You are on page 1of 13

Rules

I to 5 (inc. 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure)


A. Actions: meaning and commencement B. One suit for a single cause if action
Splitting a single cause of action Joinder of causes vs. Joinder of parties C. Parties to Civil Actions Indispensable parties vs. necessary parties ' Class suit Death or separation of a party Transfer of interest Contractual Money claims D. Venue of actions: real and personal actions E,. Summary Procedure

Cases:

1. Alday vs. F'GU Insurance - 350 SCRA 2. Korea Technologies Inc. vs. Lerma * 542 SCRA 3. Mercado vs. CA * 569 SCRA 4. Proton Pilipinas vs. Banque Nationale de Paris - 460 SCRA 5. Ruby Shelter Builders & Realty Dev. Corp. vs. Formaran IJl,578 SCRA 283

6. St. Louis University,Inc. vs. Cobamrbias,626 SCRA 649 7. Relucio vs. Lopez, 373 SCRA 578
8. De Castro vs. CA, 386 SCRA 301 9. Lotte Phil. Co. Inc. vs. De la Cru2,464
SCRA, 591

10.De laCruzvs. Joaquin,464 SCRA 576 11. Carabeo vs. Dingco, 647 SCRA 200 l2.Navarro vs. Escobido, 606 SCRA I l3.China Banking Corp. vs. Oliver, 390 SCRA 263 14. Pacific Consultants vs. Schonfeld - 516 SCRA

III. Rules 6-9 - Pleadings atrd Default


A. Kinds of Pleadings Complaint and Answer Defenses: Negative and Affirmative Counterclaims : Cornpulsory and Permissive Reply B. Parts of a Pleading Verifi cation and Certifi cation C. Allegations in Pleadings Actionable Docurnenls Specific denial D. Effect of Failure to Plead Waiver of Defenses and Objections; Default

1. Benguet Exploration Inc. vs. CA, 351 SCRA

2. Manila Bay Club Corp.vs. CA,245 SCRA 3" Biesterbos vs. CA,41l SCRA 4. Oaminalvs. Castilla,4I3 SCRA 5. Asia Const. & Dev. Corp. vs. CA, 458 SCRA 750 6. Banco de Oro vs. Tansipek, 593 SCRA 456 7. Republic vs. Sandigqnbayan,406 SCRA 190 8. Caneland Sugar Corp.vs. Alon, 533 SCRA 2g
IV. Rules 10 to 14 : Amendments to Summons
A.. Amendments and Supplemental pleadings

Kinds of Amendments Amendments vs. Supplemental pleadingg B. Time/Period for Filing Responsive pleadings Answer Reply C. Bill of Particulars D. Filing and Service of Pleadings, Judgments and other
papers

Distinction between Filing and Service Filing: Manner, completeness, proof Service: Mode, completeness, proof Priorities in Modes of Service

E.

What is summons 2. Who issues, to whom addressed . 3. Who serves 4. Kinds of summons: a. service in person b. substituted service c. extraterritorial i. . personal ii. by publication iii. any mode 5. On whom served a. on corporations: public or private; domestic or foreign b. on natural persons: prisoners; minors/incompetents; unknown; entities without juridical personality 6. Proofs of service F. Voluntary Appearance
Cases:

I.

Summons

2.

1. Biglang-awa vs. Phil. Trust Co., 550 SCRA Asean Pacific Planners Vs. City of Urdaneta, 566
SCRA 219

..:,

:l:

-ii I

,i

3. De Dios vs. CA, 212 SCRA 4. Remington Industrial Sales Corp.vs. CA, 382 5. Valmonte vs, CA, 252 SCRA 6. Millenium lnd. & Com. Corp. vs. Tan, 326 SCRA 7. E.B. Villarosa vs. Benito,312 SCRA 8. Ramos vs. Ramos, 399 SCRA 9. Teh vs. CA, 401 SCRA l0.Santos vs. PNOC Exp.* 566 SCRA
l.Mason vs. CA, 413 SCRA l2.Jose vs. Boyon, 414 SCRA 13,Dole Phil vs. Quilala - 557 SCRA l4.Manotoc vs. CA - 499 SCRA l5.Pascual vs. Pascual * 607 SCRA 288 (121412009)
1

Rules I5 to 19 : Motions to [ntervention A. Motions : definitions, requirements, omnibus motions B. Motion to Dismiss Grounds Distinctions: l.Jurisdiction over the subject matter vs. jurisdiction over the persons of the parties 2. Notice of Lis Pendens vs. Litis Pendentia 3. Lack of cause of action vs. failure to state a cause of action 4. Bar by prior judgment vs. conclusiveness ofjudgment 5. Prescription vs. laches Note; Discussion on Katarungang Pambarangay Law (Sec. 399422,Chapter VII, Title One, Book III of R.A. 7160 otherwise known as the Local Govemment Code of l99L)
Cases:

1. Heirs of Fernando Vinzons vs. CA, 315 SCRA

541

2. 3.
4.

Ledesma vs. CA, 211 SCRA 753 Uy vs. Contreras,237 SCRA 167 De Guzman Jr. vs. Oohoa, 648 SCRA 677

C. Dismissal

oIActions

Dismissal Upon Notice f)ismissal Upon Motion Failure to Prosecute

D. Pre-Trial - A.M. No. 03-1-09 of the Supreme Court effective August 16.,2004 " Guidelines to be observed by trial court judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre+rial and use of

dep os it i o n- dis c ov ery me o s ur e s

Failure to appear at the pre-trial Failure to file pre-trial briefs

E.Interuention Who may intervene When to intervene


Cases:

1. People vs. Perez,397 SCRA

2. Saguid vs. CA, 403 SCRA 3. Yao vs. Perello,414 SCRA 4. Pinlac vs. CA, 410 SCRA 5. Office of the Ombudsman vs. Sison, 612 SCRA 6. Anonuevo vs. Intestate Estate of Jalandonl, 636 SCRA
VI. Rules
21123 to 32

:Modes of Discovery

'

A. Subpoena vs. Summons B. Modes of Discovery ( R-23 to 29) 1. Depositions Pending Action (-23) a. Use of depositions (S-4) b. Officers to take depositions (S-10,11,12) c. Deposition upon written examination (S-15) d. Deposition upon written intepogatories (S-25) e. Eflects of errors and irregularities (S-29) 2. Depositions before Actions or pending Appeai (R-24) 3. Interrogatories to Parties (R-25) a. Effect of failure to serve written interrogatories (5-6) 4. Admission by Adverse Party (R-26) a.. Effect to failure to file and selve request for admission (S-

2s) 5. Production or Inspection of Documents or Things (R-27)

6. Physical and Mental Examination (R-28) - R"efusal to Comply with Modes of Discovery (R-29)
c. Trial (R-30/ Note: Proposed Rulesfor Hearing ard Adjudicating Disputes, repealing Sec. 5 of R-30; Sec. I of R-tt6; Sec. l-4 of RI lB; Sec. I I of R-L19; Sec. 4 of R-|32; Rules of Summary procedure - Rule on Judicial Affidavit (A.M. 12-8-8-SC) effective, Jan. l, 2013
Notiee (S-1) Adjournments and Postponement (5-2,3,4) Order of Trial (S-5)

D. Consolidation or Severance (R-31)


Consolidation (S-1) Severance (S-2) E. Trial By Comrnissioner (R-32) Distinguish liom trial with Assessors

Cases:

1. Dasmariflas Garments, Inc. vs. Reyes, 225 SCRA 622 (lgg3) 2. Fundamentals of Depositions . . . 98 SCRA 768 3. Insular Life Assurance Co. T.td. Vs. CA,238 SCRA 88 4. Allied Agri-Business Development Co. Inc. vs. CA, 299 SCRA 5. People vs Webb,312 SCRA 573 6. Vda. De Mangueffa vs. Risos, 563 SCRA 499

VII. Rules 33 to 38 : Demurrer to Relief from Judgment


A. Demurrer to Evidence (R-33) - In Civil and Criminal actions B. Judgment on the Pleadings (R-34)
C.Summary J udgment (R-3 5) D. Entry of Judgment and Final Orders (R-36) - Several judgments (S-4) - SeparatejuJgments'(S-a) - .Iudgments against entities without personality (5_6) F. New Trial or Reconsideration (R-37) - Grounds for New Trial (S-1) Grounds for Reconsideration (S-1) - Effects of a Grant or Denial (S-6,7,8) G. Relief from JudgmentS (R-38) - Petition for Relief from Judgment (S-1) - Petition for Relief from Denial of Appeal (S-2) - Time for filing Petition (S-3) Preliminary Injurrction (S-5)
Cases:

1. Bernardo vs. CA,278 SCRA 782

2. Radiowealth Finance Co. vs. Del Rosario, 335 SCRA 288 3. Cabadorvs. People,602 SCRA 760 4. People vs. Sumingwa, 603 SCRA 638 5. Hun Hyung Park vs, Eng Won Choi, 515 SCRA 6. Mendezona vs. O2amis -376 SCRA 482 (New Trial or
Reconsideration)

7. Padilla-Rumbaua vs, Rumbaua,596 SCRA (NT/MR) 8. Mesina vs Meer- 383 SCRA 625 (Relief) 9. Garcia vs. CA, 336 SCRA 475 l0.People vs Li Ka Kim,429 SCRA 169
1l.Mercury Drug Corp. vs. CA.335 SCRA 567 l2.Philippine Phosphate Fertilizer Corp., vs Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 461 SCRA 369 l3.Fernandez vs. CA, 458 SCRA 454

VIl. Rule 39 - Execution of Judgments


A. Kinds of Execution a. Matter of right/ministerial
(S_

I)

B. Modes "rJ;lx*tfents [. By motion (5-6) 2.By independent acrion (3_6)

b. Discretionary (S-2) a. stay ofdiscretionary execution (S_3) not staved bv appear (s-4)

C. Manner of Execution l. when party is dead (S_7) 2. when judgment is for money (5-6) 3. when judgment is for specific act (S_10) 4. when it is a special judgment (S_l l) D. Properties exempt from execution (S_13) E. Third Party Claim (S-16) F. Execrrtion Sale (S-17 to 26) G. Redernption 1. the right of redemption vs. equity of redemption

3. effect of redemption (S_29) Other remedies to fully satis$r.fudgment . l. Examination ofjudgment obligor (5_36) 2. Examination of obligor ofjudgment obligor (S_37) 3. Appointment of a receiver (S-41) 4. Sale of ascertainable interest (S_42) I. Judgment: principal vs. surety (S_46) J. Effect ofjudgment (S-47) l. in rem 2. inpersonam 3. resjudicata K. Effect of foreign judgment (S-4g) H.
1. Banes vs. Banes,374 SCRA 2. Fajardo vs. euitalig,400 SCRA 3. Santos vs. COMELEC,399 SCRA 4. RCBC vs. Magwin Marketing Corp., 402 SCRA 5. city of Iligan vs. principal Management Group, 407 scRA 6. Villaruel vs. Fernando,4l2 SCRA 7. Morta vs. Bagagnan, 4[5 SCRA 8. Serrano vs. CA, 417 SCRA 9. D'Annoured Security and Investigation Agency vs. orpia, 46 r
SCRA 312
10. Perez vs. CA, 464 SCRA g9

Cases:

l l.Panotes vs. CTDC - St2 SCRA


l2.Stronghold Insurance vs. Felix

50g SCRA

IX. Rules 40 to 56 - Appeals A. Appeal from MTC to RTC Perfection of ApPeal f)ocket Fees Appeals from Orders of Dismissal B. Appeal from RTC to CA Modes of Appeal Notice of Appeal vs. Record on Appeal Perfection of Appeal C. Petition for Review from RTC to CA How appeal taken Failure to comply with requirements Perfection of APPeal D. Appeal from CTA & QJA to CA Contents of Petition Action on Petition Effects of Appeal Note: The Court of Tax Appeals has been elevated to the level of CA
E. Ordinary Appealed Cases to CA; Briefs F,Appeal by Certiorari Distinguish Rule 45 from Rule 65 Contents of Petition Requirements/Effect G. Annulment of Judgment Coverage, Grounds, Period Contents, Effects H. Dismissal of Appeal (R-50) Grounds 'oMaterial Data" Rule

. .

Cases:
1. Heirs of Sps. Reterta vs. Sps. Mores, 655 SCRA 580 2. Phil. Business Bank vs. Chua, 634 SCRA 3. Latorre vs. Latorre, 617 SCRA 4. Catly vs. Navarro,620 SCRA 5. Republic vs. Mangotara,624 SCRA 6. Manaloto vs. Veloso 1II,632 SCRA T.Land,Bank of the Phil. vs. De Leon, 399 SCRA 8. PAL vs. CA,4l7 SCRA 9. LPBS Com. Inc. vs. Amila 544 SCRA l0.Estinozo vs. CA 544 SCRA

1l . People's Broadcasting vs. Sec. of Labor,587 SCRA 724 12. Marmo vs. Anacay - 606 SCRA 232 (lll27l09) 13. Republic vs. Technological Advocate ...,6L2 SCRA 76 14. Arcenas vs. Q.C. DevelopmentBank,62l SCRA l1

lX. Rules 40 to 56 - APPeals


A. Appeal from MTC to RTC Perfection of ApPeal Docket Fees Appeals from Orders of Dismissal B. Appeal from RTC to CA Modes of APPeal Notice of Appeal vs. Record on Appeal Perfection of APPeal C. Petition for Review from RTC to CA How appeal taken Failure to comply with requirements Perfection of ApPeal D. Appeal from CTA & QJA to CA Contents of Petition Actrbn ort Peitron Effects of Appeal Note:The Court of Tax Appea\shasbeen e\e'vatedto\he\e've\ of CA.

-,

E. Ordinary Appealed Cases to CA; Briefs F, APPeal trY Certiorari Distinguish Rule 45 from Rule 65 Contents of Petition Requirements/Effect G. Annulment of Judglnent Coverage, Grounds, Period Contents, Effects H. Dismissal of ApPeal (R-50) Grounds "Material Data" Rule

Cases:

Heirs of Sps. Reterta vs. Sps. Mores, 655 SCRA 580 2. Phil. Business Bank vs. Chua, 634 SCRA 3. Latorre vs. Latorre, 617 SCRA 4. Catly vs. Navarro, 620 SCRA 5. Republic vs. Mangotara,624 SCRA 6. Manaloto vs. Veloso l[l,632 SCRA T.LandBank of the Phil. vs. De Leon, 399 SCRA B. PAL vs. CA,417 SCRA 9. LPBS Com.Inc. vs. Amila * 544 SCRA l0.Estinozo vs. CA - 544 SCRA 11. People's Broadcasting vs. Sec. of Labor,587 SCRA 724 12. Marmo vs. Anacay - 606 SCRA 232 (lll27l09) 13. Republic vs. Technological Advocate ...,612 SCRA 76 14. Arcenas vs. Q.C. Development Bank, 621 SCRA 11
1.

X. Rules 57 to 6l

Provisional Remedies

A. Preliminary Attachment

1. Grounds 2. Requirements 3. Manner of Attaching

4. Discharge of Attachment 5. Third Party Claim


6. Claim for Damages
Cases:

1. Mangilavs. CA, 387 SCRA

2. Chuidian vs. Sandiganbayan,S49 SCRA 3. Du vs. Stronghold Insurance,432 SCRA 4. D.M. Wenceslao vs. Readycon Trading, 433 SCRA
5. Torres vs. Satsatin,605 SCRA 6. Metro Inc. vs. Lara's Gifts and Decors Inc., 606 SCRA

B. Preliininary Iniunction

1. Definition,

Classes

2. Grounds 3. Requirements 4. Damages


Cases:

1. Idolor vs. CA, 352 SCRA

2. Gustilo vs. Real,353 SCRA 3. Lagrosas vs. Bristol-Myers -

565 SCRA 4. Jenosa vs. Delariarte, 630 SCRA

C. Receivership 1. When writ may issue 2. Requirements 3.. Power of Receiver 4. fermination and ComPensation
Cases:

Aguilarvs. ManilaBanking Corp-502 SCRA3l3 SCRA 2. Lanobis, Jr. vs. Phil. Veterans Bank,440 SCRA 34 3. Koruga vs. Arcenas, 590 SCRA

t.

E. Replevin 1. When writ may issue

2. Requirements 3. Third party Claim 4. Judgment and Damages


Cases:

Orosa vs. CA, 329 SCRA


542 SCRA

2. Smart Communications vs. Astorga 3. Hao vs. Andres - 555 SCRA 4. Rivera vs. Vargas, 588 SCRA

5. Navamo vs. Escobido, 606 SCRA 6. Bautista vs. Sula, 530 SCRA

F.

Support Pendente lite

i.

Application

2. Procedure: comment, hearing Order 3. Enforcement 4. Restitutiort


Cases:

1. De Asis vs.'CA, 303 SCRA

'2.

People vs. Manahan, 315 SCRA

3. Lopezvs. CA,434 SCRA 597


4. Montefalcon vs. Vasquez -554 SCRA 5. Lim vs. Lim, 604 SCRA 691

XI. Rules 62'71- Special Civil Actions A.Interpleader 1. What is ana action for interpleader

2. Requisites 3. Procedure
Cases:

EtemalGardens vs. IAC, 165 SCRA 2. Wack-wack Golf & Country Club vs' Lee Won,70 SCRA 3. Pasricha vs. Don Luis Dizon Realty, 548 SCRA B. Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies 1. Nature, Kinds

l.

2. Parties 3. Conversion into ordinary Action

'

Cases:

1. MERALCO vs. Phil. Consumers Fndation, 374$CP.A262 2. Velarde vs. SJS * 428 SCRA 3. Tambunting vs. Sps. Sumabat*9116/2005

'

4.

Almeda vs. Bathala Marketing Ind' - 542 SCRA 470 5. Reyes vs. Ortiz, 628 SCRA 1 (Aug' 2010) 6. Malanavs. TaPPa,600 SCRA 189
Judgments and Final orders of GOMELEC and What is the distinctive nature of this action

c. Review of

coA

D. Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus (R-65 1. Similarities and Differences between C and P 2. Requirements, Parties and Effects 3. Mandamus: grounds, requisites, procedure, damages

i:l ::i

t0

Cases:

2.

1. Mallari vs. GSIS - 611 SCRA 32


Gonzales vs. Tolentino, 611 SCRA 179

3. Pineda vs. Court of Appeals, 635 SCRA 274 4. UP Board of Regents vs. Ligot-Telan, 227 SCRA 5. Tuazon vs. RD of Caloocan City, 157 SCRA 6. Security Bank Corp.vs. Indiana Aerospace University,46l
SCRA 260 (Material data rule) 7. Jorres, Jr. vs. Aguinaldo, 461 SCRA 599 9. LiberalParty vs. COMELEC, 620 SCRA 10 Angeles vs. Sec. of Justice, 614 SCRA 478 11. De Castro vs. Judiciatr and Bar Council, 615 SCRA 666

E. Quo Warranto (R-66) 1. Parties 2. Period

3. Limitations 4. Judgment for Cost


Case: 1. Mendozavs. Allas,302 SCRA 2. Callejavs. Panday; 483 SCRA 3. Lokin, Jr. vs. COMELEC, 621 SCRA 385

F. Expropriation (R-67)

'Cases:

5. The right of Eminent Domain 6. Who may expropriate 7. Two stages in expropriation
1. City of Manila vs. Serrano, 359 SCRA 2. National Power Corp.vs. CA,436 SCRA 3. Asia's Emerging Dragon vs. DOTC, April 18,2008

G. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (R-68) Di stinguish j udicial from extraj udicial fbreclosure i. The complaint 2. Thejudgment . 3. Equity of redemption vs. Right of redemption

1,

4. Deficiencyjudgment
Cases:

1. Servicewide Specialists vs. CA, 318 SCRA 2. Unionbank of the Philippines vs.'CA, 311 SCRA 3. Ardiente vs. Provincial Sheriff, 436 SCRA 655 4. BPI Family Savings Bank vs. Veloso, 436 SCRA

11

H. Partition (R-69) 1. The complaint

2.'lheOrder 3. Stages of Partition 4. Rule of Commissioners 5. Thejudgment


Cases:

SCRA 178 2. Feliciano vs. Canoza,629 SCRA 550 3. Mangahas vs. Brobio, 634 SCRA 35 1

[. Balus vs. Balus,610

I.

Unlawful Detainer and Forcible Entry (R-70; Rent Control Law of


2005)

1. Distinction between accion publiciana, accion


reivindicatoria and accion interdictal

2. Distinction between UD and FE 3. The padies; grounds (rent control law) 4. Procedure (summary procedure) 5. Judgment; character as immediately executory 6. Ways to stall execution ofjudgment 7. Appeals
Cases:

1.

2.
3. 4. 5. 6.

Sarmienta vs. Manalite H.A. Inc.,632 SCRA Calara vs. Francisco,63l SCRA Modesto vs. Urbina,633 SCRA Carbonilla vs. Abiera, 625 SCRA La Campana Dev. Corp. vs. Ledesma,629 SCRA Ferrer va. Rabaca, 632 SCRA

J.

Contempt (Rule 71) l. Kinds; nature; grounds 2. Procedure 3. Judgment and Review

Cases:

Yasay vs. Recto, 313 SCRA

2. Espanol vs. Formoso,525 SCRA 3. Sison vs. Caoibes, Jr.,429 SCRA 258 4. Montenegro vs. Montenegro, 431 SCRA

415

5. Bank of the Phil. Islands vs. Calanza,633 SCRA

hmbrondial

l2