e trial of t5e ,ase. (s t5e ,o-rt;s r-ling s-stainable 6 State t5e reasons for yo-r answer. ANS.*R' 5o. Spouses shall sue and be sued jointly e cept only in the cases provided by law. There is no showing in the problem that there is a judicial separation of property, or that there was a separation of property agreed upon in the marriage settlements or that the husband has been appointed by a court as the administrator of the wifeEs property. !'. .5at is t5e -r ose w5y s-its m-st be bro-g5t in t5e name of t5e real arty in interest 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %> of %&'

ANS.*R' )n order to end litigations. )f the suit is not brought in the name of the real party in interest, no controversy would be resolved because another suit could always be instituted for or against the GtrueG real party in interest. As the latin ma im goes, interest rei publicae ut )inis sit litium! The interest of the State demands end to litigation. !'A. Define legal interest and interest. ANS.*R/ The term interest is material interest, an interest in issue to be affected by the decree as distinguished from mere interest in the %uestion involved, or a mere incidental interest. !oreover, the interest of the party must be personal and not one based on a desire to vindicate the constitutional right of some third or unrelated party. !>. 1(B 0enants Asso,iation: ,om osed of abo-t a 5-ndred 5eads of families w5o are tenants in good standing of a %&-story b-ilding brings a s-it ,ontesting t5e ,onditional sale of s-,5 b-ilding wit5o-t noti,e to t5e tenants or rior ,learan,e from t5e ro er government offi,e. Does t5e 1(B 0enants Asso,iation 5ave t5e ersonality to s-e on its own: as a ,or oration re resenting its members w5o are tenants of t5e b-ilding 6 ANS.*R' 5o, it is not a real party in interest. )t has no real, actual, material or substantial interest in the subject matter of the action. The benefits are not really meant for the Association, but for the members of the Association. Thus, a person who is not a party to a contract and for whose benefit it was not e pressly made cannot maintain an action on it, even if the contract, if performed by the parties to it, would incidentally inure to his benefit. )t is the individual members who have personal and individual rights as tenants therefore they are the real parties in interest. !?. S o-ses 0ondas a,ting bot5 in t5eir ,a a,ity as offi,ers of 1oney 0ree A arel Cor oration E10ACD and in t5eir ersonal ,a a,ities: a lied for and wer granted ,ommer,ial letters of ,redit by 2*0ROBAN3: in ,onne,tion wit5 t5e im ortoation of raw te7tile materials to 5e -sed in t5e man-fa,t-ring of garments. 05e im orted fabri,s were wit5drawn by 10AC -nder %% tr-st re,ei ts e7e,-ted by t5e 0ondas. Des ite re eated demands: t5e 0ondas failed to a,,o-nt to 2*0ROBAN3 t5e goods andHor ro,eeds of sale of t5e mer,5andiBe: s-b8e,t of t5e tr-st re,ei ts. 2*0ROBAN3 filed wit5 t5e Provin,ial Prose,-tor a ,om laintHaffidavit ,5arging t5e 0ondas wit5 violation of P.D. No. %%' E0r-st Re,ei tsD: in relation to Arti,le #%' E%D EbD: of t5e Revised Penal Code w5i,5 was dismissed by t5e Prose,-tor. 2*0ROBAN3 a ealed to t5e Se,retary of <-sti,e w5i,5 ordered t5e filing of t5e a ro riate information. 05e 0ondas so-g5t a re,onsideration of t5e order w5i,5 was denied. 05ey filed wit5 t5e Co-rt of A eals a etition for ,ertiorari and ro5ibition w5i,5 t5e Co-rt granted ordering t5e dismissal of t5e ,riminal ,om laint. (s 2*0ROBAN3 ,lot5ed wit5 ersonality to elevate t5e matter to t5e S- reme Co-rt or s5o-ld t5e Offi,e of t5e Soli,itor +eneral instit-te t5e s-it 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' (es, !?T+$BA5B has pesonality to elevate the decision of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court. The general rule is that it is only the Solicitor <eneral who is authoriIed to bring or defend actions on behalf of the ;eople or +epublic of the ;hilippines once the case is broguht before the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeals. Cowever, an e ception has been made that 1if there appears to be grave error committed by the judge or lac7 of due process, the petition will be deemed filed by the private complainants therein as if it were filed by the Solicitor <eneral. !@. CeBar: et al.: are t5e a,t-al o,,- ants and residents of Lot No. #?%& of t5e Cadastral s-rvey of Cagayan sit-ated in Barr-i La asan: Cagayan de Oro City and are t5e mis,ellaneo-s sales atent a li,ants of s e,ifi, ortions of t5e ar,el of land. (t a earts

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %? of %&'

t5at Lot No. #?%& was Ide,larado terreno -bli,oJ as of De,ember %&: %C&": and s-bse9-ently ad8-di,ated to and ordered registered in t5e name of Sal,edo b-t OC0 No. "-?&" was a,t-ally iss-ed only in %C??. (t is now t5e ,ontention of CeBar: et al.: t5at t5e ro erty ,overed by Lot No. #?%&: t5e same as t5at ,overed by OC0 No. "-?&" is -bli, land be,a-se Sal,edo s-,,eeded in registering in 5is name land revio-sly de,lared as -bli, land as early as De,ember %C: %C&". Conse9-ently: OC0 "-?&" s5o-ld be ,an,elled and re,onveyed to CeBar: et al.: t5e a li,ants for sales atent. .o-ld t5e s-it for ,an,ellation and re,onveyan,e ros er 6 ANS.*R' 5o, because it was not brought in the name of the real party in interest. $nly the State can file a suit for reconveyance of a public land. Therefore, not being the owners of the land but mere applicants for sales patents thereon, CeIar, et al,,have no personality to file the suit. 5either will they be directly affected by the judgment in such suit.
Hnless authoriIed by law or the +ules of Court, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party in interest. 8last sentence, Sec. ., +ule 3, +$C-. A real arty in interest is t5e arty w5o stands to be benefited or in8-red by t5e 8-dgment in t5e s-it: or t5e arty entitled to t5e avails of t5e s-it. 8,st sentence, Ibid!-

!C. .illiam Uy and Rodel Ro7as: as agents of t5e owners of eig5t ar,els of land entered into a series of sale for t5ese lands wit5 t5e National 1o-sing A-t5ority EN1AD for develo ment as a 5o-sing ro8e,t. 1owever: a re ort by t5e D*NR s5owed t5at t5ree of t5e ar,els are not s-itable for a 5o-sing ro8e,t so N1A ,an,elled t5e sale for t5ese lots. .illiam and Rodel t5en filed s-it against N1A dor damages as a res-lt of t5e ,an,ellation of t5e sale of t5e t5ree lots. .ill t5e ,ase ros er 6 ANS.*R' 5o, because *illiam and +odel are not real parties in interest. The +ules provided that an action shall be prosecuted in the name of the party who, by the substantive law, has the right sought to be enforced. *illiam and +odel are not parties to the contract of sale. ?ven if they are entitled to commissions resulting from the sale, their recourse should be to the owners and not to 5CA. There is no contractual relation between *illiam and +odel one hand and 5CA on the other. #". 05e mayor of Santiago City: t5e resident of t5e Liga ng mga Barangay ng Santiago City and residents of Santiago City assailed t5e ,onstit-tionality of R.A. No. @'!@: w5i,5 dowsngraded t5e stat-s of t5e ,ity from an inde endent ,om onent ,ity into a mere ,om onent ,ity. Do t5e s-itors 5ave locus standi to s-e 6 ANS.*R' (es, it is now an ancient rule that the constitutionality of a law can be challenged by one who will sustain a direct injury as a result of its enforcement. #"A. .5en ta7 ayers 5ave locus standi to im -gn t5e validity of a law6 ANS.*R/ A citiIen ac%uires standing only if he can establish that he has suffered some actual or threatened injury as a result of the allegedly illegal conduct of the governmentF the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged actionF and the injury is li7ely to be redressed by a favorable action. A ta payer is deemd to have the standing to raise a constitutional issue when it is established that public funds have been disbursed in allegd contravention of the law or the constitution. Thus, a ta payerDs actiuon is properly brought only when there is an e ercise by congress of its ta ing and spending power. Ta payers have locus standi to %uestion the validity of ta measures or illegal e penditures of public money. +?AS$5' They are parties in interest to be prejudiced or benefited by the avails of the suit, but not if e ecutive acts do not involve the use of public funds.
b. P-bli, offi,ials 5ave locus standi because it is their sworn duty to protect public interest. 8!aceda v. !acaraig, ,6" SC+A "",-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %@ of %&'

c. Ob8e,tions to ta7 ayer;s s-its for la,A of s-ffi,ient ersonality is a ro,ed-ral te,5ni,ality which the Supreme Court could brush aside, where the iss-es are of s-,5 trans,endental im ortan,e in 7eeping with the CourtEs duty, under the ,6:" Constitution and the laws, to determine whether public officers have abused the discretion given to them. 8Bilosbayan, )nc. v. <uingona, Jr., .3. SC+A ,,#-

#%. +onBales: filing s-it as a ,itiBen and ta7 ayer: 9-estioned t5e validity of *7e,-tive Order No. &#: ,reating t5e Pre aratory ,ommission on Constit-tional Reforms EPCCRD in order: Ito st-dy and re,ommend ro osed amendments andHor revisions to t5e %C@? Constit-tion: and t5e manner of im lementing t5e same.J +onBales ,laims: t5at t5e President en,roa,5ed - on t5e legislat-reFs owers to ,reate a -bli, offi,e and to ro ose amendments to t5e ,5arter by forming t5e PCCR. Under se,tion ? of *.O. No. &#: t5e amo-nt of P# million was Ia ro riated for t5e o erational e7 enses of t5e Commission to be so-r,ed from f-nds of t5e Offi,e of t5e President: s-b8e,t to t5e -s-al a,,o-nting and a-diting r-les and reg-lations.J (s +onBales ,lot5ed wit5 lo,-s standi as a ta7 ayer to 9-estion t5e validity of *.O. No. &# 6 ANS.*R' 5o. <onIales has not shown that he has sustained or is in danger of sustaining any personal injury attributable to the creation of the ;CC+. )f at all, it is only Congress, not <onIales, which can claim 1injury2 since its powers are alleged to have been encroached upon by the ;resident. <onIales has sustained no direct, or even any indirect injury. 5either does he claim that his rights or privileges have been or are in danger of being violated, nor that he shall be subjected to any penalties or burdens as a result of the ;CC+Ds activities. A ta payerDs action is properly brought only when there is an e ercise by Congress of its ta ing or spending power. There is no such e ercise in the instant case because the funds were ta7en from funds intended for the $ffice of the ;residnt, in the e ercise of the Chief ? ecutiveDs power to transfer funds pursuant to Section .0 80- of Article 9) of the Constitution.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' There is no 1appropriation2 by Congress so to spea7. Appropriation in its strict sense, is 1the legislative authoriIation prescribed by the Constitution that money may be paid out of the Treasury,2 while 1appropriation made by law2 refers to the 1act of the legislature setting apart or assigning to a particular use a certain sumn to be used in paymnt of debt or dues from the State to its creditors.2 8Ibid!-

#!. .5o is an indis ensable arty 6 ANS.*R' An indispensable party is one without whom no final determination can be had of an action. 8Sec. ", +ule 3, +$C- They must always be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants. 8Ibid!A party is not an indispensable party if his interest in the controversy or subject matter is distinct and divisible from the interest of the other parties and will not necessarily be prejudiced by a judgment which does complete justice to the parties in court. ##. 05e s o-ses Ramon and Rosario died intestate in %C&# and %C&&: s-rvived by t5eir 5eirs: Carmen: <osefa: Angel: Am aro married to 1ernando: Con,e ,ion and salvador. S-bse9-ently: t5e estate was divided e9-ally distrib-ting Lot No. #"&> to Con,e ,ion: Angel: Am aro married to 1ernando and Ramon: t5e sole 5eir of Salvador w5o liAewise diedK w5ile lot nos. 'C!': 'C#&: %#!? and '@?! were distrib-ted e9-ally between <osefa and Carmen. Lot No. '@?! was not in,l-ded in t5e inventory of ro erties s-bmitted to t5e Co-rt: t5e ro8e,t of artition s-bmitted to and a roved by t5e Co-rt. 05e de,edent Ramon a,9-ired t5e ro erty and delivered it to t5e s o-ses Am aro and 5ernando. (t was s-bse9-ently delivered to <osefa and Carmen d-ring t5e a,t-al artition in %C'>: and t5ey 5ave been in ossession sin,e t5en. Angel: Con,e ,ion and Ramon Et5e sole 5eir of SalvadorD and t5e 5eirs of Am aro married to 1ernando: signed notariBed 9-it,laims over Lot '@?! in favor of <osefa and Carmen. S-bse9-ently: t5e 5eirs of Salvador: Am aro and Con,e ,ion laid ,laim to t5eir alleged s5ares in Lot '@?! ,laiming t5at t5e same is a ,ommon ro erty of t5e ,5ildren of Ramon and Rosario be,a-se it was not in,l-ded in t5e ro8e,t of artition be,a-se Lot No. '@?! was still in t5e name of t5e de,eased Ramon and Rosario.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %C of %&'

<osefa and Carmen t5en filed an a,tion for 9-ieting of title. (t is now ,ontended t5at <osefa and Carmen are not t5e ro er arties to bring an a,tion for 9-ieting of title: sin,e t5e Certifi,ate of 0itle to Lot '@?! is not in t5eir names. (s t5is ,ontention tenable6 ANS.*R' 5o. ;ersons having legal as well as e%uitable title to or interest in a real property may bring action to %uiet title and 1title2 here does not necessarily denote a certiticate of title issued in favor of the person filing the suit. An action to %uiet title is a common land remedy for the removal of any cloud or doubt or uncertainty on the title to real property. )t is essential for the plaintiff or complainant to have a legal or an e%uitable title to or interest in the real property which is the subject matter of the action. Also, the deed, claim or encumbrance or proceeding that is being alleged is a cloud on plaintiffDs title must be shown to be in fact involved or in operative despite its prima facie appearance of validity or lead efficacy. #&. .5o is a ne,essary arty 6. ANS.*R' A necessary party is one who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded to those already parties, for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action. 8Sec. :, +ule 3, +$C#'. +ive e7am les of a ne,essary arty. ANS.*R' Some e amples of necessary parties are' a. A solidary debtor is not an indispensable party but merely a necessary party. The creditor can proceed separately against any of the solidary debtors, who then can proceed against his co&debtors for reimbursement if complete relief is to be obtained. b. )n an action to recover possession of a parcel of land, the possessor 8tenant, etc.-, is the indispensable party while the owner is merely the necessary party. c. )n an action for the recovery of the ownership of a parcel of land, the owner is the indispensable party and the possessor 8the tenant- is merely the necessary party. #'A. Disting-is5 a ne,essary arty from an indis ensable arty. ANS.*R' The following are the distinctions between indispensable parties and necessary parties' a. The interest of indispensable parties is such that no final determination of the action can be had without them *C)@? the interest of necessary parties is such that complete relief may not be had without them. b. 5on&joinder of an indispensable party may subject the suit to dismissal *C)@? such is not the case with non&joinder of a necessary party. #>. 1ow is a ne,essary arty disting-is5ed from a ro er arty 6

ANS.*R' A ne,essary arty is distinguished from a ro er arty in the following manner' a. A ne,essary arty has an interest so joined with the parties before the court that his joinder is re%uired if complete is to be accorded the parties *C)@? the interest of a ro er arty is separable and even without his joinder complete relief can be had between the parties in courtF b. Ne,essary arties may at the discretion of the court be summoned to appear so complete relief may be accorded the parties *C)@? ro er arties need not be summoned to accord complete relief to parties. #?. Ag-ila filed a etition for e7em tion from t5e ,overage of t5e land reform rogram. 05e alleged tenants o osed t5e etition. 05e DAR Regional Dire,tor granted t5e a li,ation b-t on a eal t5e DAR reversed its r-ling and denied t5e e7em tion. Ag-ila a ealed to t5e Offi,e of t5e President w5i,5 reinstated t5e grant of t5e a li,ation. 05e tenants a ealed to t5e Co-rt of A eals: b-t t5e etition was dismissed for fail-re to im lead t5e Offi,e of t5e President w5i,5 is an indis ensable arty to t5e ,ase as it is from w5ere t5e 9-estioned de,ision and resol-tion was iss-ed. .as t5e dismissal ro er 6 *7 lain briefly.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !" of %&'

ANS.*R' 5o. The issue in the petition before the Court of Appeals is whether a private land should be e empted from the coverage of the land reform program. *hatever happens to that case and whoever wins would not bring any prejudice or gain to the government. The only participation of the $ffice of the ;resident in this case is its role as the office which entertains appeals from decisions of the >A+. )t is clear that the $ffice of the ;resident is merely a pro )orma party, in the same way that a respondent court is a pro )orma party in special civil actions for certiorari.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' Hnder Sec. ", +ule 3 of the +ules of Civil ;rocedure, an indispensable party is a party in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action without that party being impleaded. )ndispensable parties are those with such an interest in the controversy that a final decree would necessarily affect their rights, so that the court cannot proceed without their prescence. 1)nterest2, within the meaning of this rule, should be material, directly in issue and to be affected by the decree, as distinguished from a mere incidental interest in the %uestion involved. $n the other hand, a nominal or pro )orma party is one who is joined as a plaintiff or defendant, not because such party has any real interest in the subject matter or because any relief is demanded, but merely because the technical rules of pleadings re%uire the presence of such party on the record.

#@. .5at are t5e re9-isites for ermissive 8oinder of arties 6 ANS.*R' a. All persons in whom or against any right to relief b. in respect to or arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions is alleged to e ist, ,- whether jointly, severally, or in the alternative, c. may e cept as otherwise provided in these +ules of Court d. join as plaintiffs or be joined as defendants in one complaint, e. where any %uestion of law or fact common to all such plaintiffs or to all such defendants may arise in he actionF f. but the court may ma7e such orders as may be just to prevent any plaintiff or defendant from being embarrassed or put to e pense in connection with any proceeding in which he may have no interest. 8Sec. /, +ule 3, +$C arrangement, numbering and words without emphasiIed supplied#C. .5at is t5e 8-risdi,tional limitation on ermissive 8oinder of arties 6 ANS.*R' *ith respect to the jurisdiction of !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts and !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts in civil cases, B.;. Blg. ,.6 provides that where there are several claims or causes of actions between the same or different parties, embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all the causes of action irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions 8par. ,, Sec. 33, B.;. Blg. ,.6This is also 7nown as the totality rule.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' )t is apparent that the totality rule is a limitation on permissive joinder of parties because it does not allow the joinder of parties if the totality of the claims e ceeds the jurisdictional amount of the !etropolitan Trial Court, the !unicipal Trial Court and the !unicipal Circuit Trial Court

&". .5at is t5e r-le wit5 res e,t to non-8oinder of ne,essary arties 6 ANS.*R/ a. *henever in any pleading in which a claim is asserted b. a necessary party is not joined, c. the pleader shall ,- set forth his name, if 7nown, and shall state .- why he is omitted. d. Should the court find the reason for the omission unmeritorious, it ,- may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party .- if jurisdiction over his person may be obtained. 8,st par., Sec. 6, +ule 3, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied&"A. .5at are t5e effe,ts of non-in,l-sion in t5e s-it of a ne,essary arty/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !% of %&'

ANS.*R/ ,- The failure to comply with the order for his inclusion, without justifiable cause, shall be deemed a waiver of the claim against such party. 8.nd par., Sec. 6, +ule 3, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied,- The non&inclusion of a necessary party does a- not prevent the court from proceeding in the action, and b- the judgment rendered therein shall be c- without prejudice to the rights of such necessary party. 83rd par., Sec. 6, +ule 3, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied&%. 2a7imino dela Cr-B: <es-s Santiago: et al. filed s-it alleging t5at dela Cr-B in5erited t5e ro erty from t5e original ossessor of t5e land in 9-estion: and t5at t5e 5eirs of <oa9-in As-n,ion s-,,eeded in obtaining title over said land and registered in t5eir name. 05ey liAewise rayed for t5e iss-an,e of an in8-n,tive writ. 05e 5eirs filed t5eir answer wit5 ,o-nter,laim. 05e ,o-rt iss-ed t5e in8-n,tive writ. A etition was filed wit5 t5e S- reme Co-rt wit5o-t in,l-ding t5e names of dela Cr-B and Santiago. 2ay t5e etition be dismissed for fail-re to 8oin dela Cr-B and Santiago 6 ANS.*R' 5o. 5either misjoinder nor non&joinder of parties is a ground for dismissal of an action. ;arties may be dropped or added by order of the court ,- on motion of any party or .- on its own initiative at any stage of the action and 3- on such terms as are just. Any claim against a misjoined party may be severed and proceeded with separately. &%A. .5at effe,t: if any: of fail-re to in,l-de indis ensable arties6 Parties in interest6 ANS.*R' Aailure to include indispensable parties results to dismissal of the action. ;arties in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants. 8Sec. ", +ule 3, +$C+?AS$5' Their presence is a sine qua non to the e ercise of judicial power. So that the whole matter in dispute may be determined once and for all in the litigation preventing multiplicity of suits. &%B. State t5e ro,ed-re for dismissal if indis ensable arty is not im leaded. ANS.*R/ ,- A motion should be filed for the inclusion of the indispensable party. and not a motion to dismiss. .- The court then orders the inclusion of the indispensable party or opportunity afforded for amendment by the pleader. 3- )f the plaintiff to whom the order to include the indispensable party is directed refuses to comply with the order of the court, the complaint may be dismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the courtEs own motion 4- $nly upon unjustified failure or refusal to obey the order to include or to amendment is the action dismissed. &!. .5at is a t5ird arty ,om laint 6 .5at is itFs nat-re 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' A third 8fourth, etc.- & party complaint is a claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the action, called the third 8fourth, etc.&party defendant, for contribution, indemnity, subrogation, or any other relief, in respect of his opponentEs claim. 8Sec. ,,, +ule /, +$C&!a. .5at is t5e nat-re of a t5ird- arty ,om laint6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !! of %&'

ANS.*R/ The third&party complaint is actually independent of and separate and distinct from the plaintiffEs complaint. *ere it not for this provision of the +ules of Court, it would have been filed independently and separately from the original complaint by the defendant against the third&party. But the +ules permit the defendant to bring in a third&party defendant or so to spea7, to litigate his separate cause of action in respect of plaintiffEs claim against a third&party in the original and principal case. &!B. .5at is t5e -r ose of a t5ird arty ,laim6

ANS.*R/ ,- To avoid circuitry of action and unnecessary proliferation of law suitsF .- To prevent multiplicity of suits by disposing of e peditiously in one litigation the entire subject matter arising from one particular set of facts. )n short, the main purpose is to achieve complete justice between all parties. &!C. Dis,-ss t5e s e,ial 8oinder devi,es. ANS.*R/ There are three special joinder devices whereby parties may be joined in an action. These are class suits, intervention and interpleader. Class suits and interpleader may be considered as part of the initiatory joinder devices because the parties are joined at the inception of the suit. They may li7ewise be considered involuntary joinder devices because the parties joined may or may not 7now that they are being joined. $n the other hand intervention is a joinder device after the suit has been filed and is voluntary in character because a party as7s for leave of court to be allowed to intervene. &#. .5en ,o-ld a ,lass s-it be filed 6 ANS.*R/ a. *hen the subject matter of the controversy b. is one of common or general interest to many persons c. so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties, d. a number of them which the court finds to ,- be sufficiently numerous and .- representative as to fully protect the interests of all concerned e. may sue or defend for the benefit of all. f. A party in interest shall have the right to intervene to protect his individual interest.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. .5en ,lass s-its ro er and w5o files. A class suit may be to Gsue or defend.G So also, the representatives must be more than one person because of the phrase, Ga number of themG b. C5ara,teristi,s of a ,lass s-it/ ,- There is only one right or cause of action pertaining or belonging in common to many persons, not separately or severally to distinct individuals. .- The object of the suit is to obtain relief for or against numerous persons as a group or as an integral entity, and not as separate, distinct individuals whose rights or liabilities are separate from and independent of those affecting the others. 3- The numerousness of parties involved that it is impracticable to join all as parties.

&&. 4o-r 5-ndred residents of Barrio Ramos initiated a ,lass a,tion s-it t5ro-g5 Albert: a former mayor of t5e town: to re,over damages s-stained d-e to t5eir e7 os-re to to7i, waste and f-mes emitted by t5e ,ooAing gas lant of 0o 4-el +as Cor oration lo,ated in t5e town. (s t5e ,lass s-it ro er 6 E,664ANS.*R' 5o, the class suit is not proper. There is no cause of action belonging in common to the 4## residents. The e tent of damage suffered by them is individual and separate from each other. The numerousness of the parties and object of the suit a single entity are not the only determinants of a class suit. There

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !# of %&'

must be unity of cause ro right of action. The 4## residents did not suffer to the same e tent and degree, conse%uently there have different causes of action. &'. A labor -nion bro-g5t s-it involving a matter of ,ommon or general interest in be5alf of its members w5o are so n-mero-s t5at it is im ra,ti,able to bring all of t5em before t5e ,o-rt. (s t5is a ,lass s-it 6 ANS.*R' 5o. This is a suit brought in a representative capacity by the class suit. )t is the function of a labor union to carry out the representation of its members and to file an actual suit for their benefit and behalf without joining them and avoid the cumbersome procedure of joining each and every member as a separate party. &>. .5at are t5e ro,ed-ral ste s for intervention 6 ANS.*R' a. The motion to intervene may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by the trial court. A copy of the pleading&in&intervention shall be attached to the motion and served on the original parties. 8Sec. ., +ule ,6, +$Cb. The motion is heardF c. The court grants leave and issues an order admitting the complaint or answer in intervention. d. The answer to the complaint&in&intervention shall be filed within fifteen 8,0- days from notice of the order admitting the same unless a different period is fi ed by the court. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,6, +$C &>A. Dis,-ss t5e nat-re of intervention. ANS.*R/ )ntervention is a procedure whereby one not originally a party to a suit may, upon court authority before rendition of judgment by the trial court, join either as a party plaintiff or party defendant. There are two classes of persons who may intervene' ,- A person who has a legal interest a- in the matter in litigation, or b- in the success of either of the parties, or c-. an interest against both, .- Any person who is so situated a- as to be adversely affected by 8,- a distribution of property or 8.- other disposition of property b- in the custody of the court or of an officer thereof.
D*A01 O4 A PAR0L: 0RANS4*R O4 (N0*R*S0 AND C1AN+* O4 S0A0US O4 PAR0(*S

&?. .5at is t5e nat-re of ,laims t5at s-rvive t5e deat5 of a arty 6 ANS.*R/ These are the claims that could proceed as if the prospective plaintiff or defendant is still alive. Thus, the e ecutor, administrator or any legal representative of the deceased may bring or defend suits. &@. +ive some e7am les of ,laims t5at s-rvive t5e deat5 of a arty. ANS.*R/ Actions a. Aor the recovery or protection of the property or rights of the deceased. 8Sec. ., +ule :", +$Cb. to recover real or personal property, or an interest thereon, from the estate, or c. to enforce a lien on real or personal property and c. to recover damages for an injury to person or property, real or personal. 8Sec. ,, +ule :", +$C-.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !& of %&'

a. The litmus test in determining whether an action survives depends on the nature of the action and the damage sued for. )n the causes of action which survive, the wrong complained affects primarily and principally property and property rights, the injuries to the person being merely incidental, *C)@? in the causes of action which do not survive, the injury complained of is to the person, the property and rights of property affected being incidental. 8+uiI, et al., v. The Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,/6#6, prom. Aebruary .0, ,666)n the above +uiI case, attorneyDs fees were considered as basically a monetary claim which does not survive, under the old Sec. .,, +ule 3, +$C. )!;T. Cowever, the ,66" +ules on Civil ;rocedure now allows the continuation until entry of final judgment of an action for the recovery of money arising from contract, e press or implied, if the defendant dies before entry of final judgment. 8Sec. .#, +ule 3, +$Cb. +eal actions survive death.

&C. .5at are t5e ,laims t5at do not s-rvive t5e deat5 of a arty 6 ANS.*R/ These are the claims which cannot be instituted against the e ecutor, administrator or any legal representative of the deceased. These claims could however be prosecuted in the estate proceedings of the deceased. ? amples/ 5o action upon a claim for the recovery of money or debt or interest thereon shall be commenced against the e ecutor or administrator. 8Sec. ,, +ule :", +$C- Claims other than those stated in the previous heading referring to Secs. , and ., +ule :", +$C.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. Contra,t-al money ,laims s-rvive. )f the action for recovery of money arising from contract, e press or implied, is not yet filed, it could not filed against the e ecutor, administrator or legal representative. )t should be filed as a claim against the estate. Cowever, if the case is already filed, and the death occurred before entry of final judgment in the court in which the case was pending, the case shall be allowed to continue. 8Sec. .#, +ule 3, +$C)f the action for recovery of money did not arise from contract, e press or implied, it does not survive. b. Claims t5at do not s-rvive are dismissed even if atta,5ment levided on defendantFs ro erty. +?AS$5' The purpose of the attachment which is to secure the outcome of the trial no longer e ists, and so with the reasons for the issuance of the writ of attachment, insofar as the deceased is concerned. 8!alolos v. Asia ;acific Ainance Corporation, ,4" SC+A /,c. As a general r-le ersonal a,tions do not s-rvive . ? ception' action for the recovery of money arising from contract, e press or implied, if the defendant dies before entry of final judgment. 8Sec. .#, +ule 3, +$C-

'". .5at is t5e d-ty of t5e attorney - on t5e deat5 of a arty w5et5er laintiff or defendant: o,,-rring at any state of t5e a,tion 6 ANS.*R' a. )f death occurs during the pendency of the action b. And the claim is not e tinguished by death c. Counsel shall inform the court of such death d. *ithin thirty 83#- days after such death e. <iving the name and address of the legal representative8s-. 8,st par., Sec. ,/, +ule 3, +$C5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. Co-nselFs fail-re will not vitiate ro,eedings and 8-dgment. The failure of counsel to comply with his duty to inform the court of the death of his client and no substitution of the deceased party, will not invalidate the proceedings and the judgment thereon if the action survives the death of such party.

'%. .5at s5o-ld be done and w5at is t5e effe,t of t5e deat5 of t5e PLA(N0(44 w5ile t5e a,tion is ending in t5e trial ,o-rt or on a eal before entry of final 8-dgment in t5e ,o-rt 6 ANS.*R' a. The counsel reports the deathF b. There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. c. The court re%uires the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff to e plain why the action should not be dismissed because of the death of the plaintiff, where the claim does not survive.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !' of %&'

d. )f the claim is e tinguished by the plaintiffEs death the case is dismissed. )f the claim survives the death of the plaintiff, the case continues, with the substitution of the deceased plaintiff by his legal representative 8s-, or his heirs. e. *hen the action is for recovery of money arising from contract, e press or implied, and the decedent dies before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending at the time of such death, it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in the +ules of Court for prosecuting claims against the estate of deceased persons. 8Sec. .#, +ule 3, +$C'%A. State t5e ro,ed-re and effe,t of deat5 of revailing laintiff after entry of 8-dgment or order. ANS.*R/ ,- The counsel reports the deathF .- There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. 3- The substitute e ecutor, administrator or successor in interest may apply for the issuance of a writ of e ecution. 8Sec. " KaL, +ule 36, +$C'%B. State t5e ro,ed-re and effe,t of deat5 of revailing laintiff after e7e,-tion is iss-ed. ANS.*R/ ,- The counsel reports the deathF .- There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. 3- The usual procedure for e ecution is then followed. 4- The amounts recovered through e ecution form part of the estate of the deceased prevailing plaintiff. '!. .5at s5o-ld be done and w5at is t5e effe,t of t5e deat5 of a D*4*NDAN0 w5ile t5e a,tion is ending in t5e trial ,o-rt or on a eal before entry of final 8-dgment in t5e ,o-rt 6 ANS.*R/ a. The counsel reports the deathF b. There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. c. The plaintiff is as7ed to e plain why the suit should not be dismissed as a result of the death of the defendant. d. )f the action is for the recovery of money arising from contract, e press or implied, the case shall be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. )f the claim for money does not arise out of contract 8but not for recovery arising from physical injuries-, it should be dismissed. A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff therein shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in the +ules of Court for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person. 8Sec. .#, +ule 3, +$Ce. )f the action is otherwise, it shall be dismissed. f. )f it is a claim that survives another case may be filed against the e ecutor, administrator, estate or other legal representative of the deceased. a '!A. State t5e ro,ed-re and effe,ts of deat5 of a defendant after la se of eriod to eal or after entry of final 8-dgment in t5e ,o-rt.

ANS.*R/ ,- The counsel reports the deathF .- There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. 3- The plaintiff'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !> of %&'

a- )n case the judgment is for the recovery of real or personal property, or the enforcement of a lien thereon, applies for a writ of e ecution which is enforced against the defendantEs e ecutor, administrator or successor in interest. 8Sec. " KbL, +ule 36, +$Cb- )n case the judgment is other than for the above, the plaintiff files a claim against the estate for the amount of the judgment. 8Sec. 0, +ule :/, +$CF '!B. State t5e ro,ed-re and effe,ts of deat5 of a defendant after e7e,-tion. ANS.*R/ ,- The counsel reports the deathF .- There is substitution by the legal representative or heirs of the deceased plaintiff, whether the claim survives or not. 3- The property actually levied is sold for the satisfaction of the judgment obligation and the person ma7ing the sale shall account to the deceased defendantEs e ecutor or administrator for any surplus in his hands. 8Sec. " KcL, +ule 36, +$CDOC0R(N* O4 PR*COND(0(ONS: PR(OR R*SOR0 AND AL0*RNA0()* 2OD*S O4 D(SPU0* R*SOLU0(ON

'!C.

Dis,-ss t5e do,trine of re,onditions or rior resort.

ANS.*R' The doctrine which re%uires that certain matters or controversies be resolved utiliIing nonjudicial methods before resort could be had to judicial intervention. Aailure to do so could result in a dismissal of the action on the ground of prematurity of failure to comply with a condition precedent for filing the claim. 8Sec. , KjL, +ule ,/, +$CAor e ample, prior resort to settlement under the Katarunggang Pambarangay, e haustion of administrative remedies, earnest efforts towards a compromise, etc., are re%uired in certain instances before filing a suit in court. '!D. Dis,-ss t5e do,trine of alternative modes of dis -te resol-tion. ANS.*R/ These are the methods other than judicial process for the settlement of disputes or controversies between parties. These methods include among others mediation, conciliation, arbitration, etc. This doctrine differs from the doctrine of preconditions or prior resort as the former is a mandatory re%uirement for filing suits while the latter is voluntary in character and becomes mandatory only if agreed upon by the parties.
PR*COND(0(ONS AND PR(OR R*SOR0

'#. Are t5ere instan,es w5ere t5ere is a re9-irement for efforts to ,om romise rior to t5e instit-tion of s s-it 6 ANS.*R' (es, no suit between members of the same family shall prosper unless it should appear from the verified complaint or petition that earnest efforts toward a compromise have been made, but the same have failed. )f it is shown that no such efforts were in fact made, the case must be dismissed. This rule shall not apply to cases which may not be the subject of compromise under the Civil Code. 8Art. ,0,, The Aamily Code'#A. State some ,ases t5at are not s-b8e,t to ,om romise. ANS.*R/ 5o compromise upon the following %uestions shall be valid' ,- The civil status of personsF .- The validity of a marriage or legal separationF 3- Any ground for legal separationF 4- Auture supportF 0- The jurisdiction of courtsF /- Auture legitime. 8Art. .#30, Civil Code of the ;hilippines-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !? of %&'

3A0ARUN++AN+ PA2BARAN+AL

'&. 05e 1eirs of )inBons are ,o-owners of a ar,el of land a ortion of w5i,5 was o,,- ied by 2ena *doria as a lesee sin,e %C'%. Sometime in %C@>: t5e 1eirs filed s-it against 2ena and several ot5ers also o,,- ying t5e same lot owned by t5em: do,Aeted as Civil Case No. %C!#: on t5e gro-nd of non- ayment of rentals. 05e trial ,o-rt fo-nd t5at t5e res ondent was not in arrears b-t was even advan,ed in 5is rentals. Bot5 arties a ealed. .5ile Civil Case No. %C!# was on a eal: t5e 1eirs filed anot5er e8e,tment s-it: Civil Case No. !">%: against 2ena and #C ot5ers on t5e gro-nd t5at t5ey ref-sed to enter into an agreement as tenants-lessees and ref-sed to ay t5e in,reased rent of P%."" er s9.m. er mont5. 05e ,o-rt dismissed Civil Case No. !">% d-e to t5e enden,y of Civil Case No. %C!#. 05is de,ision was a ealed to t5e R0C. .5ile Civil Case No. !">% was ending a eal before t5e R0C: t5e 1eirs filed anot5er ,ase: do,Aeted as Civil Case No.!%#?: liAewise againstg t5e same defendants for e7 iration of t5e lease ,ontra,t: ref-sal to sign written renewal of ,ontra,t of lease and nonayment of rentals. S5o-ld Civil Case No. !%#?: be dismissed for fail-re to ,om ly wit5 barangay ,on,iliation des ite allegations of t5e 1eirs t5at t5ere were -ndertaAen barangay ,on,iliation for Civil Case Nos. %C!#: and !">% 6 ANS.*R' (es. The Ceirs cannot rely on barangay conciliation proceedings held in the other cases and consider the same as compliance with the law. 8Ceirs of 9inIons, etc. v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,,6,0, prom. September 3#, ,6665$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. Barangay referral ,ondition re,edent to filing of a ,om laint/ ,- Before a court, or .- Before any other government office for adjudication. 8Sec. 4,. KaL, +.A. 5o. ",/#There is substantial compliance with the law even though no pang*at was constituted if the parties met at the office of the barangay chairman for possible settlement yet the efforts of the barangay chairman proved futile as no agreement was reached. All disputes are subject to referral. The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city of municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes. 8Sec.4#:, +.A. 5o. ",/#The referral must be made irrespective of the amount and nature of the dispute and whether the case falls within the jurisdiction of the !unicipal Trial Court or the +egional Trial Court.

'&A. *n-merate t5e dis -tes w5i,5 need not be bro-g5t for barangay ,on,iliation. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof. .- *hen one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the performance of his public functions. 3- *here the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon! 4- >isputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities e cept where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon! 0- Such other disputes which the ;resident of the ;hilippines may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. 8Sec. 4#:, +.A. 5o. ",/#/- @abor disputes. This would defeat the salutary purpose of the @abor Code which mandates that the @abor Arbiters must first conciliate and mediate in order to e peditiously resolve the dispute. To re%uire referral to the +arangay would result to delay in resolving labor disputes. "- *here the dispute involves juridical persons. '&B. +ive instan,es w5ere t5e arties may go dire,tly to ,o-rt woit5o-t referral to barangay settlement. ANS.*R/ ,- *here actions are coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property, and support pendente lite!

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !@ of %&'

.- *here the action may otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations. 8Sec. 4,. KbL, +.A. 5o. ",/#'&C. State t5e r-les of ven-e for barangay ,on,iliation.

ANS.*R/ a- >isputes between persons actually residing in the same barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement before the lupon of said barangay! b. Those involving actual residents of different barangays within the same city or municipality shall brought in the barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at the election of the complainant. c. All disputes involving real property or any interest therein shall be brought in the barangay where the real property or the larger portion thereof is situated. d. Those arising at the wor7place where the contending parties are employed or at the institution where such parties are enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where such wor7place or institution is located. 8Sec. 4#6, +.A. 5o. ",/#+emember that before the rules on venue are applied, the case must first be cogniIable under the barangay justice system. '&D. *n-merate t5e forms of settlement -nder t5e 3atar-nggang Pambarangay.

ANS.*R/ ,- !ediation and conciliation. )nterchangeable terms indicating the process whereby disputants are persuaded by the Punong +arangay or Pang*at to amicably settle their disputes. 8+ule )) K,L, Katarunggang Pambarangay +ules.- Arbitration is a process for the adjudication of disputes by which the parties agree to be bound by the decision of a third person or body in place of a regularly organiIed tribunal. 8+ule )) KhL, Katarunggang Pambarangay +ules''. On A-g-st ? : %CC> Boleley filed s-it against S-rla for ,olle,tion of s-m of money stating in 5is ,om laint/ GIt5at laintiff is of legal age: married: 4ili ino and a residnt of No. %"" (melda )illage: Bag-io City w5ile defendant is also of legal age: 4ili ino and wi5 ostal offi,e address at C-& (na 2ansion: 3isad Road: Bag-io City w5ere 5e may be served wit5 s-mmons and ot5er legal ro,esses.J 05e defendant f iled a motion to dismiss alleging t5at 5e also resided in bag-io City: alleging: among ot5ers: t5at t5ere was fail-re to refer to barangay ,on,iliation. Resolve t5e motion. ANS.*R' !otion denied. )t is clear from the complaint that the defendant does not reside in Baguio City. ;ost office address is not considered as residence. This is not affected by the defendantDs motion stating that he also resided in Baguio City. There is no need for prior referral to the barangay in the absence of showing in the complaint itself that the parties reside in the same city or municipality.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. 2embers5i and residen,e in batangay re9-ired. +esidence alone, without membership in the barangay would not be an accurate and reliable criterion considering that such residence may be actual but merely temporary, transient or categoriIed into other permutations as in the case of a house guest or a sojourner on a visit for a day or two. $n the other hand, mere membership in the barangay alone without residence would defeat the purpose of the law which provides for an alternative to litigations in dispute settlement to members of the corresponding barangays who are actually residing therein. This is so because of lac7 of the common bond and belonging generally fostered in members of an identified aggrupation. Thus, the re%uirement is resident coupled with membership or vice&versa. 8Bejer v. Court of Appeals, et al., ,/6 SC+A 0//- Transient or temporary residence is not enough to vest GjurisdictionG upon the barangay Gcourts.G 8>omingo v. +osero, ,"3 SC+A ,30The court in which non&criminal cases not falling within the authority of the barangay under the @ocal <overnment Code are filed, may, at any time before trial, motu proprio refer the case to the Lupon concerned for amicable settlement. 8last par., Sec. 4#:, +.A. 5o. ",/#b. .aiver of non-referral. The failure of a party to specifically allege the fact that there was no compliance with the Barangay conciliation procedure constitutes a waiver of that defense. 8CorpuI v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,"##0, prom. June ,6, ,66">efenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule 6, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages !C of %&'

The ground for a motion to dismiss if there is failure to comply with the barangay referral is now, That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with. 8Sec. , KjL, +ule ,/, +$C)f the non&referral is raised only after arraignment, this is deemed a waiver. 8Banares )), et al., v. Balising, et al., <.+. 5o. ,3./.4, prom. !arch ,3, .###-

'>. On <-ne %&: %CC&: a ,om laint for e8e,tion was filed before t5e 20C by Am aro: assisted by ,o-nsel. 05e arties reside in barangays of different ,ities w5i,5 do not ad8oin ea,5 ot5er. 05e defendant filed a motion for referral to t5e ro er barangay for arbitration andHor ,on,iliation w5i,5 t5e ,o-rt granted t5ro-g5 its Order dated November ?: %CC& dire,ting t5e arties to ,on,iliate before t5e C5airman of barangay >?>: Mone ?#: *rmita: 2anila. 2eanw5ile: Atty. Ra-l entered 5is a earan,e as ,o-nsel and filed a motion to set aside t5e Order of November ?: %CC&. 05e Co-rt denied t5e same and referred t5e ,ase to t5e said barangay for ,on,iliation ro,eedings -nder enalty of t5e ,ase being dismissed. 05e Co-rtFs a,tion was remised - on se,tion &"@ of Re -bli, A,t No. ?%>" E05e 3atar-ngan Pambarangay rovisions of t5e Lo,al +overnment CodeD: w5i,5 rovides t5at: I05e Co-rt in w5i,5 non-,riminal ,ases not falling wit5in t5e a-t5ority of t5e l- on -nder t5is Code are filed: may at any time before trial: mot- ro rio: refer t5e ,ase to t5e l- on ,on,erned for ami,able settlement.J .as t5e a,tion of t5e Co-rt ,orre,t6 ANS.*R' 5o. +eferring a matter covered by the above cited provision that falls under the +ule of Summary ;rocedure to the @upon is an unsound e ercise of discretion. The +ule of summary ;rocedure was promulgated for the purpose of achieving an 1e peditious and ine pensive determination of the case.2 The fact that unlawful detainer cases fall under summary procedure, speedy resolution thereof is thus deemed a matter of public policy. Thus, the +ule frowns on delays. !anifestly, the act of referring the subject case to the lupon subverts the very nature of the +ule and defeats the objective of e pediting the adjudication thereof.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' The above doctrine is applicable only where there is no re%uirement for prior referral to the lupon. *here the parties reside in the same city or municipality, or in adjoining barangayss of different cities or municipalities, prior resort to the barangay is a re%uirement before filing the case in Court, and the Court does not have the discretion to ma7e a referral.

'?. *liBabet5 filed %> estafa ,ases against 4idel and ot5ers. All of t5e arties reside in Barangay Dalig: Anti olo: RiBal. *a,5 of t5e ,ases did not e7,eed P!""."". After arraignment and t5e a,,-sed leading not g-ilty: t5ey t5en filed a 2otion to Dismiss t5e ,ases for remat-rity in view of t5e fail-re to -ndergo ,on,iliation before t5e L- ong 0aga amaya a or PangAat ng 0aga agAas-ndo of Barangay Dalig in a,,ordan,e wit5 Se,. &%! in relation to Se,. &"@ of t5e Lo,al +overnment Code and Se,. %@ of t5e %CC% Revised R-le on S-mmary Pro,ed-re. On November %#: %CC': t5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt dismissed t5e %> ,riminal ,ases wit5o-t re8-di,e: -rs-ant to Se,tion %@ of t5e %C"% R-le of S-mmary Pro,ed-re. 2ore t5an two mont5s later on 4ebr-ary !>: %CC>: *liBabet5 t5ro-g5 ,o-nsel: filed a 2otion to Revive t5e abovementioned ,riminal ,ases against 4idel and ot5erK stating t5at t5e re9-irement of referral to t5e L- on for ,on,iliation 5as already been ,om lied wit5. On 2ar,5 %@: %CC>: t5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt iss-ed an order granting *liBabet5Fs 2otion to Revive. 4idel: et al assailed t5e 2ar,5 %@: %CC> order ,ontending t5at t5e November %#: %CC' dismissal of t5e ,ase against t5em 5ad long be,ome final and e7e,-toryK ,onsidering t5at t5e rose,-tion did not file any motion for re,onsideration of said order. R-le on t5e ,ontention. ANS.*R' Contention is with merit. The dismissal has attained a state of finality. The order dismissing a case without prejudice is a final order if no motion for reconsideration or appeal therefrom is timely filed. The order becomes outside the courtDs power to amend and modify. The party who wishes to reinstate the case has no other remedy but to file a new complaint.
*=1AUS0(ON O4 AD2(N(S0RA0()* R*2*D(*S

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #" of %&'

'@. .5at is t5e do,trine of e75a-stion of administrative remedies 6 ANS.*R/ )f a remedy within the administrative machinery can still be resorted to by giving the administrative officer concerned every opportunity to decide on a matter that comes within his jurisdiction then such remedy must be e hausted first before the courtEs judicial power can be sought. The premature invocation of court intervention is fatal to oneEs cause of action. The dismissal may be premised on the ground that a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with. 8Sec. ,/ KjL, +$C'C. .5at are t5e reasons for t5e e7isten,e of t5e do,trine of e57a-stion of administrative remedies 6 (n s5ort: w5at are its -r oses. ANS.*R/ a. ?nsures an orderly procedure which favors a preliminary sifting process, particularly with respect to matters, peculiarly within the competence of the administrative agency, b. Avoidance of interference with functions of the administrative agency by withholding judicial action until the administrative process had run its course, c. ;revention of attempts to swamp the courts by resort to them in the first instance. d. The administrative process is intended to provide less e pensive and more speedy solutions to disputes. e. Aor reasons of law, comity, and convenience. >". .5at are t5e e7,e tions to t5e r-le on e75a-stion of administrative remedies 6 ANS.*R/ a. *here the %uestion is purely legal. b. *here judicial intervention is urgent. c. *hen its application may cause great and irreparable damage. d. *hen the controverted acts violate due process. e. Aailure of a high government official from whom the relief is sought to act on the matter. f. *hen the issue of non&e haustion of administrative remedies has been rendered moot. g. *hen the administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lac7 or e cess of jurisdiction. h. *hen there is estoppel on the part of the administrative agency concerned. i. *hen there is irreparable injury. j. *hen the respondent is a department secretary whose acts as an alter ego of the ;resident bears the implied and assumed approval of the later. 7. *hen to re%uire e haustion of administrative remedies would be unreasonable. l. *hen it would amount to a nullification of a claim. m. *hen the subject mater is a private land in a land case proceedings. n. *hen the rule does not provide a plain, speedy and ade%uate remedy.
ARB(0RA0(ON AND AL0*RNA0()* 2OD*S O4 D(SPU0* R*SOLU0(ON

>%. 2esBellen s-ed drawee Allied BanA for damages w5i,5 it allegedly s-ffered w5en ,5e,As were not aid to it b-t to some ot5er erson. Allied t5en filed a t5ird- arty ,om laint against BanA of P5ili ine (slands: for reimb-rsement in t5e event t5at it wo-ld be ad8-dged liable to ay laintiff 2esBellen. BP( filed a motion to dismiss t5e t5ird- arty ,om laint for la,A of 8-risdi,tion. R-le on t5e motion. ANS.*R' !otion granted. A trial court that has jurisdiction over the main action, also has jurisdiction over the third& party complaint, even if the said court would have no jurisdiction over it had it been filed in an independent action. Cowever, this doctrine does not apply in the case of ban7s, which have given written and subscribed consent to arbitration under the auspices of the ;CCC.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #% of %&'

By participating in the clearing operations of the ;CCC, Allied agreed to submit disputes of this nature to arbitration. Accordingly, it cannot invo7e he jurisdiction of the trial courts without a prior recourse o the ;CCC Arbitration Committee.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. +ro-nd s5o-ld be remat-rity. )t is suggested that the ground for dismissal should not be lac7 of jurisdiction 8Section , KbL, +ule ,/, +$C- but failure to comply with a condition precedent for filing the claim 8Section , KjL, +ule ,/, +$C- This is so because jurisdiction is conferred by a Judiciary Act and not by mere agreement of the parties.

>%A. Define arbitration. ANS.*R/ The submission of a controversy for the resolution of a non&judicial third party chosen by the disputants. >%B. .5at is t5e nat-re of arbitration as a mode of dis -te resol-tion. ANS.*R/ Arbitration has been held valid and constitutional. ?ven before the approval on June ,6, ,603 of +epublic Act 5o. :"/, the Supreme Court has countenanced the settlement of disputes through arbitration. +epublic Act 5o. :"/ was adopted to supplement the 5ew Civil CodeEs provisions on arbitration. 8Ibid!)ts potential as one of the alternative dispute resolution methods that are now rightfully vaunted as Gthe wave of the futureG in international relations, is recogniIed worldwide. 8Ibid!To brush aside a contractual agreement calling for arbitration in case of disagreement between the parties would be a step bac7ward. Arbitration as an alternative method of dispute resolution is encouraged by the Supreme Court. Aside from unclogging judicial doc7ets, it also hastens solutions especially of commercial disputes.
COUR0 S*L*C0(ON

>!. State and e7 lain an instan,e w5en an a,tion quasi in rem be,omes bot5 an a,tion quasi in rem and in personam. ANS.*R' )f the property is attached and later the defendant appears, Gthe cause becomes mainly a suit in personam, with the added incident that the property attached remains liable, under the control of the court, to answer to any demand which may be established against the defendant by the final judgment of the court. The main action in an attachment or garnishment is in rem until jurisdiction of the defendant is secured. Thereafter, it is in personam and also in rem, unless jurisdiction of the res is lost by dissolution of the attachment. )f jurisdiction of the defendant is ac%uired but jurisdiction of the res is lost, it is then purely in personam! >!A. State t5e general r-le on a,tion 9-asi in rem and a,tion in ersonam. ANS.*R/ )n actions quasi in rem recovery is limited only to the value of the res! *here the defendant in an action in personam is a non&resident and refuses to appear and submit to the jurisdiction of the court the jurisdiction of the latter is limited to the property within the country which the court may have ordered attached. )n such a case, the property itself, is Gthe sole thing which is impleaded and is the responsible object which is the subject of the judicial power.G Accordingly, Gthe relief must be confined to the res, and the court cannot lawfully render a personal judgment against him.G 8Ibid>!B. Define a,tion 9-asi in rem and give e7am les. ANS.*R/ An action which while not strictly spea7ing an action in rem parta7es of that nature and is substantially such. )t is essentially an action against a person for the recovery of a specific property or rights thereto. ? amples of actions quasi in rem/ All proceedings having for their sole object the sale or other disposition of the property of the defendant, whether by attachment, foreclosure, or other

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #! of %&'

forms of remedy, are in a general way thus designated. proceedings is conclusive only between the parties.

The judgment entered in these

>!C. Disting-is5 a,tion in rem from a,tion 9-asi in rem. ANS.*R/ ,- )n actions quasi in rem an individual is named as defendant *C)@? in an action in rem the action is usually directed against the thing itself. .- )n actions quasi in rem the judgment is conclusive only between the parties *C)@? in an action in rem the judgment binds the whole world. >!D. Disting-is5 a,tion 9-asi in rem from a,tion in ersonam. ANS.*R/ ,- )n actions quasi in rem the property itself is bound *C)@? in actions in personam it is the person himself who is bound. .- )n actions quasi in rem service of summons by publication is in order to afford the defendant due process *C)@? service of summons in actions in personam for the purpose of obtaining jurisdiction. 3- )n actions quasi in rem the recovery is limited only to the value of the property attached *C)@? in actions in personam there is no such limitation.
1(*RARC1L O4 COUR0S

>#. .5at is meant by t5e ,on,e t of 5ierar,5y of ,o-rts 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' *hile the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, and the +egional Trial Courts have concurrent original jurisdiction to issue writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo -arranto and .abeas corpus, such concurrence does not accord litigants unrestrained freedom of choice of the court to which application therefor may be directed. There is a hierarchy of courts which is determinative of the venue of appeals and should also serve as a general determinant of the appropriate forum for petitions for the e traordinary writs. >#A. +ive some e7,e tions to t5e ,on,e t of 5ierar,5y of ,o-rts. ANS.*R/ There are instances where a petition that is properly cogniIable by lower courts may be filed directly with the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has full discretionary powers to ta7e cogniIance of the petition filed directly to it under the following circumstances' ,- )f compelling reasons, or the nature and importance of the issues raised, warrant, or justify direct referral to the Supreme Court. .- To avoid future litigations so as to promptly put an end to a controversy which has spar7ed national interest because of the magnitude of the problem created by the issuance of the assailed resolution of a lower court. 3- The Supreme Court could resolve to ta7e primary jurisdiction in the interest of speedy justice
<UR(SD(C0(ON (N +*N*RAL

>&. 1ow do ,o-rts a,9-ire limited or s e,ial 8-risdi,tion 6 *7 lain briefly and give an e7am le. ANS.*R' Similarly with general jurisdiction, it is the jurisdiction laws which prescribes the parameters of limited or special jurisdiction. Aor e ample, the jurisdiction of metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts and municipal trial courts over civil actions, probate proceedings, testate and intestate proceedings including grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, is limited only to instances where the value of the personal property, estate, or the amount of the demand does not e ceed Two hundred thousand pesos 8;.##,###.##- or, in !etro !anila where such personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not e ceed Aour hundred thousand pesos 8;4##,###.##-, e clusive

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ## of %&'

of interest, damages of whatever 7ind, attorneyEs fees, litigation e penses, and costs.G 8Sec. 33 K,L, B.;. Blg. ,.6 as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,, specifically Sec. 0 which increased the jurisdictional amount effective April ,/, ,666 or after five 80- years from the effectivity of +.A. 5o. "/6,. +.A. 5o. "/6, too7 effect on April ,0, ,664 8par. ,, Supreme Court Administrative Circular 5o. #6&64' #NIN/0 Aor Bar e amination purposes, you must ta7e note of the date of the factual setting given in the %uestion. )f the date of the filing is before April ,/, ,666 then apply the old rule which provides for the jurisdictional amount of ;,##,###.## for courts outside of !etropolitan !anila, and ;.##,###.## for courts within !etropolitan !anila. )f the date of filing as shown in the problem is April ,/, ,666 or is undated use the new jurisdictional amounts of ;.##,###.## and ;4##,###.## for outside !etropolitan !anila and for !etropolitan !anila respectively. >'. .5at is territorial 8-risdi,tion of t5e trial ,o-rts 6 ANS.*R/ 8a- !etropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts and municipal circuit trial courts shall e ercise their jurisdiction within the city, municipality or circuit for which the judge thereof is appointed or designated. 8b- A regional trial court shall e ercise its jurisdiction within the area defined by the Supreme Court as the territory over which the particular branch concerned shall e ercise its authority. 8Sec. A..., )nterim +ules, S.C. +es. dated January ,,, ,6:3>>. .5at determines t5e ,5ara,ter of t5e s-b8e,t matter w5et5er t5e ,o-rt 5as 8-risdi,tion 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' The complaint determines the character of the subject matter whether the court has jurisdiction. A courtEs jurisdiction cannot be made to depend upon defenses set up in the answer, in a motion to dismiss, or in a motion for reconsideration but only upon the allegations of the complaint 8Tamano v. Con. $rtiI, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.//#3, prom. June .6, ,66:, irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled or not entitled to recover upon the claim asserted therein N a matter resolved only after and as a result of the trial. This is so because the complaint comprises a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the plaintiffEs cause of action. 8Ibid!>>A. 1ow ,o-rts a,9-ire 8-risdi,tion over t5e s-b8e,t matter. ANS.*R/ Airstly, there must be a statute that confers jurisdiction over certain subject matter. Secondly, the allegations in the complaint which comprise a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the course of action, then determines whether the specific subject matter would fall under the jurisdiction conferred by the statute. )t is settled that jurisdiction of courts over the subject matter of the litigation is conferred by law and determined by the allegations in the complaint. >>B. .5en s5o-ld t5e iss-e of 8-risdi,tion be ro erly raised6 ANS.*R' *hile jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case may be objected to at any stage of the proceeding even on appeal, this particular rule, however, means that jurisdictional issues in a case can be raised only during the proceedings in said case and during the appeal of said case. )t certainly does not mean that lac7 of jurisdiction of a court in a case may be raised during the proceedings of another case, in another court and even by anybody at all. >?. .5at is t5e e7,l-sive original 8-risdi,tion of t5e fo-r E&D lower trial ,o-rts in ,ivil ,ases -nder t5e *7 anded <-risdi,tion Law ER.A. No. ?>C%D 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #& of %&'

ANS.*R/ a. ? clusive original jurisdiction over civil actions and probate proceedings, testate and intestate including grant of provisional remedies in proper cases, where the value of the personal property, estate, or amount of the demand ,- >oes not e ceed Two Cundred Thousand pesos 8;.##,###.##-, NNor .- )n !etro !anila where such personal property, estate, or amount of the demand does not e ceed Aour Cundred Thousand pesos 8;4##,###.##-,OOO e7,l-sive of interest, damages of whatever 7ind, attorneyEs fees, litigation e penses and costs, the amount of which must be specifically alleged, ;rovided, that interest, damages of whatever 7ind, attorneyEs fees, litigation e penses, and costs shall be included in the determination of the filing fees. b. ? clusive original jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer' ;rovided, that when, in such cases, the defendant raises the %uestion of ownership in his pleadings and the %uestion of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of possessionF and c. ? clusive original jurisdiction in all civil actions which involve title to or possession of real property, or any interest therein where the assessed value of the property or interest therein'NNNN ,- >oes not e ceed Twenty Thousand pesos 8;.#,###.##-, or .- )n !etro !anila, where such assessed value does not e ceed Aifty Thousand pesos 8;0#,###.##e7,l-sive of interest, damages of whatever 7ind, attorneyEs fees, litigation e penses and costs' ;rovided, that in cases of land not declared for ta ation purposes the value of such property shall be determined by the assessed value of the adjacent lots. 8Sec. 33, B.;. Blg. ,.6, as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. Jurisdiction in probate proceedings is determined by the gross value of the estate. 8@im v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.4",0, prom., January .4, .###b. 5ote that under Sec. 33, B.;. 5o. ,.6, as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,, grants jurisdiction to !TC over actions involving title to real property for any interest therein release etc. The holding in >urub v. Judge ;aras, A.!. 5o. !TJ N ## N ,.4., prom. January .#, .### to the effect that !TC have no jurisdiction over actions for %uieting title and recovery of ownership is not doctrinal because the factual antecedents occurred prior to +.A. 5o. "/6,. NN After five 80- years from the effectivity of +.A. 5o. "/6,, or on April ,/, ,666 the jurisdictional amount is adjusted to ;.##,###.##. 8Sec. 0, +.A. 5o. "/6,NNN )n !etro !anila, the amount is ;4##,###.##. 8Ibid!NNNN There is no change in jurisdictional amounts.

>@. .5at is meant by t5e totality r-le w5i,5 is a li,able only to t5e fo-r E&D lower trial ,o-rts Et5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt: t5e 2-ni,i al Cir,-it 0rial Co-rt: t5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt in Cities: and t5e 2etro olitan 0rial Co-rtD 6 ANS.*R' *here there are several claims or causes of action between different parties embodied in the same complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all the causes of action, irrespective of whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transactions. 8Sec. 33 K,L, B.;. Blg. ,.6The rule on joinder of causes of action and joinder of parties should be applied. >@A. +ive an ill-stration of t5e totality r-le.

ANS.*R/ The following amounts are the claims of various parties against Benjie, where the plaintiffs are all residents of 9ictoria, Tarlac, and all the claims arose out of the same transaction' +emy +andy +aymond Total P ; "0,###.## P "0,###.## P ,0#,###.## P ;3##,###.##

There could be no proper joinder of parties if the claims are to be filed before the !unicipal Trial Court of 9ictoria, Tarlac because under the totality rule, the joined claims of the parties e ceed the jurisdictional amount of said court.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #' of %&'

The illustration presupposes that the filing too7 place after April ,/, ,666 when Sec. 0, +.A. 5o. "/6, finds application increasing the jurisdictional amount to ;.##,###.##. >C. .5at is t5e delegated 8-risdi,tion of t5e fo-r E&D lower trial ,o-rts in ,adastral and land registration ,ases 6 ANS.*R' a. !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts, !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts in cities. b. !ay be assigned by the Supreme Court to hear and determine cadastral or land registration cases c. Covering lots ,- *here there is no controversy or opposition, or ,- Contested lots where the value of which do not e ceed $ne Cundred Thousand pesos 8;,##,###.##-, such value to be ascertained a- By the affidavit of the claimant, or b- By agreement of the respective claimants if there are more than one, or a- Arom the corresponding ta declaration of the real property. 8Sec. 34, B.;. Blg. ,.6, as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' >ecisions of !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts, !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts and !unicipal Trial Courts in cities in e ercise of their delegated jurisdiction shall be appealable in the same manner as decisions of the +egional Trial Courts. 8Sec. 34, B.;. Blg. ,.6, as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,-

?". .5at is t5e s e,ial 8-risdi,tion of t5e fo-r E&D lower trial ,o-rts in ,ertain ,ases 6 ANS.*R' a. )n the absence of the +egional Trial Judges in a province or city, b. Any !etropolitan Trial Judge, !unicipal Trial Judge, !unicipal Circuit Trial Judge. c. !ay hear and decide petitions for a writ of .abeas corpus or application for bail in criminal cases in the province or city where the absent +egional Trial Court Judges sit. 8Sec. 30, B.;. Blg. ,.6?%. .5at is t5e e7,l-sive original 8-risdi,tion of Regional 0rial Co-rts in ,ivil ,ases 6 ANS.*R' G+egional Trial Courts shall e ercise e clusive original jurisdiction' 8,- )n all civil actions in which the subject of the litigation is incapable of pecuniary estimationF 8.- )n all civil actions which involve the title to, or possession of, real property, or any interest therein, where the assessed value of the property involved e ceeds Twenty Thousand pesos 8;.#,###.##- or, for civil actions in !etro !anila, where such value e ceeds Aifty thousand pesos 8;0#,###.##- e cept actions for forcible entry into and unlawful detainer of lands or buildings, original jurisdiction of which is conferred upon the !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts, !unicipal Circuit Trial CourtsF 83- )n all actions in admiralty and maritime jurisdiction where the demand or claim e ceeds Two hundred thousand pesos 8;.##,###.##- or, in !etro !anila, where such demand or claim e ceeds Aour hundred thousand 8;4##,###.##-FOO 84- )n all matters of probate, both testate and intestate, where the gross value of the estate e ceeds Two hundred thousand pesos 8;.##,###.##- or, in probate matters in !etro !anila, where such gross value e ceeds Aour hundred thousand pesos 8;4##,###.##-F OO 80- )n all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relationsF 8/- )n all cases not within the e clusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body e ercising jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body e ercising jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body e ercising judicial or %uasi&judicialF

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #> of %&'

8"- )n all civil actions special proceedings falling within the e clusive jurisdiction of a Juvenile and >omestic +elations Court and of the Court of Agrarian +elations as now provided by lawF and 8:- )n all other cases in which the demand, e clusive of interest, damages of whatever 7ind, attorneyEs fees, litigation e penses, and costs or the value of the property in controversy e ceeds Two hundred thousand 8;.##,###.##- or, in such other cases in !etro !anila where the demand, e clusive of the abovementioned items e ceeds Aour hundred thousand pesos 8;4##,###.##-. OO 8Sec. ,6, B.;. Blg. ,.6 as amended by as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,After five 80- years from the effectivity of +.A. 5o. "/6,, April ,/, ,666 the jurisdictional amount is adjusted to ;.##,###.##. for places outside of !etro !anila, and ;4##,###.## for !etro !anila. 8Sec. 0, +.A. 5o. "/6,5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' a. +TC has jurisdiction as the issue was not title to the property but whether the ban7 can be compelled to issue a board resolution confirming the >eed of Sale. 8+ural Ban7 of !ilaor, Camarines Sur v. $ctevnia, et al., <.+. 5o. ,3"/:/, prom. Aebruary :, .###-

?!. .5at is t5e ,riteria for determining w5et5er t5e s-b8e,t matter is or is not an a,tion not ,a able of e,-niary estimation. *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R/ a. Airst ascertain the nature of the principal action or remedy. ,- )f it is primarily for the recovery of a sum of money, the claim is considered capable of pecuniary estimation, and whether jurisdiction is in the municipal courts or in the regional trial courts would depend on the amount of the claim. .- Cowever, where the basic issue is something other than the right to recover a sum of money, or where the money claim is purely incidental to, or a conse%uence of, the principal relief sought, li7e in suits to have the defendant perform his part of the contract 8specific performance- and in actions for support, or for annulment of a judgment or to foreclose a mortgage, such actions are cases where the subject of the litigation may not be estimated in terms of money, and are cogniIable e clusively by regional trial courts. Rationale/ The second class cases, besides the determination of damages, demand an in%uiry into other factors which the law has deemed to be more within the competence of courts of first instanced 8now regional trial courts-, which were the lowest courts of record at the time the first organic laws of the Judiciary 8Act ,3/ of the ;hilippine Commission of June ,,, ,6#,- were enacted allocating jurisdiction. ?!A. +ive some a,tions not ,a able of e,-niary estimation. ANS.*R/ ,- action for rescission of contract one not capable of pecuniary estimation. +eason' The court would certainly have to underta7e an investigation into facts that would justify one act or the other. 5o award of damages may be had in an action for rescission without first conducting an in%uiry into matters which would justify the setting aside of a contract, in the same manner that regional trial courts would have to ma7e findings of fact and law in actions in other cases not capable of pecuniary estimation. .- action relative to the legality or illegality of the conveyance sought for and the determination of the validity of the money deposit made. 3- action contesting the validity of a judgment. 4- action relative to the validity of a mortgage. 0- action concerning the relations of the parties, the right to support created by the relation, etc., in actions for support. /- action where the issue is the validity or nullity of documents upon which claims are predicated. )ssues of the same nature may be raised by a party against whom an action for rescission has been brought, or by the plaintiff himself. )t is difficult to see why a prayer for damages in an action for rescission should be ta7en as the basis for concluding such action as one capable of pecuniary estimation & a prayer which must be included in the main action if the plaintiff is to be

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #? of %&'

compensated for what he may have suffered as a result of the breach committed by the defendant, and not later on precluded from recovering damages by the rule against splitting a cause of action and discouraging multiplicity of suits. ?#. .5at ,o-rts 5ave 8-risdi,tion over t5e following ,ases filed in 2etro 2anila 6 aD An a,tion for s e,ifi, erforman,e or: in t5e alternative for damages in t5e amo-nt of P#'":"""."". bD An a,tion for a writ of in8-n,tionK ,D An a,tion for re levin of a motor ,y,le val-ed at P#"":""".""K dD An a,tion for inter leader to determine w5o between t5e defendants is entitled to re,eive t5e amo-nt of P#@":"""."" from t5e laintiffK eD A etition for t5e robate of a will involving an estate val-ed at P&"":"""."". 8Bar' ,66"ANS.*RS/ a- and d- the !etropolitan Trial Court. )n alternative causes of action it is the claim for sum of money which determines jurisdiction. b- and c- The +egional Trial Court because the action is not subject to pecuniary estimation. c- !etropolitan Trial Court because the jurisdictional amount falls within that court.
5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' )f amount in the alternative cause of action is within the jurisdiction of the !etropolitan Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Court, !unicipal Circuit Trial Court it should be brought in those courts. )nclusion of the alternative claim which is not subject to pecuniary estimation does not vest jurisdiction with the +egional Trial Court. 8CruI v. Tan, :" ;hil. /."-

?&. .5at is t5e original 8-risdi,tion of Regional 0rial Co-rts in ot5er ,ases 6 ANS.*R' G+egional Trial Courts shall e ercise original jurisdiction' a. )n the issuance of writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, %uo warranto, .abeas corpus and injunction which may be enforced in any part of their respective regionsF and b. )n actions affecting ambassadors and other public ministers and consuls.G 8Sec. .,, B.;. Blg. ,.6?'. .5at is t5e 8-risdi,tion of t5e Regional 0rial Co-rts to try s e,ial ,ases 6 ANS.*R' GThe Supreme Court may designate certain branches of the +egional Trial Courts to handle e clusively criminal cases, juvenile and domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban land reform cases which do not fall under the jurisdiction of %uasi&judicial bodies and agencies andMor such other special cases as the Supreme Court may determine in the interest of a speedy and efficient administration of justice.G 8Sec. .3, B.;. Blg. ,.6)*NU*

?>. .5ere is t5e ven-e of real a,tions 6 ANS.*R' a. Actions affecting title to or possession of real property or interest therein, b. shall be commenced and tried in the proper court c. which has jurisdiction over the area wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof, is situated. d. Aorcible entry and detainer actions shall be commenced and tried in the municipal trial court of the municipality or city wherein the real property involved, or a portion thereof is situated. 8Sec. ,, +ule 4, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied??. .5ere is t5e ven-e of ersonal a,tions 6 ANS.*R' All other actions may be commenced and tried a. where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or b. where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, or

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #@ of %&'

c. in the case of a non&resident defendant where he may be found at the election of the plaintiff. 8Sec. ., +ule 4, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied5$T? A5> C$!!?5TS' The last choice of where the defendant may be found is available only where the defendant is a non&resident of the ;hilippines.

??A.

State t5e r-le on ven-e of a,tions against nonresidents.

ANS.*R/ a. )f any of the defendants does not reside and is not found in the ;hilippines, b. And the action affects ,- The personal status of the plaintiff, or .- *here the property or any portion thereof is situated or is found. 8Sec. 3, +ule 4, +$C?@. Roy re resented by 5is attorney-in-fa,t Cris in filed wit5 t5e R0C: Bran,5 '#: Rosales: Pangasinan a ,om laint against <ose as owner and o erator of t5e <.B. B-s Lines. Roy so-g5t to re,over a,t-al and e7em lary damages after a b-s owned by <ose rammed Roy;s ,ar along t5e 2a5arliAa 1ig5way: Sto. 0omas: Batangas. 05e ,om laint alleged: among ot5ers: t5at Roy is a resident of Rosales: Pangasinan before 5e went to t5e U.S.A. w5ere 5e now resides: and is re resented by Cris in 5is attorney-in-fa,t w5o resides in O-eBon City. (t was liAewise alleged t5at <ose;s b-siness address is at Pasay City. <ose filed a motion to dismiss on t5e gro-nd of im ro er ven-e. 1e alleges t5at sin,e Roy was not a resident of t5e P5ili ines: ven-e s5o-ld 5ave been laid in +-bat: Sorsogon: <ose;s residen,e. R-le on t5e motion. ANS.*R' <ranted. +oy has transferred his actual residence to the H.S.A. Aor purposes of venue, actual residence signifies personal residence, i.e. physical presence and actual stay thereat. This physical presence, nonetheless, must be more than temporary and must be with continuity and consistency. There is no showing that his stay in the H.S.A. is merely temporary in character, neither has he reinstituted his residence in +osales, ;angasinan. The choice to be e ercised by the plaintiff should always be in accordance with the +ules of Court. This choice cannot unduly deprive a resident defendant of the rights conferred upon him by the +ules of Court. C@. .5en are t5e instan,es w5ere t5e r-les on ven-e are not a li,able 6

ANS.*R' a. )n those cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwiseF or b. *here the parties have validly agreed in writing before the filing of the action on the e clusive venue thereof. 8Sec. 4, +ule 4, +$CC@A. +ive instan,es w5ere a s e,ifi, r-le rovide for a ven-e ot5er t5an t5at -nder R-le &. ANS.*R/ ,- )en-e for t5e settlement of t5e estate of de,eased ersons . )f the decedent is an inhabitant of the ;hilippines at the time of his death, whether a citiIen or an alien, his will shall be proved, or letters of administration granted, and his estate settled in the +egional Trial Court in the province in which he resides at the time of his death, and if he is an inhabitant of a foreign country, in the +egional Trial Court of any province which he had estate. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule "3, +$C.- *s,5eat ro,eedings. *hen a person dies intestate, seiIed of real or personal property in the ;hilippines, leaving no heir or person by law entitled to the same, the Solicitor <eneral or his representative in behalf of the +epublic of the ;hilippines, may file a petition in the +egional Trial Court of the province where the deceased last resided or in which he had estate, if he resided out of the ;hilippines. 8Sec. ,, +ule 6,, Ibid!3- +-ardians5i ro,eedings. <uardianship of the person or estate of a minor or incompetent may be instituted in the +egional Trial Court of the province, or in the justice of the peace court of the municipality 8now the municipal trial court, municipal circuit trial court- or in

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages #C of %&'

the municipal court of the chartered city 8now in certain instances, the metropolitan trial courtwhere the minor or incompetent resides, and if he resides in a foreign country, in the +egional Trial Court of the province wherein his property or part thereof is situated. 8Sec. ,, +ule 6., +$C words in parentheses suppliedThe court ta7ing cogniIance of a guardianship proceeding, may transfer the same to the court of another province or municipality wherein the ward has ac%uired real property, if he has transferred thereto his bona-)ide residence. 8Sec. 3, Ibid!1 4- Ado tion and ,-stody of minors. A person desiring to adopt another or have the custody of a minor shall present his petition to the +egional Trial Court of the province, or the city or municipal court of the city or municipality in which he resides. 8Sec. ,, +ule 66, +$C0- Pro,eedings for 5os italiBation of insane ersons . A petition for the commitment of a person to a hospital or other place for the insane may be filed with the +egional Trial Court of the province where the person alleged to be insane is found. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,#,, Ibid!/- C5ange of name. A person desiring to change his name shall present the petition to the +egional Trial Court of the province in which he resides. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#3, Ibid!"- )ol-ntary dissol-tion of ,or orations. A petition for dissolution of a corporation shall be filed in the +egional Trial Court of the province where the principal office of a corporation is situated. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,#4, +$C:- <-di,ial a roval of vol-ntary re,ognition of minor nat-ral ,5ildren . *here judicial approval of a voluntary recognition of a minor natural child is re%uired, such child or his parents shall obtain the same by filing a petition to that effect with the +egional Trial Court of the province in which the child resides. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#0, Ibid!6- Constit-tion of family 5ome. The head of a family owning a house and he land on which it is situated may constitute the same into a family home by filing a verified petition to that effect with the +egional Trial Court of the province or city where the property is located. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#/, Ibid!,#- A ointment of absentee;s re resentative. *hen a person disappears from his domicile, his whereabouts being un7nown, and without having left an agent to administer his property, or the power conferred upon the agent has e pired, any interested party, relative or friend, may petition the +egional Trail Court of the place where the absentee resided before his disappearance, for the appointment of a person to represent him provisionally in all that may be necessary. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#", Ibid!,,- Can,ellation or ,orre,tion of entries in t5e Civil Registry. Any person interested in any act, event, order or decree concerning the civil status of persons which has been recorded in the civil register, may file a verified petition for the cancellation or correction of any entry relating thereto, with the +egional Trial Court of the province where the corresponding civil registry is located. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#:, Ibid!,.- Petition for de osition before a,tion . )n the court of the place of the residence of any e pected adverse party. 8Sec. ,, +ule .4, Ibid!CC. Unimasters: a ,or oration 5as for its rin,i al la,e of b-siness 0a,loban City w5ile 3-bota 5as its rin,i al la,e of b-siness in O-eBon City. Unimasters t5en instit-ted s-it against 3-bota in 0a,loban City. 3-bota now files a motion to dismiss ,onsidering t5e ,ontra,t-al agreement t5at: GAll s-its arising o-t of t5is Agreement s5all be filed wit5Hin t5e ro er Co-rts of O-eBon City.G Resolve t5e motion to dismiss. ANS.*R' >enied. The agreement does not contain additional words and e pressions definitely and unmista7ably denoting the parties desire and intention that actions between them should be ventilated only at the place selected by them, QueIon City & or other contractual provisions clearly evincing the same desire and intention. Thus, the stipulation should be construed, not as confining suits between the parties only to that one place, QueIon City, but as allowing suits either in QueIon City or Tacloban City, at the option of the plaintiff Hnimasters. CCA. .5at are t5e re9-irements for mandatory or restri,tive agreement by t5e arties to be determinative of ven-e= ANS.*R/ *here the parties have ,- validly agreed in writing

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &" of %&'

.- before the filing of the action 3- on the e clusive venue thereof. 4- The waiver must not be contrary to public policy or prejudicial to third persons. 0- These agreements are usually characteriIed by the use of restrictive or limiting words li7e, Gonly,G solely,G Ge clusively,G Galone,G Glimited to,G Gin no other place,G Gto the e clusion of,G and other terms indicative of a clear and categorical intent to lay the venue at a specific place and thereby waiving the general provisions of the +ules or the law on venue or proscribing the filing of suit in any other competent court.
RUL* ON SU22ARL PROC*DUR*

%"". .5at ,ivil ,ases are s-b8e,t to s-mmary ro,ed-re 6 ANS.*R' a. ? cept in cases covered by the agricultural tenancy laws or when the law otherwise e pressly provides, all actions for forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered shall be governed by the summary procedure under +ule "#, +ules of Court. 8Sec. 3, +ule "#, +$Cb. All other cases, e cept probate proceedings, falling within the jurisdiction of the four lower trial courts 8!unicipal Trial Court, !unicipal Circuit Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Courts in Cities, !etropolitan Trial Courts-, where the total amount of the plaintiffEs claim does not e ceed Ten thousand pesos 8;,#,###.##-, e clusive of interest and costs. 8Sec. ., , KAL. +ule on Summary ;rocedure%""A. +ive two instan,es w5ere s-mmary ro,ed-re is -sed. ANS.*R/ ,- Summary procedure under +ule "# of the ,66" +ules of Civil ;rocedureF and .- Summary procedure in other cases. %""B. +ive t5e distin,tions between s-mmary -nlawf-l detainer ,ases and ot5er ,ases. ro,ed-re for for,ible entry and

ANS.*R/ ,- Aorcible entry and unlawful detainer cases are governed by rule on summary procedure stated under +ule "# of the +ules of Court *C)@? those for other cases are governed by the +ule on Summary ;rocedure. .- )n forcible and unlawful detainer cases the amount of the demand is immaterial *C)@? for other cases, e cept probate, the total amount of the plaintiffEs claim does not e ceed Ten thousand pesos 8;,#,###.##-, e clusive of interest and costs. %"%. 4or fail-re of t5e tenant: Albert: to ay rentals: <-n: t5e ,o-rt-a ointed administrator of t5e estate of Nani Ba-re: de,ides to file an a,tion against t5e former for t5e re,overy of ossession of t5e leased remises lo,ated in Davao City and for t5e ayment of t5e a,,r-ed rentals in t5e total amo-nt of P&'":"""."". (s t5e ,ase ,overed by t5e R-le on S-mmary Pro,ed-re 6 EBar/ ada tedD ANS.*R. (es. All actions for forcible entry and unlawful detainer, irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered shall be governed by the summary procedure under +ule "#, +ules of Court. 8Sec. 3, +ule "#, +$C%"!. .5at are t5e leadings allowed -nder s-mmary ro,ed-re 6 ANS.*R' The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the a. complaint, b. answer 8 answer to the counterclaim, answer to the cross&claim.)f the defendant has a cross&claim or a compulsory counterclaim, the same must be asserted in the answer, or be considered barred. 8Sec. . KAL, +ule on Summary ;rocedure arrangement and numbering supplied-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &% of %&'

%"!A. *n-merate t5e ro5ibited leadings -nder t5e s-mmary ro,ed-re for bot5 ,ivil and ,riminal ,ases. ANS.*R/ ,- !otion to dismiss or to %uashF .- !otion for bill of particularsF 3- !otion for new trial, or for consideration, or reopening of trialF 4- ;etition for relief from judgmentF 0- !otion for e tension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paperF /- !emorandaF "- ;etition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the courtF :- !otion to declare the defendant in defaultF 6- >ilatory motions for postponementsF ,#- +eplyF ,,- Third party complaintsF ,.- )ntervention. 8Sec. ,0, +ule on Summary ;rocedureThe above pleadings are prohibited only within the level of the !unicipal Trial Court. *hen the case tried under summary procedure is appealed to the +egional Trial Court the concept of prohibited pleadings does not find application. %"!B. .5en does a motion ro5ibited -nder t5e R-le on S-mmary Pro,ed-re6 ANS.*R/ A motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial is a prohibited pleading under Sec. ,6 8c- of the ,66, +evised +ules on Summary ;rocedure only if it see7s the reconsideration of a judgment rendered by the court only after trial on the merits of the case. %"!C. .5en does a motion not ro5ibited6 ANS.*R/ A motion for reconsideration is not a prohibited pleading under the ,66, +ules on Summary ;rocedure, if the order of dismissal was issued due to failure of a party to appear during the preliminary conference. 8Ibid!%"#. Disting-is5 fail-re to file an answer -nder t5e R-les onS-mmaryPro,ed-re from fail-re to file an answer -nder t5e reg-lar ro,ed-re. ANS.*R' Hnder the +ule on Summary ;rocedure, upon failure of to file an answer in a civil case, the court motu proprio or upon motion of the plaintiff, shall render a judgment as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint and limited to what is prayed for therein e cept as to the amount of damages which the court may reduce in its discretion. 8Sec. 0, +ule on Summary ;rocedure- *C)@? under regular procedure )f the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the court, shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and upon proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discretion re%uires the claimant to submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may be delegated to the cler7 of court. 8Sec. 3, +ule 6, +$CA judgment rendered against a party in default shall not e ceed the amount or be different in 7ind from that prayed for nor award unli%uidated damages. 8Sec. 3 KdL, +ule 6, +$CPL*AD(N+S

%"&. 1ow is a verifi,ation made 6 ANS.*R' A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations therein are true and correct of his personal 7nowledge or based on authentic records. 8.nd par., Sec. 4, +ule ", +$C as amended by A.!. 5o. ##&.&,#&SC, effective !ay ,, .###-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &! of %&'

%"&A. State t5e general r-le and e7,e tions on verifi,ation of leadings. ANS.*R/ a. <eneral rule. ? cept when otherwise specifically re%uired by law or by rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified, or accompanied by affidavit. 8,st par., Sec. 4, +ule ", +$Cb. ? ceptions or pleadings re%uired to be verified' ,- Answer contesting the genuineness of an actionable document. 8Sec. :, +ule :, +$C.- ;etition for relief from judgment. 8Sec. 3, +ule 3:, Ibid!3- complaint with an application for preliminary injunction. 8Sec. 4, +ule 0:, Ibid!4- Complaint for replevin. 8Sec. ., +ule /#, Ibid!0- ;etitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus. 8+ule /0, Ibid!/- All pleadings under the +ule on Summary ;rocedure. The above is not complete as there are others. %"'. S o-ses S-rla filed a ,om laint for damages against Santo0omas University 1os ital redi,ated on an allegation t5at t5eir son w5ile ,onfined at t5e said 5os ital 5ad a,,identally fallen from 5is in,-bator ossibly ,a-sing serio-s 5arm on t5e ,5ild. 05e 5os ital filed its Answer wit5 Com -lsory Co-nter,laim asserting t5at t5e s o-ses S-rla still owed t5e 5os ital P@!:>#!.%" re resenting 5os ital bills for t5eir ,5ild;s ,onfinement at t5e 5os ital and maAing a ,laim for moral and e7em lary damages: l-s attorney;s fees: by reason of t5e s- osed -nfo-nded and mali,io-s s-it filed against it. 05e laintiffs moved t5e ,o-rt for t5e dismissal of t5e ,o-nter,laim for not 5aving been a,,om anied by a ,ertifi,ate of non-for-m s5o ing. De,ide t5e motion. ANS.*R' The motion should be partially granted. The claim for ;:.,/3..,# is a permissive counterclaim in an initiatory pleading which re%uires a certification of no forum shopping while the second for damages being in the nature of a compulsory counterclaim is not covered by the re%uirement. %"'A. .5at does t5e ,ertifi,ation rimarily intended to ,over6 Does it a ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laims6 .5at is t5e effe,t of fail-re to ,om ly6 ly to

ANS.*R/ a,- an initiatory pleading or .- an incipient application of a party asserting a claim for relief 8Santo Tomas Hniversity Cospital v. Surla, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.6",:, prom. August ,", ,66:-, such as a permissive counterclaim b. +e%uirement for certification does not apply to compulsory counterclaims' 8Santo Tomas Hniversity Cospital v. Surla, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.6",:, prom. August ,", ,66:c. ?ffect of failure to comply with the re%uirement. Aailure to comply shall not be curable by mere amendment of the complaint or other initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice, unless otherwise provided, upon motion and after hearing. 8,st sentence, .nd par., Sec. 0, +ule ", +$C%"'B. .5at is t5e effe,t of s-bmission of a false ,ertifi,ation or non-,om lian,e wit5 t5e -ndertaAings6 ANS.*R/ This shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without preejudice to the corresponding administrative and criminal actions. 8.nd sentence, .nd par., Sec. 0, +ule ", +$C%"'C. .5at is t5e effe,t of willf-l and deliberate for-m s5o ing6

ANS.*R/ This shall be a ground for summary dismissal with prejudice and shall constitute direct contempt, as well as a cause for administrative sanctions. 8last sentence, . nd par., Sec. 0, +ule ", +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &# of %&'

%"'D. 2-st all arties sign6 ANS.*R/ All etitioners must be signatories to the certification of no forum shopping unless one is authoriIed by other petitioners. Substantial compliance will not suffice in a matter involving strict observance by the rules. The attestation contained in the certification on non&forum shopping re%uires personal 7nowledge by the party who e ecuted the same. %"'*. .5ile r-le m-st be stri,tly followed t5ere may be s-bstantial ,om lian,e6 (ll-strate. ANS.*R/ *hile this section re%uires that it be strictly complied with, it merely underscores its mandatory nature in that it cannot be altogether dispensed with or its re%uirements completely disregarded but it does not thereby prevent substantial compliance on this aspect of its provision under justifiable circumstances. (ll-stration/ Consideration should have been ta7en of the fact that the parties were sued jointly, or as 1!r. And !rs.2 over a property in which they have a common interest. Such being the case, the signing of one of them in the certification substantially complies with the rule on certification of non&forum shopping. %"'4. +ive instan,es w5ere t5ere is NO for-m s5o ing. ANS.*R/ ,- The two cases, one for the annulment of deeds of sale and the other for ejectmentF although concerning the same property, are distinct litigations, neither involving e actly the same parties nor identical issues. .- There is no identity between a petition for probate of will and petition for issuance of letters testamentary. The first, is solely for the purpose of authenticating a will and after the allowance of the will, the proceedings are terminated. The se,ond, is for the purpose of securing authority from the court to administer the estate and put into effect the will of the testater. The estate settlement proceedings commenced by the filing of the petition terminates upon the distribution and delivery of the legacies and devices to the persons named in the will. 3- 5o forum shopping where the five actions filed by the petitioner were for %uieting of title based on separate certificates of title. Cence, the subject matters involved are different in each case. As such, the cases alleged different causes of action. Corollarily, a judgment in any case will not affect the issue in the other cases inasmuch as those portion to different lands covered by different certificates of title. 4- 5o forum shopping between petition before the Court of Appeals where the issue is to determine entitlement to the benefits and protection under the CA+@, and a case before the +TC for injunction to stop anyone from using force and intimidation to eject the lawful possessors of the same property.
2ANN*R O4 2A3(N+ ALL*+A0(ONS (N PL*AD(N+S

%">. .5at is t5e effe,t of s litting a single ,a-se of a,tion 6 ANS.*R' a. )f two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others. 8Sec. 4, +ule ., +$Cb. *ithin the time for but before filing the answer to the complaint of pleading asserting a claim, a motion to dismiss may be made on any of the following grounds' ,- That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same causeF and .- That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment . 8pars. d and f, Sec. ,, +ule ,/, +$C%">A. Define s litting a single ,a-se of a,tion. ANS.*R/ >ividing a single or indivisible cause of action into several parts or claims or bringing several actions therein.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages && of %&'

The singleness of a cause of action is determined by the number of delicts or wrongs committed by the defendant. *here there is only one delict or wrong, there is but a single cause of action, regardless of the number of rights that may have been violated. %">B. Reason o-t w5y a arty may not instit-te more t5an one s-it for a single ,a-se of a,tion. ESe,. #: R-le !: ROCD ANS.*R/ +eason for the rule' ,- To prevent repeated litigation between the same parties in regard to the same subject of controversyF .- To protect the defendant from unnecessary ve ationF and 3- To avoid the costs incident to numerous suits. %">C. +ive an instan,e w5ere t5e ,a-se of a,tion is divisible. (ll-strate. ANS.*R/ ,- Contracts to pay money on installment is divisible. ?ach default in payment of an installment may be the subject of an independent action rovided it is brought before the ne t installment is due. ?ach action should include every installment due at the time the suit is brought. )llustration of contract of pay money which is a divisble cause of action. A contract to pay in three installments on or before the periods without acceleration clause is shown below' June ,0, .##, ; 0#,###.## July ,0, .##, ; 0#,###.## August ,0, .##, ; 0#,###.## Hpon failure to receive payment on June ,0, .##,, the creditor may file suit for ;0#,###.##. Should the June and July installments be not paid, then the creditor ought to file suit for the total amount of ;,##,###.##. )f the August installment was not paid while the suit for the collection of the June and July installments is still pending, then the creditor may file a separate suit for the !arch installment. There is no splitting a single cause of action because when the suit was filed for the June and July installments, the August installments was not yet due and demandable. %">D. +ive an instan,e of a ,a-se of a,tion t5at is not divisible. ANS.*R/ +ecovery of personal property with damages is indivisible. )f suit is brought for possession only, a subse%uent action cannot be maintained to recover damages resulting from the unlawful detainer. There is only one wrong committed, the unlawful detainer which resulted not only the right to recover the property but also damages. %">*. S5ow an e7am le w5en divisible and w5en not divisible. ANS.*R/ Contract to pay interest may or may not be separate from payment of principal. Suit may be brought separately for interest d-e rior to the time the principal becomes due. *hen the interest has not yet been aid at the time the principal becomes due, then unpaid interests already due becomes merged with the principal into a single cause of action. %"?. On 4ebr-ary %': !""%: Leon filed wit5 t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt against S5aron an a,tion to 9-iet title: ann-lment of titles and deeds: de,laration of sole 5eirs5i andHor owners5i wit5 damages involving a ar,el of land registered in S5aron;s name. Later: on 4ebr-ary %C: !""%: Leon filed wit5 t5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt an a,tion for for,ible entry wit5 damages against S5aron involving t5e same ro erty s-b8e,t of t5e s-it in t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt. S5aron now raises in t5e answer filed in t5e e8e,tment s-it t5e defense of s litting a single ,a-se of a,tion. R-le on t5e defense. ANS.*R' The defense is impressed with merit.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &' of %&'

)n the first case the determination of ownership is at issue. *hile it could be seen that the forcible entry case arose out of conflicting claims of ownership over the landF the issue of ownership is indispensably involved. This is evident, because in the second complaint for forcible entry, @eon anchors his claim for rightful possession his alleged ownership over the subject property. @eon has thus brought two separate suits for a single cause of action. The result therefore is that the filing of the first may be pleaded in abatement of the second suit. the forcible entry case should therefore be dismissed. %"@. .5at are t5e ,onditions for 8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion 6 ANS.*R' A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of actions as he may have against an opposing party, subject to the following conditions' a. The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties. b. The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules. c. *here the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venue or jurisdiction, the joinder may be allowed in the +egional Trial Court, provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein. d. *here the claims in all the causes of action are principally for the recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. 8Sec. 0, +ule ., +$C%"@A. .5at is t5e ob8e,tive or -r ose of t5e r-le on 8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion6 ANS.*R/ ,- To avoid multiplicity of suits where the same parties and subject matter are to be dealt with by effecting in one action a complete determination of all matters in controversy and litigation between the parties involving one subject matter, and .- To e pedite the disposition of litigation at a minimum cost. %"@B. *7 lain w5y t5e r-le on 8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion merely ermissive and not ,om -lsory. ANS.*R/ ,- The use of the word may in Sec. 0, +ule ., +$C. .- There is no positive provision of law or any rule of jurisprudence which compels a party to join all his causes of action and bring them at one and the same time. The concept of joinder of parties may or may not be compulsory depending on the party who is to be joined. %"@C. Disting-is5 ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim from 8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion. ANS.*R/ There are two pleadings in compulsory counterclaims 8the complaint and the compulsory counterclaim-, .1(L* there is only one pleading involved in joinder of causes of action under Sec. 0, +ule ., +$C. %"C. Does t5e r-le on 8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion in,l-de s e,ial ,ivil a,tions 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' 5o. There is no relation between an ordinary action and a special civil action, nor are they of the same nature or character, much less do they present any common %uestion of fact or law, which cojointly could warrant their joinder. The two actions do not rightly meet the underlying test of conceptual unity demanded to sanction their joinder under the +ules. %%". (s mis8oinder of ,a-ses of a,tion a gro-nd for dismissal 6 ANS.*R' A misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on initiative of the court, be severed and proceeded with separately. E.nd sentence, Sec. /, +ule ., +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &> of %&'

4(L(N+ AND S*R)(C* O4 PL*AD(N+S: <UD+2*N0S AND O01*R PAP*RS E(NCLUD(N+ 2O0(ONSD

%%"A. +ive t5e -r ose w5y servi,e of noti,e w5en a ,o-nsel s5o-ld be made - on ,o-nsel: and not - on t5e arty.

arty is re resented by

ANS.*R/ ;urpose' To maintain a uniform procedure calculated to place in competent hands the prosecution of a partyDs case. %%%. An answer was filed b-t it was served by mail des ite t5e fa,t t5at t5e offi,es of t5e two lawyers were only !"" meters a art from one anot5er. 05e ost offi,e 5owever is more t5an two E!D Ailometers away from t5e offi,e of t5e ,o-nsel for t5e defendant. No e7 lanation was given w5y servi,e by mail was resorted to. S5o-ld a motion to striAe be granted 6 ANS.*R' (es. The +ules mandate that *henever practicable the service and filing of pleadings and other papers shall be done personally 8,,, +ule ,3, +$C-. Hse of the word GshallG indicates that personal service is mandatory in character, if no e planation was given. %%%A. e7 lanations. +ive instan,es w5en no ersonal servi,e is re9-ired b-t always wit5

ANS.*R/ *here personal service is not practicable as' ,- *here the adverse party or opposing counsel to be served with a pleading seldom reports to office and no employee is regularly present to receive pleadingsF .- *here service is done on the last day of the reglementary period and the office of the adverse party or opposing counsel to be served is closed, for whatever reason. %%!. 05e adverse de,ision of t5e Co-rt of A eals was sent to t5e defendant a ellee;s ,o-nsel. 05e ,o-nsel did not re,eive t5e same: it was ret-rned wit5 t5e notation GUn,laimed Ret-rn to Sender G stam ed on t5e envelo e ,ontaining t5e de,ision.
A ,ertifi,ation was t5en iss-ed in t5e following tenor/ G05is is to ,ertify t5at a,,ording to t5e re,ordEsD of t5is Offi,e Registered Letter No.?%%' Ewit5 Delivery No: #"%?'D was sent by Et5eD Co-rt of A eals: 2anila on <-ne %': %CC' addressed to Atty. Ana,leto S. 2agno of !"@ Asso,iated BanA Bldg.: *rmita: 2anila was ret-rned to sender as -n,laimed mail on <-ly &: %CC' after t5e la se of reglementary eriod rovided for -nder ostal reg-lations following t5e iss-an,e of noti,es on t5e dates 5ere-nder indi,ated E-nders,oring s- liedD/ 4irst Noti,e- <-ne %': %CC' 05ird Noti,e -<-ne !%: %CC' Se,ond Noti,e - <-ne %C: %CC'.G

.as t5e de,ision d-ly served - on ,o-nsel 6 ANS.*R' 5o. )t was not enough for the ;ostmaster to have certified that the notices were issued because this is just a prelude to service by registered mail. And definitely, it would not be in consonance with the demands of due process and e%uity to automatically conclude that from the word GissuedG alone, the notice was in fact received by the addressee or somebody acting on his behalf and on the same date of the notice. The postmaster should have included in his certification the manner, date and the recipient of the delivery.
2O0(ONS (N +*N*RAL

%%#. Are t5ere any e7,e tions to t5e r-le t5at a motion wit5o-t a noti,e of 5earing is a mere s,ra of a er 6 ANS.*R' )n Tan v. Court of Appeals, September .., ,66: it was held that liberal construction of this rule has been allowed by the Supreme Court in the following cases'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &? of %&'

a. *here a rigid application will result in a manifest failure or miscarriage of justice, especially if a party successfully shows that the alleged defect in the %uestioned final and e ecutory judgment is not apparent on its face or from the recitals contained thereinF b. *here the interest of substantial justice will be servedF c. *here the resolution of the motion is addressed solely to the sound and judicious discretion of the courtF and d. *here the injustice to the adverse party is not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed. %%#A. .5at is t5e effe,t if t5e motion does not meet t5e re9-irement for noti,e. ANS.*R/ A motion that does not meet the notice re%uirements of Secs. 4 and 0 of +ule ,0 of the +ules of Court is pro forma, and the trial court has no authority to act on it. The re%uisites laid down in the aforementioned provisions are categorical and mandatory, and the failure of the movants to comply with them renders their motions fatally defective. %%#B. .5at is t5e -r ose of noti,e.. ANS.*R/ ;rior notice enables the adverse party to appear for his own protection and be heard before an order is made. %%#C. +ive instan,es w5ere t5e S- reme Co-rt disregarded fail-re of noti,e. ANS.*R/ ,- Aailure not fatal as adverse party had actually received a copy of the motion and was in fact present in court when the motion was heard. The demands of substantial justice were satisfied by the actual receipt of said motion under those conditions. .- )t was grave abuse of discretion for the trial court to deny the motion for postponement of the private prosecutor even though no copy of the motion had been served on the accused, in view of the fact that the prosecution was not available on the date of the trial. 5o substantial right of the accused was impaired. $n the other hand, it was important that the case be decided on the merits rather than be dismissed on a technicality. The accused should realiIe that postponements are part and parcel of our legal system. 8+epublic, supra%%#D. Does t5e re9-irement of noti,e of 5earing e9-ally a re,onsideration6 lies to a motion for

ANS.*R/ (es. 8;hilippine Commercial and )ndustrial Ban7 8;C)Ban7- v. CA, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.#"36, July .#, .###D*POS(0(ON B*4OR* AC0(ON

%%&. 1ow may a erson er et-ate testimony before filing of an a,tion 6 ANS.*R' A person who desires to perpetuate his own testimony or that of another person regarding any matter that may be cogniIable in any court of the ;hilippines, may file a verified petition in the place of the residence of any e pected adverse party. 8Sec. ,, +ule .4, +$CD*POS(0(ONS AND D(SCO)*R(*S

%%'. .5at is t5e -r ose of t5e different modes of dis,overy 6 ANS.*R' They would enable the parties to inform themselves, even before the trial, of all the facts relevant to the action, including those 7nown only to the other litigants. Through this procedure, 1civil trials should not be carried on in the dar7. %%'A. State t5e different modes of dis,overy -nder t5e R-les of Co-rt. *7 lain. ANS.*R/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &@ of %&'

,- De osition. The written testimony of a witness given in the course of a judicial proceeding, in advance of he trial or hearing, upon oral e amination or in response to written interrogatories, and where an opportunity is given for cross&e amination. .- (nterrogatories. These are the %uestions in writing served directly on the adverse party to be answered by him or by his officer. )ts scope is as broad as the field of in%uiry which a person interrogated is called upon to testify in an actual trial. 3- Prod-,tion or ins e,tion of do,-ments or t5ings. This mode of discovery is an e ception to the constitutional guarantee of privacy of communication and correspondence. )t allows the production or inspection of documents and other things but does not allow them to be distrained without the 7nowledge of their lawful owner or possessor. 4- Admission by adverse arty. This may be made at any time after the pleadings are closed. This may be availed of by a party by serving upon the other party a written re%uest for the admission by the latter of the genuineness of any relevant documents described in and e hibited with the re%uest, or of the truth of any relevant matters of fact set forth therein. %%'B. 1ow de ositions may be -sed6 ANS.*R/ ,- Any deposition may be used by any party for the purpose of contradicting or impeaching the testimony of the deponent as a witness. b. The deposition of a party or any one who at the time of ta7ing the deposition was an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private corporation, partnership, or association which is a party may be used by an adverse party for any purpose. c. The deposition of a witness, whether or not a party, may be used by any party for any purpose, if the court finds' ,- That the witness is deadF or .- That the witness resides at a distance more than one hundred 8,##- 7ilometers from the place of the trial or hearingF 3- That the witness is unable to attend or testify because of age, sic7ness, infirmity or imprisonmentF or 4- That the party offering the deposition has been unable to procure the attendance of his witnesses by subpoenaF or 0- Hpon application and notice, that such e ceptional circumstances e ist as to ma7e it desirable, in the interest of justice and with due regard to the importance of presenting the testimony of witnesses orally in open court, to allow the deposition to be usedF and d. )f only a part of a deposition is offered in evidence by a partyF the adverse party may re%uire him to introduce all of it which is relevant to the part introduced, and any party may introduce any other parts. 8Sec. 4, +ule .3, +$CCence, the deposition&discovery rules are to be accorded a broad and liberal treatment . 8;roducers Ban7 of the ;hilippines v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,#460, prom. January .6, ,66: - Courts are given a wide latitude in granting motions for discovery in order to enable parties to prepare for trial or otherwise settle the controversy prior thereof. 8Security Ban7 Corporation v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,30:"4, prom. January .0, .###%%>. 05e s o-ses Uy filed an a,tion for in8-n,tion and damages against Se,-rity BanA ESBCD: Domingo and t5e *7-offi,io S5eriff of O-eBon City to en8oin t5e e7tra8-di,ial fore,los-re over a ar,el of land registered -nder t5e s o-sesF name. 05e a,tion so-g5t t5e amendment of two deeds of Real *state 2ortgage between <a,Aivi and SBC. SBC and Domingo 5ad a ,ross-,laim against ea,5 ot5er. 05ereafter: t5e s o-ses Uy and Domingo 5ad a ,ross-,laim against ea,5 ot5er. 05e s o-ses Uy and Domingo filed t5eir se arate motions for rod-,tion: ins e,tion and ,o ying of do,-ments relating to t5e mortgage. Domingo averred t5at t5e s-b8e,t do,-ments were Imaterial and im ortant to t5e iss-es raised in t5e ,ase in general: and as between defendant EDomingoD and defendant SBC in areti,-lar. IOn t5e ot5er 5and: t5e s o-ses Uy said t5e do,-ments were Ine,essary for a f-ll determination of t5e iss-es raisedJ in t5e s-it. R-le on t5e motions.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages &C of %&'

ANS.*R' <ranted. A good cause for inspection of documents is to enable a party to intelligently prepare his defenses and to come up with a full determination of the issues. 8Security
Ban7 Corporation v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,30:"4, prom. January .0, .###4(L(N+ O4 01* AC0(ON

%%?. 1ow is a ,ivil a,tion ,ommen,ed 6 ANS.*R' a. A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court. b. )f an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is ,- commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such later pleading, .- irrespective of whether the motion for its admission, if necessary, 3- is denied in court. 8Sec. 0, +ule ,, +$C arrangement and numbering suppliedDOC3*0 4**S

%%@. On 2ar,5 ?: %C@#: Adrian filed a ,om laint wit5 t5e R0C against S5ell: Calte7: 2obil and Petro 5il. No mention was made in t5e ,om laint of t5e amo-nt of damags ,laimed b-t Adrian alleged t5at t5e ,onservative amo-nt of t5e ,ombined gross sales of 5is invention by t5e oil ,om anies is PC#& million ann-ally. At t5e November %#: %C@& 5earing: Adrian estimated t5e yearly royalty d-e 5im to be P!#> million. 05e oil ,om anies filed a motion to dismiss - on dis,overy t5at Adrian aid only P!'!."" filing fee based on 5is ,laim for attorneyFs fees in t5e s-m of P!"":"""."". t5e ,o-rt denied t5e motion and ordered Adrian to ay additional do,Aet fees in t5e s-m of PC&':"""."". Adrian filed a motion for re,onsideration w5i,5 was o osed by t5e oil ,om anies. 05e trial ,o-rt t5en ordered t5e laintiff to ay t5e re9-ired additional do,Aet fee after t5e termination of t5e ,ase to be ded-,ted from w5atever 8-dgment in damages awarded to t5e laintiff. 05e matter was elevated to t5e Co-rt of A eals t5en,e to t5e S- reme Co-rt w5i,5 ordered t5e ,ase res-med - on ayment of all t5e lawf-l fees or - on e7em tion from ayment t5ereof - on ro er a li,ation to litigate as a- er. 05e laintiff t5en filed an a li,ation to litigate as a a- er w5i,5 was denied. 1e t5en filed an amended ,om laint. S-bse9-ent amendments were made aying additional amo-nts for t5e filing fees in order to a,,ommodate t5e laintiffFs finan,es 6 Does t5e laintiff 5ave t5e rig5t to amend 5is ,om laint to a,,ommodate 5is finan,es for ayment of t5e res,ribed do,Aet fees 6 ANS.*R' (es. 5ormally, the manner of payments made by the plaintiff of the doc7et fees in installments should be disallowed. Cowever, e%uity demands that procedural rules be rela ed considering the peculiar circumstances availing in the case. )t would be grossly unjust if the plaintiffDs claim against the oil companies, who have allegedly reaped the profits of his lifetime wor7, would be dismissed for the sole reason that his finances are not sufficient to allow him to file his claim. %%@A. Dis,-ss t5e 2an,5ester do,trine and s-bse9-ent do,trines. ANS.*R/ a. 2an,5ester do,trine and s-bse9-ent do,trines. !anchester >evelopment, et al., ruled that the court ac%uires jurisdiction over any case only upon payment of the prescribed doc7eting fees. The allegation in the body of the complaint of damages suffered in the amount of ;": million, and the omission of a specific prayer for that amount was intended for no other purpose than to evade the payment of correct filing fees if not to mislead the doc7et cler7 in the assessment of the correct fee. The ruling was intended to put a stop to such an irregularity. Sun )nsurance $ffice, @td., et al., v. Asuncion, et al., ,"# S+CA ."4 modified the !anchester doctrine by holding that a more liberal interpretation of the rules is called for considering that, unli7e !anchester, there was demonstrated willingness to abide by the rules by paying the additional doc7et fees as re%uired. Thus, where the filing of the initiatory pleading is

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '" of %&'

not accompanied by payment of the doc7eting fee, the court may allow payment of such fee within a reasonable time but in no case beyond the prescriptive or reglementary period. b. 0wo sit-ations t5at may arise. One is where the complaint or similar pleading sets out a claim purely for money or damages and there is no precise statement of the amounts being claimed. )n this event, the rule is that the pleading will 1not be accepted nor admitted, or shall otherwise be e punged from the record.2 )n other words, the complaint or pleading may be dismissed or the claims as to which the amounts are unspecified may be e punged, although as aforestated the court may, on motion, permit amendment of the complaint and payment of the fees provided the claim has not in the meantime become time&barred. The ot5er is where the pleading does specify the amount of every claim, but the fees paid are insufficientF and here again, the rule now is that the court may allow a reasonable time for the payment of the prescribed fees, or the balance thereof, and upon such payment, the defect is cured and the court may properly ta7e cogniIance of the action, unless in the meantime prescription has set in and conse%uently barred the right of action. c. *here the a,tion involves real ro erty and a related ,laim for damages as well, the legal fees shall be assessed on the basis of both 8a- the value of the property and 8b- the total amount of related damages sought. The court ac%uires jurisdiction over the action if the filing of the initiatory pleading is accompanied by the payment of the re%uisite fee, or, if the fees are not paid at the time of the filing of the pleading, as of the time of full payment of the fees within such reasonable time as the court may grant, unless, of course, prescription has set in the meantime. But where the fees prescribed for an action involving real property have been paid, but the amounts of certain of the related damages 8actual, moral and nominal- being demanded are unspecified, the action may not be dismissed.2 8(uchengco v. +epublic, etc., et al., <.+. 5o. ,3,,.", prom. June :, .###d. 2an,5ester do,trine not a li,able to ele,tion ,ases . 8;ahilan v. Tabala, et al., .3#
SC+A .#0, .,/&.," cited in ?nojas, Jr., v. judge <acott, Jr., etc., A.!. 5o. +TJ&66&,0,3, prom. January ,6, .###SU22ONS

%%C. .5at is t5e -r ose of servi,e of s-mmons 6 ANS.*R' the purpose of service of summons' a. Aor jurisdictional purposes which is ac%uired by courts over the person of a party& defendant by virtue of the service of summons in the manner re%uired by law. b. To give notice to the defendant or respondent that an action has been commenced against her. She is thus, put on guard as to the demands of the plaintiff or petitioner. %%CA. +ive an e7,e tion or instan,e w5ere servi,e of s-mmons is not for t5e -r ose of obtaining 8-risdi,tion. ANS.*R/ ? traterritorial service of summons to non&resident defendant where the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff, or the subject of the defendantEs property in the ;hilippines. The purpose is to comply with due process.
2*01ODS O4 S*R)(C* O4 SU22ONS

%%CB. State t5e met5ods of servi,e of s-mmons. ANS.*R/ a. ;ersonal b. Substituted c. Service by publication ,- +esident defendant .- 5on&resident defendant %!". 1ow is ersonal servi,e of s-mmons effe,ted 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '% of %&'

ANS.*R' *henever practicable, the summons shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses to receive and sign for it, by tendering it to him. 8Sec. /, rule ,4, +$C%!%. 1ow is s-bstit-ted servi,e of s-mmons made 6 ANS.*R' )f, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time as provided in the preceding section, service may be effected a- by leaving copies of the summons at the defendantDs residence with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or b- by leaving the copies at defendantDs office or regular place of business with some competent person in charge thereof. 8Sec. ", +ule ,4, +$C arrangement supplied%!%A. .5y s5o-ld modes of servi,e stri,tly followed6 ANS.*R' !odes of service strictly followed in order that the court may ac%uire jurisdiction over the person. Thus, it is only when the defendant cannot be served personally 1within a reasonable time2 that substituted service may be allowed. Aor substituted service to be valid, the summons should be left 1in the defendantsD residence with some person of suitable age and discretion of suitable age and discretion then residing therein.2 (ll-stration/ Thus, there was invalid service if made with the defendantDs son&in&law who was not living in the same house as his parents&in&law, although 1living in the same compound.2 %!!. 1ow is servi,e of s-mmons made - on a domesti, rivate entity 6 ANS.*R' *hen the defendant is a corporation, partnership or association organiIed under the laws of the ;hilippines with a juridical personality, service may be made on the a. president, b. managing partner, c. general manager, d. corporate secretary, e. treasurer, or f. in&house counsel. 8Sec. ,,, +ule ,4, +$C numbering and arrangement supplied%!#. 1ow is servi,e of s-mmons effe,ted on a defendant P5ili tem orarily abroad 6 ine resdient

ANS.*R' a. ;ersonal service outside the ;hilippines with leave of courtF b. ;ublication, with leave of court, in a newspaper of general circulation in such places and for such time as the court may order in which case' ,- copy of the summons and order of the court shall be sent by registered mail to the last 7nown address of the defendant, and .- The order specifies a reasonable time, not less than si ty 8/#- days after notice within which the defendant must answer. c. )n any other manner the court may deem sufficient. 8Sec. ,0 in relation to Sec. ,/, both of +ule ,4, +$CThe above methods are also 7nown as e traterritorial service of summons may be resorted to for a,tions in rem or quasi in rem wit5 leave of ,o-rt. %!#A. +ive some instan,es w5en t5e above met5ods of e7traterritorial servi,e may be resorted to wit5 leave of ,o-rt' ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the defendant does not reside and is not found in the ;hilippines, and a- The action affects the personal status of the plaintiff or b- The action relates to, or the subject of which is property within the ;hilippines, is one in which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest, actual or contingent, or

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '! of %&'

c- The relief demanded in such action consists, wholly or in part,. )n e cluding defend ant from any interest therein, or d- The property of the non&resident defendant has been attached within the ;hilippines. 8Sec. ,0, +ule ,4, +$C.- The above methods are resorted to where the action is in rem or quasi in rem. 3- *hat gives the court jurisdiction is not jurisdiction over the person but jurisdiction over the res, i.e. a- ;ersonal status of the plaintiff 8not the defendant- who is domiciled in the ;hilippinesF b- The property litigatedF or c- The property attached. %!#B. +ive instan,es w5ere t5ere was NO valid e7traterritorial servi,e. ANS.*R/ ,- 5o valid service in an action for partitioning and accounting under +ule /6 of the +ules of Court 8which is an action quasi in rem-, if made upon the husband, who is residing in the ;hilippines, of a non&resident defendant not found in the ;hilippines. @eave of court must be obtained and methods in Sc. ,0, +ule ,4, +$C must be followed. The service upon the husband cannot be justified under the last phrase of Sec. ,0, +ule ,4, +$C, which provides, Gin any manner the court may deem sufficient,G because' a- This mode of service li7e the first two 8personal and publication-, must be made outside the ;hilippines, such as through the ;hilippine ?mbassy in the foreign country where the defendant residesF b- 5o leave of court was obtained in the form of a motion in writing, supported by affidavit of the plaintiff or some other person in his behalf and setting forth the grounds or the application. .- Although the Supreme Court considered publication in the ;hilippines of the summons 8against the contention that it should have been made in the foreign state where the defendant was residing- sufficient, nonetheless the service was considered insufficient because no copy of the summons was sent to the last 7nown correct address in the ;hilippines. %"#B. +ive instan,es w5ere t5ere .AS valid servi,e. ANS.*R/ ,- Service of summons on the husband was considered valid because summons was served upon the defendantEs husband in their conjugal home. The wife was temporarily absent because she was on vacation. .- Service on the wife of a nonresident defendant was found to be sufficient because the defendant had appointed his wife as his attorney&in&fact. %!&. D-ra roof Servi,es s-ed for damages vario-s arties in,l-ding Ban,o do BraBil: a non-resident foreign banA w5i,5 was served s-mmons t5ro-g5 t5e ambassador of BraBil to t5e P5ili ines as well as t5ro-g5 -bli,ation. 4or fail-re of Ban,o do BraBil to file its answer: it was de,lared in defa-lt and 8-dgment rendered against it awarding damages in favor of t5e laintiff. Did t5e ,o-rt obtain 8-risdi,tion over Ban,o do BraBil 6 .5y 6 ANS.*R' 5o. The action is one that is in personam because the plaintiff sought to recover damages for the alleged commission of an injury to the person or property of the plaintiff. Since the action is one in personam, personal or, if not possible, substituted service of summons on the defendant, and not e traterritorial service, in necessary to confer jurisdiction upon the person of Banco do BraIil. %!&A. *7traterritorial servi,e of s-mmons a quasi in rem6 li,able only in a,tions in rem or

ANS.*R/ ? traterritorial service of summons apply only where the action is in rem, an action against the thing itself instead of against the person, or in an action quasi in rem, where

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '# of %&'

an individual is named as defendant and the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his interest therein to the obligation or loan burdening the property. This is so inasmuch as, in in rem and quasi in rem actions, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is not a prere%uisite to confer jurisdiction on the court provided that the court ac%uires jurisdiction over the res! Any relief granted in in rem or quasi in rem actions must be confined to the res, and the court cannot lawfully render a personal judgmnt against the defendant.
NO0(C* O4 IS !EN"ENS

%!'. (nvest,o sold to Solid 1omes: (n,.: a ar,el of land on installments. As a res-lt of t5e alleged fail-re of Solid 1omes: (n,.: to ay be,a-se its ostdated ,5e,As bo-n,ed: (nvest,o s-ed Solid 1omes. (n its answer Solid 1omes alleged t5e -r,5ase ri,e was not yet d-e: and in fa,t e7,eeded t5e installment ayments. (t rayed for dismissal of t5e ,om laint and inter osed a ,o-nter,laim for t5e ref-nd of e7,ess ayments: moral damages and attorneyFs fees. (t t5en filed wit5 wit5 t5e Register of Deeds a noti,e of lis endens w5i,5 was entered in t5e rimary *ntry BooA: b-t not on (nvest,oFs titles. 05e trial ,o-rt rendered 8-dgment in favor of (nvet,o. S-bse9-ently: (nvest,o sold t5e ro erty to A4P2BA(: w5o - on verifi,ation from t5e Register of Deeds fo-nd t5at t5ere were no liens on t5e title. 05e Register of Deeds iss-ed I,leanJ 0C0s in t5e name of A4P2BA( w5i,5 ,ontained no annotation of any lien: en,-mbran,e: or adverse ,laim by a t5ird arty. Solid 1omes: after dis,overy of t5e sale to A4P2BA( filed s-it against t5e Register of Deeds: (nvest,o and A4P2BA( for Iannotation of lis endens and damages.J .ill t5e s-it ros er 6 ANS.*R' 5o. A notice of lis pendens is not and cannot be sought as a principal action for relief. The notice is but an incident to an action, an e tra&judicial one to be sure. )t does not affect the meris thereof. )t is intended merely to constructively advise, or warn, all people who deal with the propert that they so deal with it at their own ris7, and whatever rights they may ac%uire in the property in any voluntnary transaction are subject to the results of the action, and may well be inferior and subordinate to those which ma be finally determined and laid own therein. The notice of lis pendens N that real property is involved in an action N is ordinarily recorded without the intervention of the court where the action is pending. As a settled rule, notice of lis pendens may be annotated only when there is an action or proceeding in court which affecs itle to or possession of real property. )n this case, the action was for collection of unpaid installments on the purchase of subject property and Solid ComesD claim for damages. )n such case, the annotation of a notice of lis pendens was not proper as the action was in personam. %!'A. +ive instan,es w5ere noti,e of lis pendens is ro er. ANS.*R/ +ule ,3, Section ,4 of the ,66" rules of Civil ;rocedure and Section "/ of ;residential >ecree 5o. ,0.6, otherwise 7nown as the ;roperty +egistration >ecree provide the statutory basis for a notice of lis pendens! Arom these provisions it is clear that such a notice is proper only in actions to' ,- +ecover possession of real property .- Quiet title theretoF 3- +emove clouds thereonF 4- ;artition propertyF and 0- Any other proceedings of any 7ind in Court directly affecting the title to the land or the use or occupation thereof or the building thereon. Thus, all the applicant has to do is to assert a claim of ownership to put the property under the coverage of the rule. )t is not necessary for her to prove ownership or interest over the property sought to be affected by lis pendens! )t is proper where a claim is made of an interest or right in the property specifically subject of the alleged simulated sale, where the object of the complaint is not only to enforce a lien or encumbrance against the subject property but to enforce a valid claim.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '& of %&'

The notice is specific where it refers to a portion covered by the TCTs covering .3,/#6 s%. m. of the subject real property. %!'B. Remedy w5ere Register of Deeds denies registration. ANS.*R/ Hnder ;.>. 5o. ,0.6, the 1;roperty +egistration >ecree of ,6":,2 the +egister of >eeds may deny registration of the notice of lis pendens which denial may be appealed by the applicant en consulta 8Section ,#, paragraph .- to the Commissioner of @and +egistration.
NO0(C* 0O D(S2(SS OR .(01DRA. CO2PLA(N0.

%!>. 2ay t5e laintiff dismiss 5is ,om laint by mere noti,e to t5e ,o-rt 6 ANS.*R' (es. A complaint may be dismissed by the plaintiff by filing a notice of dismissal at any time before service of the answer or of motion for summary judgment. Hpon such notice being filed, the court shall issue an order confirming the dismissal. 8,st two sentences, Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$C%!>A. State t5e general r-le and its e7,e tions in dismissal by mere noti,e. ANS.*R/ <eneral rule' The dismissal by mere notice is without prejudice. 8last sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$Cb. ? ceptions or when dismissal with prejudice' ,- The order states that the dismissal is with prejudice. 8last sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$C.- Application of the Two >ismissal +ule' A notice operates as an adjudication upon the merits when filed by a plaintiff who has once dismissed in a competent court an action based on or including the same claim. 8Ibid!2O0(ON 0O A2*ND OR SUPPL*2*N0

%!?. .5at is t5e effe,t of amended leadings 6 ANS.*R' a. An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends. b. Cowever, admissions in superseded pleadings may be received in evidence against the pleader. c. Claims or defenses alleged in the superseded pleading not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived. 8Sec. :, +ule ,#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied%!?A. .5en amendment is a matter of rig5t6 ANS.*R/ ,- A party may amend his pleading once as a matter of right before a responsive pleading is served. .- )n case of a reply, at anytime within ten 8,#- days after it is served. 8Sec. ., +ule ,#, +$C3- Aormal amendments at any stage of the proceedings provided no prejudice is caused to the adverse party. A defect in the designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the court at any stage of the action, at its initiatiove or on motion, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the adverse party. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,#, +$C%!?B. S-bstantial amendments may be made - on leave of ,o-rt if not intended for delay6 ANS.*R/ 8S-ubsantial amendments may be made only upon leave of court.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '' of %&'

But such leave may be refused if it appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to delay. $rders of the court upon the matters provided in this section shall be made upon motion filed in court, and afrter notice to the adverse party, with an opportnity to be heard. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,#, +$CCourts are not precluded from allowing amendments even if the same will substantially change the cause of action or defense provided such amendments do not result in a substantial injury to the adverse party. The Supreme Court has ruled that amendments to pleadings are favored and should be liberally construed in the furtherance of justice. %!?C. .5en amendments not allowed6 ANS.*R/ ,- The amendment is for the purpose of delay. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,#, +$C.- Aormal amendments which cause prejudice to the adverse party. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,#, +$C3- That the cause of action or defense or theory of the case is, substantially changed, but this is not an infle ible limitation because pleadings may be amended or supplemented even if there are substantial changes as long as the purpose of the amendment or supplementation is not for delay. 4- That the amendment shall result in alteration of a final judgment on a substantial matter. 0- That the amendment is for the purpose of ma7ing the complaint confer jurisdiction upon the court where none e isted before. /- That the amendment is for the purpose of curing a premature or non&e isting cause of action. %!?D. (s leave of ,o-rt addressed to ,o-rtFs so-nd dis,retion6 ANS.*R/ The granting of leave to file amended pleading is a matter particularly addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and that discretion is broad, subject only to the limitations that the amendments should not substantially change the cause of action or alter the theory of the case or that it was made to delay the action. %!?*. Does filing of amended leading retroa,t to date of filing t5e original6 A5S*?+' 5o. The filing of amended pleading does not retroact to date of filing the original because the original is superseded by the amended pleadings. Cence, the statute of limitations runs until the submission of the amendment. %!?4. .5at is t5e -r ose of slemental leading6

ANS.*R/ To supply deficiencies in aid of the original pleadding and not to dispense with or substitute the latter. )t is not li7e an amended pleading which is a substitute for the original one. )t does not supersede the original, but assumes that the original pleading is to stand. The issues joined under the original pleading remain as issues to be tried in the action. %!?+. Does slemental leading retroa,t6

ANS.*R' (es. An amendment which merely supplements and amplifies facts originally alleged in the complaint relates bac7 to the date of the commencement of the action and is not barred by the statute of limitations which e pired after service of the original complaint. Cowever, such rule does not apply to a party who is impleaded for the first time in the amended complaint that was filed beyond the prescriptive period. %!?1. .5en does an amendment ,onsidered s-bstantially altering t5e ,a-se of a,tion6 .5en not ,onsidered6 ANS.*R/ )n determining whether a different cause of action is introduced by amendments to the complaint, what must be ascertained is whether the defendants shall be

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '> of %&'

re%uired to answer for a liability or legal obligation wholly different from that stated in the original complaint. An amendment will not be considered as stating a new cause of action if the fact alleged in the amended complaint shows substantially the same wrong with respect to the same matter but is more fully and differently stated, or where averments which were implied are made e press, or the subject of the controversy or the liability sought to be enforced remains the same.
2O0(ON 0O D*CLAR* (N D*4AUL0

%!@. .5at are t5e gro-nds for de,laration of defa-lt 6 ANS.*R' a. Aailure of a defending party to answer within the time allowed. 8Sec. 3, +ule 6,+$CThis includes failure to answer a complaint, counterclaim, cross&claim, third&party complaint, etc. b. *ilful failure to appear before an officer to ma7e a deposition, after being served with a proper notice, or failure to serve answers after proper service of interrogatories. 8Sec. 0, +ule .6, +$C%!@A. .5at are t5e effe,ts of de,laration of defa-lt6 ANS.*R/ ,- The court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and upon proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his pleading may warrant. 8,st par., Sec. 3, +ule 6, +$C.- The court may, in its discretion, re%uire the claimant to submit evidence before rendering judgment. Such reception of evidence may be delegated to the cler7 of court. 8Ibid!1 3- A judgment rendered against a party in default shall not e ceed the amount or be different in 7ind from that prayed for nor award unli%uidated damages. 8Sec. 3 KdL, +ule 6, +$C4- A party in default shall be entitled to notice of subse%uent proceedings but not to ta7e part in the trial. 8Sec. 3 KaL, +ule 6, +$C%!@B. .5at is t5e nat-re and effe,ts of a 8-dgment of defa-lt6 ANS.*R/ A judgment of default does not imply a waiver of rights ? cept that of being heard and presenting evidence in defendantDs favor. )t does not imply admission by the defendant of the facts and causes of action of the plaintiff, because the codal section re%uires the latter to adduce evidence 85$T?' +eception of evidence is now discretionary under the ,66" +ules, , st par., Sec. 3, +ule 6-, in support of his allegations as an indispensable condition before final judgment could be given in his favor. 5or could it be interpreted as an admission by the defendant that the plaintiffDs causes of action find support in the law or that the latter is entitled to the relief prayed for. This is especially true with respect to a defendant who had filed his answer but had been subse%uently declared in default for failing to appear at the trial since he has had an opportunity to traverse, via his answer, the material averments contained in the complaint. Such defendant has a better standing than a defendant who has neither answered nor appeared at trial. The former should be allowed to reiterate all affirmative defenses pleaded in his answer before the court of Appeals. @i7ewise, the Court of Appeals may review the correctness of the valuation of the plaintiffDs evidence by the lower court. %!@C. S5o-ld t5ere be liberal inter retation of defa-lt orders6 ANS.*R/ (es. A default judgment does not pretend to be based upon the merits of the controversy. A judgment by default may amount to a positive and considerable injustice to the defendantF and the possibility of such serious conse%uence necessitates a careful e amination of the grounds upon which the defendant as7s that it be set aside. %!C. .5at are t5e remedies of a arty de,lared in defa-lt 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '? of %&'

ANS.*R' a. A party declared in default may at any time after discovery thereof and before judgment, file a motion, under oath, to set aside the order of default upon proper showing that' ,- Cis failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mista7e or e cusable negligence, and .- That he has a meritorious defense. 8Sec. 3 KbL, +ule 6, +$Cb. )f the judgment has already been rendered when the defendant discovered the default, but before the same has become final and e ecutory, he may file a motion for new trial under Sec. , KaL, +ule 3", +$C. c. )f the defendant discovered the default after the judgment has become final and e ecutory, he may file a petition for relief under Sec. ,, +ule 3:, +$C. d. Ce may also appeal the judgment rendered against him as contrary to the evidence or to the law, even if no petition to set aside the order or default has been presented to him. 8Sec. ., +ule 4,, +$C%!CA. (s t5e order of defa-lt is a ealable=

ANS.*R/ 5o. The order is interlocutory because the court has still to render judgment by default. $rder denying a motion to set aside order of default is appealable An order denying a motion to set aside an order of default, not being interlocutory but final is immediately appealable.
2O0(ON 4OR *=0*NS(ON O4 0(2* 0O PL*AD OR R*SPOND

%!CB. leading.

+ive a s-mmary of different eriods to file res onsive answer or res onsive

ANS.*R/ a. .it5in a eriod fi7ed by t5e ,o-rt ,- Answer to the complaint 8Sec. ,, +ule ,,, +$C,- Answer to supplemental complaint. 8Sec. ", +ule ,,, +$C.- Answer to complaint&in&intervention. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,6, +$Cb. .it5in ten E%"D days ,- Arom notice of admission of order admitting amended complaint. Answer to amended complaint, amended counterclaim, amended cross&claim, amended third 8fourth, etc- & party complaint and amended complaint&in& intervention, where amendment is not a matter of right. 8.nd and 3rd A;+s., Sec. 3, +ule ,,, +$C.- Arom service. Answer to counterclaim or cross&claim. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,,, +$C3- Arom service of pleading responded to. +eply. 8Sec. /, +ule ,,, +$C4- Arom notice of order admitting supplemental complaint. Answer to supplemental complaint. 8Sec. ", +ule ,,, +$C,. .it5in fifteen E%'D days/ ,- After service of summons. Answer 8Sec. ,, +ule ,,, +$C.- After defendant served with copy of amended complaint as a matter of right. Answer to amended complaint. 8,st par., Sec. 3, +ule ,,, +$C3- Arom notice of the order admitting a complaint&in&intervention. Answer to a complaint&in&intervention. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,6, +$Cd. .it5in t5irty E#"D days/ ,- After receipt of summons by government official designated by law to receive summons on a defendant foreign private juridical entity. Answer. 8Sec. ., +ule ,,, +$Ce. Not less t5an si7ty E>"D days ,- After notice of order granting e traterritorial service of summons or by publication when the defendant does not reside and is not found in the ;hilippines. 8Sec. ,0, +ule ,4, +$C2O0(ON 0O *=PUN+*

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages '@ of %&'

%#". 1ow may a leading or any matter ,ontained t5erein be stri,Aen o-t 6 ANS.*R' a. Hpon motion made by a party before responding to a pleading or, b. if no responsive pleading is permitted by these +ules of Court , c. upon motion made by a party within twenty 8.#- days after the service of the pleading upon him, or d. upon the courtEs own initiative at any time, e. the court may order any pleading to be stric7en out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalously matter be stric7en out therefrom. 8Sec. ,., +ule :, +$C numbering, arrangement and words not in bold supplied2O0(ON 4OR B(LL O4 PAR0(CULARS

%#%. *7 lain t5e nat-re and ro,ed-re for a bill of arti,-lars. ANS.*R' a. .5en filed. Before responding to a pleading. )f a pleading is a reply, the motion must be filed within ten 8,#- days from service. b. +ro-nds. The party may move for a definite statement or bill of particulars of any matter which is not averred with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him properly to prepare his responsive pleading. Such motion shall point out the defects complained of, the paragraphs wherein they are contained, and the details desired. c. A,tion of ,o-rt. ,- >eny the motion, or .- <rant it outright, or 3- Allow the parties to be heard. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,#, +$C%#%A. .5at is t5e effe,t of non-,om lian,e wit5 order for bill of arti,-lars6 ANS.*R/ )f the order is not obeyed, or in case of insufficient compliance therewith, the court may order the stri7ing out of the pleading or the portions thereof to which the order was directed or ma7e such order as it deems just. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,., +$C2O0(ON 0O D(S2(SS

%#!. .5at are t5e gro-nds for a motion to dismiss 6 ANS.*R' a. That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party. b. That the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the claim. c. That venue is improperly laid. d. That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue. e. That there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause. f. That the cause of action is barred by a prior judgment or by the statute of limitations. g. That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action. h. That the claim or demand set forth in the plaintiffEs pleading has been paid, waived, abandoned, or otherwise e tinguished. i. That the claim on which the action is founded is unenforceable under the provisions of the statute of frauds. j. That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with. 8Section ,, +ule ,/, +$C%#!A. .5en is t5e time for filing motion to dismiss. ANS.*R/ The period to file a motion to dismiss depends upon the circumstances of the case. Section , of +ule ,/ of the +ules of Court re%uires that, in general, a motion to dismiss should be filed within the reglementary period for filing a responsive pleading. Thus, a motion to dismiss alleging improper venue cannot be entertained unless made within that period.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages 'C of %&'

Cowever, even after an answer has been filed, the Supreme Court has allowed a defendant to file a motion to dismiss on the following grounds' ,- @ac7 of jurisdiction .- Litis pendentiaF 3- @ac7 of cause of actionF and 4- >iscovery during the trial of evidence that would constitute a ground for dismissal. 8$bando, et al., v. Aigueras, et al., <.+. 5o. ,34:04, prom. January ,:, .###%#!B. .5en is t5ere waiver of defenses6 ANS.*R/ >efenses and objections not pleaded wither in a mnotion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule 6, +$C%#!C. .5en are defenses and ob8e,tions not waived6 ANS.*R/ ?ven if motion to dismiss is filed after the answer, the court shall dismiss the claim when it appears from the pleadings or evidence on record ,- that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, .- that there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause, or 3- that the action is barred by prior judgment, or by statute of limitations. 8. nd sentence, Sec. ,, rule 6, +$C%#!D. .5at motion to dismiss t5at needs a 5earing6 ANS.*R/ A motion to dismiss raising an affirmative defense such as lac7 of cause of action poses a %uestion of fact that should be resolved after due hearing. This is unli7e a motion to dismiss based on the failure of the complaint to state a cause of action which may be resolved solely on the basis of the allegations of the complaint. %##. 05e general r-le is t5at t5e filing of a motion to dismiss 5y ot5eti,ally admits t5e material allegations of t5e ,om laint. Are t5ere any e7,e tions to t5is r-le 6 ANS.*R' There are e%ually established limitations to the rule on hypothetical admission, i.e., that a motion to dismiss does not admit' a. the truth of mere epithets of fraudF b. nor allegations of legal conclusionsF c. nor an erroneous statement of lawF d. nor mere inferences or conclusions from facts not statedF e. nor mere conclusions of lawF f. nor allegations of fact the falsity of which is subject to judicial noticeF g. nor matters of evidenceF h. nor surplussage and irrelevant matterF i. nor scandalous matter inserted merely to insert 8 sic, should be to insult =- the opposing partyF j. nor to legally impossible factsF 7. nor to facts which appear unfounded by a record incorporated in the pleading, or by a document referred toF and l. nor to general averments contradicted by more specific averments. %##A. +ive t5e test for determining s-ffi,ien,y of ,om laint as to ,a-se of a,tion. ANS.*R' )n determining the e istence of a cause of action, only the statements in the complaint may properly be considered. @ac7 of cause of action must appear on the face of the complaint and its e istence can be determined only by the allegations of the complaint, consideration of other facts being proscribed and any attempt to prove e traneous circumstances not being allowed. The test of sufficiency of the facts found in the complaint as constituting a cause of action is whether or not admitting the facts alleged the court can render a valid judgment upon the same in accordance with the prayer thereof.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >" of %&'

The hypothetical admission e tends to the relevant and material facts well pleaded in the complaint and inferences fairly deducible therefrom. Cence, if the allegations in the complaint furnish sufficient basis by which the complaint can be maintained, the same should not be dismissed regardless of the defenses that may be assessed by the defendants. %##B. +ive t5e e7,e tions to t5e above test. ANS.*R/ The trial court and the Court of Appeals should not have been too rigid in applying the rule that in resolving a motion to dismiss on the ground of failure to state a cause of action, only the averments in the complaint and no other are to be consulted. The rule admits of e ceptions' Airst' All documents attached to the complaint, the due e ecution and genuineness of which are not denied under oath by the defendant, must be considered as part of the complaint without need of introducing evidence thereon. Second' $ther pleadings submitted by the parties, in addition to the complaint, may be considered in deciding whether the complaint should be dismissed for lac7 of cause of action. Strictly limiting the evaluation of the merits of the complaint to its averments or allegations would be too constricting an interpretation of the rule. )t must be remembered that the complaint itself is accompanied by documentary evidence attached anne es. The responsive pleadings, in addition, though not attachments to the complaint, clarify its merits since they are already part of the records of the case and should therefore be considered. %#&. .5at is t5e effe,t of a motion to dismiss on a ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim 6 ANS.*R' The filing of a motion to dismiss is an implied waiver of a compulsory counterclaim A compulsory counterclaim presupposes the e istence of a claim against the party filing the complaint and a grant of a motion to dismiss would remove the basis of a counterclaim. %#&A. .5at is t5e nat-re of ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim6 ANS.*R/ A compulsory counterclaim is au iliary to the proceeding in the original suit and derives its jurisdictional support therefrom. A counterclaim presupposes the e istence of a claim against the party filing the counterclaim. Cence, where there is no claim against the counterclaimant, the counterclaim is improper and it must be dismissed, more so where the complaint is dismissed at the instance of the counterclaimant. )n other words, if the dismissal of the main action results in the dismissal of the counterclaim already filed, it stands to reason that the filing of a motion to dismiss the complaint is an implied waiver of the counterclaim because the grant of the motion ultimately results in the dismissal of the counterclaim Thus, the filing of a motion to dismiss and the setting up of a compulsory counterclaim are incompatible remedies. )n the event that a defending party has a ground for dismissal and a compulsory counterclaim at the same time, he must choose only one remedy. )f he decides to file a motion to dismiss, he will lose his compulsory counterclaim. But if he opts to set up his compulsory counterclaim, he may still plead his ground for dismissal as a affirmative defense in his answer. %#&B. .5at s5o-ld t5e reader realiBe6 ANS.*R/ That the grounds for a motion to dismiss may be pleaded as affirmative defenses in the answer and the counterclaim may be validly pleaded. This is so, because during the trial on the merits, prior to a determination whether the complaint should be dismissed upon the affirmative defenses, the counterclaimant would have ample opportunity to prove his claim. )t is different if a motion to dismiss is granted because that would be the end of the proceedings and the counterclaimant would have no opportunity to ventilate his claim. %#'. <aime filed a ,om laint for e8e,tment against Amor wit5 t5e 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rt. (n 5is answer wit5 motion to dismiss Amor averred t5at t5e 20C 5ad no 8-risdi,tion over t5e ,ase be,a-se it involved a landlord-tenant relations5i and s5o-ld

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >% of %&'

5ave been filed wit5 t5e De artment of Agrarian Reform. Sin,e t5e answer was filed o-t of time: t5e 20C ,onsidered t5e same s-bmitted for de,ision and s-bse9-ently ordered Amor to va,ate t5e land. .as t5e 20C ,orre,t in rendering 8-dgment on t5e ,ase 6 ANS.*R' The !TC should not have disregarded AmorDs answer and should have heard and received the evidence for the purpose of determining whether or not it had jurisdiction over the case. %#>. (s t5e denial of a motion to dismiss s-b8e,t to a eal or ,ertiorari 6

ANS.*R' *hen the motion to dismiss is denied the ordinary procedure is for the movant to file and answer, go to trial and then reiterate the grounds raised in the motion to dismiss as grounds for assailing the judgment. Cence it is not subject to appeal. +?AS$5' The denial of a motion to dismiss or to %uash, being interlocutory, cannot be %uestioned by certiorariF it cannot be the subject of appeal, until final judgment or order is rendered. %#>A. +ive an e7,e tion or instan,e w5ere denial of motion to dismiss may be t5e s-b8e,t of certiorari. ANS.*R/ )f the court denying the motion to dismiss acts without or in e cess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion, certiorari under +ule /0 of the +ules of Court may be availed of. The reason is that it would be unfair to re%uire the defendant&movant to undergo the ordeal and e pense of trial under such circumstances because the remedy of appeal then would not be plain and ade%uate. %#?. .5at are t5e fa,ts deemed admitted by t5e fail-re to deny -nder oat5 t5e gen-ineness and d-e e7e,-tion of an a,tionable do,-ment 6 ANS.*R' a. The party whose signature appears on the document signed it. b. )f signed by another, the document was signed for the party whose name appears on the document with his authority. c. At the time the document was signed, it was in the words and figures e actly as set out in the pleading and of the party relying upon it. d. The document was delivered. e. Any formal re%uisites of law, such as seal, ac7nowledgment or revenue stamp which the document lac7s, are deemed waived. %#?A. +ive instan,es w5ere t5e benefit of admission of gen-ineness of a,tionable do,-ment is waived. ANS.*R/ ,- *here the pleader presented witnesses to prove the genuineness and due e ecution, and the adversary proved, without objection, the contrary. .- *here the pleader fails to object to evidence controverting the genuineness and due e ecution. %#?B. +ive instan,es w5ere t5ere is no admission even if no denial -nder oat5. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument. .- *hen compliance with an order for inspection of the original document is denied. 8Sec. :, +ule :, +$CCOUN0*RCLA(2

%#@. .5at is a ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim 6 +ive e7am les.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >! of %&'

ANS.*R' $ne which, being cogniIable by the regular courts of justice, a. arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing partyEs claim and b. does not re%uire for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot ac%uire jurisdiction. c. Such a counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court both as to amount and the nature thereof, d. e cept that in an original action before the +egional Trial Court, the counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of amount. Sec. ", +ule /, +$C numbering and arrangement supplied? amples of compulsory counterclaims' a. )n an action for recovery of land, the defendantEs claim for improvements, and even necessary e penses are compulsory counterclaims. b. )n a possessory action, the defendantEs claim of ownership of the land in %uestion is a compulsory counterclaim. c. >amages claimed to have been suffered as a conse%uence of the action filed parta7e of a compulsory counterclaim which must be pleaded in the same action. d. A claim for attorneyEs fees should be considered as in the nature of a compulsory counterclaim and should be pleaded in the answer to be recoverable otherwise barred. %#@A. .5at are t5e tests to determine w5et5er ,o-nter,laim is ,om -lsory or not6 ANS.*R/ ,- Are the issues of fact or law raised by the claim and the counterclaim largely the same= .- *ould res "udicata bar a subse%uent suit on defendantDs claim absent the compulsory counterclaim rule = 3- *ill substantially the same evidence support or refute plaintiffDs claim as well as the defendantDs counterclaim = 4- )s there any logical relation between the claim and the counterclaim = Affirmative answers to the above %ueries indicate the e istence of a compulsory counterclaim. %#@B. +ive t5e effe,t if ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim is not set - . ANS.*R' Compulsory counterclaim must be set up otherwise barred. The compulsory counterclaim is barred if it is not set up in the action filed by the opposing party. Thus, a compulsory counterclaim cannot be the subject of a separate action but it should instead be asserted in the same suit involving the same transaction or occurrence, which gave rise to it. %#@C. 2ay t5e ,o-nter,laim be dismissed if defendant ob8e,t to laintiffFs motion for dismissal6 ANS.*R' Counterclaim may not be dismissed if defendant objects to plaintiffDs motion for dismissal or when counterclaim survives dismissal of original suit. )f a counterclaim has been pleaded by a defendant prior to the service upon him of the plaintiffEs motion for dismissal, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint. The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute his counterclaim in a separate action unless within fifteen 8,0- days from notice of the motion he manifests his preference to have his counterclaim resolved in the same action. 8.nd and 3rd sentences, Sec. ., +ule ,", +$CThe above rule applies only where the plaintiff moves to dismiss the complaint or in cases of permissive counterclaims. %#@D. Does a ,om -lsory ,o-nter,laim s-rvive if original s-it is dismissed for la,A of 8-risdi,tion6 ANS.*R' lac7 of jurisdiction. Compulsory counterclaim does not survive if original suit dismissed for

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ># of %&'

+?AS$5' A compulsory counterclaim is au iliary to the proceeding in the original suit and derives its jurisdictional support therefrom, inasmuch as it arises out of or is necessarily connected with the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the complaint. The above rule applies where the defendant moves to dismiss the complaint but interposes a compulsory counterclaim. The permissive counterclaim is not dismissed because it is as if, it is a separate case. This is so, because the defendant is re%uired to pay doc7et fees for his permissive counterclaim. )f the defendantDs motion to dismiss is granted no jurisdiction remains for any grant of relief under the counterclaim. There is implied waiver of the compusory counterclaim because the basis for the counterclaim does not e ist.
CROSS-CLA(2

%#C. .5at is a ,ross-,laim 6 ANS.*R' A cross&claim is any claim by one party against a co&party arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein. Such cross&claim may include a claim that the party against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the cross&claimant for all or part of a claim asserted in the action against the cross&claimant. 8Sec. :, +ule /, +$C01(RD PAR0L CO2PLA(N0

%&". .5at is a t5ird arty ,om laint 6 ANS.*R' A claim that a defending party may, with leave of court, file against a person not a party to the action, called third party defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his opponentEs claim. 8Sec. ,,, +ule /, +$C<UD+2*N0 ON 01* PL*AD(N+S

%&%. .5at is 8-dgment - on t5e leadings 6 ANS.*R' Judgment by the court upon motion of a plaintiff, counterclaimant, cross& claimant, or third&party plaintiff, where an answer' a. Aails to tender an issueF or b. $therwise admits the material allegations of the complaint, counterclaim, cross&claim or third&party complaint. 8Sec. ,, +ule 34, +$C%&%A. Disting-is5 8-dgment on t5e leadings from s-mmary 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ ,- Contents of t5e answer. )n judgment on the pleadings the answer either does not tender any issue or otherwise admits all the allegations in the plaintiffEs complaint .1(L* the answer in summary judgment tender some issues but these issues are not genuine so that they re%uire no judicial determination. .- Party. )t is the plaintiff, counterclaimant, cross&claimant, or third&party plaintiff who avails of the remedy of a judgment on the pleadings .1(L* summary judgment may be as7ed by the claimant or the defending party. 3- Basis. Judgment on the pleadings is based solely on the pleadings .1(L* summary judgment is based not only on the pleadings but also on affidavits, admissions, depositions and other documents. 4- Noti,e. )n judgment on the pleadings there is no specific re%uirement when the motion shall be served to the opposing party, hence it should be served at least three 83- days before the date of the hearing which in turn must not be later than ten 8,#- days after the filing of the motion .1(L* a motion for summary judgment shall be served at least ten 8,#- days before the date specified for hearing which in turn must not be later than ten 8,#- days after filing of the motion.
2O0(ON 4OR SU22ARL <UD+2*N0

%&!. .5at is t5e b-rden of t5e movant in a motion for s-mmary 8-dgment 6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >& of %&'

ANS.*R' A party who moves for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating clearly the absence of any genuine issue of fact, or that the issue posed in the complaint is so patently insubstantial as not to constitute a genuine issue for trial, and any doubt as to the e istence of such an issue is resolve against the movant. Testimonial evidence is not needed only documentary evidence to prove absence of genuine issues. 8 Sec. 3, +ule 34, +$C%&#. (n ,onse9-en,e of a etition for ,ertiorari filed before it t5e S- reme Co-rt on Se tember &: %C@? iss-ed a 0RO against Sta. Clara 1o-sing (nd-stries: (n,. from wit5drawing andHor f-rt5er dis osing of t5e lywood inventory inits lant or ware5o-se. On O,tober !>: %C@?: t5e s5eriff seiBed eleven E%%D ,rates of lywood allegedly being trans orted to t5e w5arf at (lang: Davao City in violation of t5e 0RO. 05ese ,rates 5ad t5e marAings of Sta. Clara and 4irmwood. On November %@: %C@? 4irmwood ,laiming to be t5e owners of t5e eleven E%%D ,rates of lywood filed wit5 R0C of Davao City a ,om laint for delivery if ersonal ro erty and damages as well as attorneyFs fees. 05e defendants alleged in t5eir answer t5at t5e owner of t5e lywood was Sta. Clara and not 4irmwood. 05e answer f-rt5er admitted t5at t5e goods ,ontained t5e label and marAings of 4irmwood. Sta. Clara filed its ,om laint in intervention stating t5at it is 8oining 4irmwood in its s-it to re,over ossession of t5e lywood seiBed and detained by t5e defendantsK t5at 4irmwood was t5e same was milled by Sta. Clara for 4irmwoodK t5at Sta. Clara 5ad t5e rig5t to t5e ossessionof t5e lywood in order to ,om ly wit5 its obligations -nder a warranty to deliver t5e goods to 4irmwoodK and finallym t5at t5e 0RO iss-ed by t5e S- reme Co-rt w5i,5 was t5e basis for t5e servi,e 5ad already been lifted. On A-g-st #": %C@@ 4irmwood filed a motion for s-mmary 8-dgment alleging t5at aside from t5e amo-nt of damages d-e it t5ere was no gen-ine iss-e as to any material fa,t of t5e ,ase: Sta. Clara 5aving ,onfirmed 4irmwoodFs owners over t5e eleven E%%D ,rates of lywood. Sta. Clara also filed a motion for s-mmary alleging t5e same gro-nds raised by 4irmwood and f-rt5er ,ontending t5at t5e defendants did not 5ave t5e a-t5ority to 5old t5e ro erty in ,-stodia legis. S5o-ld t5e motion for s-mmary 8-dgment be granted 6 ANS.*R' (es. There are no genuine issues with respect to the ownership of the eleven 8,,- crates of plywood. Aurthermore, it is clear that the defendants had no authority to seiIe the plywood considering that the T+$ did not contain any directive whatsoever to any of the defendants to seiIe property belonging to Sta. Clara, or to 7eep the property seiIed in their possession. %&#A. .5at is t5e nat-re of a-t5ority to grant relief by s-mmary 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ This rule does not vest in the court summary jurisdiction to try issues on pleadings and affidavits but gives the court limited authority to enter summary judgment only if it clearly appears that there is no genuine issue of material fact. $n a motion for summary judgment, the court is not authoriIed to decide an issue of fact but to determine whether the pleadings and records before the court create an issue of fact to be tried. Courts are %uite critical of the papers presented by the moving party but not of the papers in opposition thereto. Thus, in ruling on a motion for summary judgment, the court should ta7e that view of the evidence most favorable to the party against whom it is directed, giving such party the benefit of all favorable inferences. %&#B. .5at are t5e gro-nds for s-mmary 8-dgment6 ANS.*R/ )f the pleadings, supporting affidavits, depositions, and admissions on file, show that, e cept as to the amount of damages, there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. 8Sec. 3, +ule 30, +$C%&#C. .5en is s-mmary 8-dgment not ro er6 .5at is gen-ine iss-e6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >' of %&'

ANS.*R/ *here the pleadings tender a genuine issue, i.e. an issue of fact the resolution of which calls for presentation of evidence, as distinguished from an issue which is sham, fictitious, contrived, set&up in bad faith, or patently unsubstantial, summary judgment is not proper. %&#D. (s 5earing re9-ired for s-mmary 8-dgment6 ANS.*R/ 5o. )n proceedings for summary judgment, the court is merely e pected to act chiefly on the basis of what is in the records of the case and the hearing contemplated in the +ules is not de riguer as its purpose is merely to determine whether the issues are genuine or not, and not to receive evidence on the issues set up in the pleading.
R*PLL

%&&. .5at is t5e ro,ed-re to be followed if new ,laims arise o-t of t5e answer 6 ANS.*R/ )f the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged in the answer such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. 8.nd par., Sec. ,#, +ule /PR*-0R(AL BR(*4

%&'. .5en s5all t5e re-trial brief be filed 6 ANS.*R' The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party, in such manner as shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three 83- days before the date of the pre&trial, their respective pre&trial briefs. 8,st par., Sec. /, +ule ,:, +$C%&'A. .5at is t5e effe,t of fail-re to file re-trial brief6 ANS.*R/ The failure to file a pre&trial brief has same effect as failure to appear at the pre&trial. 8last par., Sec. /, +ule ,:, +$C%&'B. .5at are t5e ,ontents of a re-trial brief6 ANS.*R/ 8a- A statement of their willingness to enter into amicable settlement or alternative modes of dispute resolution, indicating the desired terms thereofF 8b- A summary of the admitted facts and proposed stipulation of factsF 8c- The issues to be tried or resolvedF 8d- The documents or e hibits to be presented, stating the purposes thereofF 8e- A manifestation of their having availed or their intention to avail themselves of discovery procedures or referral to commissionersF and 8f- The numbers and names of the witnesses, and the substance of their respective testimonies. 8,st par., Sec. /, +ule ,:, +$CPR*-0R(AL

%&>. (t is t5e d-ty of t5e arties and t5eir ,o-nsel to a ear at t5e re-trial. .5at is t5e effe,t of t5e fail-re of t5e arties to a ear d-ring t5e re-trial 6 ANS.*R' )f the plaintiff fails to appear the action shall be dismissed with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. 8,st and .nd sentences, Sec. 0, +ule ,:, +$CThe failure of the defendant to appear at the pre&trial shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his evidence ex parte and the court shall render judgment on the basis thereof. 83rd sentence, Sec. 0, +ule ,:, +$C%&>A. .5at are t5e fa,tors in de,iding grant or denial of motion for ost onment of re-trial6 ANS.*R' The court shall ta7e into account'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >> of %&'

,- The reason for the postponemtF .- The merits of the case of the movant. !eritorious defense. The defendant must show that she has a meritorious defense otherwise the grant of her option will prove to be a useless e ercise. Thus, her motion must be accompanied by a statement of the evidence which she intends to present if the motion is granted and which is such as to warrant a reasonable belief that the result of the case would probably be otherwise.
0R(AL

%&?. Are t5ere any instan,es w5ere no trial is ,ond-,ted in ,ivil ,ases 6 ANS.*R' (es. *here the case is' a. >ismissed upon a motion to dismiss the complaint or pleading asserting a claim filed by the defending party. 8+ule ,/, +$Cb. >ismissed by the plaintiff without order of the court. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$Cc. >ismissed by the plaintiff upon order of the court at the plaintiffEs instance. 8Sec. ., +ule ,", +$Cd. >ismissed upon motion of the defendant or upon the courtEs own motion if the plaintiff fails to appear at the trial, or prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, or to comply with the +ules of Court, or any order of the court. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,", +$Ce. >ecided after declaration of default for failure of the defending party to file an answer unless the court in its discretion re%uires the claimant to submit evidence. 8Sec. 3, +ule 6, +$Cf. >ecided on a motion for judgment on the pleadings. 8+ule 34, +$Cg. >ecided for failure of the parties and their counsel to appear at the pre&trial. 8Sec. 0, +ule ,:, +$Ch. >ecided after the court finds during the pre&trial the propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a valid ground therefore be found to e ist. 8Sec. . KgL, +ule ,:, +$Ci. >ecided on a motion to dismiss or judgment by default by wilful failure or refusal of a party to have his deposition ta7en or to answer interrogatories. 8Sec. 0, +ule .6, +$Cj. >ecided after the parties have agreed in writing, upon the facts involved in the litigation and submit the case for judgment on the facts agreed upon, without the introduction of evidence. 8Sec. /, +ule 3#, +$C%&@. .5en may trial by ,ommissioner be ,ond-,ted 6 ANS.*R' Trial by commissioner may be conducted upon reference through mutual consent of both parties, upon motion of either party or upon the courtDs own motion. a. There may be reference by consent. By written consent of both parties, the court may order any or all of the issues in a case to be referred to a commissioner to be agreed upon by the parties or to be appointed by the court. As used in these +ules, the word 1commissioner2 includes a referee, an auditor and an e aminer. 8Sec. ,, +ule 3., +$Cb. There may also be referral ordered by the court on motion. *hen the parties do not consent, the court may, upon application of either or of its own motion, direct a reference to a commissioner in the following cases' a- *hen the trial of an issue of fact re%uires the e amination of a long account on either side, in which case the commissioner may be directed to hear and report upon the whole issue or any specific %uestion involved thereinF b- *hen the ta7ing of an account is necessary for the information of the court before judgment, or for carrying a judgment or order into effectF c- *hen a %uestion of fact, other than upon the pleadings, arises upon motion or otherwise, in any stage of a case, or for carrying a judgment or order into effect. 8Sec. ., +ule 3., +$C%&@A. (s t5e ,o-rt bo-nd by t5e ,ommissioner6 ANS.*R/ Hltimately the trial court in the e ercise of its sound discretion, may either adopt, modify, or reject in whole or in part the commissioners report or it may recommit the same with instructions, or re%uire the parties to present additional evidence before the commissioner of before the court.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >? of %&'

D*2URR*R 0O *)(D*NC*

%&C. .5at is a motion for 8-dgment on dem-rrer to eviden,e and w5at are its effe,ts 6

ANS.*R' A motion to dismiss filed by the defending party after the claimant has rested his case, on the ground of insufficiency of evidence. ?ffects of filing a motion for judgment on demurrer to evidence' a. The defending party does not thereby waive his right to offer evidence in the event that his motion is denied. 8Sec. ,, +ule 33, +$Cb. )f the motion is granted and the order of dismissal is reversed on appeal, the defendant waives his right to present evidence in his behalf. 8Ibid!c. )n case 8b- above, the appellate court shall forthwith render judgment for the claimant on the basis of his evidence alone.
D(S2(SSALS

%'". .5en are dismissals wit5 re8-di,e 6 ANS.*R' The following are dismissals with prejudice' a. >ismissal upon mere notice without order of the court when filed by a party who has once dismissed in a competent court an action based on or including the same claim. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$Cb. >ismissal by order of the court upon a partyEs motion which specifies that the same shall be with prejudice o the filing of a subse%uent action based on or including the same claim. 8Sec. ., +ule ,", +$Cc. >ismissal upon motion of a defendant or on the courtEs own motion upon a failure by the plaintiff to prosecute his claim. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,", +$Cd. >ismissal as a result of the plaintiffDs absence during the pre&trial, unless otherwise ordered by the court. 8,st and .nd sentences, +ule ,:, +$C%'%. .5at dismissals are wit5o-t re8-di,e 6 ANS.*R' a. >ismissal for the first time by the plaintiff upon mere notice without order of the court. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,", +$Cb. >ismissal by order of the court upon the plaintiffEs motion. 8sec. ., +ule ,", +$Cc. >ismissal upon motion of the defendant or upon the courtEs own motion upon failure to prosecute by the plaintiff and the court specifies that the same shall be without prejudice. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,", +$C%'!. .5en may an a,tion be dismissed - on motion of t5e defendant or motro rio by t5e ,o-rt 6 ANS.*R' )f for no justifiable cause the plaintiff fails' a. To appear on the date of the presentation of his evidence in chief on the complaintF or b. To prosecute his action for an unreasonable length of time, or c. To comply with the +ules of Court, or d. To comply with any order of the court. The dismissal shall be without prejudice to the right of the defendant to prosecute the counterclaim in the same or in a separate action. The dismissal shall have the effect of an adjudication upon the merits, unless otherwise declared by the court. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,", +$C numbeing and arrangement supplied-%'#. .5en is an a,tion dismissed for fail-re to rose,-te 6 ANS.*R' a. )f the plaintiff fails to appear at the time of trialF or b. )f he fails to prosecute the action for an unreasonable length of timeF or c. )f he fails to comply with the +ules of Court or any order of the court.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >@ of %&'

%'#A. .5at is t5e effe,t of dismissal for fail-re to rose,-te6 ANS.*R' $nce a case is dismissed for failure to prosecute, this has the effect of an adjudication on the merits and is understood to be with prejudice to the filing of another action unless otherwise provided for in the order of dismissal. %'#B. +ive e7am les of disobedien,e of ,o-rt orders w5i,5 may res-lt in dismissal6 ANS.*R/ ,- An order directing the plaintiff to amend his complaint so as to indicate the representative of the deceased defendant. .- An order to file a bill of particulars. 3- An order to present his witnesses anew in view of the fact that the judge was not the one who originally tried the case.
2O0(ON 4OR 01* (SSUANC* O4 A SUBPO*NA

%'&. .5at are some of t5e valid gro-nds for ref-sal to ,om ly wit5 a s-b oena 6 ANS.*R' a. *here the witness resides more than one hundred 8,##- 7ilometers from his residence to the place where is to testify by the ordinary course of travel, or b. *here the witness is a detention prisoner if no permission of the court in which his case is pending was obtained. 8Sec. ,#, +ule .,, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied2O0(ON 4OR A2*ND2*N0 0O CON4OR2 0O *)(D*NC*

%''. 1ow may t5e leadings be amended to ,onform to eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' a. *hen issues not raised by the pleadings b. are tried with the e press or implied consent of the parties, c. they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. d. Such amendment of the pleadings as may be necessary to cause them to conform to the evidence and e. to raise these issues may be f. made upon motion of any party ,- at any time, even after judgmentF but .- failure to amend does not affect the result of the trial of these issues. 8,st two sentences, Sec. 0, +ule ,#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied%'>. .5en may t5e ,o-rt a-t5oriBe amendment of t5e leadings 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' a. )f evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues made by the pleadings, b. the court may allow the pleadings to be amended and shall do so with liberality c. if the presentation of the merits of the action and the ends of substantial justice will be subserved thereby. d. The court may grant a continuance to enable the amendment to be made. 8last two sentences, Sec. 0, +ule ,#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied<UD+2*N0

%'?. .5at is a 8-dgment 6 ANS.*R' Judgment is the final consideration and determination of a court of competent jurisdiction upon the matters submitted to it, in an action or proceeding.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages >C of %&'

)t is also the conclusion of the law upon the matters contained in the record the application of the law to the pleadings and to the facts, as found by the court or admitted by the parties, or deemed to e ist upon their default in a course of judicial proceedings. %'?A. Are strangers to t5e ,ase bo-nd by 8-dgment6 ANS.*R/ <enerally accepted is the principle that no man shall be affected by any proceeding to which he is a stranger and strangers to a case are not bound by judgment rendered by the case. %'@. .5at are t5e effe,ts of a 8-dgment - on a ,om romise6 ANS.*R' a. )t is not appealable and is immediately e ecutory, unless such a motion is filed to set aside the compromise on the ground of fraud, mista7e or duress, in which case an appeal may be ta7en from the order denying the motion. b. )t cannot be annulled unless it is vitiated by error, deceit, violence or forgery of documents. c. )t constitutes res ad"udicata! %'@A. .5at are t5e gro-nds for a ealing a 8-dgment on ,om romise6

ANS.*R/ ,- $n the ground of fraud, mista7e or duressF .- $n the ground of error, deceit, violence or forgery of documents.. %'C. .5at is t5e effe,t of foreign 8-dgments or foreign final orders 6 ANS.*R' The effect of a judgment or final order of a tribunal of a foreign country, having jurisdiction to render the judgment or final order is as follows' a. )n case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the judgment or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thingF and b. )n case of a judgment or final order against a person, the judgment or final order is presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and their successors in interest by a subse%uent title. 8 ,st par., Sec. 4:, +ule 36, +$C%'CA. .5at are gro-nds for re elling foreign 8-dgments6 ANS.*R/ ,- ?vidence of want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, .- collusion, fraud, or 3- clear mista7e of law or fact. 8Sec. 4:, +ule 36, +$C2O0(ON 4OR R*CONS(D*RA0(ON OR N*. 0R(AL

%>". .5at are t5e gro-nds of a motion for new trial6 ANS.*R' $ne or more of the following causes materially affecting the substantial rights of the aggrieved party' a. Araud, accident, mista7e or e cusable negligence which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against and by reason of which such aggrieved party has probably been impaired in his rightsF or b. 5ewly discovered evidence, which he could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial, and which if presented would probably alter the result. 8,st three pars., Sec. ,, +ule 3", +$C paraphrasing supplied%>"A. .5at are t5e gro-nds of motion for re,onsideration6 ANS.*R/ ,- The damages awarded are e cessiveF .- that the evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order, or

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?" of %&'

3- that the decision or final order is contrary to law. 8last par., Sec. ,, +ule 3", +$C%>"B. Disting-is5 between new trial and etition for relief from 8-dgment. ANS.*R/ ,- <rounds' A motion for new trial is based on fraud, accident, mista7e, e cusable evidence and newly discovered evidence *C)@? a etition for relief is based on the grounds that the petitioner has been unjustly deprived of a hearing therein, or that he has prevented from ta7ing an appeal, in either case, by reason of fraud, accident, mista7e or e cusable negligence. .- As to time of filing. A motion for new trial should be filed within the period for ta7ing an appeal *C)@? a etition for relief from judgment is filed within si ty 8/#- days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside and not more than si 8/- months after such judgment or final order was entered. 3- ?ffect on the judgment if granted. 5o distinction. %>%. .5at are t5e vario-s modes of atta,Aing final and e7e,-tory 8-dgments 6 *7 lain ea,5 briefly. ANS.*R' a. Dire,t a,tion or proceeding to annul the same, or by motion in another case if, in the latter case, the court had no jurisdiction to enter the order or to pronounce the judgment. )t is not incidental to, but is the main object of the proceeding. b. Collateral atta,A, in which the purpose of the proceedings is to obtain some relief, other than the vacation or setting aside of the judgment and the attac7 is only incidental. 8, Areemen on Judgments, Sec. 3#/, pp. /#"&/#:c. Petition for relief from judgment or order as authoriIed by statutes or by the rules, in the same action or proceeding in which the judgment or order was entered. %>!. State t5e gro-nds for ann-lment of 8-dgment. ANS.*R' a. 9oid for want of jurisdiction or lac7 of due process of lawF and b. Cas been obtained by e trinsic fraud. %>!A. .5at are t5e Ainds of fra-d6 ANS.*R/ ,- ? trinsic fraud which is basis for annulment of judgment. .- )ntrinsic fraud which is not basis for annulment of judgment. %>!B. .5at is t5e meaning of e7trinsi, fra-d6 ANS.*R/ )t also 7nown as collateral fraud. ? trinsic fraud refers to any fraudulent act of the prevailing in the litigation which is committed outside of the trial of the case, whereby the defeated party has been prevented from e hibiting fully his side of the case by fraud or deception prac ticed on him by his opponent. %>!C. .5at ,ir,-mstan,es w5ere e7trinsi, fra-d resent6 ANS.*R/ ,- *here the unsuccessful party had been prevented from e hibiting fully his case by fraud or deception practiced on him by his opponent, as by 7eeping him away from court, a false promise of a compromiseF or .- *here the defendant never had 7nowledge of the suit, being 7ept in ignorance by the acts of the plaintiffF or where an attorney fraudulently or without authority assumes to represent a party and connives at his defeatF or 3- *here the attorney regularly employed corruptly sells out his clientEs interest to the other side. %>!D. .5at is t5e meaning of intrinsi, fra-d6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?% of %&'

ANS.*R/ These are acts of a party at a trial which prevented a fair and just determination of the case and which could have been litigated and determined at the trial or adjudication of the case. )t is not a basis for annulment of a judgment. %>!*. .5en may etition be filed6 ANS.*R/ A petition for annulment of judgment on the ground of fraud may be filed within four 84- years from discovery of the same.
P*0(0(ON 4OR R*L(*4 4RO2 <UD+2*N0.

%>#. .5at are t5e gro-nds for filing a etition for relief from 8-dgment: order or ot5er ro,eedings 6 ANS.*R' *hen a judgment or final order is entered, or any other proceeding is hereafter ta7en against a party in any court through fraud, accident, mista7e, or e cusable negligence, he may file a petition in such court and in the same case praying that the judgment, order or proceeding be set aside. 8Sec. ,, +ule 3:, +$C%>#A. .5at is t5e nat-re of t5e etition6 ANS.*R/ +elief of judgmentF a uni%ue remedyF allowed only in e ceptional cases.& The issue of jurisdiction aside, the Supreme Court has emphasiIed that a petition for relief from judgment is a uni%ue remedy in the sense that it is based on the principle of e%uity and constitutes the petitionerDs final chance to prosecute or defend his cause. Being an act of grace, a petition for relief from judgment is usually not regarded with favor and thus, is allowed only in e ceptional cases where there are no other ade%uate and available remedies. %>#B. .5at are t5e gro-nds for filing a etition for relief from denial of a eal6

ANS.*R/ *hen a judgment or final order is rendered by any court in a case, and a party thereto, by ,- fraud, accident, mista7e, or e cusable negligence, .- has been prevented from ta7ing an appeal, he may file a petition in such court, and in the same case praying that the appeal be given due course. 8Sec. ., +ule 3:, +$C%>#C. .5ere m-st t5e etition be filed6 ANS.*R/ The petition for relief must be filed in the same court and in the same case irrespective of whether the court is an !TC, +TC, the CA or even the Supreme Court in case of a petition for relief from judgment, order or other proceeding. 8Secs. , and ., +ule 3:, +$C%>#D. .5en m-st t5e etition be filed6 ANS.*R/ The petition for relief from judgment,order of proceeding must be filed within si ty 8/#- days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, final order, or other proceeding to be set aside, and not more than si 8/- months after such judgment or final order was entered, or such proceeding was ta7en. 8Sec. 3, +ule 3:, +$C%>#*. .5at are t5e effe,ts of granting t5e etition for relief from 8-dgment: order or ro,eeding6 ANS.*R/ ,- The court shall set aside the judgment or final order or other proceeding complained of upon such terms as may be just. .- Thereafter the case shall stand as if such judgment, final order or other proceeding had never been rendered, issued or ta7en.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?! of %&'

3- The court shall then proceed to hear and determine the case as if a timely motion for a new trial or reconsideration had been granted by it. 8,st par., Sec. /, +ule 3:%>#4. .5at are t5e effe,ts of granting etition for relief from denial of a eal6

ANS.*R/ *here the denial of an appeal is set aside, the lower court shall be re%uired to give due course to the appeal and to elevate the record of the appealed case as if a timely and proper appeal had been made. 8Sec. ", +ule 3:, +$CAPP*ALS

%>&. Disting-is5 t5e gro-nds from a

eal from t5e gro-nds for ,ertiorari.

ANS.*R' )f the error is in the wisdom of the trial courtEs findings and not of jurisdiction, the proper remedy would be appeal and not certiorari! %>&A. 2ay t5ere be ,ertiorari even if a eal available6

ANS.*R/ Availability of an appeal does not foreclose recourse to the e traordinary remedies of certiorari or prohibition where appeal is not ade%uate, or e%ually beneficial, speedy and sufficient, and will not promptly relieve a party from the injurious effects of the order complained of, or where the appeal is ineffective. Cowever, aside from the bare, stereotype allegation in the pleading of Gno appeal, nor any plain, speedy, and ade%uate remedy in the ordinary course of law,G there must be showing that the appeal would be inade%uate, slow, insufficient, or ineffective. %>&B. Define final order. ANS.*R/ $ne which disposes of the subject matter in its entirety or terminates a particular proceeding or action, leaving nothing else t be done but to enforce by e ecution what has been determined by the court. As distinguished therefrom, an interlo,-tory order is one which does not dispose of a case completely, but leaves something more to be adjudicated upon. An interlocutory order is always under the control of the court and may be modified or rescinded upon sufficient grounds shown by any time before final judgment. This prescinds from a courtDs inherent power to control its process and orders so as to ma7e them conformable to law and justice. )t is immaterial that the judge who e ercises such powers is different from the one who issued the rescinded or amended order since the former is not legally prevented from revo7ing the interlocutory order of another judge in the very litigation subse%uently assigned to him for judicial action. The only limitation is that the judge can not act with grave abuse of discretion, or that no injustice results thereby. %>&C. (s an order dismissing a ,ase wit5o-t re8-di,e a final order6 ANS.*R' $rder dismissing a case without prejudice is a final order if no motion for reconsideration or appeal therefrom is timely filed. Such order of dismissal is complete in all details, and though without prejudice, nonetheless finally disposed of the matter. )t was not merely an interlocutory order but a final disposition of the complaint. %>&D. .5en may t5e order be,omes final and e7e,-tory6 ANS.*R/ The law grants an aggrieved party a period of fifteen 8,0- days from his receipt of the courtDs decision or order disposing of the action or proceeding to appeal or move to reconsider the same. After the lapse of the fifteen&day period, an order becomes final and e ecutory and is beyond the power or jurisdiction of the court which rendered it to further amend or revo7e. A final judgment or order cannot be modified in any respect, even if the modification sought is for the purpose of correcting an erroneous conclusion by the court which rendered the same.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?# of %&'

%>&*. .5at is t5e remedy w5en order already final and e7e,-tory6 ANS.*R/ Theoretically every final disposition of an action does not attain finality until after fifteen 8,0- days therefrom, and conse%uently within that time the action still remain within the control of the court, the plaintiff may move and set aside his notice of dismissal and revive his action before that period lapses. After dismissal has become final after the lapse of the fifteen&day reglementary period, the only way by which the action may be resuscitated or 1revived2 is by the institution of a subse%uent action through the filing of another complaint and the payment of fees prescribed by law. This is so because upon attainment of finality of the dismissal through the lapse of said reglementary period, the Court loses jurisdiction and control over it and can no longer ma7e a disposition in respect thereof inconsistent with such dismissal. %>&4. Does t5e a ellate ,o-rt 5ave dis,retion to ,onsider errors not assigned6

ANS.*R' )n the following instances an appellate court is accorded a broad discretionary power to waive the lac7 of assignment of errors and consider errors not assigned' ,- <rounds not assigned as errors but affecting the jurisdiction of the court over the subject matterF .- !atters not assigned as errors on appeal but evidently plain or clerical errors within contemplation of lawF 3- !atters not assigned as errors on appeal but consideration of which is necessary in arriving at a just decision and complete resolution of the case or to serve the interests of justice or to avoid dispensing piecemeal justiceF 4- !atters not specifically assigned as errors on appeal but raised in the trial court and are matters of record having some bearing on the issue submitted which the parties failed to raise or which the lower court ignoredF 0- !atters not assigned as errors on appeal but closely related to an error assignedF /- !atters not assigned as errors on appeal but upon which the determination of a %uestion properly assigned, is dependent. There is no reason why this rule should not apply to administrative bodies as well. %>'. .5at is t5e effe,t of a ro forma motion for re,onsideration 6 ANS.*R' A motion for reconsideration interrupts the running of the period to appeal, unless the motion is pro )orma! A pro )orma motion for new trial or reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal. 8last par., Sec. ., +ule 3", +$C%>'A. Define Pro forma motion for re,onsideration. ANS.*R/ $ne that does not specify the findings or conclusions in the judgment which are not supported by evidence or contrary to law, ma7ing e press reference to the pertinent evidence or legal provisions, alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions. 83rd par., Sec. ., +ule 3", +$C,/0B. *hen is the motion not pro #orma even if motion reiterates iss-es already assed - on by t5e ,o-rt6 ANS.*R/ ,- Although a motion for reconsideration may merely reiterate issues already passed upon by the court, that by itself does not ma7e it pro )orma and is immaterial because what is essential is compliance with the re%uisites of the +ules. .- Among the ends to which a motion for reconsideration is addressed is precisely to convince he court that its ruling is erroneous and improper, contrary to law or the evidence, and in doing so, the movant has to dwell of necessity upon the issues passed upon by the court. )f a motion for reconsideration may not discuss these issues, the conse%uence would be that after a decision is rendered, the losing party would be confined to filing only motions for reopening and new trial.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?& of %&'

Such is not the intendment of the +ules. 3- *here the circumstances of a case do not show an intent on the part of the pleader to merely delay the proceedings, and his motion reveals a bona )ide effort to present additional matters or to reiterate his arguments in a different light, the courts should be slow to declare the same outright as pro )orma. The doctrine relating to pro )orma motions has a direct bearing upon the movantEs valuable right to appeal. )t would be in the interest of justice to accord the appellate court the opportunity to review the decision of the trial court on the merits rather than to abort the appeal by declaring the motion pro )orma, such that the period to appeal was not interrupted and had conse%uently lapsed. 4- Hnder Supreme Court Circular 5o. ,&6, dated ." Aebruary ,66, and +evised Administrative Circular 5o. ,&60 dated ,/ !ay ,660, which too7 effect on , June ,660, an aggrieved party is allowed one motion for reconsideration of the assailed decision or final order before he may file a petition for review with the Court of Appeals. %>>. 1ow is a eal erfe,ted 6

ANS.*R' a. )f by noti,e of a eal. A partyEs appeal by notice of appeal is deemed perfected as to him upon the filing of the notice of appeal in due time. The court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the e piration of the time to appeal of other parties. b. )f by re,ord on a eal. A partyEs appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to him with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal filed in due time. The court loses jurisdiction only over the subject matter of the appeal upon the approval of the records on appeal filed in due time and the e piration of the time to appeal of the other parties. 8Sec. 6, +ule 4,, +$C%>>A. (s ayment of a ellate do,Aet fee mandatory6

ANS.*R/ (es. This is so because a court ac%uires jurisdiction over the subject matter of the action only upon the payment of the correct amount of doc7et fees regardless of the actual date of filing of the case in court. )n /egare v! &ourt o) ppeals, the Supreme Court upheld the appellate courtDs dismissal of an appeal for failure of petitioner to pay the doc7et fees within the reglementary period despite a notice from the Court of Appeals informing him that such fees had to be paid within fifteen 8,0- days from receipt of such notice. %>>B. .5at is t5e material data r-le6 ANS.*R/ The rule to the effect that 1the petition shall state the specific material dates showing that it was filed within the period fi ed herein,2 should be ta7en to refer more particularly to the date of receipt of the award, judgment, final order or resolution appealed from for the purpose of determining whether or not the appeal or petition was reasonably brought up to the appellate body or tribunal. %>>D. Does a eal in ,ontem t re9-ire re,ord on a eal6

ANS.*R/ )n the case of #oman &at.olic rc.bis.op o) 2anila v! &ourt o) ppeals , multiple appeals are allowed 1in special proceedings, in actions for recovery of property with accounting, in the special civil action of eminent domain and foreclosure of mortgage,2 contempt proceedings is not one of those instances where a record on appeal is re%uired to perfect an appeal. %>>*. After erfe,tion of t5e a eal and transmittal of re,ords: may t5e ,o-rt still grant a motion or iss-e a writ of immediate e7e,-tion6 ANS.*R' 5o. After perfection of the appeal and the transmittal of the records, the trial court loses jurisdiction over the case. Cenceforth, it may no longer grant a motion for, or issue a writ of immediate e ecution. To do so would be an abuse of discretion.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?' of %&'

%>?. S o-ses 2orales filed a ,om laint against Poli,ar io asserting t5at 5e s-rre titio-sly tooA ossession of t5eir lots and re ared t5em for lanting: t5ereby altering its residential o-tline and a earan,e. Defendant ,o-ntered wit5 t5e allegation t5at re,lassifi,ation of t5e land was not a roved by t5e ro er a-t5orities and t5at 5e was d-ly ,onstit-ted as tenant t5ereof by t5e revio-s owner. 05e m-ni,i al trial ,o-rt re,eived eviden,e on t5e iss-e of rig5t of ossession and 5e land;s ro er ,lassifi,ation. 4inding t5e land to be agri,-lt-ral and t5e fa,t t5at tenan,y was in iss-e: t5e m-ni,i al trial ,o-rt dismissed t5e ,ase for la,A of 8-risdi,tion. 05e laintiffs a ealed to t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt w5o 5eard t5e ,ase and fo-nd t5at t5e m-ni,i al trial ,o-rt 5ad 8-risdi,tion be,a-se t5e land was d-ly re,lassified from agri,-lt-ral to residential and t5at tenan,y was not involved. (f yo- were t5e R0C 8-dge 5ow will yo- ro,eed 6 S5o-ld yo- de,ide t5e iss-es on t5e merits or s5o-ld yo- remand t5e ,ase to t5e m-ni,i al trial ,o-rt for f-rt5er ro,eedings 6 ANS.*R' The case should be decided on the merits and should not be remanded to the municipal trial court. *here the parties have presented their respective evidence before the !TC, a remand becomes a useless superfluity, an undue imposition on the time and doc7ets of courts. A remand is necessary only when there has been no trial on the merits. A remand would unnecessarily impose on the parties the concomitant difficulties and e penses of another proceeding where they would have to present the same evidence again. This clearly runs counter to Section /, +ule , of the +ules of Court, which mandates liberal construction of the +ules to attain just, speedy and ine pensive disposition of every action or proceeding.
APP*LLA0* <UR(SD(C0(ON O4 R*+(ONAL 0R(AL COUR0

%>@. 1ow may de,isions of Regional 0rial Co-rts rendered in aid of its a 8-risdi,tion be a ealed 6

ellate

ANS.*R' The decision of +egional Trial Courts on such cases shall be appealable by petition for review to the Court of Appeals which 5ay give it due course only when the petition shows prima )acie that the lower court has committed an error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision or judgment sought to be reviewed. 8last sentence, Sec. .., B.;. Blg. ,.62OD*S AND P*R(ODS O4 APP*AL

%>@A. .5at are t5e modes and eriods of a

eal6

ANS.*R/ a. Appeal from !unicipal Trial Court to +egional Trial Court ,- Appeal in ordinary cases' a- Ailing notice of appeal with the !unicipal Trial Court that rendered the judgment or order appealed from. 8Sec. 3, +ule 4#, +$Cb- ;ayment of the full amount of the appellate doc7et fee and other lawful fees. 8Sec. 0, +ule 4#, +$Cc- *ithin fifteen 8,0- days after notice to the appellant of the judgment or final order appealed from. 8Sec. ., +ule 4#, +$C.- Appeal in special proceedings and other cases wherein multiple appeals are allowed' a- Ailing of notice of appeal and a record on appeal with the !unicipal Trial Court that rendered the judgment or order appealed from. 8Sec. 3, rule 4#, +$Cb- ;ayment of the full amount of the appellate doc7et fee and other lawful fees. 8Sec. 0, +ule 4#, +$Cc- *ithin thirty 83#- days after notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. 8Sec. ., +ule 4#, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?> of %&'

3- Appeal in cases decided under delegated jurisdiction. decisions of the +egional Trial Court. 8Sec. 34, B.;. Blg. ,.6-

)n the same manner as

%>C. .5at ro,ed-re s5o-ld t5e R0C follow w5ere it finds t5at t5e 20C 5ad no 8-risdi,tion in a ,ase a ealed to it from t5e said 20C 6 ANS.*R' a. )n case of affirmance of the decision or judgment appealed from and the ground of dismissal is lac7 of jurisdiction over the subject matter, the +egional Trial Court, if it has jurisdiction thereover, shall try the case on the merits as if the case was originally filed with it. 8.nd sentence, ,st par., Sec. :, +ule 4#, +$C words not in bold suppliedb. )f the case was tried on the merits by the lower court without jurisdiction over the subject matter, the +egional Trial Court on appeal shall not dismiss the case if it has original jurisdiction thereof but shall decide the case on the merits as of the case was originally filed with it, without prejudice to the admission of amended pleadings and additional evidence in the interest of justice. 8.nd par., in relation to the ,st par., Sec. :, +ule 4#, +$C%?". Con,5ita s-ed Beltran et al.: for -nlawf-l detainer. 05e 20C rendered 8-dgment in 5er favor ordering Beltran et al.: to va,ate: ay reasonable rental and attorneyFs fees. Beltran: et al.: a ealed to t5e R0C. 05e 20C 8-dgment was e7e,-ted ending a eal be,a-se Beltran: et al. failed to file s- ersedeas bond. Beltran: et al.: moved t5e R0C to admit additional eviden,es ,onsisting of a ,ontra,t to sell between t5em and its O-eBon City government ,overing t5e lot in dis -te: and some re,ei ts of ayment: w5i,5 t5e R0C granted. 05e R0C also ,ond-,ted seven I,larifi,atory 5earingsJ d-ring w5i,5 t5e arties resented testimonial eviden,es: as well as ,ond-,ted an o,-lar ins e,tion of t5e dis -ted remises. 05ereafter: t5e R0C rendered 8-dgment reversing t5e 20C de,ision: r-ling t5at Con,5ita 5as no interest to t5e dis -ted ro erty. 05e R0C t5en dismissed 5er ,om laint. Con,5ita filed a etition for ,ertiorari wit5 t5e Co-rt of A eals w5i,5 denied t5e etition and restored ossession to Beltran: et al. .as t5e R0C ,orre,t in reversing t5e 20C6 .5at abo-t t5e CA in restoring ossession to Beltran: et al.6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*RS' 5o, the +TC was in error. +TC in e ercise of appellate jurisdiction could not hear cases de novo. +TC in the e ercise of its appellate jurisdiction, cannot hear the case de novo in the guise of clarificatory hearings during which additional evidence is to be presented by the parties and on ocular inspection conducted. The Court of Appeals erred in granting private respondentsD motion for e ecution pending appeal. Aor, indeed, the case was not with said court on appeal but on a petition for certiorari. Thus, the appellate courtED jurisdiction was only to pass upon the validity of the orders of the +TC in the conduct of clarificatory hearings and ocular inspection. Since the +TC has yet to act on private respondentED motion for e ecution pending appeal, this matter should have been left for resolution by the trial court, not by the Court of Appeals. Although +egional Trial Courts should decide cases on appeal on the basis solely of the record of the proceedings in !unicipal Trial Courts and other courts of e%ual ran7, nonetheless, the principle of estoppel may bar a party from %uestioning the reception of additional evidence, as in this case. )n Ti"am v! Sibong.anoy, the Supreme Court ruled' A party can not invo7e the jurisdiction of a court to secure affirmative relief against his opponent and, after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, repudiate or %uestion that same jurisdiction 8>ean v. >ean, ,3/ $r. /64, :/ A.@.+. "6Aurthermore, it has been held that after voluntarily submitting a cause and encountering an adverse decision on the merits, it is too late for the loser to %uestion the jurisdiction or power of the court 8;ease v. +athbun&Jones etc., .43 H.S. ."3, /, @. ?d. ",0, 3" S. Ct. .:3F St. @ouis etc. v. !cBride, ,4, H.S. ,.", 30 @. ?d. /06- And in @ittleton v. Burgess, ,/ *yo. 0:, the Court said that it is not right for a party who has affirmed and invo7ed the jurisdiction of a court

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?? of %&'

in a particular matter to secure an affirmative relief, to afterwards deny that same jurisdiction to escape a penalty. %?"A. S5o-ld in8-n,tion lie to restrain t5e de,ision in -nlawf-l detainer. ANS.*R/ No. )n @egaspi, the Supreme Court held' *here the action R is one of illegal detainer R and the right of the plaintiff to recover the premises is seriously placed in issue in a proper judicial proceeding, it is more e%uitable and just and less productive of confusion and disturbance of physical possession, with all its concomitant inconvenience and e pense for the court in which the issue of legal possession,, whether involving ownership or not, is brought to restrain, should a petition for preliminary injunction be filed with it, the effects of any order or decision in the unlawful detainer case in order to await the final judgment in the more substantive case involving legal possession or ownership. %?%. (n Re -bli, v. +ar,ellano: %"# P5il. !#%: t5e S- reme Co-rt affirmed t5e de,ision of t5e C4( of Mamboanga City e7 ro riating !@":@@' s9. m. of land t5at is now art of t5e Mamboanga (ntl. Air ort. On 4ebr-ary %?: %CC>: a,ting on t5e basis of a re,onstit-ted title: t5e alleged 5eirs of <-n Ledesma: a defendant in e7 ro riation ,ase ERe -bli, v. +ar,ellanoD for,ibly entered t5e ro erty and ,a-sed t5e b-ilding of a ,on,rete wall se arating t5e ro erty from t5e rest of t5e air ort. Conse9-ently: t5e government filed a ,om laint for for,ible entry: b-t t5e 20C dismissed t5e ,ase. On a eal: R0C: Bran,5 %?: reversed t5e de,ision. Sin,e t5e defendants did not a eal: t5e R0C de,ision be,ame final. (n t5e meantime: t5e 5eirs-defendants filed a ,om laint for a,,ion -bli,iana: alleged t5at t5e government did not ay t5em 8-st ,om ensation: t5e ro erty was not being -sed for t5e -r ose for w5i,5 t5ey were e7 ro riated: t5ey were in ossession: titles to same were in t5eir names: no res 8-di,ata be,a-se t5ere are ot5er arties: et,. 05e ,ase was raffled to R0C: Bran,5 %#. 05e government moved to dismiss t5e ,om laint. (nstead of resolving t5at motion: Bran,5 %# iss-ed a 0RO dated November %@: %CC? dire,ting t5e 20C to ,ease and desist from enfor,ing t5e for,ible entry ,ase de,ision. On De,ember %>: %CC?: t5e ,o-rt iss-ed a writ of of reliminary in8-n,tion e7 laining t5at w5ile t5e for,ible entry ,ase 5ad be,ome final and e7e,-tory: t5e ,laim of owners5i of t5e land and a,t-al o,,- ation t5ereof by t5e 5eirs Easide from t5e fa,t t5at t5ey 5ad not yet been ,om ensated for t5e a ro riated landD: demanded stay of e7e,-tion. .as R0C: Bran,5 %# ,orre,t in iss-ing t5e in8-n,tive writ6 (f not: w5at s5o-ld be t5e remedy of t5e 5eirs-defendants6 ANS.*R' 5o. Although the injunctive writs issued by +TC, Branch ,3 were directed to the !TC, the same had the ultimate effect of preventing the e ecution of the decision of the +TC, Branch ,", a court of e%ual ran7 and jurisdiction. The remedy of the heirs&defendants should have been to oppose the issuance of a writ of e ecution by the !TC on these grounds, instead of as7ing +TC, Branch ,3 to issue a T+$ or a writ of preliminary injunction.
APP*LLA0* <UR(SD(C0(ON O4 COUR0 O4 APP*ALS

%?!. .5at is t5e a Regional 0rial Co-rts 6

ellate 8-risdi,tion of t5e Co-rt of A

eals over de,isions of

ANS.*R' The Court of Appeals shall e ercise ' a. ? clusive original jurisdiction over actions for annulment of judgments of +egional Trial CourtsF and b. ? clusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, or awards of +egional Trial Courts. 8Sec. 6, B.;. Blg. ,.6 paraphrasing supplied%?#. .5at may not be a ealed 6

ANS.*R' 8a- An order denying a motion for new trial or reconsiderationF 8b- An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion see7ing relief from judgmentF

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?@ of %&'

8c- An interlocutory orderF 8d- An order disallowing or dismissing an appealF 8e- An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession or compromise on the ground of fraud, mista7e or duress, or any other ground vitiating consentF 8f- An order of e ecutionF 8g- A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties or in separate claims, counterclaims, cross&claims and third&party complaints, while the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefromF and 8h- An order dismissing an action without prejudice. 8.nd par., Sec. ,, +ule 4,, +$C%?#A. .5at is t5e remedy w5ere t5e 8-dgment: order: et,.: is not a ealable6 ANS.*R' *here the judgment or final order is not appealable, the aggrieved party may file an appropriate special civil action under +ule /0. 8last sentence, Sec. ,, +ule 4,, +$C%?#B. .5at may be a ealed6

ANS.*R/ An appeal may be ta7en from a judgment or final order that completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter herein when declared by the +ules of Court to be appealable. 8,st par., Sec. ,, +ule 4,, +$C A judgment or order denying relief under +ule 3: is final and appealable, unli7e an order granting such relief which is interlocutory. Cence, jurisdiction then properly belonged to the Court of Appeals. %?#C. Denial of motion for re,onsideration not a ealable.

ANS.*R/ The failure to perfect an appeal within the reglementary period is not a mere technicality. )t raises a jurisdictional problem as it deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction over the appeal. The failure to file the notice of appeal within the reglementary period is a7in to the failure to pay the appeal fee within the prescribed period. A %?&. eals 6 1ow are a eals taAen from t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt to t5e Co-rt of

ANS.*R' ,- Appeal in ordinary ,ases/ a- Ailing of notice of appeal with the +egional Trial Court that rendered the judgment or order appealed from. 8Sec. . KaL, +ule 4,, +$Cb- ;ayment of the appellate doc7et fee and other lawful fees to the +egional Trial Court. 8Sec. 4, +ule 4,, +$Cc- *ithin fifteen 8,0- days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. 8Sec. 3, +ule 4,, +$C.- Appeals in s e,ial ro,eedings and other cases wherein multiple appeals are allowed' a- Ailing of a notice of appeal and record on appeal with the +egional Trial Court that rendered the judgment or order appealed from. 8Sec. . KaL, +ule 4., +$Cb- ;ayment of the appellate doc7et fee and other lawful fees. 8Sec. 4, +ule 4,, +$Cc- *ithin thirty 83#- days after notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. 8Sec. 3, +ule 4,, +$C3- Appeals of judgments in e7er,ise of a ellate 8-risdi,tion' a- Ailing of verified petition for review with the Court of Appeals. 8Sec. ,, +ule 4., +$Cb- ;ayment of doc7et and other lawful fees and deposit of ;0##.## for costs. 8Sec. ,, +ule 4., +$Cc- *ithin fifteen 8,0- days from notice of the decision sought to be reviewed or of the denial of the petitionerEs motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after judgment.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages ?C of %&'

d- Additional period of fifteen 8,0- days, only after motion for e tension, payment of doc7eting and other lawful fees and further e tension of fifteen 8,0- days only for the most compelling reasons. 8Sec. ,, +ule 4., +$CAPP*AL 4RO2 C0A: OUAS(-<UD(C(AL A+*NC(*S 0O CA

%?'. 1ow are a eals taAen from t5e Co-rt of 0a7 A agen,ies to t5e Co-rt of A eals6

eals and 9-asi-8-di,ial

ANS.*R' A eals from t5e Co-rt of 0a7 A eals and 9-asi-8-di,ial agen,ies li7e the Civil Service Commission, Central Board of Assessment Appeals, Securities and ? change Commission, $ffice of the ;resident, @and +egistration Authority, Social Security Commission, Civil Aeronautics Board, Bureau of ;atents, Trademar7s and Technology Transfer, national ?lectrification Administration, ?ntergy +egulatory Board, 5ational Telecommunications Commission, >epartment of Agrarian +eform under +epublic Act 5o. //0", <S)S, ?mployees compensation commission, ;hilippine Atomic ?nergy Commission, Board of )nvestments, Construction )ndustry Arbitration Commission and voluntary arbitrators authoriIed by law to t5e Co-rt of A eals' ,- Appeal through verified petition for review filed with the Court of Appeals. 8Sec. 0, +ule 43, +$C.- ;ayment to cler7 of court of the Court of Appeals the doc7eting and other lawful fees and ;0##.## deposit for costs. 8Sec. 0, +ule 43, +$C3- *ithin fifteen 8,0- days from notice of award, judgment, order or date of last publication if re%uired. 8Sec. 4, +ule 43, +$C4- Additional time of fifteen 8,0- days only may be granted after motion for e tension, payment of doc7et and other lawful fees and deposit for costs and further e tension for the most compelling reasons and in no case to e ceed fifteen 8,0- days. 8Sec. 4, +ule 43, +$CAPP*AL 0O 01* SUPR*2* COUR0

%?>. 1ow is an a

eal by ,ertiorari taAen to t5e S- reme Co-rt 6

ANS.*R' Appeal from the Co-rt of A eals: t5e Sandiganbayan: t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt or other courts whenever authoriIed by law to t5e S- reme Co-rt' ,- Appeal only through verified petition for review on certiorari raising only %uestions of law and filed with the Supreme Court. 8Sec. ,, +ule 40, +$C.- ;ayment of doc7et fee and other lawful fees to the cler7 of court of the Supreme Court with deposit of ;0##.## for costs. 3- *ithin fifteen 8,0- days from notice of the judgment or order appealed from, or of denial of petitionerEs motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time after notice of judgment. 4- ? tension to file petition for a period of thirty 83#- days only may be granted for justifiable reasons, on motion duly served and with full payment of doc7et and other lawful fees and deposit for costs. 8Sec. ., +ule 40, +$C%?>A. .5at is t5e s,o e of t5e review by t5e S- reme Co-rt in a etition for review on certiorari as a mode of a eal -nder R-le &' of t5e R-les of Co-rt6 ANS.*R' $nly those errors committed by the Court of Appeals and not by the trial court. Authermore, only %uestions of law may be raised and passed upon. Absent any whimsical or capricious e ercise of judgment, and unless the lac7 of any basis for the conclusions made by the lower courts be amply demonstrated, the Supreme Court will not disturb their findings.
*=*CU0(ONS: (N +*N*RAL

%??. Does t5e ,o-rt 5ave a-t5ority to amend 8-dgments w5i,5 are not yet final 6 ANS.*R' (es. A court has the inherent power to amend and control its process and orders so as to ma7e them conformable to law and justice 8Sec. 0 KgL, +ule ,30, +$C-, and when it finds that the ends of justice would be better served, the court may disregard technicalities and amend its order or process that has not become final.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @" of %&'

%??A. +ive instan,es w5ere a ,o-rt 5as a-t5ority to amend 8-dgments t5at are already final. ANS.*R/ Clerical errors or mista7es or omissions plainly due to inadvertence or negligence may be corrected or supplied after the judgment has been entered. *here there is an ambiguity caused by an omission or mista7e in the dispositive portion of a decision the court may clarify such ambiguity by an amendment even after the judgment had become final, and for this purpose it may resort to the pleadings filed by the parties, the courtEs findings of facts and conclusions of law as e pressed in the body of the decision. %?@. .5at is t5e remedy w5ere an e7e,-ted 8-dgment was reversed b-t t5e f-nds were already garnis5ed 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' )n case the e ecuted judgment is reversed, the Supreme Court instead of ordering the judgment creditor to return funds that have been improperly garnished pursuant to an order of e ecution pending appeal, directed the judgment debtor to proceed against the bond filed by the judgment creditor. This is supported by +ule 36, Sec. 0 of the ,66" +ules of Civil ;rocedure which provides that, where the e ecuted judgment is reversed totally or partially, or annulled, on appeal or otherwise, the trial court may, on motion, issue such orders of restitution or reparation of damages as e%uity and justice may warrant under the circumstances. As garnishment is a specie of attachment, the procedure provided in +ule 0", Section .# of the +ules of Court for the recovery of damages against a bond in case of irregular attachment should be applied. This means that notice should be given to the surety and that there should be a hearing before it is held liable on its bond.
*=*CU0(ON AS A 2A00*R O4 R(+10

%?C. .5en s5all e7e,-tion iss-e - on 8-dgments or final orders 6 ANS.*R' a. ? ecution shall issue as a matter of right, on motion upon a judgment or order that disposes of the action or proceeding upon the e piration of the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected. b. )f the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the e ecution may forthwith be applied for in the court of origin, on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting therewith certified true copies of the judgment or judgments or final order or orders sought to be enforced and of the entry thereof, with notice to the adverse party. c. The appellate court may, on motion in the same case, when the interest of justice, direct the court of origin to issue the writ of e ecution. 8Sec. ,, +ule 36, +$C%?CA. Cite instan,es w5en e7e,-tion iss-es as a matter of rig5t. ANS.*R/ ,- ? ecution shall issue as a matter of right, on motion upon a judgment or order that disposes of the action or proceeding upon the e piration of the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected. 8,st par., Sec. ,, +ule 36, +$C.- )f the appeal has been duly perfected and finally resolved, the e ecution may forthwith be applied for in the court of origin, on motion of the judgment obligee, submitting therewith certified true copies of the judgment or judgments or final order or orders sought to be enforced and of the entry thereof, with notice to the adverse party. 8.nd par., Ibid!3- Judgments in actions for injunction, receivership, accounting and support, and such other judgments as are now or may hereafter be declared to be immediately e ecutory, shall be enforceable after their rendition and shall not be stayed by an appeal ta7en therefrom, unless otherwise ordered by the trial court. 8,st sentence, ,st par. Sec 4, +ule 36, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied4- )n forcible entry and unlawful detainer, )f judgment is rendered against the defendant, e ecution shall issue immediately upon motion unless the defendant complies with the re%uisites for staying e ecution. 8Sec. ,6, +ule "#, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @% of %&'

0- )n forcible entry and unlawful detainer, The judgment of the +egional Trial Court in aid of its appellate jurisdiction against the defendant shall be immediately e ecutory, without prejudice to a further appeal to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court that may be ta7en therefrom. 8Sec. .,, +ule "#%?CB. .5en may interlo,-tory order be enfor,ed by e7e,-tion6 ANS.*R/ An order granting support pendente lite, although interlocutory, may be enforced by e ecution. 8Sec. ,, +ule /,, +$C%@". Disting-is5 a final 8-dgment from a 8-dgment t5at 5as be,ome final and e7e,-tory. ANS.*R' A Gfinal judgmentG becomes final - on t5e e7 iration of t5e eriod to a eal t5erefrom if no a eal 5as been d-ly erfe,ted 8Sec. ,, +ule 36, +$C-, or an appeal therefrom having been ta7en, the judgment of the appellate tribunal in turn becomes final and the records of the case are returned to the court of origin. The Gfinal judgmentG is then correctly categoriIed as a Gfinal and e ecutory judgmentG in respect to which, as the law e plicitly provides, *7e,-tion s5all iss-e as a matter of rig5t 8Sec. ,, +ule 36, +$C-,. )t bears stressing that only a final judgment or order, i.e. a 8-dgment or order t5at dis oses of t5e a,tion of ro,eeding can become final and e ecutory.
D(SCR*0(ONARL *=*CU0(ON

%@%. 1ow may dis,retion e7e,-tion or e7e,-tion ending a

eal be availed of 6

ANS.*R' a. $n motion of the prevailing party with notice to the adverse party filed in the trial court while it has jurisdiction over the case and is in possession of either the original record or the record on appeal, as the case may be, at the time of the filing of such motion, said court may, in its discretion, order e ecution of a judgment or final order even before the e piration of the period to appeal. b. After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for e ecution pending appeal may be filed in the appellate court. c. >iscretionary e ecution may only issue upon good reasons to be stated in a special order after due hearing. 8Sec. . KaL, +ule 36, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied%@%A. 1ow may e7e,-tion of several: se arate or artial 8-dgments made6 ANS.*R/ A several, separate or partial judgment may be e ecuted under the same terms and conditions as e ecution of a judgment or final order pending appeal. 8Sec. . KbL, +ule 3, +$C%@%B. .5en motion for e7e,-tion ending a eal of dis,retionary e7e,-tion filed.

ANS.*R/ ,- *hile the trial court has jurisdiction over the case and is in possession of either the original record or the record on appeal, as the case may be, at the time of the filing of such motion, said court may, in its discretion, order e ecution of a judgment or final order even before the e piration of the period to appeal. .- After the trial court has lost jurisdiction, the motion for e ecution pending appeal may be filed in the appellate court. 8,st and .nd pars., Sec. . KaL, +ule 36, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied%@%C. .5at are t5e gro-nds for iss-ing e7e,-tion ending a e7e,-tion6 eal or dis,retionary

ANS.*R/ >iscretionary e ecution may only issue upon good reasons to be stated in a special order after due hearing. 8last par., Sec. . KaL, +ule 36, +$C%@%D. Cite good reasons for e7e,-tion ending a eal.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @! of %&'

ANS.*R/ a. *here the judgment is for the necessary support of an heirF b. *here the education of the person to be supported would be unduly delayed if financial assistance is to be rendered only after termination of the appeal. c. *hen the appeal is being ta7en for the purpose of delay d. *hen there is danger of the judgment becoming ineffectual because the judgment debtor, a foreign corporation, is withdrawing its business from the countryF and e. *hen advance e ecution of an order authoriIing the removal of a regular administrator is necessary to protect the estate from mismanagement. a %@%*. eal. Cite gro-nds t5at ,o-ld NO0 <US0(4L iss-an,e of e7e,-tion ending

ANS.*R/ ,- Actual and immediate danger of insolvency. ?ven the danger of e tinction of prevailing the corporation will not per se justify a discretionary e ecution unless there are showings of other good reasons, such as for instance, impending insolvency of the adverse party or the appeal being patently dilatory. But even so, it is not for the trial judge to determine the merit of a decision he rendered as this is the role of the appellate court .- ;osting of a bond to answer for damages is not alone a sufficient reason for ordering e ecution pending appeal. The filing of a bond does not constitute a good reason. 5evertheless, the trial court may re%uire the filing of a bond as a condition for the issuance of a corresponding writ of e ecution to answer for the payment of damages which the aggrieved party may suffer by reason of the e ecution pending appeal. 8+amas, et al., supra%@%4. .5at is t5e remedy if e7e,-tion ending a eal is im ro er6

ANS.*R/ &ertiorari is the proper remedy where the grant of e ecution pending appeal is not founded upon good reasons. Appeal is not a speedy and ade%uate remedy that can relieve the losing party from the immediate effects of an improvident e ecution pending appeal. %@%+. .5en may dis,retionary e7e,-tion stayed6 ANS.*R' Stay of discretionary e ecution' ,- >iscretionary e ecution issued .- may be stayed upon approval by the proper court of a sufficient supersedeas bond 3- filed by the party against whom it is directed, a- conditioned upon the performance of the judgment or order allowed to be e ecuted b- in case it shall be finally sustained in whole or in part. c- The bond thus given may be proceeded against on motion with notice to the surety. 8Sec. 3, +ule 36, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied%@!. .5at s5o-ld be done to stay t5e e7e,-tion in -nlawf-l detainer or for,ible entry ,ases d-ring t5e enden,y of an a eal before t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt 6 ANS.*R' An appeal is perfected and the defendant to stay e ecution files a sufficient supersedeas bond, approved by the !unicipal Trial Court and e ecuted on favor of the plaintiff to pay the rents, damages, and costs accruing down to the time of the judgment appealed from. 8Sec. ,6, +ule ",, +$CPROC*DUR* 4OR *=*CU0(ON AND SA0(S4AC0(ON O4 <UD+2*N0

%@#. .5en may a 8-dgment be e7e,-ted by mere motion 6 ANS.*R' A final and e ecutory judgment or order may be e ecuted on motion within five 80- years from the date of its entry. 8,st sentence, Sec. /, +ule 36, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @# of %&'

%@&. .5at is t5e ,on,e t of a dormant 8-dgment 6 ANS.*R' A dormant judgment is one which has not been enforced by action within five 80- years after its entry and is, therefore, reduced to a mere right of action in favor of the judgment&creditor. )t may be enforced by action. %@&A. Cite e7,e tions to t5e dormant 8-dgment r-le or instan,es w5ere e7e,-tion may be 5ad on mere motion des ite t5e la se of t5e firve year eriod. ANS.*R/ ,- Judgment for support which does not become dormant, nor does it prescribe, e cept as to installments not collected during the period fi ed by the statute of limitations, and it is enforceable by motion at any time. Aurthermore, since the obligation is a continuing one, the court never loses jurisdiction to enforce the same. .- Hpon meritorious grounds or upon e%uity. Thus, if the delays were through no fault of the prevailing party, the delays should not be included in computing the five 80- year period. The e ceptions have one common denominator, and that is the delay is caused or occasioned by actions of the judgment debtor andMor is incurred for his benefit or advantage. 8Ibid%@'. .5en may a 8-dgment be e7e,-ted by a,tion 6 ANS.*R' After the lapse of five 80- years from date of its entry, and before it is barred by the statute of limitations, a judgment may be enforced by action. 8.nd sentence, Sec. /, +ule 36, +$C%@'A. .5at is t5e nat-re of t5e a,tion6 ANS.*R/ The action for enforcement of a dormant judgment is an ordinary civil action, the object of which is two&fold, namely' ,- To revive the dormant judgmentF and .- To e ecute the judgment reviving it, if it grants the plaintiff any relief. Cence, the rights of the judgment&creditor depend upon the second judgment. Being an ordinary civil action, it is subject to all defenses, objections and counterclaims which the judgment&debtor may have e cept that no in%uiry can be made as to the merits of the first judgment. Therefore, defenses that do not go to the merits of the first judgment, such as lac7 of jurisdiction, collusion, fraud, prescription, or satisfaction of the judgment, may be set&up by the judgment&debtor. The revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within five 80- years from the date of its entry and thereafter by action before it is barred by the statute of limitations. 8last sentence, Sec. /, +ule 36, +$C*=*CU0(ON (N CAS* O4 D*A01 O4 PAR0L

%@>. 1ow is e7e,-tion effe,ted in ,ase of t5e deat5 of a arty 6 ANS.*R' 8a- )n case of the death of the judgment obligee, upon the application of his e ecutor or administrator, or successor in interestF 8b- )n case of the death of the judgment obligor, against his e ecutor or administrator or successor in interest,if the judgment be for the recovery of real or personal property, or the enforcement of a lien thereonF 8c- )n case of the death of the judgment obligor, after e ecution is actually levied upon any of his property, the same may be sold for the satisfaction of the judgment obligation, and the officer ma7ing the sale shall account to the corresponding e ecutor or administrator for any surplus in his hands. 8Sec. ", +ule 36, +$CPROC**D(N+S .1*R* PROP*R0L CLA(2*D BL 01(RD P*RSON

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @& of %&'

%@@. .5at ro,eedings are to be -ndertaAen w5ere t5e ro erty is ,laimed by a t5ird erson 6 ANS.*R' )f the property levied on is claimed by any person other than the judgment obligor or his agent, and such person ma7es an affidavit of his title thereto or right to the possession thereof, stating the grounds of such right or title, and serves the same upon the officer ma7ing the levy and a copy thereof upon the judgment obligee, the officer shall not be bound to 7eep the property, unless such judgment obligee, on demand of the officer files a bond approved by the court to indemnify the third&party claimant in a sum not less than the value of the property levied on. )n case of disagreement as to such value, the same shall be determined by the court issuing the writ of e ecution. 5o claim for damages for the ta7ing or 7eeping of the property may be enforced against the bond unless he action therefor is filed within one hundred twenty 8,.#- days from the date of the filing of the bond. The officer shall not be liable for damages for the ta7ing or 7eeping of the property , to any third&party claimant if such bond is filed. 5othing herein contained shall prevent such claimant or any third person from vindicating his claim to the property in a separate action, or prevent the judgment obligee from claiming damages in the same or a separate action against a third&party claimant who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious claim. 8,st and .nd pars., Sec. ,/, +ule 36, +$CR*D*2P0(ON O4 PROP*R0L SOLD ON *=*CU0(ON

%@C. .5at is meant by t5e rig5t of redem tion 6 ANS.*R' The right of a judgment debtor or redemptioner to buy bac7 from the purchaser of the proper sold at public auction by virtue of a writ of e ecution at anytime within the reglementary period. +edemption may be made in by the following persons' 8a- The judgment obligor, or his successor in interest in the whole or any part of the propertyF 8b- A creditor having a lien by virtue of an attachment, judgment or mortgage on the property sold, or on some part thereof, subse%uent to the lien under which the property was sold. Such redeeming creditor is termed as a redemptioner.
R*2*D(*S O4 <UD+2*N0 CR*D(0OR (N A(D O4 *=*CU0(ON

%C". .5at remedies may be availed of by a 8-dgment ,reditor in aid of e7e,-tion 6 ANS.*R' a. )f e ecution is returned unsatisfied, he may cause e amination of the judgment&debtor as o his property and income 8Sec. 3/, +ule 36, +$C-F b. Ce may cause e amination of the debtor of the judgment&debtor as to any debt owed by him to the judgment&debtor or as to any other property of the judgment&debtor in his possession 8Sec. 3", Ibid!-F c. )f after e amination the court finds that there is property of the judgment&debtor either in his own hands or in that of any other person, the court may order the property applied to the satisfaction of the judgment 8Sec. 4#, Ibid!-F d. )f the court finds that the earnings of the judgment&debtor are more than sufficient for his familyEs needs, it may order payment of the judgment in installments 8Ibid!-F e. The court may appoint a receiver for property of the judgment&debtor not e empt from e ecution, or forbid a transfer or other disposition of or interference with such property 8Sec. 4,, +ule 36, +$C-F f. )f the court finds that the judgment&debtor has an ascertainable interest in real property either as mortgagor, mortgagee, or otherwise, and his interest can be ascertained without controversy, the court may order the sale of such interest 8Sec. 4.g. )f the person alleged to have property of the judgment&debtor or to be indebted to him claims an adverse interest in the property, or denies the debt, the court may authoriIe the judgment&creditor to institute action to recover the property, forbid transfer of the property until the action can be commenced and prosecuted to judgment, and may punish disobedience of such order as contempt 8Sec. 43, Ibid!-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @' of %&'

01* PRO)(S(ONAL R*2*D(*S PR*L(2(NARL A00AC12*N0

%C%. = s-ed L for a s-m of money. L is leaving t5e P5ili ines wit5 intent to defra-d ,reditors. 1en,e: = a lied for and was granted e7- arte a writ of reliminary atta,5ment w5i,5 was immediately im lemented by t5e s5eriff. L now moves to dis,5arge t5e atta,5ment be,a-se it was iss-ed and im lemented rior to servi,e of s-mmons. On t5e ot5er 5and: = 9-otes Se,. !: R-le '?: w5i,5 rovides t5at: Ian order of atta,5ment may be iss-ed eit5er e7- arte or - on motion wit5 noti,e and 5earing by t5e ,o-rt in w5i,5 t5e a,tion is ending 777J 1e liAewise adverts to Se,. % of t5e same R-le w5i,5 rovides t5at: IAt t5e ,ommen,ement of t5e a,tion or at any time before entry of 8-dgment: a laintiff or any ro er arty may 5ave t5e ro erty of t5e adverse arty atta,5ed as se,-rity for t5e satisfa,tion of any 8-dgment t5at may be re,overed 777J 4inally: 5e ,ontends t5at t5e s-bse9-ent servi,e of s-mmons ,-red any infirmities t5at may 5ave attended t5e iss-an,e and im lementation of t5e writ. R-le on t5e motion to dis,5arge t5e atta,5ment. *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' The motion to discharge the attachment is granted. The issuance of the writ of attachment prior to service of summons was valid, but the same must be implemented together with or after service of the summons. The subse%uent service of summons does not cure the defect of failure to serve the summons at the time of the implementation of the writ. %C!. IAJ owns an anti9-e wood ,arving val-ed at P#'":"""."" w5i,5 5e lent to IBJ for e75ibition d-ring t5e ina-g-ration of t5e latterFs art gallery. After t5e ina-g-ration: IBJ bro-g5t t5e ainting to 5is 5o-se in O-eBon City w5ere 5e 5-ng it in 5is sala. Des ite IAFsJ n-mero-s demands for t5e ret-rn of t5e ainting IBJ ref-sed. (f yo- were IAFsJ attorney: w5at legal ste s wo-ld yo- taAe to rote,t t5e interest of IAJ and in w5at ,o-rt s5o-ld yo- bring t5e s-it 6 ANS.*R' ) would bring a suit for the recovery of the wood carving with a prayer for an order for the delivery of the property to 1A2. ) would file the case before the +TC since the action is one which not capable of pecuniary estimation. %C!A. .5at are t5e re9-irements to sort an a li,ation for re levin6

ANS.*R/ The applicant must show by his own affidavit or that of some other person who personally 7nows the facts' a- That the applicant is the owner of the property particularly describing it, or is entitled to the possession thereofF b- That the property is wrongly detained by the adverse party, alleging the cause of detention thereof according to the best of his 7nowledge, information and beliefF c- That the property has not been distrained or ta7en for a ta assessment or a fine pursuant to law, or seiIed under a writ of e ecution or preliminary attachment, or otherwise placed under custodia legis, or if so seiIed, that it is e empt from such seiIure or custodyF and d- The actual mar7et value of the property. The applicant must also give a bond, e ecuted to the adverse party in double the value of the property as stated in the affidavit aforementioned, for the return of the property to the adverse party if such return be adjudged, and for the payment to the adverse party of such sum as he may recover from the applicant in the action. C 8Sec. ., +ule /#, +$C%C#A. Disting-is5 ,ertiorari as a s e,ial ,ivil a,tion -nder R-le >' from ,ertiorari as a mode of a eal -nder R-le &' of t5e R-les of Co-rt. ANS.*R' The following are the distinctions' a. Certiorari as a s e,ial ,ivil a,tion is within the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals and the +egional Trial Courts *C)@? ,ertiorari as a mode of a eal is within the jurisdiction only of the Supreme Court.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @> of %&'

b. The grounds for ,ertiorari -nder R-le >' are lac7 or e cess of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion *C)@? the grounds for certiorari under R-le &' are errors of law. c. Hnder R-le >' the public respondents should be joined *C)@? under R-le &', they need not be joined. %C#B. .5at is t5e basi, iss-e in a s-it for -nlawf-l detainer 6 ANS.*R' Solely the issue of physical or material possession over the property or possession de )acto, that is, who between the plaintiff and the defendant has a better right to possess the property in %uestion. %C&. (n ,ase of several demands in a s-it for -nlawf-l detainer w5en s5o-ld t5e 8-risdi,tional date of one year be ,o-nted 6 ANS.*R' Arom the last demand. %C'. Co-ld t5ere be e8e,tment of ossessors by mere toleran,e 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' (es. ;ossession by tolerance is lawful, but such possession becomes unlawful upon demand to vacate made by the owner and the possessor by tolerance refuses to comply with such demand. A person who occupies the land of another at the latterEs tolerance or permission, without any contract between them, is necessarily bound by an implied promise that he will vacate upon demand, failing which, a summary action for ejectment is the proper remedy against him. The possessorEs status is analogous to that of a lessee or tenant whose term of lease has e pired but whose occupancy continued by tolerance of the owner. )n sauch case, the unlawful deprivation or withholding of possession is to be counted from the date of the demand to vacate. %C>. .5y is 8-dgment in an -nlawf-l detainer ,ase immediate e7e,-tory 6 ANS.*R' To prevent further damage to the plaintiff arising from the loss of possession of the property in %uestion. %C?. .5at are t5e re9-isites to stay t5e immediate e7e,-tion of a 8-dgment in an -nlawf-l detainer ,ase 6 ANS.*R' a. The defendant perfects his appealF b. Ce files a supersedeas bondF c. Ce periodically deposits the rentals which become due during the pendency of the appeal. 8Sec. :, +ule "# %CC. .5at is a s- ersedeas bond 6 ANS.*R' This is a bond filed to stay the immediate e ecution of a judgment, in an unlawful detainer case, in favor of the plaintiff. )t is e%uivalent to the amount of rentals, damages and costs stated in the judgment.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @? of %&'

CR(2(NAL PROC*DUR* E!""" R-les of Criminal Pro,ed-reD +*N*RAL CONC*P0S 4LO. O4 CR(2(NAL PROC*DUR* B*4OR* PR*L(2(NARL (N)*S0(+A0(ON. D*0*R2(N* a. The offense ,- >esignation of the offense .- ;lace of commission of the offense 3- >ate of commission of the offense b. Cause of the accusation c. Subsistence of right of action ,- ;rescription .- >ouble jeopardy d. ;arties ,- +espondent .- ;rivate offended party e. Arrests, searches and seiIures f. +ights of the accused g. ? istence of cause of action ,- ;rescription .- >ouble jeopardy PR*L(2(NARL (N)*S0(+A0(ON a. *hen conducted ;enalty prescribed is at least four 84- years, two 8.- months and one 8,day without regard to fine B*4OR* 4(L(N+ .(01 01* COUR0 a. >octrine of prior resort b. Alternative dispute resolution and precondition ,- +eferral under Katarrungang Pambarangay c. Selection of court ,- Jurisdiction .- 9enue 3- Summary procedure d. ;leadings ,- Complaint Minformation a- *ho files b- Aorm c- >uplicity .- Amendments 3- ? tinction of criminal liability 4- >ouble jeopardy 0- *itnesses /- Bail recommended "- Civil liability :- ;rovisional remedies 4(L(N+ .(01 01* COUR0 a. )ntervention of the private offended party A40*R 4(L(N+ .(01 COUR0 B*4OR* 0R(AL a. Arrest b. Bail c. !otion to %uash d. Arraignment and plea e. ;re&trial

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @@ of %&'

f. ? amination of witnesses 0R(AL a. $rder of trial b. Consolidation c. >ischarge of accused for use as state witness d. ? clusion of public e. Actg. public prosecutor A40*R 0R(AL a. !otion for judgment on demurrer to evidence b. Judgment c. !otion for new trial d. !otion for reconsideration APP*AL PROBA0(ON S*R)(C* O4 S*N0*NC* B*4OR* PR*L(2(NARL (N)*S0(+A0(ON (S 01*R* A )(OLA0(ON O4 SUBS0AN0()* P*NAL LA. 6 Aamiliar is the concept of nullum crimen, nulla peoena sine lege! There is no crime unless there is a law that punishes it. Before preliminary investigation there must first be a determination of whether or not there is a crime. $therwise, there is no need to proceed to the preliminary investigation to determine the culpability of a person so he could be held for trial. $ther considerations would be to determine the particular designation of the offense, the place and time where it was committed. Ainally, there must be a determination of how the respondent committed the crime. DO*S 01* R(+10 O4 AC0(ON SUBS(S0 6 )t is li7ewise at this point where a determination is made whether the right to file the criminal action still subsists. *hether the crime or the penalty has already prescribed, or whether or not the concept of double jeopardy finds application. .1O AR* 01* PAR0(*S 6 *ho is the accused and who is the private offended party, if any = These %uestions must be resolved in order to 7now whom to call during the preliminary investigation. S*ARC1 AND S*(MUR* %. .5at are t5e re9-isites for iss-ing a sear,5 warrant 6 ANS.*R' A search warrant shall not issue but upon probable cause in connection with one specific offense to be determined personally by the judge after e amination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the things to be seiIed which may be anywhere in the ;hilippines. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,./, +$C%A. Cite instan,es of valid warrantless sear,5es and seiB-res. ANS.*R/ ,- Search incident to a lawful arrest. A erson lawf-lly arrested may be sear,5ed for dangero-s wea ons or anyt5ing w5i,5 may 5ave been -sed or ,onstit-te roof in t5e ,ommission of an offense wit5o-t a sear,5 warrant. 8Sec. ,3, +ule ,./, +$C.- SeiIure of evidence in Gplain view.G 3- Search of a moving vehicle. Cighly regulated by the government, the vehicleEs inherent mobility reduces e pectations of privacy especially when its transit in public

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages @C of %&'

thoroughfares furnishes a highly reasonable suspicion amounting to probable cause that the occupant committed a criminal activity. 4- Consented warrantless search. 0- Customs searches. /- 0erry sear,5' GStop and fris7G is a Glimited protective search of outer clothing for weapons.G *hile probable cause is not re%uired to conduct a Gstop and fris7,G mere suspicion or a hunch will not invalidate it. %B. Cite a ,ase w5ere an invalid sear,5 of ve5i,le was ,-red by ,onsent of owner. 8;eople v. ?scano, January .:, .###-. ANS.*R/ 5ot all chec7points are illegal. Those which are warranted by the e igencies of public order and are conducted in a way least intrusive to motorists are allowed. Aor as long as the vehicle is neither searched nor its occupants subjected to a body search, and the inspection of the vehicle is limited to a visual search, siad routine chec7s cannot be regarded as violative of an individualDs right against unreasonable search. )n fact, these routine chec7s, when conducted in a fi ed area, are even less intrusive. 8Ibid!%C. Dis,-ss t5e lain view do,trine. ANS.*R' $bjects falling within the plain view of an officer who has a right to be in the position to have that view are subject to seiIure even without a search warrant and may be introduced in evidence. The 1plain view2 doctrine applies when the following re%uisites concur' ,- the law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a prior justification for an instrusion or is in a position from which he can view a particular areaF .- the discovery of the evidence in plain view is inadvertentF 3- it is immediiaely appratent to the officer that the item he observes may be evidence of a crime, contrabannd or otherwise subject to seiIure. The law enforcemenrt officer must lawfully ma7e an initial intrusion or properly be in a position from which he can particularly view the area. )n the course of such lawful intrusion, he came inadvertently across a piece of evidence incriminating the accused. The object must be open to eye and hand and its discovery inadvertent. %D. Dis,-ss sear,5 in,idental to lawf-l arrest. ANS.*R/ A person lawfully arrested may be searched for dangerous weapons or anything which may be used as proof of the commissionof the offense. The search may e tend beyond the person of the one arrested to include the permissible area or surroundings within his immediate control. The lawful arrest being the sole justification for the validity of the warrantless search under the e ception, the same must be limited to and circumscribed by the subject, time and place of the arrest. As to subject, the warrantless search is sanctioned only with respect to the person of the suspect, and things that may be seiIed from hom are limited to 1dangerous weapons2 or 1anything which may be used as proof off the commission of the offense.2 *ith respect to time and place of the warrantless search, it must be contemporaneous with the lawful arrest. Stated otherwise, to be valid the search must be conducted at about the time of the arrest or immediately thereafter and only at the place where the suspect was arrested, or the premises or surroundings under his immediate control. %*. .5i,5 ,o-rt 5as a-t5ority to iss-e sear,5 warrant6 ANS.*R/ A search warrant is merely a process issued by the court in the e ercise of its ancillary jurisdiction and not a criminal action which it may entertain pursuant to its original jurisdiction. The authority to issue search warrants is in5erent in all ,o-rts and may be effected outside their territorial jurisdiction. The +ules of Court as amended re%uires the certification of no forum shopping only from initiatory pleadings, omitting any mention of 1applications.2 The old Supreme Court Circular #4&64, the old rule on the matter, re%uired such certification even from 1applications.2 The

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C" of %&'

absence of such certification will not result in the dismissal of an application for search warrant. 8Ibid!!. .5at are t5e re9-isites to be ,om lied wit5 before a warrantless sear,5 be ,onsidered as valid be,a-se ,onsent was given 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' )n case of consented searches or waiver of the constitutional guarantee, against obtrusive searches, it is fundamental that to constitute a waiver, it must first appear that' a. The right e istsF b. The person involved had 7nowledge, either actual or constructive, of the e istence of such rightF and c. The said person had an actual intention to relin%uish the right. 5$T?S A5> C$!!?5TS' There was valid consented search where the accused accmpanied police officers to his house in order to surrender his share of the ransom money. Ce even brought them to his room upstairs. The consent of the owner of the house to the search effectively removed any badge of illegality, 8;eople v. >eang, August .4, .####. A oli,e atrol team: res onding to a bomb t5reat re,eived earlier: a,,osted a groersons standing on a ,orner street. 05ey were allegedly a,ting s-s i,io-sly wit5 Gt5eir eyes moving fast.G As t5ey were a roa,5ed t5e gro- fled and were ,5ased by t5e oli,e. 2ala,at was among t5ese ersons w5o was ,5ased and w5en ,a-g5t: was sear,5ed. D-ring t5e sear,5 t5e oli,e re ortedly fo-nd a fragmentation grenade t-,Aed inside 5is front waist line. (s t5e seiB-re an in,ident to a lawf-l arrest 6 ANS.*R/ 5o. There is a difference between the concepts of Gstop and fris7G search and of search incidental to a lawful arrest where a precedent arrest determines the validity of the incidental search. Cere there could be no valid warrantless arrest in )lagrante delicto nor a Ghot pursuitG arrest preceding the search because of the lac7 of personal 7nowledge on the part of the arresting office or an overt physical act on the part of the accused, indicating that a crime had just been committed, was being committed, or was going to be committed. R(+10S O4 01* ACCUS*D &. .5ile Andan was in ,-stody: 5e was visited by t5e mayor and in t5e resen,e of t5e media ,onfessed to 5aving ra ed and Ailled t5e vi,tim. (s t5e ,onfession to t5e mayor and t5e media admissible in eviden,e 6 Reason o-t yo-r answer briefly. ANS.*R' (es. The confession to the mayor is not one made under custodial investigation but a spontaneous statement, not elicited through %uestioning by the authorities but given in an ordinary manner. *hat the Constitution bars is the compulsory disclosure of incriminating facts or confessions. The prohibition against self&incrimination are guaranteed to preclude the slightest use of coercion by the state as would lead the accused to admit something false, not to prevent him from freely and voluntarily telling the truth. The media confessions were given free from any undue influence from the police authorities. There was no coercive atmosphere in the interview made by the reporters, neither were they acting under the direction and control of the police. Ainally, the Bill of +ights does not concern itself with the relation between a private individual and another individual. )t lays down limitations on governmental power to protect the individual against aggression and unwarranted interference by any department of the government and its agencies. &A. (s t5e taAing of i,t-res of an a,,-sed wit5o-t assistan,e of ,o-nsel a violation of 5is rig5ts to self-in,rimination6 ANS.*R' 5o. Ta7ing of pictures of an accused even without the assistance of counsel, being purely a mechanical act, is not a violation of the constitutional right against self& incrimination.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C% of %&'

The right proscribes the use of physical or moral compulsion to e tort communications from the accused and not the inclusion of his body in evidence when it may be material. ;urely mechanical acts are not included in the prohibition as the accused does not thereby spea7 his guilt, hence the assistance and guiding hand of counsel is not re%uired. &B. .5at is t5e re9-irement for waiver of rig5t to remain silent and to ,o-nsel6 ANS.*R/ Any person under investigation for the commission of an offense shall have the right to be informed of his right to remain silent and to have competent and independent counsel preferably of his own choice. )f the person cannort afford the services of counsel, he must be provided with one. These rights cannot be waived e cept in writing and in the presence of counsel. Authoritative interpretations of the !iranda rule as embodied in the above Art. ))), Sec. ,. 8,- re%uire, however, that the crucial %uestion is whether the accused has effectively waived the effectuation of these rights. Accused should be as7ed whether he was willing to testify even without the assistance of counsel. )f he was willing to testify only with the assistance of counsel, he should be as7ed if he has one. )f he said he wanted to have counsel but could not afford one, he should be as7ed if he wanted one appointed for him. )f these %uestions are not as7ed there is no effective waiver of the rights to remain silent and to counsel. &C. .5at is t5e rationale be5ind 2iranda warning6 ANS.*R/ An uncounseled statement is preseumed to be psycholigically coerced. Swept into an unfamiliar enviroment and surrounded by intimidating figures typical of the atmosphere of polic interrogation, the suspect really needs the guiding hand of counsel. &D. .5at is t5e nat-re of t5e 2iranda warning6 ANS.*R/ The Court has condemned as unsatisfactory advice given perfuncntorily and belonged to the stereotyped class N a long %uestion by the investigator informing the ccused of his right followed by a monosyllabic answer. The desired role of coiunsel in the process of cusodial invenstogation is rendered meaningless if the lawyer gives an advice in a cursory manner as opposoed to a meaningful advocacy of the rioghts of the person undergoing %uestioning. )f advice is given casually and tritely as to be useless, understanding on the part of the accused is sacrficied and the unconstrained vbiving up of a right becomes impaired. The warning contemplates 1the transmission of meaningful information rather than just the ceremonial and perfunctory recitation of an abostact constitutional prionciple.2 )t is not enough for the interrogaotor to merely enumerate to the person his rights as provided in Sec. ,., Art. ))), of the Constitution, the interrogator must also e plain the effect of such provision in practical terms, e.g. what the person under interrogation may or may not do, and in a langauage the subject fairly understands. &*. 2-st t5e ,o-nsel d-ring ,-stodial investigation be ,om etent and inde endent6 ANS.*R/ )deally, a lawyer engaged for an individual facing custodial investigation 8if the latter could not afford one- should be engaged by the accused 8himself-, or by the latterDs relatives or person authoriIed by him to engage an attorney or by the court, upon proper petition of the accused or person authoriIed by the accused to file such petition. @awyers engaged by the police, whatever testimonials are gven as proof their probity and supposed independence, are generally suspect, as in many cases, the relationship between lawyers and law enforcement authorities can be symbiotic. The independent counsel cannot be a special counsel, public or private prosecutor, municipal attorney or counsel of the police whose interest is admittedly adverse to the accused. To allow a Station Commander of the *;>, a part of the police force, would render illusory the protection given to the suspect during custodual investigation.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C! of %&'

&4. .5o 5as t5e ,5oi,e of lawyer6 ANS.*R/ *hile the initial choice of the lawyer in cases where a person under custodial investigation cannot afford the services of a lawyer is naturally lodged in the police investigators, the accused really has the final choice as he may reject the counsel chosen for him and as7 for another one. A lawyer provided by the investogators is deemed engaged by the accused where he never raised any objection against the formerDs appointment during the course of the ivnestigation and the accused thereafter subscribes to the veracity of his srtatement before the swearing officer. &+. .aiver of rig5t m-st be in writing6 ANS.*R/ The right to counsel during custodial investigation is not waived by reason of failure to ma7e a timely objection before plea. There can only be a valid waiver of the right if such waiver is in writing and in the presence of counsel as mandated by Article ))), Section ,. of the ,6:" Consitution and the pertinent provisions of +epublic Act 5o. "43:. &1. Poli,e line-- not ,-stodial investigation6 ANS.*R/ Custodial investigation commences when a person is ta7en into custody and ius singled ot as a suspect in the commission of the crime under investigation and the police officers begin to as7 w%uestions on the suspectDs participation therein and which tend to eleicut an admission. The stage of an investigation wherein a person is as7ed to stand in a police line&up has been held to be outside the mantle of protection of the right to counsel because it involves a general in%uiry into an unslved crime and is purely investogatory in nature. )t has also been held than an uncounselled identifrication at the police line&up does not preclude the admissibility of an in&court identification. &(. .5en mere invitation not ,onsidered as art of ,-stodial investigation. ANS.*R/ )nviting certain individuals without singling them out as the perpetrators of the crime is not considered custodial investigation. So also, as7ing a single %uestion as to whereabouts is not custodial investigaton as the %uery was merely part of the 1general e ploratory stage.2 Cowever, where the %uestioning is not a 1general in%uiry into an unsolved crime2 but already focused on the individual as a 1particular suspect2 there was already custodial investigation and he must be accorded his !iranda rights. &<. .5at is t5e -r ose of rig5t to ,o-nsel d-ring ,-stodial investigation6 ANS.*R/ The protection covers the period from the time a person is ta7en into custody for the investigation of his possible participation in the commission of a crime or from the time he is singled out as a suspect in the commission of the offense although not yet in custody. The e clusionary rule is premised on the pesumption that the defendant is thrust into an unfamiliar atmosphere running through menacing police interrogation procedures where the ootentiality for compulsion, physical or psycholigical is forcefully apparent. Cowever, the rule is not intended as a deterrent to the accused from confession guilt if he voluntarily ad intelligently so desires but to protect the accused from admitting what he is coerced to admit although untrue. The presence of a lawyer is not intended to stop an accused from saying anything which might incriminate him but, rather, it was adopted in our Constitution to preclude the slughest coercion as would lead the accused to admit something false. The counsel, however, should never prevent an accused from freely and voluntarily telling the truth. '. +allarde was ,5arged wit5 t5e s e,ial ,om le7 ,rime of ra e wit5 5omi,ide wit5o-t any 9-alifying ,ir,-mstan,e. D-ring t5e arraignment 5e leaded not g-ilty. After

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C# of %&'

trial 5e was ,onvi,ted of t5e ,rime of m-rder only: not of t5e ,oA le7 ,rime of ra e wit5 5omi,ide be,a-se of t5e la,A of roof of ,arnal Anowledge. .as +allarde ro erly ,onvi,ted 6 R*ason o-t yo-r answer. ANS.*R' 5o. Although the term 1homicide2 as used in special comple crom of rapKe with homicide is to be unbderstood in its generric sense, and includes murder and slight physical injuries committed by reason or on the occasion of rape, it is settled itat where a cpmple crime is charged and the evidence fails to support the charge of rape, the %ualifying cirumstance must be sufficiently alleged and provided. $therwise it would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the nautre of the offense with which he is chaged. An accused cannot be convicted of an offense higher thatn that which he is charged in the complaint or information for which he is tried, or necessarily incluyded in that which is charged. Ce has a right to be informed of the nature of the offense with which he is charged before he is put on trial. to convict an accused of a higher ofofense than that charged in the complaint or information under which he is ctried would be an unbauthoriIed denial of that right. PR*L(2(NARL (N)*S0(+A0(ON >. .5at is reliminary investigation 6 ANS.*R' ;reliminary investigation is an in%uiry or proceeding to whether there is sufficient ground to engender a well&founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial. 8, st par., Sec. ,, +ule ,,., +$C>A. .5at is t5e nat-re of a reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R/ )t is a statutory right in those instances where it is re%uired, and to withhold it would violate the constitutional right to due process. )t is part of the guarantees of freedom and fairplay. A preliminary investigation is 1merely in%uisitorial, and it is often the only means of discovering the persons who may reasonably be charged with a crimne, to enable the prosecutor to prepare his complaint or information. )t is not a trial of the case on the merits2 and does not place the persons against whom it is ta7en in jeopardy. )t 1is not the occasion for the full and e haustive display of the partiesD evidence, it is for the presentation of such evidence as may engender a well&grounded belief that an offense has been committed and that the accused is probably guillty thereof.2 >B. .5at are t5e -r oses of reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R/ A preliminary investigation ta7es on an adversarial %uality. This must be so because the purpose of a preliminary investigation or a previous in%uiry of some 7ind, before an accused person is placed on trial, is to ,- Secure the innocent against hasty, malicious and oppressive prosecutionF and to .- ;rotect the innocent from an open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, and e pense and an iety of a public trial as well as to 3- ;rotect the state from useless and e pensive trials. )t 1has no other purpose e cept that of determining whether a crime has been committed and whether there is probable cause to believe that the accused is guilty thereof, and it does not place the persons against whom it is ta7en in jeopardy.2 >C. 1ow many stages are t5ere in reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R/ ;reliminary investigation has only one stage. ;residential >ecree 5o. 6,,, upon which the present rule is based, removed the preliminary e amination stage and integrated it into the preliminary investigatin proper. >D. .5at is t5e f-n,tion of government investigation6 rose,-tor d-ring reliminary

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C& of %&'

ANS.*R/ 18!-erely to determine the e istence of probable cause, and to file the corresponding information if he finds it to be so.2 )n determining probable cause, an in%uiry into the sufficiencey of evidence to wearrant conviction is not re%uired. )t is enough that it is believed that the act or omission complained of constitutes the offense charged. The trial of a case is conducted precisely for the reception of evidence of the prosecution in support of the charge. >*. (s t5e rose,-torFs dis,retion in determining robable ,a-se aramo-nt6 ANS.*R' (es. The Supreme Court has 1adopted a policy of non&interference in the conduct of preliminary investigations, and leaves to the investigating prosecutor sufficient latitude of discretion in the e ercise of determination of what constitutes sufficient evidence as will establish Jprobable causeD for filing of information against the supposed offender. >4. Probable ,a-se: defined. ANS.*R/ 18T-he e istence of such facts and circumstances as would e cite the belief, in a reasonable mind, acting on the facts within the 7nowledge of the prosecutor, that the person charged was guilty of the crime for which he was prosecuted.2 ;robable cause is based neither on clear and convincing evidence of guilt nor evidence establishing absolute certainty of guilt. )t is merely based on opinion and reasonable belief, and so it is enough that there e ists such state of facts as would lead a person of ordinary caution and prudence to believe, or entertain an hones or strong suspicion, that a thing is so. The term does not connote absolute certainty. 5either does it re%uire an in%uiry into the sufficiency of the evidence to obtain a conviction. >+. .5at are t5e offenses w5ere reliminary investigation is re9-ired = ANS.*R/ *here the penalty prescribed by law is at least four 84- years, two 8.months and one 8,- day without regard to the fine. 8.nd par., Sec. ,, +ule ,,., +$CThe absence of a preliminary investigation does not affect the courtDs jurisdiction nor does it impair the validity of the information or otherwise render it defective. >1. .5en is t5ere waiver of rig5t to reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R/ The absence of a preliminary investigation does not impair the validity of the criminal information or render it defective. There is waiver of the right where the accused enteres his plea during arraignment. >(. (s resen,e of a,,-sed a ,ondition sine 9-a non to t5e validity of a reliminary investigation. ANS.*R' 5o. The presence of the accused is not re%uired for as long as efforts to reach him were made, and an opoortunity to controvert the evidence for the complainant is accorded him. The obvious purpose of the rule is to bloc7 attempts of unscrupulous respondents to thrwart the prosecution of offenses by hiding themselves or by employing dilatory tactics. ><. 4or ele,tion ,ases: w5o ,ond-,ts t5e reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R/ C$!?@?C. J)f the complaint is initiated motu proprio by the Commission, or is filed with the Commission by any aggrieved party, it shall be referred to the @aw >epartment for investigation. Hpon direction of the Chirman of the Commission, the preliminary investigation may be delegated to any lawyer of said >epartment, or to any of the +egional ?lection >irectors or ;rovincial ?lection supervisors, or any lawyer of the Commssion.2 8Sec. 0, +ule 34, C$!?@?C +ules of ;rocedure?. On Se tember %': %CC?: members of Larranaga: albeit wit5o-t warrant for Aidna ,5arges stemmed from an alleged Aidna ing Larranaga resisted t5e arrest and immediately in t-rn so-g5t t5e aid of Atty. Arnovit. t5e PNP went to O-eBon City to arrest ing wit5 serio-s illegal detention. 05e t5at was ,ommitted on <-ly %>: %CC?. 5oned 5is sister and brot5er-in-law: w5o

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C' of %&'

Over t5e 5one: Atty. Arnovit was able to diss-ade t5e oli,e offi,ers from ,arrying o-t t5e warrantless arrest and ro osed to meet t5em at t5e PNP 5ead9-arters in Cam Crame: O-eBon City. Larranaga: toget5er wit5 5is sister and brot5er-in-law also went to Cam Crame aboard t5eir own ve5i,le. After some dis,-ssion: Larranaga was allowed to go 5ome on Atty. Arnovit;s -ndertaAing in writing t5at 5e and Laranaga wo-ld a ear before t5e Ceb- City Prose,-tor on Se tember !?: %CC? for reliminary investigation. 05e rose,-tors now ,ontend t5at Larranaga is entitled only to an in9-est investigation -nder Se,tion ? of R-le %%! sin,e 5e was lawf-lly arrested wit5o-t a warrant -nder Se,tion ': R-le %%# of t5e R-les of Co-rt. 05e rose,-tors liAewise arg-e t5at Larranaga was a,t-ally ,ommitting a ,rime at t5e time of 5is arrest sin,e Aidna ing wit5 serio-s illegal detention is a ,ontin-ing ,rime. (s Larranaga entitled to reg-lar reliminary investigation 6 ANS.*R' (es. )n%uest investigation under Section ", +ule ,,. of the +ules of Court applies only to persons lawfully arrested without a warrant. The facts show that @arranaga was not arrested as there was no restraint upon his person, neither was deprived of his own will and liberty. <ranting that @arranaga was arrested such arrest would be illegal because of the absence of a warrant. )t does not appear that @arranaga has just committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense when the police officers tried to arrest him on September ,0, ,66". The case of ;arulan v. >irector of ;risons, .. SC+A /3: which considered 7idnapping with illegal detention as a continuing crime does not find application. )n ;arulan, the deprivation of liberty is persistent and continuing from one place to another. There is no showing in the facts that the victim Jac%ueline was being detained by @arranaga who was then residing in QueIon City. ?A. .5en may in9-est ens-e6 ANS.*R/ Before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may as7 for a preliminary investigation in accordance with this +ule ,,. of the +ules of Court on ;reliminary )nvestigation, but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Article ,.0 of the +evised ;enal Code, as amended, in the presence of his counsel. 5otwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated within fifteen 8,0- days from its inception. 8.nd par., Sec. ", +ule ,,., +$C words not in bold supplied?B. .5en may one be entitled to reg-lar reliminary investigation/ ANS.*R/ ;erson not lawfully arrested should be subject to the regular preliminary investigation. Thus, a person who has been arrested without a warrant for a crime allegedly committed some two months before was not lawfully arrested hence entitled to the regular preliminary investigation. +?AS$5' ;reliminary investigation is not in%uisitorial but %uasi&judicial. Aairness dictates that the right should be considered not a mere formal or technical right but a substantive right. 8The minor @arranaga, et al., v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,3#/44, prom. !arch ,3, ,66:- 5ote the case of +aro v, Sandiganbayan, et al., <.+. 5o. ,#:43,, prom. July ,4, .### citing CruI, Jr. v. ;eople which considered a preliminary investigation as merely in%uisitorial. Aor Bar purposes, the author suggests that the @arranaga doctrine is the better view because it adheres more to the libertarian interpretation of criminal law and procedure. @. .5en is reliminary investigation not re9-ired 6

ANS.*R' a. *here accused lawfully arrested without warrant and he does not as7 for a preliminary investigation. b. *here the penalty prescribed by law is lower than four 84- years, two 8.- months and one 8,- day without regard to fineF c. Cases covered by the +ule on Summary ;rocedure. 8There may be no need to state this because cases covered by the +ule on summary ;rocedure include criminal cases where the penalty prescribed is imprisonment not above / months-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C> of %&'

@A. 2ay a erson lawf-lly arrested wit5o-t a warrant be s-b8e,t to reliminary investigation first before t5e ,om laint or information be filed against 5im6 ANS.*R/ ;erson lawfully arrested without warrant not subject to preliminary investigation. *hen a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant for an offense which re%uires a preliminary investigation, the complaint or information may be filed by a prosecutor without need of such investigation provided an in%uest has been conducted in accordance with e isting rules. )n the absence or unavailiability of an in%uest prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person. 8,st par., Sec. ", +ule ,,., +$C@B. B-t may 5e asA for a reliminary investigation6 ANS.*R' Though not entitled but may as7 for preliminary investigation' After the filing of the complaint or information in court without preliminary investigation, the accused may, within five 80- days from the time he learns of its filing, as7 for a preliminary investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense as provided in this +ule ,,. on ;reliminary )nvestigation 83rd par., Sec. ", +ule ,,., +$C@C. *n-merate t5e ,ases ,overed by t5e R-le On S-mmary Pro,ed-re w5ere reliminary investigation is not re9-ired. ANS.*R/ a. 9iolation of traffic laws, rules and regulationsF b. +ental lawF c. $rdinancesF d. Criminal cases' ,- ;enalty prescribed is imprisonment not above / months .- $r not above ;,,###.## fine 3- $r both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise 4- 5egligence where the imposable fine does not e ceed ;,#,###.##. 8Sec. , KBL, +evised +ule on Summary ;rocedureC. .5at are t5e stages of ro,ed-re for reliminary investigation 6 ANS.*R' The first phase or stage of the investigation consists of an ex parte in%uiry of the sufficiency of the complaint and the affidavits and other documents offered in support thereof, and ends with the determination by the judge either' a. that there is no ground to continue with the in%uiry, in which case he dismisses the complaint and transmits the order of dismissal, together with the records of the case, to the ;rovincial ;rosecutorF or b. that the complaint and the supporting documents show sufficient cause to continue with the in%uiry, which finding ushers in the second phase. The se,ond phase or stage is designed to afford the respondent notice of the complaint, access to complainantEs evidence and an opportunity to submit counter&affidavits and supporting documents. )n such a scenario, the Judge may conduct a hearing and propound to the parties and their witnesses %uestions on matters that, in his view, should be clarified. The second phase concludes with the Judge rendering his resolution, either for dismissal of the complaint or finding a prima )acie case, and holding the respondent for trial which shall be transmitted, together with the pertinent records, to the provincial prosecutor for appropriate action. %". (s reliminary investigation a s-bstantive rig5t 6 *7 lain briefly. ANS.*R' *hile the right is statutory rather than constitutional in its fundament, it is a component part of due process in criminal justice. The right to have a preliminary investigation conducted before being bound over to trial for a criminal offense and hence formally at ris7 of

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C? of %&'

incarceration or some other penalty, is not a mere formal or technical rightF it is a substantive right. To deny the accusedEs claim to a preliminary investigation would be to deprive him of the full measure of his right to due process. %"A. 2ay t5e rig5t to reliminary investigation be waived6 ANS.*R/ The rule is that the right to preliminary investigation is waived when the accused fails to invo7e it before or at the time of entering a plea at arraignment. The right to preliminary investigation is not a fundamental right and may be waived e pressly or by silence. Aailure of an accused to invo7e this right constitutes a waiver of such right and any irregularity that attends it. The right may be forfeited by inaction and can no longer be invo7ed for the first time at the appellate level. ;reliminary investigation is part of procedural due process. )t cannot be waived, unless the waiver appears to be clear and informed. There is no waiver if the accused has been actively and consistently demanding a regular preliminary investigation even before he was charged in court. Also, accused refused to enter a plea during the arraignment because there was pending a case in the Supreme Court regarding his right to avail of a regular preliminary investigation. Clearly the acts of the accused and his counsel are inconsistent with a waiver. %"B. .ill t5e absen,e of reliminary investigations affe,t t5e ,o-rt;s 8-risdi,tion over t5e ,ase6 ANS.*R/ No. 5or do they impair the validity of the information or otherwise render it defectiveF but, if there were no preliminary investigations and the defendants, before entering their plea, invite the attention of the court to their absence, the court, instead of dismissing the information, should conduct it, or remand the case to the inferior court so that the preliminary investigation may be conducted. %%. 2ay ,o-rts interfere wit5 t5e ,ond-,t of a reliminary investigation 6 *7 lain briefly. 2ay an in8-n,tive writ iss-e to en8oin t5e ,ond-,t of a reliminary investigation 6 (f: so - on w5at gro-nds 6 ANS.*R' As a general rule, courts may not interfere with the conduct of a preliminary investigation as this is an e ercise by the e ecutive department of its %uasi&judicial functions. ?ven the Supreme Court has 1adopted a policy of non&interference in the conduct of preliminary investigations, and leaves to the investigating prosecutor sufficient latitude of discretion in the e ercise of determination of what constitutes sufficient evidence as will establish Jprobable causeD for filing of information against the supposed offender. Cowever, courts may enjoin the conduct of a preliminary under the following circumstances' a. To afford protection to the constitutional rights of the accused. b. *hen necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions. c. *hen there is a prejudicial %uestion which is sub "udice! d. *hen the acts of the officer are without or in e cess of authority. e. *hen the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation. f. *hen double jeopardy is clearly apparent. g. *here the court has no jurisdiction over the offense. h. *here it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution. i. *here the charges are manifestly false and motivated by the lust for vengeance. j. *hen there is clearly no prima )acie case against the accused and a motion to %uash on that ground has been denied. %%A. 2ay t5e S- reme Co-rt review de,ision or finding of Omb-dsman only on -re 9-estion of law6 ANS.*R/ Les. Sec. ,4, +.A. 5o. /""#, the $mbudsman Act of ,6:6, provides that, 18n-o court shall hear nay appeal or application for remedy against the decision or findings of the

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages C@ of %&'

$mbudsman, e cept the Supreme Court on pure %uestions of law.2 !oreover, Sec. ." of the same Act provides further that, 18f-indings of fact by the $ffice of the $mbudsman when supported by substantial evidence are conclusive.2 %!. G0G filed a ,om laint for libel against GLG w5i,5 ri ened into an information filed by t5e rose,-tor;s offi,e wit5 t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt. GLG filed a etition for review of t5e rose,-tor;s resol-tion wit5 t5e De artment of <-sti,e: w5i,5 gave d-e ,o-rse to t5e etition and dire,ted t5e rose,-tor to move for deferment of f-rt5er ro,eedings and to elevate t5e entire re,ords of t5e ,ase. 05e ,o-rt a roved t5e motion and deferred t5e etitioner;s arraignment -ntil t5e final termination of t5e etition for review. 05e Se,retary of <-sti,e reversed t5e rose,-tor;s findings: as a ,onse9-en,e of w5i,5 t5e rose,-tor filed a motion to wit5draw information. 05e trial ,o-rt denied t5e motion -sing as a-t5ority Cres o v. 2og-l. (f yo- were to review t5e order of t5e trial ,o-rt: 5ow wo-ld yo- de,ide 6 ANS.*R' ) would reverse the order of the trial court. Sole and bare reliance on Crespo is not sufficient basis for the denial. The trial court should have conducted an independent and competent assessment of the issue8s- presented in the motion to dismiss because grant or denial of the motion is e%uivalent to effecting a disposition of the case itself. $nce a complaint or information is filed in court, any disposition of the case such as its dismissal or its continuation rests on the sound discretion of the court. Trial judges are re%uired to ma7e their own assessment of whether the Secretary of Justice committed grave abuse of discretion in granting or denying the appeal, separately and independently of the prosecutionEs or the secretaryEs evaluation that such evidence is insufficient or that no probable cause to hold the accused for trial e ists. They should embody such assessment in their written order disposing of the motion. %!A. R*CONC(L(A0(ON B*0.**N CR*SPO v. 2O+UL: %'% SCRA &>!K 2ARC*LO v. COUR0 O4 APP*ALS: !#' SCRA #CK 2AR0(N*M v. COUR0 O4 APP*ALS: !#? SCRA '?'K ROB*R0S: <R. v. COUR0 O4 APP*ALS: !'& SCRA #"?. ANS.*R/ )n Cres o the Secretary was advised to restrict such review to e ceptionally meritorious cases. +ule ,,., Section 4, of the +ules of Court which recogniIes such power, does not, however, allow the trial court to automatically dismiss the case or grant the withdrawal of the resolution of the Secretary of Justice. 2ar,elo ruled that prudence and wisdom dictate that the court should hold in abeyance the proceedings and wait for a final resolution of a motion for review or reinvestigation from the Secretary of Justice before acting on a motion to dismiss or a motion to withdraw the information. Cowever, after the S$J has the resolved the matter, the trial court should ma7e its own study and evaluation of said motion and not rely merely on the awaited action of the secretary. 8reiterated in >imatulac v. 9illon and Solar Team ?ntertainment, )nc., et al., v. Cow, etc., et al., <.+. 5o. ,4#:/3, prom. August .., .###)n 2artineB the trial courtEs grant of the motion to dismiss filed by the prosecuting fiscal upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice was overruled because such grant was based upon considerations other than the judgeEs own assessment of the matter. +elying solely on the conclusion of the prosecution to the effect that there was no sufficient evidence against the accused to sustain the allegation in the information, the trial judge did not perform his function of ma7ing an independent evaluation or assessment of the merits of the case. )n Roberts the authority of the Secretary of Justice to review resolutions of the prosecutors upon petition by a proper party even while the criminal case is already pending with the courts was sustained. SU22ARL/ *hile the Secretary of Justice has the prerogative to review and could direct the e clusion of an accused from the information, such is not binding upon the court since the court is mandated to independently evaluate or assess the merits of the case, and may either agree or disagree with the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. +eliance alone on the resolution of the Secretary of Justice would be an abdication of the trial courtDs duty and jurisdiction to determine a prima )acie case. 8Solar entertainment, )nc., et al., v. Cow, etc., et al., <.+. 5o. ,4#:/3, prom. August .., .###- The final ruling on the e clusion of the accused rests upon the trial court who has already obtained jurisdiction over the case.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages CC of %&'

%!B. Dis,-ss t5e a investigations.

ellate a-t5ority of Se,retary of <-sti,e over

reliminary

ANS.*R/ The Secretary of Justice has the power to review resolutions or decisions of provincial or city prosecutors or the Chief State ;rosecutor upon petition by a proper party. Hnder the +evised Administrative Code, the Secretary of Justice e ercises the power of direct control and supervision over said prosecutors. Ce may thus affirm, nullify, reverse or modify their rulings as he may deem fit. This same power is granted under Section , 8d- of ;.>. 5o. 6,,. )f upon petition by a proper party undr such rules as the >epartment of Justice may prescribe or motu proprio, the Secretary of Justice reverses or modifies the resolution of the provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor, he shall direct the prosecutor concerned either to file the corresponding information without conducting another preliminary investigation, or to dismiss or move for dismissal of the complaint or information with notice to the parties. The same rule shall apply in preliminary investigations conducted by the officers of the $ffice of the $mbudsman. 8last par., Sec. 4, +ule ,,., +$CB*4OR* 4(L(N+ .(01 01* COUR0

%#. .5at are t5e elements of a re8-di,ial 9-estion 6 ANS.*R' The elements of a prejudicial %uestion are' 8a- the previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subse%uent criminal actionF and 8b- the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. 8Sec. ", +ule ,,,, +$C%#A. .5at is t5e rationale be5ind rin,i le of re8-di,ial 9-estion6 ANS.*R/ To avoid conflicting decisions.

%#B. .5en may t5e etition for s-s ension of ,riminal a,tion d-e to re8-di,ial 9-estion be filed6 ANS.*R/ Ailing petition for suspension of criminal action due to prejudicial %uestion. A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial %uestion in a civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary investigation. *hen the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests. 8Sec. /, +ule ,,,, +$C%#C. 2ay t5e iss-e of re8-di,ial 9-estion be waived6 ANS.*R/ (es. +?AS$5' )t is a procedural matter the waiver of which is not contrary to law, public order, public policy, morals,or good customs, or prejudicial to a third person with a right recogniIed by law. %&. On O,tober !%: %C@': (sagani ,ontra,ted a first marriage wit5 D-l,e. .it5o-t 5said marriage 5aving been ann-lled or terminated: (sagani ,ontra,ted a se,ond marriage wit5 (meldla on <an-ary !': %CC> and a s-bse9-ent t5ird marriage wit5 <-lia. U on ,om laint of D-l,e: (sagani was ,5arged wit5 bigamy. (sagani t5en initiated a ,ivil a,tion for t5e 8-di,ial de,laration of absol-te n-llity of 5is first marriage to D-l,e on t5e gro-nd t5at it was ,elebrated wit5o-t a marriage li,ense. 1e t5en filed a motion to s-s end t5e ro,eedings in t5e ,riminal ,ase for bigamy invoAing t5e enden,y of t5e ,ivil s-it for n-llity as a re8-di,ial 9-estion. R-le on t5e motion. ANS.*R' !otion denied.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"" of %&'

Assuming that the first marriage was null and void on the ground alleged by )sagani, that fact would not be material to the outcome of the criminal case. ;arties to the marriage should not be permitted to judge for themselves it nullity, for the same must be submitted to the judgment of the competent courts and only when the nullity of the marriage is so declared can it be held as void, and so long as there is no such declaration the presumption is that the marriage e ists. Therefore, he who contracts a second marriage before the judicial declaration of nullity of the first marriage assumes the ris7 of being prosecuted for bigamy. E2arbella-Bobis v. Bobis: +.R.
No. %#@'"C: rom. <-ly #%: !""" ,iting Landi,5o v. Relova: !! SCRA ?#%: ?#'D

%&A. (s t5e a,tion for n-llity of marriage re8-di,ial 9-estion to ,on,-binage. ANS.*R/ 5o. Aor a civil case to be considered prejudicial to a criminal action as to cause the suspension of the latter pending the final determination of the civil case, it must appear not only that the said civil case involves the same facts upon which the criminal proseuction would be based, but also that in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the aforesaid civil action, the guilt or innocence of the accused would be necessarily be determined. EBeltran v.
Peo le: et al.: +.R. No. %#?'>?: rom. <-ne !": !"""D

%'. L-na filed a ,riminal ,om laint against Co for estafa and er8-ry. (t a ears t5at Prod-,ers BanA a-t5oriBed Co to -r,5ase a ro rietary s5are of 2anila Polo Cl-b to be la,ed in 5is name being t5e Dire,tor of t5e BanA and to be 5eld by 5im on be5alf of t5e ,or oration. After se aration as BanA Dire,tor: Co: des ite demand: ref-sed to s-rrender to t5e BanA t5e 2anila Polo Cl-b ,ertifi,ate. (nstead: 5e e7e,-ted a false affidavit of loss and was able to se,-re a re la,ement ,ertifi,ate: des ite t5e e7isten,e of t5e original ,ertifi,ate in t5e BanAFs ossession. D-ring t5e enden,y of t5e ,riminal a,tion: Co filed a ,ivil a,tion for damages against L-na and ,laimed owners5i over t5e 9-estioned ,ertifi,ate. Co now moves for a s-s ension of t5e ,riminal ro,eedings ,laiming t5at t5e ,ivil a,tion 5e filed raises a re8-di,ial 9-estion. (s t5e motion meritorio-s 6 ANS.*R' The motion is bereft of merit. The trial court hearing the criminal case can resolve the %uestion of ownership. The civil action for recovery of civil liability is impliedly instituted with the filing of the criminal action. hence, Co may invo7e all defenses pertaining to his civil liability in the criminal action. Ce is not prohibited from airing e haustively the %uestion of ownership. After all, the trial court has jurisdiction to hear the said defense. %>. On "& 4ebr-ary %CC!: C5ing was ,5arged before t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt2aAati wit5 fo-r ,o-nts of estafa -nis5able -nder Arti,le #%' ar. % EbD of t5e R.P.C.: in relation to P.D. No. %%': t5e I0r-st Re,ei ts Law.J On "' 2ar,5 %CC!: C5ing: toget5er wit5 P5ili ine Blooming 2ills Co.: (n,.: filed a ,ase before anot5er bran,5 of t5e R0C2anila: for de,laration of n-llity of do,-ments and for damages. On "? A-g-st %CC!: C5ing filed a etition before t5e R0C-2aAati: for t5e s- sension of t5e ,riminal ro,eedings on t5e gro-nd of re8-di,ial 9-estion in a ,ivil a,tion. R-le on t5e etition. ANS.*R' The alleged prejudicial %uestion in the civil case for declalration of nullity of documents and for damages does not juris et de jure dtermine the guilt or innocence of the accused in the criminal action for estafa. Assuming arguendo that the court hearing the civil aspect of the case adjudicates that the transaction entered into between the parties was not a trust receipt agreement, nonetheless the guilt of the accused could still be established and his culpability under penal laws determined by other evidence. To put it differently, even on the assumption that the documents are declared null, it does not ipso facto follow that such declaration of nulllity shall e onerate the accused from criminal prosecution and liability.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"% of %&'

3A0ARUN++AN+ PA2BARAN+AL

%?. .5at ,riminal ,ases s5o-ld be referred to t5e 3atar-nggang Pambarangay 6 ANS.*R' The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes e7,e t' a. $ffenses punishable by imprisonment e ceeding one 8,- year or fine e ceeding Aive thousand pesos 8;0,###.##-F and b. $ffenses where there is no private offended party. 8Ssec. 4#: KcL and KdL, +.A. 5o. ",/#%?A.. *n-merate t5e ,ases w5ere t5e arties may go dire,tly to ,o-rt. ANS.*R/ Cases where the parties may go directly to court' a. *here the accused is under detentionF b. *here the action may otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations. 8Sec. 4,. KbL T,U and T4U, +.A. 5o. ",/#<UR(SD(C0(ON O4 COUR0S

%@. .5at law determines t5e 8-risdi,tion of a ,o-rt to try a ,riminal ,ase. (s t5ere any e7,e tion to t5is r-le 6 ANS.*R' The jurisdiction of a court to try a criminal case is determined by the law in force at the time of the institution of the action. $nce the court ac%uires jurisdiction over a controversy, it shall continue to e ercise such jurisdiction until the final determination of the case and it is not affected by subse%uent legislation vesting jurisdiction over such proceedings in another tribunal. A recogniIed e ception to this rule is when the statute e pressly provides, or is construed to the effect that it isintended to operate upon actions pending before its enactment. Cowever, where such retroactive effect is not provided for, statutes altering the jurisdiction of a court cannot be applied to cases already pending prior to their enactment. %C. .5at is t5e 8-risdi,tion of 2etro olitan 0rial Co-rts: 2-ni,i al 0rial Co-rts and 2-ni,i al Cir,-it 0rial Co-rts 6 ANS.*R' ? cept in cases falling within the e clusive original jurisdiction of +egional Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, the !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts, and !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts shall e ercise' 8,- ? clusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdictionF and .- ? clusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not e ceeding si 8/- years irrespective of the amount of fine and regardless of other inposable accessory penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offensesF or predicated thereon, irrespective of 7ind, nature, value or amount thereof' ;rovided, however, That in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have e clusive original jurisdiction thereof. 8Sec. 3., B.;. Blg. ,.6 as amended by +.A. 5o. "/6,%CA. Dis,-ss on 20Cs: w5i,5 do not 5ave 8-risdi,tion w5ere t5e law s e,ifi,ally vests t5e 8-risdi,tion in ot5er ,o-rts. ANS.*R/ By virtue of the e ception provided for in the opening sentence of Sec. 3. of B.;. Blg. ,.6 as amended by Sec. . of +.A. 5o. "/6,, the e clusive original jurisdiction of the three lower trial courts does not cover those criminal cases which by specific provisions of law fall within the e clusive original jurisdiction of +egional Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, regardless of the penalty prescribed therefor. $therwise stated, even if those e cepted cases are punishable by imprisonment of not e ceeding si 8/- years 8i!e!prision correccional, arresto mayor, or arresto menor-, jurisdiction thereon is retained by the +egional Trial Courts or the Sandiganbayan, as the case may be. Among the e ceptions provided for in the opening sentence of Sec. 3. are cases under 8,Section .# of B.;. Blg. ,.6F 8.- Article 3/# of the +evised ;enal Code, as amended, and 83- the

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"! of %&'

>angerous >rugs Act of ,6"., as amended. Hndoubtedly, pursuant to Section ./: of the $mnibus ?lection Code, election offenses also fall within the e ception. !". .5at is t5e 8-risdi,tion of Regional 0rial Co-rts in ,riminal ,ases 6 ANS.*R' +egional Trial Courts shall e ercise e clusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the e clusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, e cept those now falling under the e clusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be e clusively ta7en cogniIance of by the latter.G8Sec. .#, B.;. Blg. ,.6 .#A. *hich court has jurisdiction over libel cases= A5S*?+' +egional Trial Courts not !unicipal Trial Courts have jurisdiction over libel cases. *hile libel is punishable by imprisonment of si months and one day to four years and two months 8Art. 3/#, +evised ;enal Code- which imposable penalty is lodged within the !unicipal Trial CourtsE jurisdiction under +.A. 5o. "/6, 8Sec. 3. K.L-, said law however, e cludes therefrom cases falling within the e clusive original jurisdiction of the +egional Trial Courts. +?AS$5' Although +.A. 5o. "/6, was enacted to decongest the clogged doc7ets of the +egional Trial Courts by e panding the jurisdiction of first level courts, said law is of a general character. ?ven if it is a later enactment, it does not alter the provision of Article 3/# of the +;C, a law of a special nature. !%. .5at is t5e 8-risdi,tion of t5e Sandiganbayan 6 ANS.*R' <-risdi,tion of t5e Sandiganbayan. The Sandiganbayan shall e ercise' EaD *7l,-sive original 8-risdi,tion in all ,ases involving' 8,- 9iolations of +epublic Act 5o. 3#,6, as amended, otherwise 7nown as the Anti& <raft and Corrpupt ;ractices Act, +epublic Act 5o. ,3"6, and Chapter )), Section ., Title 9)), of the +evised ;enal Code as amended, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying positions in the government classified as <rade ." or higher whether in a permanent, acting or interim capacity at the time of the commission of the offense. 8.- $ther offenses or felonies committed by public officers and employees in relation to their office, including those employed in government&owned or controlled corporations,w hether simple or comple ed with other crimes, where the penalty prescribed by law is higher than prision correccional or imprisonment for si 8/- years or a fine of ;/,###.##F ;+$9)>?>, C$*?9?+, that offenses or felonies mentioned in this paragraph where the penalty prescribed by law does not e ceed prision correccional or imprisonment for si 8/- years or a fine of ;/,###.## shall be tried by the proper +egional Trial Court, !etropolitan Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Court and !unicipal Circuit Trial Court. EbD *7,l-sive a ellate 8-risdi,tion' 8,- $n appeal, from the final judgments, resolutions or orders of the +egional Trial Courts in cases originally decided by them in their respective territorial jurisdictionsF 8.- By petition for review, from the final judgments, resolutions or orders of the +egional Trial Courts in the e ercise of their appellate jurisdiction over cases originally decided by the !etropolitan Trial Courts, !unicipal Trial Courts and !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts, in their respective jurisdiction 8c- 05e Sandiganbayan s5all 5ave e7,l-sive original 8-risdi,tion over petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, .abeas corpus, injunction, and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its jurisdiction' Provided0 That the jurisdiction over these petitions shall not be e clusive of the Supreme Court. 8Sec. 4, ;.>. 5o. ,/#/, as amended by +.A. 5o. "6"08d- +epublic Act 5o. "6"0, an acgt amending ;.>. 5o. ,/#/, provides that the Sandiganbayan s5all 5ave original 8-risdi,tion over all civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with ? ecutive $rder 5os. ,, ., ,4 and ,4&A, or the so called ill&gotten wealth cases. The Sandiganbayan has jurisdiction to annul the judgment of the +egional Trial Court in a se%uestration&related case. The Sandiganbayan has original and e clusive jrisdiction not only over principal causes of actiuon involving recovery of ill&gotten wealth, but also over all incidents arising from, incidental to, or related to such cases. EPresidential Commission on +ood
+overnment v. Sandiganbayan E%st Div.D: et al.: +.r. No. %#!?#@: rom. 4ebr-ary !#: !"""D

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"# of %&'

!"A. .5ere rivate individ-als are ,o- rin,i als wit5 -bli, offi,ers: w5i,5 ,o-rt 5as 8-risdi,tion6 ANS.*R/ *here private individuals are charged as co&principals with the public officers or employees, including those employed in government&owned or controlled corporations shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall e ercise e clusive jurisdiction over them. !"B. Does t5e Sandiganbayan 5as 8-risdi,tion over violations of R.A. No. #"%C: as amended: against m-ni,i al mayors6 ANS.*R/ (es. There is no merit to the averment that the salary received by a public official dictates his alary grade. 1$n the contrary, it is the officialDs grade that determinies his or her salary, not the other way round.2 To determine whether an official is within the e clusive jurisdiction of the Sandiganayan, therefor, reference should be made to +epublic Act 5o. /"0: and the )nde of $ccupational Services, ;osition titles and Salary <rades, An officialDs grade is not a matter of proof, but a matter of law which the court must ta7e judicial notice. Sec. 4448d- of the @ocal <overnment Code provides that 1the municipal mayor shall receive a minimum monthly compensatin corresponding to Salary <rade twenty&seven 8."- as prescribed under +epublic Act 5o. /"0: and the implementing guidelines issued pursuant thereto.2 Additionally, both the ,6:6 and the ,66" versions of the )nde opf $ccupational Services, ;ostion Titles and Sallary <rades ist the municipal mayor under Salary <rade .". Sandiganbayan has no jurisdiction if the accused is occupying the position of >irector )) with Salary <rade 1./2 under the Compensation and ;osition Classification Act of ,6:6 8+epublic Act 5o. /"0:-. )*NU* !!. .5ere s5o-ld ,riminal ,ases be filed 6 .5at is t5e ven-e of ,riminal ,ases 6 ANS.*R' Subject to e isting laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried a. in the court of the municipality or territory b. where the offense was committed or c. where any of its essential ingredients occurred. KSec. ,0 8a-, +ule ,,#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied!!A. +ive e7,e tions or instan,es w5ere a ,ase may be instit-ted at a la,e ot5er t5an w5ere t5e offense was ,ommitted. ANS.*R/ ,- Continuing offenses at any place where the essential elements of the crime was committedF .- @ibel where generally the venue is the place of publication or where any of the offended parties actually reside at the time of the commission of the offenseF 3- *here a change of venue was ordered by the Supreme CourtF 4- Cases cogniIable by the Sandiganbayan where cases are always filed where the Sandiganbayan is locatedF 0- ? traterritorial crimes or crimes committed outside of the ;hilippines. !!B. State t5e r-le on ven-e for ,riminal a,tions6

ANS.*R/ 8a- Subject to e isting laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients too7 placeF 8b- *here an offense is committed in a train, aircraft, or other public or private vehicle while in the course of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of any

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"& of %&'

municipality or territory where such train, aircraft, or other vehicle passed during its trip, including the place of departure and arrival. 8c- *hen an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the proper court of the first port of entry or of any municipality or territory through which the vessel passed during such voyage subject to the generally accepted principles of international law. 8d- Crimes committed outside of the ;hilippines but punishable under Article . of the +evised ;enal Code shall be cogniIable by the court where the criminal action is first filed. 8Sec. ,0, +ule ,,#, +$CSU22ARL PROC*DUR* (N CR(2(NAL CAS*S

!#. .5at ,riminal ,ases are governed by t5e s-mmary ro,ed-re 6 ANS.*R' 9iolations of traffic laws, rules and regulations. 9iolations of the rental laws. 9iolations of municipal or city ordinances. All other criminal cases where the penalty prescribed by law for the offense charged' ,- >oes not e ceed si 8/- months imprisonment, or .- A fine of one thousand pesos 8;,,####.##-, or 3- Both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise or of the civil liability arising therefrom 4- ;rovided, however, that in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence, this +ule shall govern where the imposable fine does not e ceed ten thousand pesos 8;,#,###.##-. 85os. , to 4, Sec. , KBL, +ule on Summary ;rocedurea. b. c. d. !#A. 2aAe an o-tline of ro,ed-re for ,riminal ,ases falling -nder t5e R-le on S-mmary Pro,ed-re. ANS.*R/ a. Complaint or information filed directly in !unicipal Trial Court without need of prior preliminary e amination or investigation. ,- !ust be accompanied by affidavits of the complainant and of his two witnesses in such number of copies as there are accused plus two 8.- copies for the court files. a- )f the above re%uirement is not complied with, the case is dismissed within five 80- days from date of filing. b- )n !etro !anila and chartered cities, only informations may be filed. c- *hen the offense cannot be prosecuted de o)icio, the complaint shall be signed and sworn to before the public prosecutor by the private offended party. b. The court ma7es a preliminary determination' ,- whether to dismiss the case for patently without basis or meritF or .- +e%uire further proceedings. c. )f further proceedings re%uired' ,- Accused under custody for the crime charged' a- Judge orders immediate arraignmentF b- Accused pleads' 8,- <uilty, he shall forthwith be sentenced. 8.- <uilty to a lesser offense to which he shall be sentenced. 83- 5ot guilty, the court issues an order.... d. >irecting accused to appear and submit their counter affidavits and those of their witnesses at a specified date not later than ten 8,#- days from receipt of order ,- )f the defendant does not appear the court shall issue a warrant for his arrest if the court shall find that a probable cause e ists after an e amination in writing and under oath or affirmation of the complainant and his witnesses. 8last par., Sec. ,#, +ule on Summary ;rocedure.- Hpon consideration of the complaint or information and the affidavits submitted by both parties and the Court a- Ainds no cause or ground to hold the accused for trial & the case is dismissed. b- Ainds cause' e. ;arties are called for a preliminary conference for'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"' of %&'

,- Stipulation of factsF .- Aor accused to plead to a lesser offenseF 3- $ther matters to clarify the issues and to ensure a speedy disposition of the case. f. Arraignment' Accused pleads' ,- <uilty, he shall forthwith be sentenced. .- <uilty to a lesser offense, he shall forthwith be sentenced. 3- 5ot guilty, the .... g. Trial is set which must be finished on the same day set. ,- $nly witnesses who submitted affidavits shall be presented for cross&e amination. 5o other witnesses allowed. h. Judgment & same as in civil cases. i. Appeal & same as in civil cases. j. ;etition for review & same as in civil cases.
PROS*CU0(ON O4 CR(2(NAL O44*NS*S

!&. 1ow are ,riminal offenses instit-ted 6 ANS.*R' Criminal actions shall be instituted as follows' 8a- Aor offenses where preliminary investigation is re%uired pursuant to section , of +ule ,,. 8where the penalty prescribed by law is at least four 84- years, two 8.- months and one 8,day without regard to the fine- by filing the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the re%uisite preliminary investigation thereinF 8b- Aor all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly with the !unicipal Trial Courts and !unicipal Circuit Trial Courts, or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. )n !anila and other chartered cities, the complaint shall be filed with the office of the public prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters. 8,st par., Sec. ,, +ule ,,#, +$C, words not in bold supplied!'. .5at is a ,om laint in ,riminal ro,ed-re 6 ANS.*R' A complaint is a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,,#, +$C!>. .5en is a ,om laint or information ,onsidered as s-ffi,ient 6 ANS.*R/ A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accusedF the designation of the offense given by the statuteF the acts or ommissions complained of as constituting the offenseF the name of the offended partyF the appro imae date of the commission of the offenseF and the place where the offense was committed. *hen an offense is committed by more than one person, all of them shall be included in the complaint or information. 8Sec. /, +ule ,,#, +$C!>A. s-ffi,ient6 .5at is t5e -r ose of t5e r-le t5at t5e ,om laint or information be

ANS.*R/ )n a criminal procsecution, it is the fundamental rule that every element of the crime charged must be alleged in the complaint or information. The main purpose of this re%uirement is to enable the accused to properly prepare his defense. Ce is presumed to have no independent 7nowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. This doctrine is not a mere technicality, it rests on the constitutional principle that an accused is entitled 1to be informed of the nature and cause2 of the accusation against him, as stated in the information. !>B. .5at are t5e ob8e,tives of t5e defendantFs rig5t Ito be informedJ6

ANS.*R/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"> of %&'

,- To furnish the accused with such a description of the charge against him as will enable him to ma7e the defenseF .- To avail himself of his conviction or ac%uittal for protection against a further prosecution for the same cusaeF and 3- To inform the court of the facts alleged, so that it may decide whetherr they are sufficient in law to support a conviction, if one should be had. )t is thus imperative that the information filed with the trial court be complete N to the end that the accused may suitably prepare his defense. Corollary to this, an indictment must fully state the elements of the specific offense alleged to have been committed as it is the recital of the essentials of a crime which delineates the nature and cause of accusation aainst the accused. !>B. (ll-strate t5e s-ffi,ien,y of allegations in ,om laint. ANS.*R/ The allegations in the complaint that the accused had carnal 7nowledge with the offended woman 1against her will2 or 1without her consent2 is insufficient to warrant conviction for rape, although the evidence proves the commission of the crime.
EPeo le v. 2endeB: +.R. No. %#!'&>: rom. <-ly ': !""" ,iting Peo le v. OsoD

!>C. (n ,ase of varian,e between t5e vi,timFs ,om laint and t5e information: w5i,5 s5all ,ontrol6 ANS.*R' )n case of variance between the victimDs complaint and the information in crimes against chastity, the complaint controls. The faiure of the information to state that the rape was committed 1through force or intimidation2 is not a fatal omission where the compalint alleged the ultimate fact that the accused raped the victim 1by means of force.2 So, at the outset, the accused could have readily ascertained that he was being accused of rape committed through force. . !>D. 2-st t5e s e,ial 9-alifying ,ir,-mstan,es in ra e be alleged in order for t5e deat5 enalty to be im osed6 ANS.*R/ Special %ualifying circumstances in rape must be alleged in the information otherwise the death penalty may not be imposed. The seven additional attendant circumstances introduced by Sec. " of +epublic Act 5o. "/06, 8such as victimDs minority and her filial relationship with the accused, among othersshould be considered as special %ualifying circumstances specifically applicable to the crime of rape considering that they have changed the natiure of simple rape by increasing the penalty one degree higher through the imposition of the death penalty. These attendant circumstances are considered as e%uivalent to %ualifying circumstances since they increase the penalties by degrees, and not merely as aggravating circumstances which affect only the period of the penalty but do not increase it to a higher degree. These circumstances must be specifically pleaded or alleged with certainty in the information, otherwise, the death penalty cannot be imposed. )t would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the charges against him and, subse%uently, a denial of due process, if he is charged with simple rape and be convicted of its %ualified form punishable with death, although the attendant circumstance %ualifying the offense and resulting in capital punishment was not alleged in the indictment on which he was arraigned. !>*. 1ow many enalties are to be im osed w5en t5e information alleges only one ,rime b-t two were roven6 ANS.*R/ ;enalty for one crime only if information alleges only one such crime even if prosecution proves two crimes. The accused could only be convicted of a crime committed as shown in the information and not as proven by the prosecution. An accused cannot be convicted of an offense, unless it is clearly charged in the complaint or information. Constitutionally, he has a right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him. To convict him of an offense other than that charged in the complaint or information would be violative of this constiturtional right. )ndeed, the accused cannot be

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"? of %&'

convicted of a crime, even if duly proven, unless it is alleged or necessarily included in the information filed against him. !>4. Does error in ,a tion affe,t t5e ,rime6 ANS.*R/ ?rror in the caption is not fatal. *hat is controlling are the actual recital of facts in the body of the information and not the caption or preamble of the crime. !?. Define an information. ANS.*R' An information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,,#, +$C!@. 1ow many offenses may be ,5arged in a ,om laint or information 6 ANS.*R' A complaint or information must charge only one offense, e cept when the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses. 8Sec. ,3, +ule ,,#, +$C!C. (s it ne,essary to state t5e date and time of ,ommission of t5e felony in t5e ,om laint or information 6 ANS.*R' )t is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was commmitted e cept when it is a mterial ingredient of the offense. The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission. 8Sec. ,,, +ule ,,#, +$C!CA. (s allegation of e7a,t time and date of ,ommission of ra e im ortant6 ANS.*R/ 5o. This is because the precise time of the commission of the crime is not an essential element of rape and it has no substantial bearing on its commission. )t is e%ually settled that a variance of fedw months between the time set out in the indictment and that established by the evidence during the trial has neen held not to constitute an error so serious as to warrant reversal of a conviction volely on that score. EPeo le v. Alvero: et,.: +.R. Nos. %#&'#>-#@:
rom. A ril ': !"""D

#". 0an: <r.: Urbi: 2aBa: Avendano and dela Cr-B were ,5arged wit5 5aving violated t5e Anti-+raft Law t5ro-g5 ,ons ira,y. U on reinvestigation: all t5e a,,-sed were dro ed from t5e information e7,e t 0an: <r 1e now moves to 9-as5 t5e information arg-ing t5at t5ere being no ,ons ira,y as a res-lt of t5e dis,5arge of 5is ,o-a,,-sed: t5e ,5arge against 5im of G,ons iring and ,onfederatingG wit5 ot5ers in ,ommitting t5e ,rime 5as no more basis. 5e f-rt5er ,ontends t5at t5ere ,an be no ,ons ira,y if only one erson remains ,5arged -nder t5e same information. R-le on t5e motion. ANS.*R' !otion denied. Conspiracy is not an element of the crime. The subse%uent dismissal of the charges against Tan, Jr.Es co&accused premised on the non&e istence of conspiracy did not render the information defective. The allegation of conspiracy in the information becomes a mere surplussage as a conse%uence of the outcome of the reinvestigation. )n any case, an information alleging conspiracy can stand even if only one person is charged e cept that the court cannot pass verdict on the co&conspirators who were not charged in the information.
PROS*CU0(ON O4 C()(L AC0(ONS

#%. A assenger b-s owned by San (ldefonso Lines: (n,. ES(L(D driven by *d-ardo ,ollided wit5 t5e 0oyota Lite A,e )an driven by Annie: totally wre,Aing t5e van and in8-ring Annie and 5er two assengers in t5e ro,ess. A ,riminal ,ase was filed wit5 t5e Pasig R0C ,5arging *d-ardo wit5 re,Aless im r-den,e res-lting to damage to ro erty wit5 m-lti le 5ysi,al in8-ries.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"@ of %&'

4o-r mont5s later: Pioneer (ns-ran,e and S-rety Cor oration EP(SCD: as ins-rer of t5e van and s-brogee filed a ,ivil ,ase for damages against S(L( before t5e 2anila R0C. After 8oinder of iss-es: S(L( filed a 2anifestation and 2otion to S-s end Civil Pro,eedings gro-nded on t5e enden,y of t5e ,riminal ,ase against *d-ardo in t5e Pasig R0C and t5e fail-re of P(SC to maAe a reservation to file a se arate damage s-it in said ,riminal a,tion. De,ide t5e motion 6 ANS.*R' !otion granted. +eservation is re%uired in order to avoid multiplicity of suits, guard against oppression and abuse and prevent delays, to clear congested doc7ets, simplify the wor7 of the trial courtF in short, the attainment of justice with the least e pense and ve ation to the parties&litigants. 8San
)ldefonso @ines, )nc.,et al., v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,6"",, prom. A ril !&: %CC@-

Clearly ;)SC as subrogee under Article ..#" of the Civil Code is not e empt from the reservation re%uirement with respect to its damages suit based on %uasi&delict arising from the same act or omission of ?duardo complained of in the criminal case. ;)SC merely stepped into the shoes of Annie 8as owner of the van-, hence it is bound to observe the procedural re%uirements which Annie ought to follow has she herself instituted the suit. 8Ibid!#!. (s ,ivil liability based on 9-asi-deli,t e7ting-is5ed wit5 t5e a,9-ittal of t5e a,,-sed 6 ANS.*R' 5o. A separate civil action lies against the offender in a criminal act, whether or not he is criminally prosecuted and found guilty or ac%uitted, provided that the offended party is not allowed, if he is actually also charged criminally, to recover damages on both scores, and would be entitled in such eventuality only to the bigger award of the two assuming the awards made in the two cases vary. )n other words, the e tinction of civil liability referred to in +ule ,,,, Sec. . 8b-, of the +ules of Court refers e clusively to civil liability founded on Article ,## of the +evised ;enal Code whereas the civil liability for the same act considered as a quasi-delict only and not as a crime is not e tinguished even by a declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act charged has not happened or has never been committed by the accused. 8Ceirs of <uaring, Jr. v. Court of
Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,#:360, prom. 2ar,5 ?: %CC?-

<eneral +ule' The death of the accused prior to conviction e tinguishes his civil liabiity arising from delict. ? ception' Civil liability arising from %uasi&delict is not e tinguished. Thus, even if the separate civil action under Article 33, of the Civil Code had not been e pressly reserved it may still be enforced separately. +?AS$5' The civil action was terminated without final adjudication as a result of the death of the accused. 89illegas v. Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5os. :.0/. V <.+. 5o. :.06., prom. April ,,,
,66"-

##. 2ay moral damages be awarded to ra e vi,tims 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' (es. Hndoubtedly, rape victims suffer mental anguish, fright, serious an iety, besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shoc7, social humiliation and other emotional injuries that entitle them to moral damages. Thus, in ;eople v. ;rades, .63 SC+A 4,,, the Supreme Court resolved to grant moral amages to rape victims, in such amount as the Court deems just, without the necessity for pleading or proof of the basis threreof. The conventional re%uirement of allegata et probata in civil procedure is dispensed with in criminal prosecutions for rape as no appropriate pleadings are filed wherein such allegations can be made. )n rape cases, proof of mental and physical suffering provided under Article ..," of the Civil Code can be dispensed with because it is recogniIed that the vicrtimDs injury is concommitant with and necessarily resultls from the odious crime of rape to warrant per se the award of moral damages.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %"C of %&'

a. Civil indemnity different from moral damages. Civil indemnity is different from the award of moral damages. . 8;eople v. !angila, <.+. 5os. ,3#.#3&#4, prom. Aewbruary ,0, .### - The award authoriIed by criminal law as civil indemnity e delicto to the offended party is mandatory - on t5e finding of t5e fa,t of ra e F it is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the e ercise of sound discretion. 8;eople v. !endiona, etc., et al., <.+. 5o. ,.6#0/, prom.
Aebruary .,, .### citing ;eople v. ;rades, .63 SC+A 4,,-

#&. .5en is t5ere an award of e7em lary damages in ,riminal ,ases 6 ANS.*R' *here there is an attendance of aggravating circumstances pursuant to Article ..3# of the Civil Code. 8;eople v. +endo%ue, Sr., et al., <.+. 5o. ,#/.:., prom. January .#, .####'. .5ere an em loyer is fo-nd to be s-bsidiarily liable -nder Arti,le %"# of t5e Revised Penal Code: w5at s5o-ld be determined at a 5earing rior to e7e,-tion 6 ANS.*R' Before e ecution against an employer ensues, there must be a determination, in a hearing set for the purpose' a- the e istence of an employer&employee relationshipF b- that the employer is engaged in some 7ind of industryF c- that the employee is adjudged guilty of the wrongful act and found to have comitted theoffense in the discharge of his duties 8not necessarily any offensed he commits 1while2 in the discharge of such dutiesF and d- that said employee is insolvent. #'A. Dis,-ss t5e vi,ario-s ,ivil liability of em loyer for fa-lt or negligen,e of em loyee. ANS.*R/ Hnder the law, the vicarious liability of the employer is founded on at least two specific provisions of law' ,- Article .,"/ in relation to Article .,:# of the Civil Code, which would allow an action predicated on quasi-delict to be instituted by the injured party against the employer for tan act or omission of the employee and would necessitate only a prepondrance of evidence to prevail. Cere the liability of the employer for the negligent conduct of the subordinate is direct and primary, subject to the defense of due diligence in the selection of supervision of the employee. The enforcement of the judgment against the emploer in such an action does not re%uire the employee to be insolvent since the nature of the liability of the employer with that of the employee 8the two being statutorily considered joint tortfeasors-, is solidary. .- Article ,#3 of the +evised ;enal Code which provides for the subsidiary liability of the employer for a felony committed by his employee in the discharge of his duty. This liability attached when the employee is convicted of a crime doen in the performance of his wor7 and is found to be insolvent that renders him unable to properly respond to the civil liability adjuged. #'B. Cite instan,es w5en e7isten,e of em loyer-em loyee relations5i a,,-sed driver and alleged ve5i,le owner is determined. between

ANS.*R/ ,- >uring the criminal proceeding, and .- >uring the proceeding for the e ecution of the judgment. )n both instances, the alleged vehicle owner should be given the opportunity to be heard, which is the essence of due process.
PRO)(S(ONAL R*2*D(*S (N CR(2(NAL CAS*S

#>. Are rovisional remedies available in ,riminal ,ases 6 ANS.*R' (es. The provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as they are applicable, may be availed of in connection with the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,.", +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%" of %&'

ARR*S0

#?. .5at is arrest 6 ANS.*R' Arrest is the ta7ing of a person into custody in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of an offense. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,,3, +$C#?A. .5at does t5e iss-an,e of warrant of arrest by R0C 8-dge res- ose6 ANS.*R' )ssuance of warrant of arrest by +TC judge presupposes completion of preliminary investigation. *ithin ten 8,#- days from the filing of the complaint or information, the judge shall personally ealuate the resoliton of the prosecutor and is supporting evidence. Ce may immeidately dismiss the case if the evidence on record clearly fails to etablish probable cause. )f he finds probable cause, he shall ssue a warrant of arrest, or a commitment order if the accused has already been arrested pursuant to a warrant issued by the judge who conducted the preliminary investigation or when the complaint of information was filed pursuant to section of this +ule. 8*hen accused lawfuly arrested without warrant)n case of doubt on the e istence of probable cause, the judge may order the prosecutor to present additional evidence within five 80- days from the filing of the complaint or information. 8Sec. / KaL, +ule ,,., +$C#?B. Does t5e R-les re9-ire reliminary investigation be first ,on,l-ded before a warrant of arrest may iss-e6 ANS.*R' )ssue by an !TC judge of a warrant of arrest does not re%uire completion of preliminary investigation. The +ules do not re%uire that preliminary investigation be first concluded before a warrant of arrest may issue. Cowever, without waiting for the conclusion of the investigation, the judge may issue a warrant of arrest, if he finds after an e amination in writing and under oath of the complainant and his witnesses in the form of searching %uestions and answers, that a probable cause e ists and that there is a necessity of placing the respondent under immediate custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice. 8Sec. / KbL, +ule ,,., +$C-. #?C. Define robable ,a-se for iss-an,e of warrant of arrest. ANS.*R/ ;robable cause to warrant arrest re%uires such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed by the person sought to be arrested. #?D. .5at eviden,e are needed to determine robable ,a-se6 ANS.*R/ ,- )n the determination of probable cause, the average man weighs facts and circumstances without resorting to the calibrations of technical rules of evidence which his 8the average man- 7nowledge is nil. *hat is necessary is not proof beyond reasonable doubt but just a probable cause. G?vidence re%uired to establish guilt is not necessary.G .- A finding of probable cause needs only to rest on evidence showing that more li7ely than not a crime has been committed and was committed by the suspects. ;robable cause need not be based on clear and convincing evidence of guilt, neither on evidence establishing guilt beyond reasonable doubt and definitely, not on evidence establishing absolute certainty of guilt. As well put in Bringer v. Hnited States, while probable cause demands more than Gbare suspicion,G it re%uires Gless than evidence which would justify ... conviction. A finding of probable cause merely binds over the suspect to stand trial. )t is not a pronouncement of guilt.G 8;en, supra-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%% of %&'

#@. .5en is arrest wit5o-t warrant lawf-l 6 ANS.*R' A peace officer or a private person may, without warrant, arrest a person' 8a- *hen in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing or is attempting to commit an offense 8b- *hen an offense has in fact just been committed, and he has probable cause to believe based on personal 7nowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed itF and 8c- *hen the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another. )n cases falling under paragraphs 8,- and 8b- above, the person arrested without a warrant shall be forthwith delivered to the nearest police station or jail and shall be proceeded against in accordance with section " of +ule ,,.. 8Sec. 0, +ule ,,3, +$C#@A. Dis,-ss 5ow may dis osition of erson arrested wit5o-t warrant be made. ANS.*R' *hen a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant involving an offense which re%uires a preliminary investigation, the complaint or iformation may be filed by a prosoecutor without need of such investigation provided an in%uest has been conducted in accordance with e isting rules. )n the absence or unavailiability of an un%uest prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person. Before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may as7 for a preliminary invesrtigation in accordance with this +ule, but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Article ,.0 of the +evised ;enal Code, as amended, in the presence of his counsel. 5otwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated within fifteen 8,0- days from its inception. After the filing of the compalint or information in court without a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within five 80- days from the time he learns of its filing, as7 for a preliminary investigation with the same right to adduce evidence as provided in his defense as provided in this +ule. 8Sec. ", +ule ,,., +$C#@B. .5at are t5e Ainds of warrantless arrest6 ANS.*R/ ,- Arrest Gin )lagrante delitoG under Sec. 0 8a-, +ule ,,3, +$CF .- Arrest in Ghot pursuitG under Sec. 0 8b-, and 8c-, +ule ,,3, +$C. #@C. Cite an instan,e w5ere t5ere is no valid in #lagrante delito or 5ot -rs-it arrest. ANS.*R/ *here there is lac7 of personal 7nowledge on the part of the arresting officer, or an overt physical act on the part of the accused, indicating that a crime had just been committed, was being committed or was going to be committed. Aor warrantless arrest to be valid there must be compliance with the element of immediacy between the time of the commission of the offense and the time of the arrest. *arrantless arrests made within shorter periods li7e ten 8,#- days from commission considered as illegal. #C. .5at is t5e remedy for -nlawf-l arrest 6 ANS.*R' a. !otion for the %uashal of the warrantF b. !otion for reinvestigation. #CA. Cite instan,es ,onsidered as waiver of illegal arrest. ANS.*R/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%! of %&'

a. Aailure to challenge the validity of the arrest and search, as well as the admission of the evidence obtained thereby, is considered a waiver of the constitutional rights, particularly against unreasonable searches and seiIures. b. Any irregularity attendant to the arrest was cured by voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the trial court upon entering a plea and participation during the trial. c. The filing of charges and the subse%uent issuance of a warrant of arrest against a person invalidly detained will cure the defect of that detention or at least deny him the right to be released because of such defect. d. Aailure to %uestion the legality of the arrest before arraignment is deemed a waiver of such defense.
BA(L

&". .5en is bail a matter of rig5t 6 ANS.*R' All persons in custody shall be admitted to bail as a matter of right, with sufficient sureties, or be released on recogniIance as prescribed by law or this +ule ,,4 of the +ules of Court. a- before conviction by the !etropolitan Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Court in Cities,or !unicipal Circuit Trial Court, and b- before conviction by the +egional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,,4, +$C words not in bold supplied&"A. Dis,-ss t5e ,on,e t of dis,retionary bail. ANS.*R/ Hpon conviction by the +egional Trial Court of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, the court, on application, admission to bail is discetionary. Should the court grant the application, the accused may be allowed provisional liberty during the pendency of the appeal under the same bail subject to the consent of the bondsman.
8,st two pars., Sec. 0, +ule ,,4, +$C paraphrasing supplied-

&"B. +ive instan,es w5en t5e ,o-rt s5all deny bail or ,an,el if already osted. ANS.*R/ )f the penalty imposed by the trial court is imprisonment e ceeding si 8/years, the accused shall be denied bail, or his bail shall be cancelled, upon a showing by the prosecution, with notice to the accused, of the following or other similar circumstances' 8a- that he is a recidivist, %uasi&recidivist, or habitual delin%uent, or has committed the crime aggravated by the circumstance of reiterationF 8b- That he has previously escaped from legal confinement, evaded sentence, or has violated the conditions of his bail without valid justificationF 8c- That he committed the offense while under probation, parole, or under conditional pardonF 8d- That the circumstances of his case indicate the probability of flight if released on bailF or 8e- That there is undue ris7 that he may commit another crime during the pendency of the appeal. The appellate court may, motu proprio or on motion of any party, review the resolution of the +egional Trial Court, on motion notice to the adverse party. 83 rd and 4th pars., Sec. 0, +ule ,,4, +$C&"C. Bail defined. ANS.*R/ Bail is the security given for the release of a person in custody of the law, furnished by him or a bondsman, to guarantee his appearance before any court as re%uired under the conditions hereinafter specified. 8,st sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,,4, +$C&"D. 4orms of bail. ANS.*R/ ,- Corporate suretyF

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%# of %&'

.- ;roperty bondF 3- Cash depositF or 4- +ecogniIance. 8.nd sentence, Sec. ,, +ule ,,4, +$C&%. .5en may t5e Co-rt of A eals deny bail on a ,ase elevated for review 6

ANS.*R' A person who appealed his conviction of homicide on a murder charge to the Court of Appeals, may be denied bail by the Court of Appeals because he could be convicted of a capital offense. <eneral rule' 5o bail shall be allowed after a judgment of conviction has become final. 8,st sentence, Sec. .4, +ule ,,4, +$C? ception when bail may be granted even after final judgment' )f after such finality, the accused applies for probation, he may be allowed temporary liberty under his bail. *hen no bail was filed or the accused is incapable of filing one, the court may allow his release on recogniIance to the custody of a responsible member of the community. )n no case shall bail be allowed after the accused has commenced to serve sentence. 8Sec. .4, +ule ,,4, +$C&!. A,,-sed Roger filed a etition for bail. 05e 5earing of t5e etition was set for 2ay #%: %CC@: b-t was not 5eard be,a-se t5e <-dge was t5en on leave. (t was reset to <-ne @: %CC@: b-t on said date: t5e <-dge reset it to <-ne !!: %CC@. 05e 5earing did not materialiBe: and a reset was made to <-ly %?: %CC@. (n t5e meantime: a <-ne !C: %CC@ Order was iss-ed granting bail based on a marginal note dated <-ne !!: %CC@: at t5e bottom of t5e bail etition w5i,5 stated/ GNo ob8e,tion/P@":"""."":G signed and a roved by t5e -bli, rose,-tor and t5e <-dge. 05e <-dge averred t5at w5en t5e rose,-tion ,5ose not to o ose t5e etition for bail: 5e 5ad t5e dis,retion on w5et5er to a rove it or not. Did t5e <-dge a,t ro erly 6 ANS.*R' 5o. )t is mandatory for a judge to re%uire a hearing in a petition for bail even if the prosecution refuses to adduce evidence or fails to interpose an objection to the motion for bail. The determination of whether or not the evidence of guilt is a matter of judicial discretion and not reposed upon the prosecutor. )t is thus, mandatory for the court to conduct a hearing or as7 searching %uestions from which it may infer the strength of the evidence of guilt, or the lac7 of it, as well as the ade%uacy of the amount of bail. &!A. .5at are t5e d-ties of t5e trial 8-dge w5ere an a li,ation for bail is filed6

ANS.*R/ a. give reasonable notice to the prosecutor or re%uire him to submit his recommendation. 8Sec. ,:, +ule ,,4, +$Cb. Conduct a hearing of the application for bail regardless of whether or not the prosecution refuses to present evidence to show that the guilt of the accused is strong for the purpose of enabling the court to e ercise its sound discretion 8Secs. " and :, suprac. >ecide whether the evidence of guilt of the accused is strong based on the summary of evidence of the prosecution. d. )f the guilt of the accused is not strong, discharge the accused upon the approval of the bailbond. 8Sec. ,6, supra2O0(ON 0O OUAS1

&#. .5at are t5e gro-nds for motion to 9-as5 6 ANS.*R' The accused may move to %uash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds' 8a- That the facts charged do not constitute an offenseF 8b- That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense chargedF 8c- That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accusedF 8d- That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do soF 8e- That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed formF

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%& of %&'

8f- That more than one offense is charged e cept when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by lawF 8g- That the criminal action or liability has been e tinguishedF 8h- That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal e cuse or justificationF and 8i- That the accused has been previously convicted or in jeopardy of being convicted, or ac%uitted of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his e press consent. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,,", +$C&#A. .5en may t5e a,,-sed move to 9-as5 t5e ,om laint or information6

ANS.*R/ At any time before entering his plea, the accused may move to %uash the complaint or information. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,,", +$C)f the accused objects to the jurisdiction of the court over his person, he may move to %uash the information, but only on that ground. )f the accused raises other grounds in the motion to %uash, he is deemed to have waived that objection and to have submitted his person to the jurisdiction of the court. &&. 05e general r-le is t5at fail-re to move to 9-as5 or to allege any gro-nd in a motion to 9-as5 is ,onsidered as a waiver of t5e gro-nd not alleged. ESe,. C: R-le %%?: ROCD Are t5ere e7,e tions to t5is general r-le 6 ANS.*R' (es, the e ceptions are the following' 8a- That the facts charged do not constitute an offenseF 8b- That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense chargedF 8c- That the criminal action or liability has been e tinguishedF 8d- That the accused has been previously convicted or in jeopardy of being convicted, or ac%uitted of the offense charged, or the case against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his e press consent. 8Sec. 6, +ule ,,:, +$C&'. 2ay a denial of a motion to 9-as5 be t5e s-b8e,t of a s e,ial ,ivil a,tion of ,ertiorari 6 (f not may it be a ealed 6 (f it ,o-ld neit5er be t5e s-b8e,t of a ,ertirorari nor a eal: w5at t5en is t5e remedy available to t5e movant 6 ANS.*R' &ertiorari is not the remedy where a motion to dismiss 8%uash- an information is denied. +?AS$5' An order denying a motion to %uash is interlocutory and therefore not appealable, nor can it be the subject of a petition for certiorari! Cowever, the e traordinary remedy of certiorari can be availed of if the denial of the motion constitutes grave abuse of discretion. An order denying a motion to %uash may only be reviewed in the ordinary course of law by appeal from the judgment after trial. The ordinary procedure to be followed in that event is to enter a plea, go to trial, and if the decision is adverse, reiterate the issue on appeal from the final judgment. &>. *7 lain t5e ,on,e t of do-ble 8eo ardy 6 ANS.*R' *hen an accused ,- has been convicted or ac%uitted, or .- the case against him dismissed or otherwise terminated a- without his consent b- by a court of competent jurisdiction, c- upon a valid complaint or information or other formal charge sufficient in form and substance to sustain a conviction and 3- after the accused had pleaded guilty to the charge, 4- the conviction or ac%uittal of the accused or the dismissal of the case shall be a bar to another prosecution a- for the offense charged, or b- for any attempt to commit the same or frustration thereof, or

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%' of %&'

c- for any offense which necessarily includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the former complaint or information. 8, st par., Sec. ", +ule ,,", +$C numbering and arrangement supplied&>A. Re9-isites for do-ble 8eo ardy. ANS.*R/ ,- The first jeopardy must have attached prior to the second. .- The first jeopardy must have been validly terminated. 3- The second jeopardy must be for the same offense, or the second offense includes or is necessarily included in the offense charged in the first information, or is an attempt to commit the same or is a frustration thereof. &>B. Proof t5at first 8eo ardy 5as atta,5ed. ANS.*R/ ,- Court of competent jurisdictionF .- 9alid complaint or informationF 3- ArraignmentF 4- 9alid pleaF and 0- The defendant was ac%uitted or convicted or the case was dismissed or otherwise terminated without the e press consent of the accused. &?. .5en are t5e instan,es w5ere t5e ,onvi,tion of t5e a,,-sed s5all not be a bar to anot5er rose,-tion for an offense w5i,5 ne,essarily in,l-des t5e offense ,5arged in t5e former ,om laint or information 6 ANS.*R' 8a- the graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or omission constituting the former chargeF 8b- the facts constituting the graver charge became 7nown or were discovered onlu after a plead was entered in the former complaint or informationl or 8c- the plead of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended party e cept when more than one offense is charged unless a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law, as provided in section , 8f- of +ule ,,/. 8last par., Sec. ", rule ,,"ARRA(+N2*N0 AND PL*A

&@. .5at is t5e ,on,e t of invalid im rovident lea 6 ANS.*R' The court must fully discharge its duty to conduct the re%uisite searching in%uiry in such a way as would indubitably show that the accused had made not only a clear, definite and unconditional plea, but that he did so with a well&informed understanding and full realiIation of the conse%uences thereof. The bottom line of the rule is that a plea must be based on a free and informed judgment, otherwise it is an improvident plea which does not meet the re%uirements of the law. &@A. .5at is t5e fo,-s of t5e ,o-rtFs in9-iry in order to determine w5et5er t5e lea is im rovident or not6 ANS.*R/ The focus of the courtDs in%uiry in order to determine whether the plea is improvident' a. The voluntariness of the plea, and b. The full comprehension of the conse%uences of the plea. &@B. .5at m-st t5e ,o-rt do to avoid an invalid im rovident lea6 ANS.*R/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%> of %&'

a. A mere warning to the accused that he could possibly face e treme retribution in the form of death or face a life sentence in jail is not eno-g5. b. The trial judge should ascertain and be totally convinced that, for all intents and purposes, the plea recorded has all the earmar7s of a valid and acceptable confession upon which an eventual judgment of conviction can stand. Aor instance, the court may re%uire the accused to fully narrate the incident that spawned the charges against him, or by ma7ing him reenact the manner in which he perpetrated the crime, or by causing him to furnish and e plain to the court missing details of significance. c. The trial court should also be convinced that the accused has not been coerced or placed under a state of duress either by actual threats of physical harm coming from malevolent or avenging %uarters by ascertaining from the accused himself the manner in which he was subse%uently brought into the custody of the law, or whether he had the assistance of competent counsel during the custodial and preliminary investigationsF and ascertaining from him the conditions under which he was detained and interrogated during the aforesaid investigations. d. The trial court could direct %uestions at the defense counsel as to whether or not counsel had conferred with, and completely e plained to the accused the meaning of a plea and its conse%uences. e. Questions relative to the personality profile of the accused 8his age, socio&economic status, educational bac7ground, etc.-, which can serve as a trustworthy inde of his capacity to give a free and informed plea of guilt. 5o valid judgment can be rendered upon an invalid arraignment and this includes an improvident plea. The case should be remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. &C. .5at is t5e r-le for arraignment -nder S eedy 0rial A,t of %CC@ 6 ANS.*R' The arraignment of the accused shall be held within thirty 83#- days from the filing of the information, or from the date the accused has appeared before he justice, judge or court in which the charge is pending, whichever date last occurs. 8,st par., +.A. 5o. :463Thereafter, where a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen 8,0- days to prepare for trial. Trial shall commence within thirty 83#- days from arraignment as fi ed by the court. )f the accused pleads not guilty to the crime charged, heMshe shall state whether heMshe interpose a negative or affirmative defense. A negative defense shall re%uire the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, while an affirmative defense may modify the order of trial and re%uire the accused to prove s uch defense by clear and convincing evidence. 8last sentence of the ,st par., and the .nd par., Sec. ", +.A. 5o. :463PR*-0R(AL

'". (s re-trial mandatory in ,riminal ro,ed-re 6 ANS.*R' (es. )n all criminal cases cogniIable by the Sandiganbayan, +egional Trial Court, !etropolitan Trial Court, !unicipal Trial Court in Cities, , !unicipal Trial Court and !unicipal Circuit Trial Court, the court shall, after arreaignment and within thirty 83#- days from the date the court ac%uires jurisdiction over the person of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars of the Supreme court, order a pre&trial conference to consider the following' shall after arraignment, order a pre&trial conference to consider the following' 8a- plea bargainingF 8b- stipulation of AactsF 8c- mar7ing for identification of evidence of partiesF 8d- waiver of objections to admissibility of evidenceF 8e- modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defenseF and 8f- such matters as will promote a fair and e peditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,,:, +$C0R(AL

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%? of %&'

R(+10S O4 ACCUS*D A0 01* 0R(AL

'%. +ive some e7am les of violation of t5e rig5t of t5e a,,-sed to be res-med inno,ent. ANS.*R' a. )t is incumbent upon the prosecution during the trial, to prove that prior to %uestioning, the confessant was warned of his constitutionally protected rights because the presumption of regularity of official acts does not apply during in&custody investigation. b. The signatures of the accused on the bo es and on the plastic bags are tantamount to uncounselled e trajudicial confessions which is not sanctioned by the Bill of +ights and are, therefore inadmissible as evidence. The fact that all of the accused are foreign nationals does not preclude application of the Ge clusionary ruleG because the constitutional guarantee embodied in the Bill of +ights are given and e tends to all persons, both aliens and citiIens. '!. .5at is t5e rig5t to s eedy trial g-aranteed -nder t5e S eedy 0rial A,t of %CC@ 6 ANS.*R' )f the accused is not brought to trial within the time lmit re%uired by Section , 8g-, +ule ,,/ and Section ,, as e tended by Section / of this rule, the information may be dismissed on mnotion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial. The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish the e clusion of time under section 3 of this rule. The dismissal shall be siject to the rules on double jeopardy. Aailure of the accused to move for dismissal prior to trial shall constitute a waiver of the right to dismiss under this section. 8Sec. 6, +ule ,,6, +$C'!A. .5at is t5e eriod for arraignment -nder Se,. % EgD: R-le %%>. ANS.*R/ Hnless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court circular, the arraignment shall be held within thirty 83#- days from the day the court ac%uires jurisdiction over the person of the accused. The time of the pendency of a motion ot %uash or for a bill of particulars or other causes justifying the suspension of the arraignment shall be e cluded in computing the period. '!B. Commen,ement of trial -nder Se,tion %: R-le %%C. ANS.*R/ After a plea of not guilty is entered, the accused shall have at least fifteen 8,0- days to prepare for trial. The trial shall commence within thrity 83#- days from receipt of the pre&trial order. '!C. *7tended time -nder Se,. >: R-le %%C. ANS.*R' The time limit from arraignment to trial is as follows' Airst twelve&calendar month period after September ,0, ,66: or until September ,/, ,666 P ,:# daysF Second twelve&calendar month period after September ,0, ,66: or until September ,/, .### P ,.# daysF and Third twelve&calendar month period after September ,0, ,66: or starting September ,/, .### P :# days. 8Sec. /, +ule ,,6, +$C'!D. 0ime limit for trial/ ANS.*R/ )n criminal cases involving persons charged of a crime, e cept those subject to the +ules on Summary ;rocedure, or where the penalty prescribed by law does not e ceed si 8/- months imprisonment, or a fine of $ne thousand pesos 8;,,###.##- or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties, the justice or judge shall, after consultation with the public prosecutor and the co unsel for the accused, set the case for continuous trial on a wee7ly or other short&term trial calendar at the earlies possible time so as to ensure speedy trial. 8Sec. /, +.A. 5o. :463-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%@ of %&'

)n no case shall the entire trial period e ceed one hundred eighty 8,:#- days from the first day of trial, e cept as otherwise authoriIed by the Supreme Court. 8last sentence, . nd par., Sec. ., +ule ,,6, +$C'#. +ive some e7am les w5ere t5e rig5t to ,o-nsel was violated. ANS.*R' a. ?ven if the confession of the accused is gospel truth, if it was made without the assistance of counsel, it is inadmissible in evidence regardless of the absence of coercion, or even it had been voluntarily given. This refers to custodial investigation only. b. Accused who was a foreign national was effectively denied his right to counsel, as he was provided with one he could not understand and communicate with concerning his defense. Ce was li7ewise denied his right to compulsory process to guarantee the availability of witness and the production of evidence on his own behalf, including the services of a %ualified and competent interpreter to enable him to present his testimony. '&. Lanie was ,5arged by *lenita: (melda and Rosamar wit5 large s,ale illegal re,r-itment in t5e Regional 0rial Co-rt. Only *lenita testified in ,o-rt as (melda and Rosamar were t5en abroad. (n lie- of t5e testimonies of t5e absent ,om lainants t5e rose,-tion resented as witnesses: (melda;s mot5er: Lilia and Rosamar;s sister: )i,toria. Lanie was ,onvi,ted by t5e R0C of large s,ale illegal re,r-itment by ado ting a revio-s de,ision of t5e 2etro olitan 0rial Co-rt w5ere Lanie was ,onvi,ted of estafa involving t5e same ,ir,-mstan,es - on ,om laint of (melda and Rosamar. .as t5e ,onvi,tion ro er 6 ANS.*R' 5o. @anie was deprived of her constitutional right to confront witnesses against her. A previous decision or judgment, while admissible in evidence, may only prove that an accused was previously convicted of a crime. )t may not be used to prove that the accused is guilty of a crime charged in a subse%uent case, in lieu of the re%uisite evidence proving the commission of the crime, as said previous decision is hearsay. ?very conviction must be based on the findings of fact made by a trial court according to its appreciation of the evidence before it. A conviction may not be based merely on the findings of fact of another court, especially where what is presented is only its decision without the transcript of the testimony of the witnesses who testified therein and upon which the decision is based. '&A. .5at is t5e -r ose of t5e rig5t to ,onfront witnesses6

ANS.*R/ a. To secure the opportunity of cross&e aminationF and b. To allow the judge to observe the deportment and appearance of the witness while testifying. ''. .5at are t5e re9-isites for a trial in absentia 6 ANS.*R' a. The accused was already arraignedF b. Ce was properly notified of the date of trial c. Ce failed to appear without any justifiable reason. 8Sec. ,4 K.L, Art. ))), ,6:" ConstitutionD(SC1AR+* O4 ACCUS*D 4OR US* AS S0A0* .(0N*SS

'>. .5at are t5e re9-isites for t5e dis,5arge of an a,,-sed to be a state witness 6 ANS.*R' *hen two or more persons are jointly charged with the commission of any offense, upon motion of the prosecution before resting its case, the court may direct one or more of the accused to be discharged with their consent so that they may be witnesses for the state when after re%uiring the prosecution to present evidence and the sworn statements of each proposed state witness at a hearing insupport of the discharge, the court is satisfied that'

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %%C of %&'

8a- There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is re%uestedF 8b- There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, e cept the testimony of said accusedF 8c- The testimony of said accused can be sibstantially corroborated in its material pointsF 8d- Said accused does not appear to be the most guiltyF and 8e- Said accused has not at any time ben convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. 8,st par., Sec. 6, +ule ,,6, +$C'>A. .5at is t5e treatment of eviden,e add-,ed in sort of dis,5arge6

ANS.*R/ ?vidence adduced in support of the discharge shall automatically form part of the trial. st 8, sentence, .nd par., Sec. ,", +ule ,,6, +$C'>B. .5at is t5e effe,t of ,o-rt denial of motion for dis,5arge6 ANS.*R/ )f the court denies the motion for discharge of the accused as state witness, his sowrn statement shall be inadmissible in evidence. 8.nd sentence, .nd par., Sec. ,", +ule ,,6, +$C'>C. .5at is t5e effe,t of order dis,5arging an a,,-sed to be a state witness6 ANS.*R/ The order discharging an accused to a state witness ,- shall amount to an ac%uittal of the discharged accused and .- shall be a bar to future prosection for the same offense, 3- unless the accused fails or refuses to testify against his co&accused in accordoance with is sworn statement constituting the basis for his discharge. 8Sec. ,:, +ule ,,6, +$C2O0(ON 4OR <UD+2*N0 ON D*2URR*R 0O *)(D*NC*

'?. .5en may a ,o-rt render 8-dgment on dem-rrer to eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' After the prosecution has rested its case, the court may dismiss the case on the ground of insufficiency of evidence 8,- on its own initiative after giving the prosecution an opportunity to be heardF or 8.- upon demurrer to evidence filed by the acused filed with or without leave of court. 8,st par., Sec. ,.3, +ule ,,6, +$C arrangement supplied'?A. .5at are t5e effe,ts of denial of dem-rrer to eviden,e6 ANS.*R/ )f the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court, the accused may adduce evidence in his defense. then the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court, the accused waives the right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution.,8.nd par., Sec. .3, +ule ,,6, +$CThe order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself shall not be revieable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment. 8last par., Sec. .3, +ule ,,6, +$C'?B. +ive an instan,e w5ere t5e r-les on waiver of rig5t to s-s ended. resent eviden,e

ANS.*R/ The accused were convicted of murder without presenting evidence because their lawyer filed leave to file a motion for judgment on demurrer to evidence, but at the same time e pressly waiving the right to present evidence. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and remanded the case to the lower court for its proper disposition. The Court ruled that the court should have been put on guard that the counsel may not entirely comprehend the conse%uences of the waiver and should have e ercised prudence by warning him about the prejudicial effects of the waiver. There is thus, doubt as to the voluntariness of the waiver and full comprehension of the effects of the waiver.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!" of %&'

<UD+2*N0

'@. 2ay an a,,-sed be ,onvi,ted - on a d- li,ito-s information Eone w5i,5 ,5argeds more t5an one ,rimeD 6 *7 lain briefly: ANS.*R' a. *hen two or more offenses are charged in a single complaint or information b. but the accused fails to object to it before trial, c. the accused may convict him of as many offenses as are charged and proved, and impose on him the penalty for each offense, setting out separately the findings of fact and law in each offense. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,.#, +$C numbering and arrangement supplied'C. 1ow s5o-ld a ,o-rt render 8-dgment in a ,riminal ,ase w5ere t5ere is a varian,e between t5e allegations in t5e ,om laint or information and t5e eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' *here there is a a variance between the offense charged and that proved, and a. the offense charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, b. the accused shall be convicted of ,- the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of .- the offense charged which is included in the offense proved. 8Sec. 4, rule ,.#, +$C>". .5en does an offense in,l-de or is in,l-ded in anot5er 6 ANS.*R' An offense charged necessarily includes the offense proved when some of the essential elements or ingredients of the former, as alleged in the complaint or information constitute the latter. And an offense charged is necessarily included in the offense proved, when the essential ingredients of the former constitute or form part of those constituting the latter. 8Sec. 0, +ule ,.#, +$C arrangement supplied>%. 2ay a ,o-rt reo en a 8-dgment of ,onvi,tion 6 (f not w5y not 6 (f so: 5ow may t5e 8-dgment be reo ened 6 *7 lain yo-r answers briefly. ANS.*R' (es, a court may reopen a judgment of conviction. a. At any time before finality of the judgment of conviction, b. the judge may, motu proprio, or upon motion, c. with hearing in either case, d. reopen the proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice. The proceeding shall be terminated within thirty 83#- days from the order granting it. 8Sec. .4, +ule ,,6, +$C numbering and arrangement supplied>o not confuse reopening of a judgment of conviction with modification of a judgment of conviction. A judgment of conviction may, upon motion of the accused, be modified or set aside before it becomes final or before appeal is perfected. 8,st sentence, Sec. ", +ule ,.#, +$CN*. 0R(AL OR R*CONS(D*RA0(ON

>!. 2ay t5e ,onvi,ted a,,-sed file a motion for new trial 6 (f so - on w5at gro-nds6 ANS.*R' (es. At any time before a judgment of conviction becomes final, the court may, on motion of the accused, or on its own instance, but with the consent of the accusd, grant a new trial or reconsideration. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,.,, +$CThe court shall grant a new trial on any of the following grounds' 8a- That errors of law or irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused have been comitted during the trialF 8b- That new and material evidence has been discovered which the accused could not with reasonable diligence have discovered and produced at the trial, and which if introduced and admitted, would probably change the judgment. 8Sec. ., +ule ,.,, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!% of %&'

The court shall grant reconsideration on the ground of errors of law or fact in the judgment, which re%uires no further proceedings. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,.,, +$C>#. Dis,-ss briefly b-t ,om re5ensively t5e effe,ts of granting a new trial or re,onsideration. ANS.*R' The effects of granting a new trial or reconsideration are the following' 8a- *hen a new trial is granted on the ground of erros of law or irregularities committed during the trial, all the proceedings and evidence affected thereby shall be set aside and ta7en anew. The court may, in the interest of justice, allow the introduction of additional evidence. 8b- *hen a new trial is granted on the ground of newly&discovered evidence, the evidence already adduced shall stand and the newly&discovered and such other evidence as the court may, in the interest of justice, allow to be introduced shall be ta7en and considered together with the evidence already in the record. 8c- )n all cases,, when the court grants new trial or reconsideration, the original judgment shall be set aside or vacated and a new judgment rendered accordingly. 8Sec. /, +ule ,.,, +$CAPP*AL

>&. .5at is t5e nat-re of t5e rig5t to a

eal 6

ANS.*R' Although the right to appeal is a statutory and not a natural right, it is an essential part of the judicial system and courts should proceed with caution so as not to deprive a party of this prerogative, but instead afford every party&litigant the amplest opportunity for the proper and just disposition of his cause free from the consraints of technicalities. >'. An a,,-sed es,a ed from detention: tried in absentia: was deemed to 5ave waived 5is rig5t to a eal E2a alao: %C? SCRA ?CD w5ile anot5er w5o was absent d-ring t5e rom-lgation was ,onsidered as not 5aving lost 5is rig5t to a eal. E2oslares: rom. <-ne !>: %CC@D. Disting-is5 between t5e two. ANS.*R' )n !apalao, the accused escaped from detention and trial in absentia continued against him. Ce remained at large even at the time of the promulgation of judgment, and thus, was to have waived his right to appeal. )n !oslares, the accused was not a fugitive from justice. Ce has been see7ing redress under the law as he has filed various pleadings and motions with the courts. Therefore, he cannot be considered as one who has lost his standing in court and thus, cannot be deprived of his right to see7 judicial relief. 8!oslares v. Third >iivisions, Court of Appeals, et al., <.+. 5o. ,.6"44,
prom. June ./, ,66:-

!ere absence of the accused, despite due notice to him and his bondsman or counsel, during the promulgation of the sentence is not considered a waiver of right to appeal. )f the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause, he shall lose the remedies available in these rules against the judgment and the court shall order his arrest. *ithin fifteen 8,0- days from promulgation of hjudgment, however, the accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies. he shall stae the reasons for his abosence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a judtifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within fifteen 8,0- days from notice. 8last par., Sec. /, +ule ,.#, +$CThe Supreme Court must still review the death penalty despite the convictDs escape. +eason' @ife is too valuable to be given away just because the convict escaped. 8;eople v.
?spargas, ./# SC+A 036-

>>. .5at is t5e effe,t of a

eal by several a,,-sed 6

ANS.*R' 8a- An appeal ta7en by one or more of several accused shall not affect those who did not appeal, e cept insofar as the judgment of the appellate court is favorable and applicable to the latter. 8b- The appeal of the offended party from the civil aspect shall not affect the criminal aspect of the judgment or order appealed from.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!! of %&'

8c- Hpon perfection of the appeal, the e ecution of the judgment or order appealed from shall be stayed as to the appealing party. 8Sec. ,,, +ule ,.., +$C-

*)(D*NC*
*)(D*NC* (N +*N*RAL

%. .5at are t5e fa,ts t5at do not need introd-,tion of eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' a. Aacts which a court shall or may ta7e judicial notice. 8Secs. , and ., +ule ,.6, +$Cb. Judicial admissions. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,.6, +$Cc. Aacts which may be presumed from proven facts.
<UD(C(AL NO0(C*

!. Disting-is5 mandatory 8-di,ial noti,e from dis,retionary 8-di,ial noti,e. ANS.*R' a. Aor mandatory judicial notice the court is compelled to ta7e judicial notice because of the use of the word GshallG in Sec. ,, +ule ,.6, +$C *C)@? for discretionary judicial notice the court is not compelled because of the use of the word GmayG in Sec. ., +ule ,.6, +$C. b. !andatory judicial notice ta7es place at the courtEs own initiative *C)@? discretionary judicial notice may ta7e place at the courtEs initiative, or on re%uest of a party. c. >iscretionary judicial notice re%uires a hearing and presentation of evidence *C)@? mandatory judicial notice does not re%uire hearing and presentation of evidence. #. (s t5ere 8-di,ial noti,e of foreign laws 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' )n general, courts may not ta7e judicial notice of foreign laws, ?WC?;T in a few instances where, in the e ercise of sound discretion, they may ta7e judicial notice of such foreign laws of which they are evidently familiar. #A. .5en may foreign laws be t5e s-b8e,t of 8-di,ial noti,e6 ANS.*R/ a. *hen the local court is evidently familiar with the foreign law. b. *hen the foreign law refers to the law of nations. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,.6, +$Cc. *hen the court ta7es judicial notice of a published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of law as a learned treatise. 8Sec. 4/, +ule ,3#, Ibid!d. *hen the foreign statute is acepted by the ;hilippine government. e. *hen a foreign judgmen containing foreign law is recogniIed for enforcement. 8Sec. 4:, +ule 36, +$Cf. )f the foreign law refers to common law doctrines and rules from which many of our laws were derived. &. (s eviden,e obtained from illegal sear,5 and seiB-re admissible 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' Any evidence in violation fo Section ., Article ))), shall be inadmissible for any purpose in any proceeding. KSec. 3 8.-, Article ))), ,6:" ConstitutionThe right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seiIures of whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, abnd no search warrant or warant of arrest shall issue e cept upon probable cause to be determined by the judge after e amination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place to be searched and he pesons or things to be seiIed. 8Sec. ., Article ))), ,6:" Constitution'. *7 lain t5e rig5t against self-in,rimination.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!# of %&'

ANS.*R' 5o person shall be compelled to be a witness against himself. 8Sec. ,", Article ))), ,6:" ConstitutionThis right is recogniIed under he +ules on ?vidence, which provides that, it is the right of a witness not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless otherwise provided by law. KSec. 3 84-, +ule ,3., +$CThe human body could be used as evidence without violating the right. !echanical acts without the use of intelligence do not fall within the scope of the protection. Some of the acts which are not covered by the right of self&incrimination are the following' a. Aingerprinting, photographing nd paraffin testing, physical e amination. b. ;hysical e amination of a woman accused of adultery to determine if she is pregnant. c. Hndergoing ultra&violet rays e amination to determine presence of flourescent powder on the hands. d. Subpoena directing government officials to produce official documents or public records in their custody. e. Aitting the accused foot over a foot print, putting on a pair of trousers, etc.
OB<*C0 *)(D*NC*

>. Are 5otogra 5s admissible as eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' ;hotographs may be admissible upon proof of their e actness and accuracy by the photographer himself who can testify of his personal 7nowledge of the correctness of the representation. a. P5otogra 5s. The photographer is not the only witness who can identify the pictures. The faithful rpresentation of the photiograph may be proved prima )acie by the testimony of those who were present at the time it was ta7en, or by any other competent witness who can testify as to its e actness and accuracy. $nce proved, the court may admit it subject to impeachment as to its accuracy. The value of a photograph lies in its being a correcrt representation or reproduction of the original, and its admissibility is determined by its accuracy in protraying the scene at the time the picture was ta7en. 8Sison v. ;eople, .0# SC+A 0:, "0&"/;hotocopies or ero copies of signed documents are not duplicate originals because thy are not signed. 8!ahilum v. Court of Appeals, ," SC+A 4:.b. 0reatment of ,om -ter rinto-ts. )f the data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an original. 8?vidence Code of California, Added by Stats. ,6"", Sec. ,)n a labor case, )B! ;hilippines, )nc., et al., v. 5@+C, et al., <.+. 5o. ,,"..,, prom. April ,3, ,666, the Supreme Court held that computer printouts which were not signed because they are unsigned. The Court went on further to say that its decisions, while adhering to a liberal view in the conduct of proceedings before administrative agencies, have nonetheless consistently re%uired some proof of authenticity or reliability as condition for the admission of documents. 5ot one of the ,: print&out copies submitted by )B! was ever signed, either by the sender or the receiver. There is thus no guarantee that the message sent was the same message received. 5either were the print&outs certified or authenticated by any company official who could properly attest that these came from )B!Ds computer system or that the data stored in the system were not andMor could not haved been tampered with before the same were printed out.
DOCU2*N0ARL *)(D*NC* B*S0 *)(D*NC* RUL*

?. .5at is t5e best eviden,e r-le and 5ow is it a

lied to do,-ments 6

ANS.*R' )f, possible, the best evidence which the nature of the case is susceptible shall always be re%uired, if not available, then the best evidence that can be had shall be allowed. *hen the subject of in%uiry is the contents of a document admissible other than the original itself. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,3#, +$Cno evidence shall be

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!& of %&'

a. Reason for r-le/ The reason for the best evidence rule is to prevent fraud. 8Anglo& American, etc., v. Cannon, 3, Aed. 3,4-. The best evidence rule is a misnomer because it merely re%uires the best evidence that is available, and if not available, secondary evidence shall be allowed. b. A li,ation of best eviden,e r-le/ The best evidence rule applies only to contents of a writing, when those contents are the facts in issue, and not to its e ecution which may be proved by parol testimony or e trinsic papers. 8CernaeI v. !cgarth, 6# ;hil. 0/0c. Do,-ments defined. >ocuments as evidence consist of writings or any material containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written e pression offered as proof of their contents. 8Sec. ., +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering suppliedd. 05e different r-les on admissibility of do,-mentary eviden,e are t5e/ ,- Best evidence ruleF .- +ules for admission of secondary evidenceF 3- ;arol evidence ruleF and 4- +ules on interpretation of documents. @. .5at are t5e e7,e tions to t5e best eviden,e r-le or instan,es w5ere t5e original need not be resented or instan,es w5ere se,ondary eviden,e is admissible 6 ANS.*R' a. *hen the original has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court, without bad faith on the part of the offerorF b. *hen the original is in the custody or under the control of the party against whom the evidence is offered, and the latter fails to produce it after reasonable noticeF c. *hen the original consists of numerous accounts or other documents which cannot be e amined in court without great loss of time and he fact sought to be established from them is only the general results of the wholeF and d. *hen the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,3#, +$C@A. Pro,ed-re for order of roof -sing se,ondary eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- ;roof of e ecutionF .- ;roof of loss or unavailabilityF 3- ;roof of contents. 8*igmore, Sec. ,,:6@B. Pro,ed-re for roving ,ontents of writing w5ere original do,-ment is not available or 5ow se,ondary eviden,e is resented w5ere original do,-ment is not available. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the original document a- has been lost or b- destroyed, or c- cannot be produced in court, .- the offeror, a- upon proof 8,- of its e ecution or e istence 8.- and the cause of its unavailability 83- without bad faith on its part, b- may prove its contents 8,- by a copy, or 8.- by recital of its contents in some authentic document, or 83- by the testimony of witnesses 84- in the order stated. 8Sec. 0, +ule ,3#, +$C@C. Pro,ed-re for roving ,ontents of writing w5ere original do,-ments is in t5e adverse artyFs ossession or ,ontrol or 5ow se,ondary eviden,e is resented w5ere original is in t5e ,-stody or ,ontrol of t5e adverse arty.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!' of %&'

ANS.*R/ ,- )f the document is .- in the custody or under the control 3- of the adverse party, a- he must have reasonable notice b- to produce it. 4- )f after such notice and a- after satisfactory proof of its e istence, b- he fails to produce the document, 0- secondary evidence may be presented /- as in the case of its loss. 8Sec. /, +ule ,3#, +$C rearragement and numbering supplied@D. Pro,ed-re for roving t5e ,ontents of original in t5e ,-stody of a -bli, offi,er. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the original of a document .- is in the custody of a public officer or 3- is recorded in a public office 4- its contents may be proved a- by a certified copy b- issued by the public officer c- in custody thereof. 8Sec. ", +ule ,3#, +$CPAROL *)(D*NC* RUL*

C. .5at is meant by arol eviden,e and w5at is t5e r-le regarding t5is ,on,e t 6 ANS.*R' ;arol evidence is oral or verbal testimony of a witness. )t is also 7nown as e trinsic evidence or evidence aliunde! *hen the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing, it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and there can be between the parties and their successors in interest no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement. 8,st par., Sec. 6, +ule ,3#, +$C rearrangement and numbering suppliedCA. .5at is t5e nat-re of I arol eviden,e r-leJ ANS.*R/ )t is not a rule of evidence but of substantive law. )t is part of the law of contracts, the law of negotiable instruments, and the law of wills. )t is founded upon the substantive rights of the parties. )t was made part of the rules of evidence in order that it may be considered in all its phases in one place. CB. Reasons for t5e arol eviden,e r-le. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the parties have reduced their agreement in writing, .- it is presumed that they have made the writing 3- the only repository and memorial of the truth, and 4- whatever is not found in the writing must be understood to have been waived or abandoned. CC. Best eviden,e r-le disting-is5ed from arol eviden,e r-le. ANS.*R/ ,- Hnder the best eviden,e r-le, the issue is contents of a writing *C)@? under the arol eviden,e r-le, there is no issue as to contents of a writingF .- Hnder the best eviden,e r-le, secondary evidence is offered to prove the contents of a writing, which is not allowed unless the case falls under any of the e ceptions *C)@? under the arol eviden,e r-le, the purpose of the offer of parol evidence is to change, vary, modify, %ualify, or contradict the terms of a complete written agreement, which is not allowed unless the case falls under any of the e ceptions.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!> of %&'

$nly the parties and their successors in interest, and not strangers may invo7e the protection of the parol evidence rule. %". .5at are t5e e7,e tions to t5e arol eviden,e r-le or w5en are t5e instan,es w5en testimonial eviden,e may be -sed to rove t5e terms of a written agreement 6 ANS.*R' A party may present evidence to modify, e plain or add to the terms of the written agreement if he puts into issue in his pleading' a. An intrinsic ambiguity, mista7e or imperfection in the written agreement. b. The failure of the written agreement to e press the true intent and agreement of the parties thereto. c. The validity of the written agreement. d. The e istence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest after the e ecution of the written agreement. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,3#, +$C%%. .5at is t5e ,overage of t5e arol eviden,e r-le and w5at are t5e e7,e tions to t5e arol eviden,e r-le 6 ANS.*R' a. Covered. $nly prior and contemporaneous agreements which are deemed to have been merged in the writing conformably to the Gintegration of the agreement rule.G b. Not ,overed. ,- Subse%uent agreements, notwithstanding that such agreements may have the effect of adding to, changing, modifying, or even altogether abrogating the contract of the parties as evidenced by the writing. .- Collateral agreements which although oral and contemporaneous with the writing are separate and distinct agreements. %%A. .5at is a ,ontem oraneo-s agreement6 ANS.*R/ A contemporaneous agreement is one entered into at the same time as the agreement which has been redued to writing. %%B. 0ests to determine w5et5er a ,ontem oraneo-s oral agreement is se arate and distin,t from t5e written agreement and t5erefore rovable by arol eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- The first test is the subject&matter of the two agreements. )f the subject&matter of the written agreement is different from that of the contemporaneous oral agreement, then the latter is a separate and distinct agreement and, therefore, provable by parol evidence. .- )f the two agreements refer to the same subject&matter, the test is to determine whether or not the contemporaneous oral agreement is se arable, then the contemporaneous oral agreement is separate and distinct and, therefore, probable by parol evidence. %%C. *7am le of agreement w5i,5 CANNO0 be roven by arol eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ? press trusts concerning real property cannot be proven by parol evidence because title and possession cannot be defeated by oral evidence which can easily be fabricated and contradicted. %%D. *7am les of ,ollateral agreements w5i,5 CAN be roved by arol eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- An agreement of reconveyance is a distinct agreement, separate from the sale itself, although the two agreements are usually contained in one and the same document. .- )nducements and representations which led to the e ecution of an agreement may be proven by parol evidence because they do not vary the terms of the agreement. 3- ;arol evidence is admissible to prove an independent and collateral agreement which constitutes an inducement to the ma7ing of the sale or part of the consideration thereof. 4- A condition precedent not stipulated in writing is provable by oral evidence.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!? of %&'

+?AS$5' Before the happening of the condition, there is no written agreement yet to which the parol evidence may apply. 0- 9erbal assurances given by the indorser of an out&of&town chec7 to the employees of the ban7 where it was presented for encashment that he would refund the amount if the chec7 should be dishonored by the drawee ban7 is a collateral agreement separate and distinct from the indorsement, by virtue of which the first ban7 was induced to cash the same, and therefore, provable by parol evidence. /- Any prior or contemporaneous conversaion in connection with a note or its indorsement may be proved by parol evidence. "- An e trinsic agreement between indorser and indorsee which cannot be embodied in the instrument without impairing its credit may be proved by parol evidence. :-. The fact that parties who appear to have signed as principals did so as merely sureties is provable by parol evidence.
(N0*RPR*0A0(ON O4 DOCU2*N0S AU01*N0(CA0(ON AND PROO4 O4 DOCU2*N0S

%!. 1ow are alterations in do,-ments e7 lained 6 ANS.*R' The party producing a document as genuine whuich has ben altered and appears to have been altered after its e ecution, in a part material to the %uestion in dispute, must account for the alteration. he may show that the alteratuion was made by another, without his concurrence, or was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or was otherwise properly or innocently made, or that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. )f he fails to do that, the documen shall not be admissible in evidence. 8Sec. 3,, +ule ,3., +$C%#. As a general r-le t5ere is need to rove t5e a-t5enti,ity of rivate do,-ments. Are t5ere e7,e tions to t5is general r-le 6 ANS.*R' (es. There may be no need to prove the a uthenticity of private documents' a. *hen the document is ancient. 8Sec. .,, +ule ,3., +$Cb. *hen the e ecution and enuineness of the document is admitted by the adverse partyF and c. *hen the enuineness and due e ecution of the document is immaterial. %#A. .5at is t5e an,ient do,-ment r-le6 ANS.*R/ *here a private document is more than thirty years old, is produced from a custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine, and is unblemished by any alterations or circumsmtances of suspicion, no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. 8Sec. .,, +ule ,3., +$C%#B. 1ow gen-ineness of 5andwriting roved6 ANS.*R/ The handwriting of a person may be proved by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of s uch person because he has seen the person write, or has seen handwriting purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged, and has thus ac%uired 7nowledge of the handwriting of such person. ?vidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison made by the witness in court, with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuinbe to the satisfaction of the judge. 8Sec. .., +ule ,3., +$C%#C. Not m-,5 weig5t is given to 5andwriting e7 erts. ANS.*R/ Hnless, therefore, there is, in a given case, absolute absence, or manifest dearth, or direct or circumstantial competent evidence of the character of a %uestioned handwriting, much weight should not be given to characteristic similarities, or dissimilarities, between the %uestioned handwriting and an authentic one.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!@ of %&'

Questions involving the mere similarity or dissimilarity of handwritings could be determined by the court itself as authoriIed under Sec. .., +ule ,3. of the +ules of Court by ma7ing a comparison of the disputed handwriting Gwith writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.G
*)(D*NC* 0O B* PR*S*N0*D 2US0 B* AD2(SS(BL*

%&. .5en is eviden,e admissible 6 .5at is meant by relevan,y and are t5ere instan,es w5en eviden,e t5at is not relevant is admissible 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' ?vidence is admissible when it is relevant to the issue and is not e cluded by the law or these rules. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,.:, +$C+elevant evidence is that evidence that has such a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its e istence or non&e istence. 8,st sentence, Sec. 4, +ule ,.:, +$C$nly relevant evidence is admissible and evidence on collateral matter is not allowed. Cowever, it may be allowed w5en it tends in any reasonable degree to establis5 t5e robability or im robability of t5e fa,ts in iss-e. 8.nd sentence, Sec. 4, +ule ,.:, +$C%&A. 0o determine w5et5er eviden,e is admissible looA for t5e -r ose. +ive t5e reason be5ind t5e said statement. (ll-strate. ANS.*R/ The reason behind the above statement is that evidence may be admissible for one purpose and not for another purpose. )@@HST+AT)$5' *hile @eon was sitting in front of his house, he saw !iguel running and heard him shouting, GJuan stabbed ;edro.G )f @eon is presented as a witness, during the trial of Juan for having stabbed ;edro, and his testimony is offered to prove that Juan stabbed ;edro, his 8@eonEs- testimony would not be admissible because it is e cluded by the rules for being hearsay. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,.: in relation to Sec. 3/, +ule ,3#, both of the +$C- @eon did not have personal 7nowledge of the fact that Juan stabbed ;edro. Cis 7nowledge that Juan stabbed ;edro was not derived from his own perception but from that of !iguel. $n the other hand, if @eonEs testimony is offered to prove that he heard that !iguel shouted, GJuan stabbed ;edro,G then this would be admissible. )t could not be e cluded under the hearsay rule because his testimony is derived from his own perception of what !iguel said. @eonEs testimony is li7ewise admissible because it is relevant under the concept of independent relevant statement, a statement that tends in a reasonable degree to establis5 t5e robability or im robability of t5e fa,t in iss-e. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,.:, +$C- Cis testimony would tend in a reasonable degree to establish the probability that Juan stabbed ;edro.
OUAL(4(CA0(ON O4 .(0N*SS*S

%'. .5o are 9-alified to be witnesses or w5o may be witnesses 6 ANS.*R' All persons who can perceive, and perceiving, could ma7e 7nown their perception to others, may be witnesses. 8,st par., Sec. 3#, +ule ,3#, +$C-, provided they are not dis%ualified under the +ules of Court. %'A. .5o are dis9-alified to be witnesses6

ANS.*R/ The following are dis%ualified to be witnesses' Those who are dis%ualified by reason of' a. !ental incapacity or immaturity 8Sec. .,, +ule ,3#, +$C-F b. !arriage 8Sec. .., Ibid1F c. >eath or insanity of adverse party 8Sec. .3, Ibid.d. ;rivileged communication 8Sec. .4, Ibid!,- !arital privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KaL, Ibid!-F .- @awyer&client privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KbL, Ibid!-F 3- >octor&patient privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KcL, Ibid!-F

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %!C of %&'

4- ;riest&penitent privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KdL, Ibid!-F and 0- ;ublic officer privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KeL, Ibid!-. e. ;arental and filial testimonial privilege rule 8Sec. .0, +ule ,3#, +$CConviction of a crime does not dis%ualify a person from testifying but may dis%ualify him from being discharged as a state witness. 8Sec. 6 KeL, +ule ,,6, +$C%>. .5at is t5e marital dis9-alifi,ation r-le 6 Disting-is5 t5e marital dis9-alifi,ation r-le from t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le. ANS.*R' >uring their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife may testify for or against the other without the consent of the affected spouse, e cept in a civil case by one against the other, or in a criminal case committed against the other or the latterEs direct descendants or ascendants. 8Sec. .., +ule ,3#, +$CThe distin,tions between t5e marital dis9-alifi,ation r-le and t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ations rule are the following' a. The marital dis%ualification rule applies to any fact *C)@? the marital privileged communications rule refers only to confidential communications made during the marriage. b. The marital dis%ualification rule is claimable only during the marriage *C)@? the marital privileged communications rule is claimable during or after the marriage. %>A. .5at are t5e re9-isites for invoAing t5e marital dis9-alifi,ation r-le6 ANS.*R/ ,- The spouses are legally marriedF .- The marriage is subsisting at the time of the testimonyF 3- The spouse is being made to testify for or against the otherF 4- The spouse who is testifying was not given the consent to testify by the other spouseF 0- The case is not a civil case filed by one spouse against the other or a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latterEs direct descendants or ascendants. 8Sec. .., +ule ,3#, +$Cb. >o not confuse the marital dis%ualification rule under Sec. .., +ule ,3#, +$C with the marital privileged communication rule under Sec. .4 KaL, +ule ,3#, +$C. c. The rationale behind the marital dis%ualification rule is to preserve the marriage relation as one of full confidence, affection and concord. d. The right to invo7e this dis%ualification belongs to the spouse&party against or for whom the testimony is being proferred. )t may be waived ,- By a failure to interpose timely objection, or .- By calling the other spouse as witness The privilege could be invo7ed even if the spouse is testifying in favor of the spouse& party because damaging testimony may be elicited during the cross&e amination. %?. .5at is t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le 6 ANS.*R' a. The husband or the wife, b. during or after the marriage, c. cannot be e amined d. without the consent of the other e. as to any communication ,- received in confidence .- by one from the other 3- during the marriage f. e cept ,- in a civil case by one against the other, or .- in a criminal case committed by one a- against the other or b- the latterEs direct descendants or descendants. 8Sec. .4KaL. +ule ,3#, +$C-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#" of %&'

%?A. .5at are t5e re9-isites for t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le are t5e following6 ANS.*R/ ,- The parties are or were legally married. .- The communication, oral or written, was made during the marriageF 3- The communication was received in confidenceF 4- The e amination is done during the marriage. 0- The consent of the other spouse was not given. /- The case is not a civil case filed by one against the other or a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latterEs direct ascendants or descendants. %?B. +ive t5e rational be5ind t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le. ANS.*R/ marriage. %?C. A To preserve the peace of families and maintain the sacred institution of

li,ations of t5e marital rivileged ,omm-n,iation r-le.

ANS.*R/ ,- ?very communication between spouses is presumed to be confidential. .- Communications made in the presence of third parties are not confidential, unless the third person may be considered as an agent of the spouses. 3- Communications overheard by third persons remain confidential as between the spouses, but the third person who overheard may be called upon to testify. 4- Communications coming into the hands of third persons, whether legally or illegally, remain confidential as between the spouses, but the third person may be called upon to testify. But if the third person ac%uired 7nowledge of the communication by collusion and voluntary disclosure on the part of either of the spouses, he thereby becomes an agent of such spouses so that the privilege is claimable against him. 0- Communications intended for transmission to third persons are not confidential. The above rules may apply by analogy to other privileged communications. %?D. .aiver of t5e marital rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le. ANS.*R/ The privilege is claimable by the spouse not called as witness, so that it its waivable only by him or herF and it is waivable by any act of such spouse which might be considered as an e press or implied consent to the disclosure of the communication. %@. .5at is meant by t5e s-rvivorFs dis9-alifi,ation r-le or t5e dead manFs stat-te 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' a. ;arties or assignors of parties to a case, or b. persons on whose behalf a case is prosecuted, c. against an e ecutor or administrator or other representative d. of a deceased person, or against a person of unsound mind, e. cannot testify as to any matter of fact f. occurring before the death of such person or g. before such person became of unsound mind. Sec. .3, +ule ,3#, +$C%@A. Rationale: ob8e,t and -r ose of Dead 2anFs Stat-te. ANS.*R/ ,- To discourage false testimony or perjury on the part of the survivorF and .- To protect the deceased against false and unjust claims. %@B. .5at is t5e ob8e,t and -r ose of t5e r-le6

ANS.*R' The object and purpose of the rule is to guard against the temptation to give false testimony in regard of the transaction in %uestion on the part of the surviving party,

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#% of %&'

and further to put the two parties to a suit upon terms of e%uality in regard o the opportunity to giving testimony. )f one party to the alleged transaction is precluded from testifying by death, insanity, or other mental disabilities, the other party is not entitled to the undue advantage of giving his own uncontradicted and une plained account of the transaction. %@B. *7,e tions to t5e s-rvivorFs dis9-alifi,ation r-le. ANS.*R/ ,- $rdinary witnesses, who are not the plaintiff, assignor of plaintiff, or person in whose behalf the case is prosecuted may testify. .- *hen the plaintiff is a corporation, the officers or stoc7holders thereof are not dis%ualified. 3- *hen there is an imputation of fraud against the deceased, the plaintiff is not barred from testifying to such fraud 4- *hen the plaintiff is the e ecutor, administrator or legal representative of the deceased, or the person of unsound mind, the defendant or defendants are free to testify against the plaintiff. 0- *hen the defendant or defendants, though heirs of the deceased, are sued in their personal and individual capacities, the plaintiff may testify against them. /- *hen the survivorEs testimony refers to a negative fact. "- *hen the survivorEs testimony is favorable to the deceased. :- The adverse party is competent to testify to transactions or communications with the deceased or incompetent person which were made with an agent of such person in cases in which the agent is still alive and competent to testify. But the testimony of the adverse party must be confined o those transactions or communications which were had with the agent. %@C. 1ow rote,tion of t5e dead manFs stat-te is waived6 ANS.*R/ ,- By not objecting to plaintiffEs testimony on prohibited matters. .- By cross&e amining the plaintiff on prohibited matters. 3- By calling witnesses to testify on prohibited matters. 4- *hen the plaintiffEs deposition is ta7en by the representative of the estate or when counsel for the representative cross&e amined the plaintiff as to matters occurring during the deceasedEs lifetime. %C. *7 lain w5at is meant by t5e arental and filial testimonial rivilege r-le. ANS.*R 5o person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants, children or other direct descendants. 8Sec. .0, +ule ,3#, +$C%CA. .5o may not be ,om elled to testify against ,ertain arental and filial testimonial rivilege r-le6 arties -nder t5e

ANS.*R/ ,- ;erson against his parents.. .- ;erson against his other direct ascendants li7e grandparents, great grandparents, great great grandparents. 3- ;erson against his children. 4- ;erson against his other direct descendants li7e grandchildren, great great grandchildren. %CB. .5o are not ,overed and may be ,om elled to testify6 ANS.*R/ ,- +elatives by affinity. .- Brothers and sisters. 3- Aunts, uncles, nephews, nieces. 4- Cousins of whatever degree. 0- $ther collateral relatives.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#! of %&'

;arental and filial testimony dies not prohibit voluntary testimony or compelled testimony against relatives by affinity or collateral relatives. %CC. Rationale be5ind arental and filial testimonial rivilege r-le6 ANS.*R/ To preserve harmonious relations between parent and child which could be ruptured through testifying in court. Aurthermore, perjury may result because the parent or the child may give false testimony to protect the other. The author believes that the adopted and adopter are covered by the parental and filial testimonial privilege rule but only insofar as the parent and child is concerned. )t does not e tend to the direct ascendants of the adopter because the adoptive relation is between the adopter and the adopted only. The reason for this opinion is the rationale behind the privilege. !". .5at is meant by dis9-alifi,ation by reason of t5e rivileged ,omm-ni,ation r-le 6 ANS.*R' Hnder this rule, a person is dis%ualified to testify as to matters learned in ,onfiden,e 8Sec. .4, +ule ,3#, +$C-. )t should be noted that the person 8other than a spouse under Sec. .4KaL, +ule ,3#- is not otherwise prohibited to testify. Ce could testify but not on the matters learned in confidence. There are five 7inds of privileged communications that could not be the subject of testimony' a. !arital privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KaL, Ibid!-F b. @awyer&client privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KbL, Ibid!-F c. >octor&patient privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KcL, Ibid!-F d. ;riest&penitent privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KdL, Ibid!-F e. ;ublic officer privileged communication rule 8Sec. .4 KeL, Ibid!-. !%. .5at is t5e 5ysi,ian and a tient rivileged ,ommm-ni,ation r-le 6 ANS.*R' a. A person authoriIed to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics b. cannot in a civil case, c. without the consent of the patient, d. be e amined as to ,- any advice or treatment given by him or .- any information a- which he may have ac%uired in attending such patient in a professional capacity, b- which information was necessary to enable him to act in that capacity, and c- which would blac7en the reputation of the patient . 8Sec. .4 KcL, +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied!%A. 05e 5ysi,ian may be ,om elled to testify in a ,riminal ,ase. +ive t5e rationale be5ind t5e rivilege/ ANS.*R' The reason is to facilitate and ma7e safe, full and confidential disclosure by a patient to the physician of all symptoms, untrammeled by apprehension of their subse%uent and enforced disclosure and publication on the witness stand. !%B. .aiver of t5e rivilege6 ANS.*R' This privilege belongs to the patient, so that it is only he that can claim or waive it. )t is waivable e pressly or impliedly. )t is impliedly waived li7e any other privilege rule.
AD2(SS(ONS AND CON4*SS(ONS

!!. .5at is self-serving eviden,e 6 (s it admissible in eviden,e 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' An admission favorable to the party ma7ing it.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %## of %&'

!!A. admissible6

.5y are self-serving or favorable admissions made o-t of ,o-rt not

ANS.*R/ +?AS$5S ,- A man may be safely believed if he declares against his own interest, but not if he advocates his interest. .- )t is e cluded on the same ground as any hearsay evidence, that, the lac7 of opportunity for cross&e amination by the adverse party. !!b. .5en self-serving or favorable admissions are admissible6 ANS.*R/ ,- )f made in open court .- giving full opportunity to the adverse party 3- to e ercise his right of cross&e amination. !#. State t5e r-le on admission by silen,e. ANS.*R' a. An act or declaration made ,- in the presence and .- within the hearing or 3- observation b. of a party who does or says nothing c. when the act or declaration ,- is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true, and .- when proper and possible for him to do so, d. may be given in evidence against him. 8Sec. 3., +ule ,3#, +$C!#A. Re9-isites for a li,ation of r-le on admission by silen,e

ANS.*R/ Before the silence of a party can be ta7en as an admission of what is said, it must appear that' ,- he heard and understood the statementF .- he was at liberty to interpose a denialF 3- the statement was in respect to some matter affecting his rights, or in which he was then interested, and calling, naturally, for an answerF 4- the facts were within his 7nowledgeF and 0- the fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence would be material to the issue. !#B. Rationale be5ind r-le on admission by silen,e. ANS.*R/ The reason is the recogniIed rule that if a man remains silent when he ought to spea7, he will be debarred from spea7ing later. 3ui tacet consitere videtur or silence means consent. !#C. *7,e tions to t5e r-le on admission by silen,e or instan,es w5ere t5ere is no admission by silen,e. ANS.*R/ ,- *here no good reason e ists for the party to comment on the act or declaration, as when the act or declaration was not specifically directed to the party who remained silent. .- *hen the party had no opportunity to comment on the act or declaration. 3- *here the act or declaration was made in the course of an official investigation. 4- *hen silence is upon advice of counsel. !&. Disting-is5 e7tra8-di,ial ,onfessions from admissions.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#& of %&'

ANS.*R' A confession, as distinguished from admission, is a declaration made at any time by a person, voluntarily and without compulsion or inducement, stating or ac7nowledging that he had committed or participated in the commission of a crime. The term, admission, on the other hand, is usually applied in criminal cases to statements of fact by the accused which do not directly involve an ac7nowledgment of the guilt of the accused or of criminal intent to commit the offense with which he is charged. !'. .5en is an offer of ,om romise not admissible in eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' )n civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror. 8,st par., Sec. .", +ule ,3#, +$Ca. An offer to pay of the payment of medical, hospital, or other e penses, occasioned by an injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury. 8last par., Sec. .", +ule ,3#, +$Cb. +ationale for non&admissibility of offer to compromise in civil cases' To encourage the parties to settle their suits amicably resulting to decongestion of the courtsE clogged doc7ets. c. Compromise is a contract whereby the parties, by ma7ing reciprocal concessions, avoid a litigation or put an end to one already commenced. 8Article .#.:, Civil Code of the ;hilippines!>. .5en is an offer to ,om romise admissible in eviden,e 6 Are t5ere any e7,e tions 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R/ a. )n criminal cases, e cept ,- those involving %uasi&offenses 8criminal negligence- or .- those allowed by law to be compromised, b. an offer of compromise by the accused c. may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt . 8.nd par., Sec. .", +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied!?. .5at is meant by res inter alios a,ta alteri no,ere non debet or res inter alios a,ta6 ANS.*R' Statements made or matters accomplished between two parties cannot prejudice a third party. The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or omission of another, e cept as hereinafter provided. 8Sec. .:, +ule ,3#, +$C!?A. Rational for res inter alios a,ta/ ANS.*R/ This evidentiary rule guards against the practical inconvenience of trying collateral issues and protracting the trial and prevents surprise or other mischief prejudicial to litigants. !?B. *7,e tions to res inter alios a,ta. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen there is a rational similarity or resemblance between the conditions giving rise to he fact offered and the circumstances surrounding the issue or fact to be proved. .- )n actions based on fraud and deceit, because it sheds light on the state of mind or 7nowledge of a personF it provides insight into such personEs motive or intentF it uncovers a scheme, design or planF or it reveals a mista7e 3- The rights of a party may be prejudiced by the act, declaration or omission of another when between the party ma7ing the admission and against whom it is offered there e ists a relation of' a- partnershipF b- agencyF c- joint interestF d- conspiracyF or e- privity.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#' of %&'

!?C. R-le on admission by ,o- artner or agent. ANS.*R/ ,- The act or declaration of a partner or .- agent within the scope of his authority and during the e istence of the partnership or agency, 3- may be given in evidence against such party 4- after the partnership or agency a- is shown by evidence b- other than such act or declaration. 0- The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other person jointly interested with the party. 8Sec. .6, +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied!?D. R-le on admission by ,ons irator. ANS.*R/ ,- The act or declaration of a conspirator .- relating to the conspiracy and during its e istence, 3- may be given in evidence against the co&conspirator 4- after the conspiracy a- is shown by evidence b- other than such act or declaration. 8Sec. 3#, +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied!?*. Re9-isites for a li,ation of t5e admission by ,ons irator.

ANS.*R/ ,- The conspiracy must be established by independent evidence. .- The statement refers to the purpose or object of the conspiracy. 3- The statement must be made during the e istence of the conspiracy. This refers to e trajudicial acts and declarations of a conspirator and not to his testimony as a witness in the trial. !@. .5at is t5e robative val-e of a ,onfession 6 ANS.*R' )t depends on whether the confession is judicial or e trajudicial. a. A judicial confession, li7e a plea of guilty, is in fact evidence of guilt of the most trustworthy 7ind, is conclusive upon the court and is sufficient to sustain a judgment of conviction. b. An e trajudicial confession made by an accused, shall not be sufficient ground for conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. 8Sec. 3, +ule ,33, +$C!@A. Confession: defined. ANS.*R/ The declaration of an accused ac7nowledging his guilt of the offense charged, or of any offense necessarily included therein. 8Sec. 33, +ule ,3#, +$C A confession made by an accused may be given in eviden,e against 5im. 8Sec. 33, +ule ,3#, +$C paraphrasing supplied!@B. .5y is ,onfession is eviden,e of 5ig5 order6 ANS.*R/ ,- There is no evidence of a higher %uality than a confession, )t represents the outward manifestation of a man. Hnless, therefore, the confession is nullified by evidence of duress, the same is admissible as an evidence of guilt of a high %uality. .- )f a confession be true and voluntary, the deliberate act of the accused with a full comprehension of its significance, there is no impediment to its admission as evidence and it then becomes evidence of a high order, since it is supported by the presumption, a very strong

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#> of %&'

one, that no person of normal mind will deliberately and 7nowingly confess himself to be the perpetrator of a crime, especially if it be a serious crime, unless prompted by truth and conscience. !@C. Probative val-e of re,antations. ANS.*R/ They are loo7ed upon with disfavor as recantations are usually secured through intimidation or for a monetary consideration. !@D. +eneral r-le on admissibility of ,onfession. ANS.*R/ A confession is admissible only against the accused who made it and not against his co&accused, for as against the latter, the confession would be hearsay and res inter alios acta! !@*. *7,e tions/ w5en a ,onfession is admissible against ,o-a,,-sed. ANS.*R/ ,- *hen the confession of an accused implicating his co&accused is made judicially at a joint trial or when the e trajudicial statements implicating a co&accused are repeated in open court, because the co&accused as a chance to cross&e amine. .- *hen the offer in evidence of an e trajudicial confession against a co&accused is not objected to. 3- *hen the co&accused against whom an e trajudicial confession is offered had, by his acts, conducts and declarations adopted he confession as his own. 4- *here several accused, without collusion, made e trajduicial confessions which are identical in essential details and corroborated by other evidence, such confession is admissible against the others. 0- The confession of a conspirator is admissible against his co&conspirator provided it was made during the e istence of the conspiracy. /- *hen the recitals in the e trajudicial confession of an accused is corroborated in its important details by other proofs in the record, it may be admitted against the other accused. !@4. Dis,-ss w5y t5e e7tra8-di,ial ,onfessions identi,al in material res e,ts Ealso Anown as interlo,Aing ,onfessionsD admissible against all de,larants. ANS.*R/ ,- As ,ir,-mstantial eviden,e. ? trajudicial confessions independently made without collusion and are identical with each other in their material respects and confirmatory of the other are admissible as circumstantial evidence against co&accused implicated therein to show the probability of the latterEs actual participation in the commission of the crime. 8;eople v. ?ncipido, et al., ,4/ SC+A 46..- As ,orroborative eviden,e. They are admissible as corroborative evidence against the other accused, if it is clear from other facts and circumstances presented that persons other than the declarants themselves participated in the commission of the crime charged and proved. 8Ibid!They are what is commonly 7nown as interloc7ing confession and constitute an e ception to the general rule that e trajudicial confessionsMadmissions are admissible in evidence only against the declarants thereof. 8Ibid!The invocation of amnesty is in the nature of a plea of confession and avoidance, which means that the pleader admits the allegations against him, but disclaims liability therefor on account of intervening facts which, if proved, would bring the crime charged within the scope of the amnesty proclamation. !C. .5at is meant by ,or -s deli,ti 6 +ive e7am les. ANS.*R/ a. )t refers to a particular crime and signifies that the specific offense had been actually committed by someone, being composed of two elements' ,- certain results were produced, and .- someone is criminally responsible.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#? of %&'

b. )t also means actual commission of the crime charged, or the specific fact of loss or injury. !CA. +ive e7am les of corpus delicti. ANS.*R/ a. )n murder or homicide, the corpus delicti is the fact of death, which may be proved even circumstantially. b. )n robbery or theft, the fact of loss. c. )n arson, the fact of burning, d. )n an affray, the fact that pistol shots were heard and a bystander was 7illed by one of the shots constitute evidence of corpus delicti, which is the violent death of a person, whether feloniously caused or not. !CB. Convi,tion for m-rder ro er even if vi,timFs body is not rod-,ed.

ANS.*R/ )n all crimes against persons in which the death of the victim is an essential element of the offense, there must be satisfactory evidence of the fact of death and the identity of the victim that a crime has been committed which is what corpus delicti really means. The failure of the prosecution to produce the body of the victim does not imply the absence of corpus delicti for the term does not refer to the body of the murdered person.
PR*)(OUS CONDUC0 AS *)(D*NC*

#". (s revio-s ,ond-,t admissible in eviden,e 6 *7 lain. ANS.*R' ?vidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same thing or a similar thing at another time. 8Sec. 34, +ule,3#, +$C#"A. Rationale be5ind t5e ro5ibition. A5S*?+' ?vidence of similar acts or occurrences compels the defendant to meet allegations that are not mentioned in the complaint, confuses him in his defense, raises a variety of irrelevant issues, and diverts the attention of the court from the issues immediately before it. #"B. Cite e7,e tions or w5en revio-s ,ond-,t admissible in eviden,e. A5S*?+' ,- ?vidence that one did or did not do .- a certain thing at one time 3- may be received in evidence to prove a- a specific intent or 7nowledge, b- identity, plan, system, scheme, c- habit, custom or usage, and the li7e. 8Sec. 34, +ule ,3#, +$C rephrasing, arrangement and numbering supplied1*ARSAL RUL*

#%. *7 lain t5e meaning of t5e 5earsay r-le. ANS.*R' a. A witness can testify b. only to those facts c. which he 7nows of his personal 7nowledgeF d. that is which are derived from his own perception, e. e cept as otherwise provided in these rules 8Sec. 3/, +ule ,3#, +$C- of Court. Conse%uently, facts which are not derived from the perception of the witness is hearsay, and not admissible. The rule is not limited to oral testimony, it also includes writings. 8.# Am. Jur. 4##-

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#@ of %&'

#%A. +ive e7am les of 5earsay eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- The testimony of a witness as to what he has heard another person say about the facts in dispute. See concept of independent relevant statement. .- Affidavits. 3- A letter offered in evidence to establish the facts in issue. 4- A medical certificate to the e tent of the injuries found by the doctor on the offended partyEs body. 0- A resolution of the municipal council of a certain municipality as to the character of an accused in a criminal case. #%B. .5at is t5e t5eory of t5e 5earsay r-le6 ANS.*R' *hen a human utterance is offered as evidence of the truth of the fact asserted in it, the credit of the assertor becomes the basis of inference, and therefore the assertion can be received as evidence only when made on the witness stand, subject to the test of cross& e amination. #%C. Rationale be5ind t5e non-admissibioity of 5earsay eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- A witness can testify only to those facts which he 7nows of his own 7nowledgeF and .- To preserve the right of parties to cross&e amine the original witness or person claiming to have 7nowledge of the transaction or occurrence. The right to cross&e amine he adverse partyEs witnesses is essential in the administration of justice for it is the only means of testing the credibility of witnesses and their testimony, and this right is not available in respect of hearsay evidence since he declarant is not in court. d. +eneral r-le/ Affidavits wit5o-t resenting afiant in ,o-rt is mere 5earsay ' The constitutional right to confrontation precludes reliance on affidavits. Such a constitutional safeguard cannot be satisfied unless the opportunity is given to the accused to test the credibility of any person, who, by affidavit or deposition would impute the commission of an offense to him. )t would be to disregard one of the most valuable guarantees of a person accused if solely on the affidavits presented, his guilt could be predicated. e. *7,e tions/ w5en affidavits are given weig5t/ ,- *here said affidavits are overwhelming, uncontroverted by competent evidence and not inherently improbable. .- Hnder the +ule on Summary ;rocedure for civil casesF 3- *hen a motion is based on facts not appearing of record the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct hat the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions. 8Sec. ", +ule ,33, +$C*=C*P0(ONS 0O 01* 1*ARSAL RUL*

#!. .5at are t5e e7,e tions to t5e 5earsay r-le 6 ANS.*R' There are certain instances, where by reasons of convenience and public policy, matters usually considered as hearsay are admissible in evidence. Among such e ceptional instances are' a. >ying declaration 8Sec. 3", +ule ,3#, +$C-F b. >eclaration against interest 8Sec. 3:, Ibid!c. Act or declaration about pedigree 8Sec. 36, Ibid!-F d. Aamily reputation or tradition regarding pedigree 8Sec. 4#, Ibid!e. Common reputation 8Sec. 4,, Ibid!-F f. ;art of the res gestae 8Sec. 4., Ibid!-F g. ?ntries in the course of business 8Sec. 43, Ibid!-F h. ?ntries in official records 8Sec. 44, Ibid!-F i. Commercial lists and the li7e 8Sec. 40, Ibid!-F j. @earned treatises 8Sec. 4/, Ibid!-F

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %#C of %&'

7. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding 8Sec. 4", Ibid!##. *7 lain and ill-strate t5e ,on,e t of an inde endent relevant statement. ANS.*R' )t is a statement intended not to establish the truth of the facts asserted in that statement, but to establish only the tenor of the statement, not the truth of the facts therein asserted. (ll-stration' )n a libel case, if the prosecution witness testifies that he heard the accused say that the complainant was a rapist, this testimony is admissible not to prove that the complainant was really a rapist, but merely to show what the accused uttered. )ndependent relevant statements are hearsay in character but not legal hearsay. hence they are not considered as e ceptions to the hearsay rule. #&. *7 lain t5e ,on,e t of dying de,laration as an e7,e tion to t5e 5earsay r-le. ANS.*R' a. The declaration of a dying person, b. made under consciousness of an impending death, c. may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of in%uiry, d. as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death. 8Sec. 3", +ule ,3#, +$C arrangement and numbering supplied#&A. +ive t5e rationale be5ind admitting dying de,laration or w5y dying de,laration is an e7,e tion to t5e 5earsay r-le. ,- 5ecessity, because the declarantEs death ma7es it impossible to obtain testimony in court and, usually, in crimes against persons, the victimEs testimony is the best evidence of the crime. .- Trustworthiness, because it is made at the point of death, a situation so solemn and awful as creating an obligation e%ual to that created by a positive oath administered in a court of justice. #&B. .5at are t5e re9-isites of ante$mortem statement6 ANS.*R/ a. )t must concern any case involved in and the circumstances surrounding the declarantEs deathF b. At the time of the declaration, the declarant must be conscious of impending deathF c. The declarant must be competent as a witnessF d. The declaration must be offered in any case wherein the death of the declarant is the subject of in%uiryF and e. The declarant actually died, otherwise, the declaration may be admitted as part of the res gestae and not as a dying declaration #&C. (n dying de,laration: does t5e vi,tim 5ave to state t5at 5e 5as lost all 5o e of re,overy6 ANS.*R/ 9ictim need not state that he has lost all hope of recovery. )t is sufficient that circumstances are such as to inevitably lead to the conclusion that at the time the declaration was made, the declarant would not e pect to survive the injury from which he actually died. The degree and seriousness of the wounds and the fact that death supervened thereafter constitute substantial evidence of the victimEs consciousness of his impending death. 8;eople v.
Tanaman, et al., <.+. 5o. ","/:, July .:, ,6:"-

#&D. Does t5e dying de,laration 5ave weig5t even if t5e de,larant did not die immediately after 5is de,laration6 ANS.*R' >ying declaration has weight even if declarant did not die immediately after his declaration' The fact that the declarant died four 84- hours after his statement does not

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&" of %&'

diminish the probative value of the dying declaration since it is not indispensable that the a declarant e pires immediately thereafter. )t is the belief of impending death and not the rapid succession of death that renders the dying declaration admissible. !ere gesture of dying victim inconclusive' The gesture of a dying woman in pointing to a direction, when as7ed for the identity of her assailant, is too vague to be given such probative value in determining the culpability of the accused. +?AS$5' Hnli7e an oral or a written declaration, a simple gesture of the hand unaccompanied by words, is open to various interpretations by the witness who testifies to its e istence. Thus, the evidence comes to the court couched in the witnessE second hand perception and possibly, imbued with his personal meanings and biases. This is what ma7es hearsay evidence objectionable. The second hand evidence is placed before the court without the benefit of cross&e amination by the party against whom it is brought, nor of any other means of assessing the competence and credibility of the source. 8;eople v. $la,
<.+. 5o. @&4",4", July 3, ,6:"-

#'. .5at are t5e re9-isites for admissibility of de,laration against interest 6 ANS.*R' a. The declaration is made by ,- a person deceased, or .- unable to testify, b. against the interest of the declarant, c. if the fact asserted in the declaration ,- was at the time it was made .- so far contrary to declarantEs own interest, 3- that a reasonable man in his position a- would not have made the declaration b- unless he believed it to be true. 8Sec. 3:, +ule ,3#, +$C#'A. De,laration against interest disting-is5ed from admission. ANS.*R/ ,- An admission is not necessarily against the interest of the admitter *C)@? the declaration must be against the declarantEs own interestF .- An admission may be received even if the admitter is alive *C)@? the declarant must be dead or is unable to testifyF 3- An admission may be received in evidence only against the admitter and those identified with him in legal interest *C)@? the declaration may be received even against third persons. 8Smith v. !oore, ,4. 5.C. .""#'B. .5en is de,laration against interest re,eived in eviden,e6 ANS.*R/ ,- Against the declarantF .- Against his successors in interestF and 3- Against third persons. 8Sec. 3:, +ule ,3#, +$C#>. *7 lain t5e ,on,e t of res gestae. ANS.*R' A matter incidental to the main fact and e planatory of it, including acts and words which are so closely connected therewith as to constitute a part of the transaction, and without a 7nowledge of which the main fact might not be properly understood. .# Am. Jur. 003*hat is admissible as part of res gestae is not the details of an occurrence, but the human assertions or statements about those details. 8.# Am. Jur. 003&00/#>A +ive t5e rationale be5ind admissibility of res gestae or w5y res gestae is an e7,e tion to t5e 5earsay r-le. ANS.*R/

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&% of %&'

,- 5ecessity because such natural and spontaneous utterances are more convincing than the testimony of the same person on the stand. .- Trustworthiness because these statements are made instinctively. #?. gestae6 a. b. c. d. .5at are t5e re9-isites for s ontaneo-s e7,lamations as art of t5e res

ANS.*R' The res gestae is an e%uivocal act. The e%uivocal act must be material to the issue. The statement or %uestion must be necessary for the understanding of the e%uivocal act. The statement must accompany the e%uivocal act. #@. +ive e7am les of s ontaneo-s e7,lamations as art of t5e res gestae.

ANS.*R' a. A conversation between two accused immediately after the commission of the crime overheard by prosecution witnesses. b. A statement made by a wounded person shortly after a violent occurrence heard by another. c. The statement made by a shooting victim to persons who answered his cries for help that the accused shot him. #C. .5at is t5e nat-re of e7 ert o inions 6 ANS.*R' ? pert opinions are not ordinarily conclusive in the sense that they must be accepted as true on the subject of their testimony, but are generally regarded as purely advisoryF the courts may place whatever weight they choose upon such testimony and may reject it, if they find that it is inconsistent with the facts in the case or otherwise unreasonable. Testimony of handwriting e pert not indispensable to C$!?@?C. Candwriting e perts, while probably useful, are not indispensable in e amining or comparing handwritingF this can be done by the C$!?@?C itself. )t was ruled by the Supreme Court that evidence aliunde is not allowed to prove that a ballot is mar7ed, an inspection of the ballot itself being sufficient.
C1ARAC0*R *)(D*NC* PR*SU2P0(ONS

&". .5at are t5e re9-isites for adverse res-m tion from sANS.*R' a. The suppression is wilful. 8Sec. 3&e, +ule ,3,, +$C- continue b. The suppression is not in the e ercise of a privilege. c. The evidence suppressed is not merely corroborative. d. The evidence is at the disposal only of the suppressing party. &"A. not a ly. Cite instan,es w5ere adverse res-m tion from s-

ression of eviden,e 6

ression of eviden,e does

ANS.*R/ a. )f the evidence is at the disposal of both parties. b. The suppression was not willful. c. The suppressed evidence is merely corroborative or cumulative. d. The suppression is an e ercise of a privilege. &%. .5at is b-rden of roof 6 ANS.*R' a. Burden of proof is b. the duty of a party c. to present evidence d. on the facts in issue

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&! of %&'

e. necessary to establish his claim or defense f. by the amount of evidence g. re%uired by law. 8Sec. ,, +ule ,3,, +$C, arrangement and numbering supplied. &%A. .5at is t5e risA of non- ers-asion6 ANS.*R/ +is7 of non&persuasion is another term for burden of proof. The burden of proof lies upon the party who would be defeated if no evidence were given on either side. &%B. Dis,-ss briefly t5e b-rden of eviden,e. ANS.*R/ The duty resting upon a party, by means of evidence, to create or meet a prima )acie case. ?ach party must prove his affirmative allegation. Since the burden of evidence lies with the party who asserts an affirmative allegation, the plaintiff or complainant has to prove his affirmative allegations in the complaint and the defendant or respondent has to prove the affirmative allegations in his affirmative defenses and counterclaims. >uty of going forward with the evidence or burden of going forward is another term for burden of evidence. )llustration of going forward with the evidence' Aor e ample after the e istence of a debt has been proven by the creditor the burden of proving payment devolves upon the debtor. *here the debtor introduces evidence of payment, the burden of going forward with the evidence & as distinct from the general burden of proof& shifts to the creditor who is then under the duty of producing evidence to show non&payment. )n short, the burden of going forward is the burden of producing evidence. &!. .5at is t5e do,trine of e9-i ose 6 ANS.*R' *here the evidence on an issue of fact is in e%uipoise or there is doubt on which side the evidence preponderates, the party having the burden of proof fails upon that issue. Therefore, as neither party was able to ma7e out a case, neither side could establish its cause of action and prevail with the evidence it had. They are thus no better off than before they proceeded to litigate, and, as a conse%uence thereof, the courts can only leave them as they are. &!A. Disting-is5 b-rden of roof from b-rden of eviden,e. ANS.*R/ Burden of proof does not shift during the course of the trialF it remains with the party upon whom the law cast it at the beginning of the trial. $n the other hand, burden of evidence shifts or passes from side to side as the trial progresses and evidence is introduced. &!B. .5o 5as t5e b-rden of roof in ,ivil ,ases6 ANS.*R/ The plaintiff has the burden of proof in civil cases' ,- )n civil cases, the burden of proof is on the party who would be defeated if no evidence is given on either side. The party who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it. .- )n civil cases, the burden of proof rests upon the party who, as determined by the pleadings or the nature of the case asserts affirmative allegations of an issue. +?AS$5' Ce who asserts and not he who denies, must prove. The party who asserts the affirmative would lose as to a particular issue or the entire case, if no evidence were given on either side. 8Ibid!, citing Sec. ,, +ule ,3,, +$C&!C. .5o 5as t5e b-rden of roof in ,riminal ,ases6 ANS.*R/ ;rosecution has burden of proof in criminal cases. )n criminal cases the burden of proof as to the offense charged lies on the prosecution. A negative fact alleged by the prosecution need not be proved unless it is an essential ingredient of the offense charged. +?AS$5' The accused has in his favor the presumption of innocence. &!D. .5o 5as t5e b-rden of roof in infringement ,ases6

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&# of %&'

ANS.*R/ Burden of proof in infringement cases. The burden of proof to substantiate a charge of infringement is with the plaintiff. But where he plaintiff introduces the patent in evidence, and the same is in due form, there is created a prima )acie presumption of its correctness and validity. The decision of the Commissioner of ;atent 8now the >irector of the )ntellectual ;roperty $ffice-, in granting the patent is presumed to be correct. The burden of going forward with the evidence 8burden of evidence- then shifts to the defendant to overcome by competent evidence this legal presumption.
ORD*R O4 PR*S*N0A0(ON O4 *)(D*NC*

&#. State t5e order of resentation of eviden,e if trial is to be 5eard in order to add-,e eviden,e. ANS.*R/ a. The plaintiff shall adduce evidence in support of his complaintF b. The defendant shall then adduce evidence, in support of his defense, counterclaim, cross&claim and third&party complaintF c. The third&party defendant, if any, shall adduce evidence of his defense, counterclaim, cross&claim and fourth&party complaintF d. The fourth&party, and so forth, if any, shall adduce evidence of the material facts pleaded by themF e. The parties against whom any counterclaim or cross&claim has been pleaded, shall adduce evidence in support of their defense, in the order to be prescribed by the courtF f. The parties may then respectively adduce rebutting evidence only, unless the court, for good reasons and in the furtherance of justice, permits them to adduce evidence upon their original caseF and g. Hpon admission of the evidence, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision, unless the court directs the parties to argue or to submit their respective memoranda, or any further pleadings. )f several defendants or third&party defendants, and so forth, having separate defenses appear by different counsel, the court shall determine he relative order of presentation of their evidence. 8Sec. 0, +ule 3#, +$C&#A. .5at is t5e s,o e of t5e 8-dgeFs arti,i ation at t5e trial6

ANS.*R/ A judge who presides at a trial is not a mere referee. Ce must actively participate therein by directing counsel to the facts in dispute, by as7ing clarifying %uestions, and by showing an interest in a fast a fair trial. Ce can interrogate witnesses to elicit the truth, to obtain clarification, or to test their credibility. Cowever, this power must be e ercised by the court sparingly and judiciously. $f course, the judge cannot curtail counselEs right to interrogate witnesses. &#B. Dis,-ss t5e ower of ,o-rt to sto f-rt5er eviden,e. ANS.*R/ ,- The court may stop .- the introduction of further testimony 3- upon any particular point 4- when the evidence upon it is already so full 0- that more witnesses to the same point /- cannot be reasonably e pected "- to be additionally persuasive. But this power should be e ercised with caution. 8Sec. /, +ule ,33, +$C*hen the evidence already presented on one point is sufficient and the party merely see7s to present cumulative evidence which cannot produce additional persuasive effect or that

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&& of %&'

he is not sure of what the other witnesses would testify, the court may in its sound discretion stop the introduction of such further evidence. &#C. .5at is t5e role of t5e attorney d-ring resentation of eviden,e. ANS.*R/ An attorney has a dual role to perform relative to proving the truth respecting a matter of fact. Ce must ensure that all evidence supporting the material allegations, whether raised in the pleadings or not are admitted by the court. Cis other role is to bloc7 the admission of evidence supporting his opponentsE material allegations whether raised in the pleadings or not. )n order to perform this dual role the attorney should ensure that the evidence he offers are admissible in accordance with the +ules of Court and those of his opponent are properly objected to for being inadmissible &&. .5at is t5e rationale for re9-irement of offer of eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' The offer is necessary because it is the duty of a judge to rest his findings of facts and his judgment only and strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties to the suit. ?vidence not formally offered not considered on appeal. ?vidence is not formally offered before the trial court cannot be considered on appeal. To consider them at this stage will deny the other parties their right to rebut them. &'. .5at is meant by resent re,olle,tion revived 6 ANS.*R' A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a matter of at by referring to anything' a. *ritten or recorded by himself or under his directionF b. At the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memoryF c. Ce 7new that the same was correctly written or recorded. But in such case the writing must be produced and may be inspected by the adverse party who may, if he chooses, cross&e amine the witness upon it, and may read it in evidence. 8Sec. ,/, +ule ,3., +$C&'A. .5at is t5e ,on,e t of ast re,olle,tion re,orded6

ANS.*R/ A witness may testify from such writing or record though he retains no recollection of the particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the transaction when made, but such evidence must be received with caution. 8Sec. ,/, +ule ,3., +$C&>. .5at is t5e effe,t of inadmissible eviden,e t5at 5as not been ro erly ob8e,ted to6 ANS.*R' )t is a well&settled doctrine that where the proponent offers evidence deemed by counsel of the adverse party to be inadmissible for any reason, the latter has the right to object. A protest or objection against the admission of any evidence must be made at the proper time, and that if not so made it will be understood to have been waived. The proper time to ma7e a protest or objection is when, from the %uestion addressed to the witness, or from the answer thereto, or from the presentation of proof, the inadmissibility of evidence is, or may be inferred. Cross&e amination conducted to the inadmissble evidence may constitute waiver. &?. 1ow is t5e adverse artyFs witnesses im ea,5ed 6 ANS.*R' a. By contradictory evidence. b. By evidence that his general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity is bad. c. By evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony.

Silliman University College of Law - Notes of Prof. Abelardo Domondon in Remedial Law BarO s !""# $ atty. Den 2(RROR .**3 NO0*S ages %&' of %&'

B-t not by evidence of particular wrongful acts, e7,e t that it may be shown by the e amination of the witnesses, or the record of the judgment that he has been convicted of an offense. 8Sec. ,,, +ule ,3., +$C&?A. Dis,-ss 5e ,on,e t of laying t5e redi,ate.

ANS.*R/ )t is the duty of the party trying to impugn the testimony of a witness by means of prior or, for that matter, subse%uent inconsistent statements, whether oral or in writing, to give the witness a chance to reconcile his conflicting declarations, such that it is only when no reasonable e planation is given by him that he should been deemed impeached. &@. .5at is t5e eviden,e re9-ired in ,ivil ,ases 6 ANS.*R' The party having the burden of proof must establish his case by a preponderance of evidence. 8Section ,, +ule ,33, +$C;reponderance of evidence is evidence which is of greater weight, or more convincing that that which is offered in opposition to it. &C. .5at are t5e re9-isites for s-ffi,ien,y of ,ir,-mstantial eviden,e 6 ANS.*R' a. There is more than one circumstance. b. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven. c. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. 8Sec. 4, +ule ,33, +$C*7 lanation/
8This wor7 of ;rof. >omondon is very e haustive, almost all of the answers have case citations, but these were removed in this notes for the purpose of the mirror wee7.-

+OOD LUC3 AD)ANC* CON+RA0ULA0(ONS S** LOU (N COUR0 P