EVIDENCE

1st Semester AY 2014-2015

Prof. V. A. Avena
PRE-FINALS EXAM EXERCISE
B.
X (a professional squatter on public lands) told a group of province-based
OFWs (who had just returned from abroad) that he owns a parcel of land in Manila,
respective portions of which that latter can purchase on installment but which their
families can start occupying upon delivery of a down payment. The latter were
inveigled to purchase because X showed them a deed of absolute sale in his favor
from the (alleged) previous owner Y, saying his (Xs) title is still being processed.
However, one OFW, O, was able to verify from the Register of Deeds that there is no
such title in Ys name because the land is public.
In the suit of the OFWs against X for estafa by falsification of public document, the
prosecution will present O to testify on the photograph that he took of the
(simulated) deed of absolute sale that X had shown to all of them (but naturally
concealed afterwards). Is there any objection/s that X can validly pose?
C.
When brother A, B, C, D, and E inherited the antique baul of their greatgrandfather, G, they discovered his Owners Duplicate Transfer Certificate of Title
evidencing his ownership of the adjoining land occupied by F and G. The brothers
promptly filed an accion reinvidicatoria against the latter.
1. What should the brothers present as part of their evidence-in-chief in said
case?
2. Is there any occasion and basis for the defendants to object on the hearsay
rule?
D.
To overcome plaintiff Ps evidence in the collection case against him,
defendant D wants to present the affidavit of plaintiffs business partner B (who has
desisted from the case and gone abroad) to show complete payment. If D calls on
the notary public to do so, will you have any objection?
E.
One day, B revealed to A that during a badminton break X had admitted to
him that he (X) had actually just plagiarized the masteral thesis of A, simply
paraphrasing the same to avoid detection. Upon learning of the foregoing story and
thereafter confirming the plagiarism through comparison of their works, A sued X for
damages under the laws on intellectual property; in his answer, X denied
everything. In addition, X filed a civil action for libel against A and B. In A v. X (for
damages arising from plagiarism), A will now present B to prove As story. Any
objection?
F.
Mr. A encashed 3 checks payable to cash and al drawn against the account of
Mr. B. Mr. B filed an action to recover the amount with photocopies of the checks as
evidence. The trial court dismissed the complaint because Mr. A failed to show that
the signatures on the subject checks were forged. The CA reversed the lower courts
decision and said that it was not necessary for Mr. A to present the originals to

prove that the signatures were forged because the defendant Mr. B failed to object.
Rule.
G.
One day, over beer and roasted highland legumes, Atty. K learned that his
married Kumpare Mr. K had fallen into a romantic entanglement with his sexytary.
Atty. A advised K then and there to cease and desist, otherwise he wont know what
to say to his Kumare Mrs. K. Unfortunately, Mr. K was careless, so Mrs. K eventually
discovered his extra-curricular activities, promptly sued for legal separation and has
now subpoenaed Atty. A, your client, to the stand, because you have advised the
latter not to execute a judicial affidavit. In anticipation of Atty. As taking the stand,
is there any other technique that you can resort to?
H.
In an action for annulment of marriage (on the ground that his wife W has
schizophrenia), petitioner-husband H requested a subpoena duces tecum and ad
testificandum for psychiatrist P (a doctor who had examined W) to testify as an
expert. W objected, invoking Rule 130.24.c. How would you rule?
I.
One time, illegitimate son S told his cousin C that F is actually his father; soon
after, S died. In the estate proceeding upon the death of F, the heirs of S will
present C to testify on what S said. Admissible?
J.

State whether true or false:

a) In the absence of evidence, receipt of money is presumed onerous rather

than gratuitous.
b) On the day after he was temporarily discharged from the National Center
for Mental Health due to prolonged, continuous improvement of his mental
health, A hand-wrote a letter to his children, dated that day, distributing to
them his properties, to take effect upon his death. Detractors say this is not a
will, and that even if it is, the alleged heirs should present evidence that A
was of sound mind when he executed the same, and that if the fail in this, the
will cannot be probated.
c) wasnt able to take a picture of this question.
d) There is a presumption as to who died first based on the probabilities
arising from age and sex.
e) The right against self-incrimination is available only in criminal cases.
K.
Cross-examination of Lakumdin Saliao, househelp of the Ampatuan family in
the criminal cases for the Maguindanao massacre: (Prosecutor = Pros. Navera;
defense counsel = Attty. Gregorio Narvasa)
Atty. Narvasa: What was the age of Andal Jr. when you joined the Ampatuan
household?
Pros. Navera: Objection. Incompetent, hes not the Civil Registrar.

Comment.
-

Objection overruled. Witness can testify on his opinion as an ordinary witness

based on the appearance of a person. Rule 130.50