UST Law Review Case Digest Style Guide

I. FONT and LAYOUT 1.) Font Style: GARAMOND; Font Size: 11.5 2.) Paragraph: JUSTIFIED, except the Title which should be CENTERED 3.) Spacing: SINGLE 4.) Space between paragraphs: DOUBLE II. TITLE 1.) The title of the case should consist of the COMPLETE NAMES of the parties, in BOLD, ALL CAPS and CENTERED. 2.) NATURAL PERSONS If the parties are natural persons, their complete names should be indicated and the letters must all be in caps and bold. Example: GILBERTH D. BALDERAMA v. JOAN LOU P. GAMBOA

3.) JURIDICAL PERSONS If any of the parties is a juridical person, the name of such juridical person should be SPELLED OUT and not in acronym form. Example: COMMISSION ON AUDIT v. JEANETTE C. ALVAREZ PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION 3.) MULTIPLE PARTIES If there are two or more parties in the case, use the first-named party followed by et al. which should be italicized. Example: The petitioners are: Jeanette C. Alvarez, Marvyn Gaerlan and Erlou V. Salunat versus Nesrin B. Cali JEANETTE C. ALVAREZ, et al. v. NESRIN B.CALI NESRIN B. CALI v. JEANETTE C. ALVAREZ, et al.

NESRIN B. CALI, et al. v. JEANETTE C. ALVAREZ, et al. NOTE: The word versus should be abbreviated as v. (bold and italicized). 4.) CITATION The citation of case should first start with the G.R. number followed by the date of promulgation, the division of the court that decided the case (First, Second, Third Division or En Banc) and the ponente. (See attached sample case digest). The format for the date should be: Day, Month, Year The Division of the Supreme Court should be ALL CAPS (Note: if the decision is by the EN BANC, the same should also be italicized) The name of the ponente is in parenthesis: surname of the justice, followed by the capital letter j (italicized), then a period. Example: NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. LUCMAN G. IBRAHIM, et al. G.R. No. 168732, 29 June 2007, FIRST DIVISION, (Azcuna, J.) If the Decision is a consolidation of several cases with several G.R. numbers, include ALL such numbers. Example: G.R. Nos. 1243535, 453466754, 1451345 III. DOCTRINE Right after the title and citation of the decision, copy the DOCTRINE enunciated in the case. This is found in the ratio or ruling portion of the case. It should be italicized. (See attached sample case digest). This will serve as the lead introduction of the digest, so it is very important that it should reflect the main doctrine pronounced in the case. Guidelines in selecting the doctrine: 1. It should be the main reason or basis of the Courts decision. Discard supplementary statements or mere technical or procedural rules, unless procedural law is the issue involved in the case. 2. As much as possible, it should be a NEW DOCTRINE, and not a mere reiteration of an old one. However, the cases do not always declare new doctrines, in which case, refer to the first guideline. 3. Be guided of the note given by the Jurisprudence Editor, when the cases are assigned, with respect to the issue and/or doctrine for each particular case.

IV. FACTS 1.) The facts should be limited to two to three (2-3) paragraphs. If the case is lengthy, you may exceed said limitation. However, make sure that it is not too long as to make it a mere reproduction of the facts of the original case. Guidelines in writing the facts: a. First, read the case in its entirety. Make sure that you have understood the case properly before you start digesting the case. b. Be guided by the issue and ruling of the Supreme Court in selecting what facts are pertinent and relevant. c. Simplify the facts. Paraphrase them if necessary. Just be sure that you dont lose alter the substance of the facts. d. Read the digest anew, and check if the facts, issues and ruling are in concordance with each other. Ask yourself, do the facts logically bring about the issue presented? Does the ruling answer the issue based on the facts presented and applicable laws? There must be a smooth and systematic flow when you read the facts, issue and ruling. e. Bear in mind that other people are going to read the digests, so it is not enough that you understand your digest. Make equally sure that others can read and comprehend your digests as well. 2.) The names of the courts should be SPELLED OUT when first mentioned. In subsequent uses, abbreviate them as may be appropriate. In the case of Regional Trial Courts, DO NOT MENTION THE BRANCH NUMBER. It is enough that you indicate the geographical location of the same when first mentioned. Example: Gilberth Balderama filed with the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City an action for collection of sum of money against Charmaine Savellano. In her answer, Savellano said that the two entered into a Compromise Agreement which extinguished her obligation to pay Balderama the subject amount of money. The RTC, however, after considering all the evidences, ruled in favor of Balderama, finding that the latters signature in the Compromise Agreement was forged. In case of the Court of Appeals, DO NOT MENTION THE DIVISION THAT DISPOSED OF THE CASE. The same rule applies to the Supreme Court. Example: The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto and not The third division of the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision in toto. 4.) The parties must be identified in the facts part of the case with their complete names and should NOT merely be referred to as petitioner, defendant, appellant or appellee. Using those terms alone to identify the parties causes confusion to the reader.

But use those terms to identify the parties when they are mentioned for the first time before their complete names. In subsequent identification of the parties, use their last names. Example: Petitioner Katlyn Aguilar filed an action against defendant Cesar Mindaro for specific performance. In her complaint, Aguilar alleged that she entered into a contract of sale with Mindaro, the subject of which was a prize-winning Arabian horse from Saudi Arabia. She further alleged that despite her having fully paid the purchase price, Mindaro refused to deliver the said horse. With regard to juridical persons, the names should be SPELLED OUT when first mentioned and then abbreviated in subsequent identifications. Example: Philippine National Bank (PNB) filed an action to foreclose the mortgaged property of defendant Arjay Lim. In its complaint, PNB alleged that Lim obtained a loan in the amount of Php One Million (P1, 000, 000.00) and to secure said loan, he mortgaged his house and lot located at the Forbes Park in its favor. 5.) DATES should be eliminated when not necessary. However, when they are material to the resolution of the issue/s of the case, such as in cases of prescription, questions on the timeliness of filing an appeal etc., RETAIN THEM. 6.) Foreign words, i.e., foreign in the sense that they are not English words, should be italicized. Example: -Latin maxims -Tagalog words mandamus certiorari en banc quo warranto mutatis mutandis

V. ISSUE 1.) The issue part of the case should be in this form: Whether or not Lapuz has a cause of action against Savellano NOTE: There should be NO PERIOD or QUESTION MARK at the end. 2.) Procedural issues should be dispensed with, unless the resolution of the material issue/s hinges on them or the case is an application of REMEDIAL LAW. 3.) The issues are usually mentioned in the Decision itself. However, there are cases which do not. In this case, identify the issue by determining what field of law covers the

case. Thus, if it concerns POLITICAL LAW, then focus on the political law aspect of the case. 4.) If the issue/s mentioned the case is formulated in very general terms, such as whether or not the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the RTC decision, REWRITE THE ISSUE IN MORE SPECIFIC TERMS. Example: As written in the Decision: Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC Decision You may rewrite it in this manner: Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the RTC Decision which held that Gerrero is vicariously liable for the tortious acts of her employees 5.) If there are more than one important issues, write them in the following manner: 1.) Whether or not x x x 2.) Whether or not x x x VI. HELD (Ruling/Ratio Decidendi) 1.) Write first what action the Supreme Court took upon the case, i.e., denied, granted, dismissed or (CA decision) affirmed. Write it in this manner (bold): Petition DISMISSED. Petition GRANTED. CA Decision AFFIRMED. Petition DENIED. 2.) Do NOT paraphrase the ruling of the case. Copy (verbatim) the portion of the ratio decidendi which answers the issue/s of the case. It should contain the main reason or basis of the Court for their decision. Be guided of the issues presented in the case and the field of law under which the case falls in selecting the portion of the ruling that will be included in the digest. 3.) If the case tackles more than one issue, place a HEADING before each paragraph that answers each issue in seriatim. Such heading should be in BOLD and ITALICS. 4.) Replace the words Petitioners, Respondents, Appellant, Appellee, and the like, with their proper names, same with how they are referred to in the facts portion of the digest. Also, pronouns used to refer to the Supreme Court (We, Us, Our), should be replaced with the word Court. VII. FILE NAME and FORMAT

1.) The case digests should be sent to ulr_cases@yahoo.com 2.) The file name for each case should contain: a shortened title of the case, followed by the name of the person who digested it. Example: Chavez v. Gonzales_Ajay If the digest is already a revised version of your digest, i.e. 2nd draft, 3rd or 4th, as the case may be, likewise include it in the file name. Example: Chavez v. Gonzales_Ajay_2nd draft 3.) The case digests for the same month should all be sent together as attachments in a single e-mail. The subject of the e-mail should be the month of promulgation of the set of cases being sent. 4.) For those who are using Microsoft Office 2007, save your digests as MS Word 972003 document. This is to ensure compatibility with our computers in the Law Review office.