Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail.

com Page 1 of 66

ANSWERS TO BAR

EXAMINATION QUESTIONS
IN

Bar Examination
Remedial Law Bar Examination Q
Q&&&A (1997-2006)))by:
AA (1997-2006
(1997-2006 by:
by:sirdondee@gmail.com
sirdondee@gmail.com
sirdondee@gmail.com Page4
Page
Page
by: sirdondee@gmail.com 326Page
7Page
5of
ofof66
66
8966of
of 66
66 affairs.
Jurisdiction;
Witness;
Provisional This
Examination
Finality
Remedies; ais
of of
TRO
Judgment
Witnesses Default;
vs.
law,rendering
In the Status Remedies;
(2002)
(2005)
result Quo a of Party
Order
decision,the Declared
(2006) should
testing in cannot
Default
a court (2006)
be distinguished from REMEDIAL
............................................................................................................
............................................................................................................ 47Witness;
.......................................................................................
60 33Parties;
Provisional
Utilized
Prosecution
LAW Remedies;
aswhich
Stateof
..............................................................................................
considered
TRO;
Offenses
Witness;
take
TRO;its
Offense
Default;
CA
19
into
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
and can
Procedure
(2000)
Demurrer
Duration
20
JusticeRemedies;
to be
consideration
be offered
(2002) to
Dept.
(2006)
the(2006)
(2006)
Evidence
fruit
inthe
FORWARD
TABLE
Substantial
theOF CONTENTS
evidence
(2001)
Compliance
of apossible
poisonous
to prove
(2000)
effecttree prescribes
the obtaining
..............................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................
of 1991, R.A. 7160.)
Plea Provisional
Local of Government
enforcing
Noinvasion
47
33
Guilty; toRemedies;
such prohibition
Reglementary
Prejudicial
a Lesser
................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................
............................................................................................
.............................................................................................
P.D. No. the 1508;method Sec.60 47of
415, 33 rights Code
Question
Period;v.
or
.................................................................................................................................
of verdict upon political stability redress for their (Bustos
SPECIAL
GENERAL
qualifying Demurrer PROCEEDINGS
toJudgment
Evidence; under
Civil ..................................................................................................................................
PRINCIPLES........................................................................................................................................
circumstance Case thevs.information
Criminal 61
Bar
and by
Supplemental
(1999) 20
economic Prior Pleadings welfare (2000) vs.
of theConclusiveness
nation? 4%Case (2003)
of Lucero, exists
G.R. in the
No. pre-trial
....................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................
L-2068, 3347Remedies;
Prejudicial
negotiations
October Appeal
20, Question
to SC;
....................................................................................
under 8
for qualified
Judgment
Appeals
(2000)
SUGGESTED Discovery;
20 to(1997)
CA
ANSWER: rape
Modes
(2002) under
of R.A. No.
Discovery (2000) 8353. The
.....................................................................................................
the
1948). Rules of Court. 33 Remedies;
47 PrejudicialAppeal; Question;
RTC to
...................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
Cancellation or Correction; Entries Civil Registry (2005) ........................................................................................
This work is not intended for sale or commerce. This work is
fruit,
No,
CA
Suspension
Bar
because
Discovery;
(1999)
Distinguish20
61
by
a court
Modes;
Criminal
Bar
Priortree doctrine
bySubpoena
Action is (1999)
prior
Judgmentrefers vs.
required
Duces
judgment
Escheat Tecumto take
..............................................................................
(1997)
from
Conclusiveness
of .....................................................................................................................
theof poisonous Remedial
Family Proceedings Law; 33Act
Courts
of
Concept
Remedies;
..................................................................................
8 Cause of action
Judgment
48 Pre-Trial
vs. Appeal;
ActionRule
(1997)
to ...............................................................................................
Agreement
45 vs.
(2002)
(1997)
that rule
Discovery; of evidence
Production and that
Inspection excludes of any
Documents (2002)
freeware. It may be freely copied and distributed. It is primarily
into
Rule 65
(2004)
evidence
Remedy
vs.
and
SUGGESTED
21consideration
conclusiveness (1999)
Dismissal;
Civil
21
the which
(2004)
Case
evidence
ANSWER: Motion
(1997) may to
only
have been
Dismiss;
admitted
the
Res
legal
in derived
Judicata
the
issues
case.
(2006)
(2001)
What
a) How is the
should
.......................................................................................................
of judgment concept
34
..................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................ Remedies;
the of
records
48
8 61Civil remedial
Pre-Trial;
Void
Extra-judicial Decision;
Criminal
of
Actions Settlement child law?
Proper
vs. Special Case
and
..................................................................................
....................................................................................................................................
or ................................................................................................
(2000) (2%)
.................................................................................................. Special
........................................................................................................
family
SUGGESTED cases 34
ANSWER:in the 48 Civil
Family Provisional
Action;
Courts Ejectment
Dismissal
or RTC
of
Estate
Proceedings (2005) ..............................................................................................................
(1998) 61 Habeas
........................................................................................................... 8 Corpus (1993)
Conciliation
intended for all those who desire to have a deeper understanding of
acquired
Bar
The
Such
by
(1997)Proceedings;
(2002) 21 fromAdmissibility;
prior-judgment
Evidence; a tainted Photocopies
stability isorthe polluted
anddoctrine (2000)source.
economic of The concept by of Special
Remedial 61 Law
48 Remedies;
Civil Action;
Void lies at the
Ejectment
Judgment
.........................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................
political designated 35 the
...........................................................................................................................................
evidence Katarungang
is inadmissible Pambarangay for vs. Pre-Trial Conference
having (1999) Supreme Habeas Court
........................................... 8 Corpus
Family to
res
(1998)judicata,
(2004) Forum
22 Shopping; which bars
Definition a second
(2006) action very core of procedural
Special Search
Civildue process,
Warrant;
Action; which
Foreclosure
Motion to
........................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................................... 35 48
the issues touched by the Philippine Bar Examinations and its trend.
welfare
emanated of
(1998) from
Courts the nation are extraneous to handle Family Court cases
...........................................................................................................................................
Act spurious origins. of The doctrine, means a 35 lawSpecial which
be treated
61 Habeas8
(2001) ......................................................................................................................................... and
when
(2003)
Quash
the
however,
Forum
22 there
(2005) Shopping;
is Effects;
identity ofLack parties, Certification
subject
................................................................................................................
Corpus
case.
Interlocutory
does
...............................................................................................................
(2003)
They
not Orderapply can have persuasive dealt with? (3%) 49 Trial;
Civilb)hears
Action;
Trial
Under before
(2006) ...........................................................................................
inPetition
Absentia;
...........................................................................................................................................
(2006)to the results obtained what62 it
for
.......................................................................................................................................
It is specially intended for law students from the provinces who,
former
Certiorari
Automatic
matter
influence
pursuant
Rule
22 Rule
Gen.and (2002)
8Intestate
39).
Review
to but
39;
Principles;
cause Sec,
Proceedings
Sec. they
Judgment
1, Rule
47
ofQuestions
ofConviction[b]
action. of
of Law newvs.the
(1998) Questionsof of Fact condemns,
(2004)
..................................................................................................
(2002)
are
28, 1997 (Sec. 49[b]
vs.
Rules
which proceeds
.............................................................................
ofmain
Civil Opinion conditions may identitythe49 of upon inquiry
............................................................................
35of Special
the Civil Action; Venue
Quoparties
Warranto
(1997)
.................................................................................................................................
not Court in
(2001) Judgment;
22 Annulment
Intestate of Judgment; Grounds
Proceedings; (1998) and
SUGGESTED
Debts renders judgment
ANSWER: Special
.........................................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................. 36 of Civilonly
49 after Mandamus
Actions;
the trial,Estateand
.............................................................................................
very often, are recipients of deliberately distorted notes from other
factors
Procedure, 62
(2006)
Conclusiveness
(2006) Judgment;
22
(2002)
thatas it should be considered
does not contemplate a search in child and family
................................................................................................................ 8 cases
Judicial
of ................................................................................................................
Enforcement; judgment
5-year period precludes contemplates anofopportunity
be divulged
Autonomy & (2%)
Impartiality
to ofbe Estate heard
(1997) .......................................................................................................
a) The records
the .................................................................................................. 62 Judicial child and family
Settlement cases36
deciding
within
Montilla,
EVIDENCE (2003) aG.R.
moaning case. No. ofAthe decision
law. (People
123872, should
January be
..................................................................................................................
v. 8 Katarungang Pambarangay;
................................................................................................................................................................ 50
unscrupulous
the
based
relitigation
Judgment;
22
Summons
(2005)
30,1998) of law
Enforcement; schools
a particular
Foreign Judgmentissueand in students.
(2005) before
in the Share
judgment
Family
on.......................................................................................................................
Objective
Admissibility
Judgment;
another
22 action
the(1999)
(1998)
Execution
between
to
Code isothers
62
law,..........................................................................................................
rules of procedure,
rendered
9 toLiberal
January
Probate handle this
..............................................................................................................................................................
G.R. No. L-19118, 30,Lost
of work
(Albert
Family
Construction; 36 v.
...............................................................................................
Wills
...............................................................................................................................................
pendingthe Appeal
same (2002)
parties University Publishing, 50
.........................................................................................................
Summons
(1999) (1999) 1965).
...................................................................................................................................................
Court cases shall be
................................................................................................................................... dealt with utmost
Probate ofLawWill
629 Remedial 37
JURISDICTION
and
justice
on 23
Summons;you
Rules
aPhil.
(2003)
ofand
Admissibility
Judgment; will
Court
Substituted
different
System
Admissibility
exceptional
(2002)
cause
of
be
(1998)
equity.
Interlocutory
Gov’t
(2004)
cases
Service
the
of richly
Order;
(2006)
court
(2004)
action. rewarded
However,
Partial Summary in by God
(2004) in heaven. It
............................................................................................................. is also very
...............................................................................................................................................
Judgments Remedial Law is that branch of law which in
50
......................................................................
...................................................................................................................
(Sec. 49 [c] confidentiality. (Sec. 12, Family963
............................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................
may consider Probate
Courts
Remedial Act 37
Law
............................................................................................................................................... of
50of
Judgment;
23 Judgment on[c]theEffects
ofPleadings (1999) prescribes the method of enforcing the
.......................................................................................................
good
Summons;
of former
Will
vs. karma.
Validity
Rule
(2005)
Substantive
Venue;Admissibility;
the
Cause political
of action
Judgment;
23Improper
39; ofsec.
Service;
Admission
47
stability
vs.
Judgment
Venue; on of
Action theGuilt;
Compulsory
new (2006)
Rule
Requirements
andCounterclaim
Pleadings
39).
economic
b) The identity
1997) of parties in 963
............................................................................................................................................
Law (2006) ............................................................................................................... child
.........................................................................................................
Probate
Remedial
(2006)....................................................................................
(1998)
and
37
........................................................................................
rights
family cases or obtainingshall not be redressdivulged for unlesstheir
(2005) ....................................................................................................... 38
Jurisdiction
Katarungang
of Will Pambarangay;
(2006) Objective
............................................................................................................................................ 63

REMEDIAL LAW
welfare
(1997) Law;
51
Distinguish Concept
of Admissibility;
the
Cause (2006)
nation ................................................................................................................................
of Document;
when
action these
from Not
are raised in the Pleading Rights
9Lepanto
(2004)
Venue;
(1997)
(1999)
What Judgment;
24 Personal
courts
Probate is of Mandamus
Actions
have
Will; the (1997)
Mandatoryjurisdiction object
Nature over invasion
L-2068,
necessary October
and with v.20, 1948;
authority First
vs..............................................................................................................................
Quo Warranto (2001) the.....................................................................................................
(Bustos Lucero,
JURISDICTION....................................................................................................................................................... G.R. ofNo. the
of......................................................................................................
(2002) 38judge.
...............................................................................................................
10
capable
action of the Accused; Validity; HIV Test (2005)
...................................................................................
SUGGESTED ofANSWER:
being takenAttachment into judicial notice 51 Admissibility;
Ceramics, Electronic
Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 110571, Evidence 9
(2003)
Judgment;
24
following
Katarungang
63 cases Soundness;
filed
Pambarangay in Metro Law? (2002)
Settlement
Manila?
(2%) ............................................................................................................
a) (Id.) of Estate
A
of CAUSE
CRIMINAL
and Jurisdiction
are
Judgments;
24 OF
relevant ACTION
Enforcement; to the is
case.
Examination an act
of or
..............................................................................................................
Defendant (2002)March 10,511994).Admissibility;
PROCEDURE....................................................................................................................................
(1997) Object or Real Evidence
................................................................................................................................................. 38
..................................................................................
(2001)
An action
SUGGESTED ANSWER: specific performance or,the in Interlocutory
Rights of the vs. Order
....................................................................................................................................
for Accused; 64 Settlement
Validity;Objections
HIV Test (1997) of
omissionAcquittal;
(1994)
10 of Effect
one (2002)
........................................................................................................
party in violation of Admissibility;
..........................................................................................................................................
Jurisdiction 51 Venue
SUMMARY
The Jurisdiction;
24 object
Estate;
alternative,
the (2006) PROCEDURE...................................................................................................................................
Habeas
Administrator
for of Corpus;
damages the
(1998) Custody
in Katarungang
the of Minors
amount (2005)
of ........................................................................................
(2006)
What is an interlocutory
............................................................................................................. order? 64 Venue;65
legal 38 Actions; the BP22; Civil Under(2005)
............................................................................................................................
right Republic 51
Action
.................................................................................................................................
Jurisdiction; or Lack rights ofeffect
ofisJurisdiction; other
Proper (Maao
Action Act No.108353,
Admissibility;
deemed Offeronetoincluded
Jurisdiction; may CTA be
Marry;
Sugar
25
Pambarangay
Special
P180,000.00
Prohibited
(2001)
Circumstantial
Division
Central vs.
Law
Proceedings
b)
Pleadings
CTA
vs. An
Evidence
En
Barrios,
to
(1997)
action
(2004)
Banc (1998) for ana amicable
writ ofof the Court
..............................................................................................
(2006)
79 Phil.
(2%) (2004)
SUGGESTED
charged39with
.....................................................................
ANSWER:
........................................................................................................................
and found
Actions;
................................................................................ BP22;
52 guilty
Admissibility;
Demurrer
...............................................................................................
606; Sec. of10qualified
to
Offer 64to Pay
...................................................................................................................................
Evidence
Jurisdiction; rape
Parties; Death
25
settlement of(1997) of a Party;among
disputes Effect (1998) family An interlocutory order refers to an order
..................................................................................................................
injunction.
2 65
(2003)
Expenses
ofIncapable
new c) An action forEstimation
replevin ofand a ..........................................................................................
if he knew on 39
.........................................................................................................
Rule of or Actions;
..........................................................................................................
Pecuniary
2), causing damage (2000) to before52the commission
Commencement
Admissibility; ofan
Private
of 10the
Parties; members
25 Death of a Party; Effect (1999) ..................................................................................................................
issued between the commencement
MISCELLANEOUS.................................................................................................................................................
barangay at the barangay level and
65
ARRANGED BY TOPIC
motorcycle
Action;
Document valued at crime that he is afflicted with Human Immuno-
another.
without Parties;Double
Jurisdiction;
An ACTION
25 Death(2005)
judicial
Jeopardy
isIncapable
anof ordinary
Party; of(2004)
Pecuniary
Effect ............................................................................
suit (1999) Estimation
in a court 39 Actions;
a................................................................................................................. 52Discretionary
Admissibility;Power Proof
(2000) ..........................................................................................
..................................................................................................................
the end of Virus the suit(HIV)/Acquired
which is not a final
P150,000.00.
of of Filiation;
Fiscal
Administrative
11
Justice by (1999)
Action
which of
Jurisdiction;
Proceedings one Anrecourse
Partition (2005)
party action
(2000) and
d) ........................................................................................................
for Deficiency
.....................................................................................
Incapable of Pecuniary 39 Actions;
52 Immune
Admissibility;
Injunction
Estimation
........................................................................................................................
prosecutes
No. Parties; the
26
1508, Thirdformer Party Claim and (2000)
the ...........................................................................................................................
first Katarungang decision
Deficiency Syndrome of the whole controversy
(AIDS) 39 or any and
other
consequently
interpleader
(1999)
Rules
(2003)
65 to help
ofThird-Party determine
Evidence relieve
(1997) who the courts of
......................................................................................................................................
Congress; .................................................................................................................
Law
.......................................................................................... Expropriating 11al. v. People, Jurisdiction;
Property 53Arrest;
Best
MTC
(2006)
We would like (1997
another
docket
of
Parties;
26
Pambarangay
between
a (2002)
Liberal
for
– 2006)
to seek the
congestion.
Warrantless
Evidence
the
Law.)enforcement
theArrest;
forRule
defendants
(1997)
Claim
(Preamble
Preliminary
(2005)
indulgence of the reader for some Bar is
or...........................................................................................................................
P.D.
protection
of entitled
orInvestigation
to receive (Gallardo
leaves
sexually et
something
transmissible moredisease to G.R.
beand
redress of(2004) ..................................................................................
No.
donethe
.....................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
Petition
right,
26 or
Construction; Certiorari
the Rules(2000)
prevention of Court 65 RA 3019;Investments
........................................................................................................................................Mandatory Suspension 11
142030,
on
virus
Jurisdiction;
(2001)
..................................................................................................................................
April 21, 2005; Inc. v. Court
40
53its
of
or
amountthe
Arrest;
Burden of Warrantless
P190,000.00
of from the plaintiff. merits
disease is transmitted to the victim. Under
2).
a Office
Petition
26
wrong.
(1998)
How shall forProof
of
the
(Section the
Relief
Rules
vs.Solicitor
1 of &Arrests
Burden
Questions which are improperly classified under a topic and for
Action
of
former Court
&for
of Searches
Rule
Evidence
General
Annulment
be construed?
(1997)
(2004)
(2006)(2002) ......................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
................................................................................................................ 66 No. 60036, January 27, 1987 11
...................................................................................................
[2%] Appeals,
Section 17(a) G.R.
e) AJurisdiction;
40
54 petition
PetitionANSWER:
27 for
Arrest;
Ombudsman the probate
Case Warrantless of
Decisions a will
(2006)Character Arrests & of Republic Act No. 8504 the
Seizures Evidence
(2003)
..................................................................................................
for Relief; Injunction (2002) .......................................................................................................................
cited in Denso Phils, v. /AC, G.R. No. 75000,
some topics which are improperly or ignorantly phrased, for the
SUGGESTED
Theestate
involving
Civil (2002)
Actions
12
Rules
Pleadings;
27 anof vs. valued
Special
Court
Amendment ofProceedings
should Complaint; beat By
.......................................................................................................
LeaveJurisdiction;
liberally of Court (2003)
court may compel the accused to submit
Feb.
himself 27, Arrest; Warrantless Arrests;
.....................................................................................................................................
401987).
to a blood test where blood Probate
54 Confession;
Objection
............................................................................
samples
(1998)P200,000.00.
(2000)
Affidavit
SUGGESTED
(2001)
Distinguish of
ANSWER: Recantation (1998) Judgment
........................................................................................................
civil actions vs. Opinion of the Court
Bail
...........................................................................................................
from special
................................................................................................................................... 41 12 Jurisdiction;54 (2002)
Facts;
RTC
authors are just Bar Reviewees who have prepared this work while
(a) An Pleadings;
27
construed action
Legislative
(2002)
proceedings.
in Amendment
for
Facts
order
specific
vs.
ofto Complaint;
promote
performance
Adjudicative
By
Edited
Facts
Leave
their
or,and
(2004)
of Court;
in Arranged Prescriptive
would
(2006)
What by:be
is
Period
extracted
the
(2000) .............................................
from
difference
.............................................................................................................................................................
his veins to
between
determine
...........................................................................................
........................................................................................................................................
[3%] 12 41 54a
Bail;
Jurisdiction;
Pleadings;
27
objective of Amendment
securing of
a Complaint;
just,inspeedy Matter of Right (2005)
and .................................................................................
whether he has HIV. (8%)
reviewing for the Bar Exams under time constraints and within their
the
CIVIL
of
alternative,
PROCEDURE
Appeal
Hearsay
Subdivision
SUGGESTED
28
inexpensive
180,000.00
(1998)
Evidence
ANSWER:
Pleadings; Amendment
for damages
Homeowner
disposition
falls
(2002)
within of Complaint;
of every
the
the
(2006)
jurisdiction
amount
..............................................................................................................................................
version 1987-2003 judgment and an opinion of the
................................................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................
To Conform
action of w/ vs. Evidence
a) Are (2004) the rights of the accused to court?
....................................................................................................................................... 13
41
12 be
..................................................................
A CIVIL
Bail;
54
Actions;
Pleadings;ACTION
Application;
Katarungang Cause Hearsay
Answer; of is
Pambarangay;Venueone
Action
Defense; vs.by
(2002) which
Lupon;Evidence
Action
Specific Extent
Silliman
(1999) a
Denial party
of Authority;
University
(2004) (2001)
(2.5%)
SUGGESTED
CollegeOpinion ANSWER: Evidence (2004)
..............................................................................................................................
............................................................................
limited knowledge of the law. We would like to seek the reader’s
sues
However,
28
ADDITIONAL
and proceeding.
Metropolitan
41 another
Pleadings;
13
28
ANSWER:
strict
Trial (Sec.
for Courts
Bail;
observance
Certification
Actions;
6, Rule
the Against
in 1
Metro
enforcement
of
Cause
1997 Rules
Forum the
of Law
Manila.
Forms
rules
Shopping
............................................................................................................
Batch
of
of
or
.....................................................................................................
13 is(2000)
..............................................................................................
2005
presumed
The judgment
Action;
to of Hearsay;
54
privacy,
innocent
and
or Exception;
Joinder
falloBail
against
of
is thethefinal
Dead
&
crime
Man
self-incrimination
charged,
disposition
Statute
(1999)
Splitting
.......................................................................................
Civil
AlthoughProcedure.)
an action for specific performance of the Court which is reflected in the
indulgence for a lot of typographical errors in this work.
is
(2001)
......................................................................................................................................
protection
an imperative
(1998)
Pleadings;
29
not
(1999)
Declaration
........................................................................................................
ofCounterclaim
a right,
necessity oragainst
the when prevention
the Counselthey of or
are the Plaintiff
.............................................................................................
capable (1998) of pecuniary estimation,
(2004)
violated
dispositive
13 Actions; 54
byportion Hearsay;41
Cause ofcompulsory
such
....................................................................................................................................
....................................................................................................... of
Bail; Exception;
Matter of
Action; Joinder of testing?
55 the
Hearsay;
41 decision.
Bail;
Dying
Right
Action
......................................................................
Exception;
Matter of A
redress (1999)
considered
29 of................................................................................................
Pleadings; a Motions;
wrong.indispensable (See.
Bill 3[a], Rule
of Particulars 1, 1997
to(2003) the SUGGESTED ANSWER:
13 Actions; Cause of Action; Joinder of
.........................................................................................................
Explain.
since the Gestae;
alternative demand for damages is decision
No. The is
courtdirectly prepared by a judge and
Rules Right
Res
Pleadings;
Action
29
prevention vs.
of Civil (2005)Matter
ofReply; Opinion
of
Procedure), Discretionof
Effect ofdelays Ordinary
while (1999)
Non-Filing aand Witness
SPECIALUPDATED
of Reply (2005) BY: 13 Actions; Cause of Action; Splittingto
may compel
............................................................................................... the
...................................................................41 accused
55 Bail;
Hearsay;
Matter
(2000) ...........................................................................................
................................................................................................
needless to the
capable of of pecuniary
Exceptions
Right vs. Matter
(1999) estimation,
of Discretion it is within
(2006) signed
submit byhimselfhim, containing clearly and
Bail;
PROCEEDING
Prejudicial is a Ejectment
Question; remedy vs.bySpecific
of which a
Performance 14 to a Cause blood
...................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................... of test
42 55to
Dondee
orderly (1999)
29 and (2000) ..........................................................................
.............................................................................................................
speedy dispatch Judicial Actions; Action;
the
3[C]. jurisdiction
Witness
Hearsay;
Rule Posting
Exceptions;
1,1997 ofBail the
RulesDying
(1999)Metropolitan
ofDeclaration
Civil Trial.....................................................................................................
(1999) distinctly awhether
statement of the facts
...........................................................................................................................
determine he has HIV under proved 42
Sec.
party
businessPre-Trial;
Splitting
30 seeks Requirements
(2005)
(Alvero
. Metro to establish vs. Judge (2001)
a status,
de a 129right 14 Actions; Cause of
..............................................................................................................................
.............................................................................................................
la Rosa, 76
Courts us.inTan,
Complaint
Procedure.)
Cruz 55 vs.
87 Manila.
Information
Phil. 627]. (Sec.
(1999) of BP as
Hearsay; and
Singson, the of law Adm. upon
No,Matter which His the rights
No.
17(a).........................................................
R.A. 8054. judgment
33 ...........................................................................................................................
Inapplicable
RTJ-91-758, to be is
Remedial
or a Provisional
Actions;
30 Law
particular Motion
in Remedies
Phil.
fact. to System (1999)
Dismiss; ofbar Gov’tby prior judgment (2002) 14 Actions;
.................................................................................................................................
Phil.
amended 428)
Conciliation
(2003)
42 by
(2006)Counterclaim
How 30
RA
remedial
No.
Proceedings; 7691:
Demurrer
(2002)
(Sec.
Katarungang
laws Attachment The RE-Take 2007
implemented toPambarangay based
inEvidence;presumedContract
September (Etoya 26,v.
are ..................................................................................................................................
Provisional Remedies; Abraham
1994).
innocent of the of Judicialcharged,
55 crime Carriage
Notice;
(1999) .............................................................................................................
................................................................................................................................ 14
(b) An
vs. Pre-Trialaction
(2004)
Evidence
Provisional Conference for injunction
(2005) (1999) is not capable
................................................................................................
Remedies; Demurrer to Evidence;
............................................................................................................................
Attachment (1999) to privacy 42 and against w/o
56
self-incrimination Leave
Judicial of
Actions;
30 Counterclaim
our system of government? (2%) vs. Crossclaim (1999) .............................................................................................................
.........................................................................................................
An opinion of the court is the informal
of pecuniary estimation and hence falls
The
FromAuthors
What
within
Court
Notice;
30
15
SUGGESTED
of
is the (1998)
Provisional Evidence;
ANSWER:
the ANSWERS
difference,
TO BAR
the jurisdiction
Memorandum
Court
Remedies;
(2001)
Actions;
EXAMINATION
(1996)
Foreign if any,
Attachment
of the RTCs.
Law (1997) .......................................................................................................
between
(2001)
Cross-Claims; the
..................................................................................................
are
Third not
expression of the
42 Demurrer
violated
Party
43 views
by tosuch
Claims
Demurrer
Evidence;
of tothe
w/o (1997)
compulsory Leave 56
.............................................................................................................
court w/o and
conciliation
RemedialProvisional
30 laws are
Remedies; ..................................................................................................
proceedings implemented
Attachment under the
................................................................................................. testing.15 Actions;
In an action Derivative in its vs.Evidence;
..............................................................................................................................................
(2005)in .............................................................................................................
our Suit final
which the Class Suit
physical
July 26, 2005
Leave
57
Katarungang ofgovernment
Court (2004)Attachment
Pambarangay
QUESTIONS by the UP LAW COMPLEX & Philippine Law
system Provisional
(2005)
30 Remedies; Offer Law vs.the and theof (1999) cannot
of.........................................................................................................
through pillars
Garnishment condition
prevail
16
ofthe
against
Evidence
..................................................................................................
Actions;is43
a party inDismissal;
Filing;
order.
Failure
Civil Actions
controversy, (1997) The
to
&
...................................................................................
the
(c) An action
Prosecute for(2003) replevin of a motorcycle opinion of
........................................................................................................................................
negotiations for an court
...................................................................................................................
amicable settlement (Look for citation of latest57 is contained
Offer
case, of
43
in Evidence; in
Dismissal; the
res
of Provisional
the
Criminal
31 judicial Remedies;
Action system,
(2005) Injunction including(2001) the Actions; Intervention;
................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................
court may 16
Schools Association 2006
valued
during at
Provisional
inter the
Provisional
Requisites
31 150,000.00
aliospre-trial
acta
Dismissal(2003)
Remedies;
(2000) (2003) falls within the body of theorder decision the that
..........................................................................................................
conference
Injunction under
(2003) the
accused
57serves
to as
OfferActions;
................................................................................................................
2004)
submit
of 43 aDouble
guide
Evidence;Real
................................................................................................................
to
prosecutory service, our courts of justice
................................................................................................................
a physical examination. 16
(Sec. 1, Rule 28,
Jeopardy
Testimonial
jurisdiction
SUGGESTED ANSWER: &(2002)
of Documentary
the (1994)
Metropolitan Trial or
Mainenlightenment to
of determine 57 Opinion
.........................................................................................................................................
...........................................................................................
Remedy vs. b) If the result such test the
shows ratio
Rule
44
that
Updated by Dondee
Rules
and
The
Courts
Remedial
Provisional
of Court?
Actions
31
quasi
difference
Double
(1994)in Law
judicial
Jeopardy;
Metro
ProvisionalDeath
Survives
31
Remedies;
& Personal
vs.
(2%) agencies.
between
Manila
Remedies;
Injunctions;
Actions
Upgrading;
Substantive (Sec.
of theInjunctions;
(2006)Ancillary
the
Original
Law 33 conciliation
DefendantIssuance of Charges
(2000) w/out (2005)
1997
decidendi
Action
Rules (2006)
of Civil
of the
Procedure)
decision.
...............................................................................................................................................
he is HIV positive, and the The 57
Actions;
........................................................
................................................................................................... 16
opinion
prosecution
Bond (2006) ...........................................................................
................................................................................................... Parol
..........................................................................................
16
July 22, 2007
proceedings
(2006) Evidence
44
Provisional
Distinguish
Appeals;
31 July 22, 2007
Ruleunder
Remedies;
between
Period of(2001) the FreshKatarungang
Injunctions;
substantive
Appeal; Requisites
Period law Ruleand Extradition
(2006)
(2003) forms such no part of inthe judgment
....................................................................................................................................
offers result evidence to prove (2004)
even 58the
............................................................................................
............................................................................................. if
Preponderance
Pambarangay
Provisional
31
remedial law. (2%)
17 Law vs.
Remedies; Substantial
and
Certiorari; the
Receivership Evidence
negotiations
(2001) (2003)
..................................................................................................................................................
Mode of in one instrument,
Certiorari but Information
....................................................................................................
qualifying
combined circumstance 44 under may
(2006)
...........................................................................................................the
be
for (2001)
58
an amicable settlement Privilege during the 1947).
referred Communication
Information to for for qualified
the purpose rape,
................................................................................................................................................. of vs. should (1998)
construing 45the
Provisional
32 Remedies; Replevin (1999)
......................................................................................................................
SUGGESTED ANSWER: 17 Certiorari; Rule 45 Rule 65
..................................................................................................................
Information;
pre-trial
Provisional
(1998)
32 conference Amendment
Remedies; (2001)
Support the Rules ofLitethe of court reject
............................................................................................................................
SUBSTANTIVE LAW under is thatPendente part the judgment (Contreras such 58 Privilege
result on theCommunication;
ground
............................................................................................................................
(1999) .............................................................................................
..................................................................................................................... 17 Certiorari; Rule 45
v. Felix, G.R. vs. No. that
RuleL-
law
Court Marital
45
which
65
32 is
Provisionalthat
(2005) Privilege
Information;
creates, in thedefines
Remedies; (1989)
Support and
former, Amendment;
lawyers
Pendente regulatesLiteare it
Double is the
SUGGESTED fruit
ANSWER:of a poisonous
Jeopardy;
................................................................................................. Bailtree?
58 Death Explain.
Privilege
(2002)
(2001) .............................................................................................
477, June 30,
..................................................................................................................... 18 Contempt; of not
a
rights Communication;
Provisional
prohibited
Party;
32 from
Effect Remedies; Marital Privilege (2000)
........................................................................................
concerning 45Since
Judicial
Information;the rights &of Supervening
Autonomy
Amendment;
life,..............................................................................................................
appearing
(1998) liberty,
TRO for or
(2001) the property,
parties.
the accused
Impartiality Eventsare
Default (1997)
.................................................................................................
(2000)
........................................................................................................................
18 59
Privilege (2003) 45 because
violated the compulsory Bail 18 testing
or
Parties the mustCommunication;
powers
appear of Marital
person Privilege
agencies
only (2004)
...........................................................................................
Provisional
32 Remedies;inTRO (2006) Information; (2003)
or .................................................................................................
........................................................................................................................
except
........................................................................................................................................................ Default
Privilege Communication; is authorized
Marital
.........................................................................................................................................
59 by the Privilege
45 Information; Motion
(2006) to
minors (2001)
33 or ........................................................................................................................................................
instrumentalities incompetents for the administration who may be of Version 1997-2006 Updated by Dondee 18
Quash (2000)
.................................................................................................
Default; Remedy; Lost
......................................................................................................................
59 Documents; 46 Secondary
Information; Evidence
Motion
public
assisted byOrder theirof next Default; ofEffects
kin who (1999)are ................................................................................................................
not
to Quash
(1992) (2005) ......................................................................................................................
.........................................................................................
Default; 60 Testimony; Independent Relevant
46 Information;
Statement
lawyers 18 . (Formerly Sec. 9, Remedies; Party Declared in Default (1998)
Motion ..............................................................................................
(1999) to Quash; Grounds (1998) ......................................................................................................
.............................................................................................. 19 60 Witness; Competency of the Witness vs. 46
Judgment; of
Credibility Promulgation
the Witnessof (2004) Judgment (1997) ........................................................................................................
............................................................. 60 Witness; Examination of a Child
Witness;
46 via Live-Link Jurisdiction;
TV (2005) .........................................................................
Complex Crimes
60 Witness; Examination (2003) of
Witnesses (1997) ............................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................... 47 60

Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail.com Page 10 of 66
under the jurisdiction of the RTCs. (e) A petition for the probate of a will
(Russell v. Vestil, 304 SCRA 738,[1999]). involving an estate valued at 200.000.00
falls within the Jurisdiction of the
However, the action for annulment is a Metropolitan Trial Courts in Metro Manila
personal action and the venue depends ADDITIONAL
(Sec. 19[4]ANSWER:
of BP 129, as amended).
on the residence of either A or B. Hence, (b) An application for a writ of
it should be brought in the RTC of the preliminary injunction may be granted by
place where either of the parties resides. a Municipal Court in an action of forcible
Jurisdiction; Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation entry vs.
Day and RTC
unlawful
of detainer.
Zamboanga, 191
(Sec.33 of BP
(2000)
A files an action in the Municipal Trial SCRA610.
129;
Court against B, the natural son of A’s Jurisdiction vs. Venue
father, for the partition of a parcel of land (2006)
Distinguish jurisdiction from venue?
located in Taytay, Rizal with an assessed (2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
JURISDICTION treats of the power of the
value of P20,000.00. B moves to dismiss Court to decide a case on the merits, while
the action on the ground that the case VENUE refers to the place where the suit
should have been brought in the RTC may be filed. In criminal actions, however,
because the action is one that is not venue is jurisdictional. Jurisdiction is a
capable of pecuniary estimation as it matter of substantive law; venue, of
involves primarily a determination of procedural law. Jurisdiction may be not be
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
hereditary
The motionrights shouldand
be not merelyThe
granted. theaction
bare conferred by consent through waiver upon
right to real property. Resolve the
for partition depends on a determination motion. a court,
G.R. No.but145022,
venue may be waived,23,
September except in
2005;
(2%) criminalIII
Santos cases (Nocum et al.
v. Northwest v. Tan, G.R. No.
Airlines,
of the hereditary rights of A and B, which
101538, June 23, 1992).
is not capable of pecuniary estimation. Jurisdiction; CTA Division vs. CTA En Banc
Hence, even though the assessed value of (2006)
Mark filed with the Bureau of Internal
the land is P20,000.00, the Municipal Trial Revenue a complaint for refund of taxes
Vestil,
Court supra)
has no jurisdiction. (Russell v. paid, but it was not acted upon. So, he
Jurisdiction; Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation filed a similar complaint with the Court of
(2003)
A filed with the MTC of Manila an action Tax Appeals raffled to one of its Divisions.
for specific performance against B, a Mark's complaint was dismissed. Thus,
resident of Quezon City, to compel the he filed with the Court of Appeals a
latter to execute a deed of conveyance petition for certiorari under Rule 65.
covering a parcel of land situated in Does the Court of Appeals have
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Quezon City having an assessed value of jurisdiction over Mark's petition? (2.5%)
No. The procedure is governed by Sec. 11
p19,000.00. B received the summons and of R. A. 9282. Decisions of a division of
a copy of the Complaint on 02 January the Court of Tax Appeals must be
2003. On 10 January 2003, B filed a appealed to the Court of Tax Appeals en
Motion to Dismiss the Complaint on the banc. Further, the CTA now has the same
ground of lack of jurisdiction contending rank as the Court of Appeals and is no
that the subject matter of the suit was longer considered a quasi-judicial agency.
incapable of pecuniary estimation. The It is likewise provided in the said law that
court denied the motion. In due time, B the decisions of the CTA en bane are
filed with the RTC a Petition for cognizable by the Supreme Court under
Certiorari praying that the said Order be Jurisdiction; Incapable of Pecuniary Estimation
Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil
set aside because the MTC had no (2000)
A brings an action in the MTC of Manila
Procedure.
jurisdiction against B for the annulment of an
(a) Was theover the of
denial case.
the 6% On 13
Motion to
February 2003, A filed with the MTC a extrajudicial foreclosure sale of real
Dismiss the Complaint correct?
motion to declare B in default. The property with an assessed value of
(b) Resolve the Motion to Declare the
motion wasinopposed P50,000.00 located in Laguna. The
Defendant Default. by B on the ground
that his Petition
BP 129. as amended for Certiorari
by RA No.was still
complaint alleged prematurity of the sale
pending.
7691). for the reason that the mortgage was not
(d) An action for interpleader to yet due. B timely moved to dismiss the
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
determine who between the defendants is case on the ground that the action should
The motion should be granted. The MTC
entitled to receive the amount of have been brought in the RTC of Laguna.
of Manila has no jurisdiction because the
P190,000.00 falls within the jurisdiction Decide with reason. (3%)
action for the annulment of the
(Makati Dev Corp. v. Trial
of the Metropolitan Tanjuatco
Courts27inSCRA
Metro
401)
extrajudicial foreclosure is not capable of
Manila. pecuniary estimation and is therefore

Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail.comPage
by: sirdondee@gmail.com Page 11 12
of 66of 66 Was the
billion. He announced to the public that municipal estimationcircuit and,trial court correct
therefore, the action in was
its
the VRIS project has been set aside. Two ruling? Why?
within the (5%)jurisdiction of RTC. (Russel v.
Commissioners sided with Chairman Go, Vestil,
SUGGESTED 304ANSWER:
SCRA 738 [1999]; Copioso v.
but the majority voted to uphold the Yes, the Municipal
Copioso, G.R. No. 149243, Circuit October
Trial Court was
28,2002;
Cabutihan
correct in v. Landcenter
proceeding to Construction,
hear the case. 383
It
contract. SCRA 353 [2002]).
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:
Meanwhile, Fotokina filed with the RTC a has exclusive jurisdiction in all matters of
If the action affects title to or possession
petition for mandamus compel the COMELEC probate, both testate and intestate, where
of real property then it is a real action
to implement the contract. The Office of the the value of the estate does not exceed
and jurisdiction is determined by the
Solicitor General (OSG), representing P100,000.00 (now P200,000.00). The
Chairman Go, opposed the petition on the
assessed value of the property. It is
value in this case of P95,000.00 is within
ground that mandamus does not lie to within the jurisdiction therefore of the
its jurisdiction. In determining the
enforce contractual obligations. During the Metropolitan Trial Court.
jurisdictional
SUGGESTED ANSWER:amount, excluded are
proceedings, the majority Commissioners (B.P.Blg. 129, Sec. 33, as
attorney’s
(b) The Court fees,could litigation
declare expenses
B in default and
filed a manifestation that Chairman Go was amended)
because these
costs; B did are not obtain a only
considered writ for of
not authorized Jurisdiction; RTC
May the OSGbyrepresent
the COMELEC En Banc
Chairman Goto preliminary the
determining injunction
filing fees.or a temporary
oppose the the petition. (2002)
P sued A in the RTC-Manila to recover the
before RTC notwithstanding that his restraining order from the RTC prohibiting
position is contrary to that of the
following
the judge from sums: (1) P200,000.00
proceeding in the caseon an
during
SUGGESTED ANSWER: overdue
the pendency promissory note, (2) P80,000.00
majority? (5%) (Sec. 7 of Ruleof65; theDiazpetition for certiorari.
v. Diaz, 331 SCRA 302
Yes, the OSG may represent the COMELEC on the purchase
ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:price of a computer, (3)
[2002].
Chairman before the RTC notwithstanding (4)
The P100,000.00
P150,000.00
Court should for
not attorney’s
for damages to hisB car
declare fees
in andand
default
that his position is contrary to that of a litigation expenses. Can
inasmuch as the jurisdiction of MTC was A move to
majority of the Commission members in the dismiss the case on the ground
put in issue in the Petition For Certiorari that the
COMELEC because the OSG is an court has the
filed with no jurisdiction
RTC. The MTC overshould
the subject
defer
independent office; it's hands are not SUGGESTED
matter? ANSWER: (2%)
Explain.
further proceedings pending the result of
shackled to the cause of its client agency. No, because
Corporation v. Court
theof Appeals,
RTC-Manila has
such petition. (Eternal Gardens164 SCRA 421
Memorial
The primordial concern of the OSG is to see jurisdiction
[1988]). over the subject matter. P
Park
to it that the best interest
v. Quyano-Padilla, September 18, of the government may sue
Jurisdiction; A in one
MTC complaint asserting as
is upheld (COMELEC
2002). many
P suedcauses
(2002) A andofBaction in one as complaint
he may have in and
the
Jurisdiction; Ombudsman Case Decisions since
RTC-Manila, the cause of action againstfor
all the claims are principally A
(2006)
Does the Court of Appeals have recovery
being on of anmoney,
overdue the aggregatenote
promissory amountfor
jurisdiction to review the Decisions in claimed
P300,000.00 shalland be that
the test
againstof jurisdiction.
B being on
criminal and administrative cases of the an alleged
[Rule 5(d)]. The
2, sec.balance aggregate amount
of P300,000.00 on the
SUGGESTED
Ombudsman? ANSWER:
(2.5%) claimed
purchase isprice
P450,000.00,
of goods exclusive
sold on of the
credit.
The Supreme Court has exclusive appellate
amount
Does theof P100,000.00
RTC-Manila for
have attorney’s
jurisdictionfees
jurisdiction over decisions of the Jurisdiction;
SUGGESTED Subdivision
ANSWER: Homeowner
Ombudsman in criminal cases (Sec. 14, R.A. and
over expenses
the case? of
Explain.litigation.
(3%) Hence, the
(2006)
What
No, the court has
RTC-Manila jurisdiction
has no over an action
jurisdiction
6770). In administrative and disciplinary
RTC-Manila has jurisdiction.
for specific
over the case. A performance
and B could not filed by a
be joined
cases, appeals from the Ombudsman must be subdivision
as defendants homeowner in one complaint againstbecause a
taken to the
(Lanting Court of Appeals
v. Ombudsman, G.R.under Rule 43
No. 141426, subdivision
the right to developer?
relief against Choose
both the correct
defendants
May 6, 2005; Fabian v. Desierto, G.R. No. 1
do not The
answer. Explain.
arise Housing
out of the same and transaction
Land Use or
129742, September 16, 1998; Sec. 14, RA. Regulatory Board
6770).
series of transactions and there is no
Jurisdiction; Probate 2
common The Securities
question of law and or factExchange
common
(2001)
Josefa filed in the Municipal Circuit Trial Commission
to both. (Rule 3, sec. 6). Hence, separate
Court of Alicia and Mabini, a petition for 3
complaintsThe Regional
will haveTrial to beCourtfiles and they
144
4
would SCRAThe
fall377 (1986)].
Commercial
under the Court
jurisdiction orof the
the
the probate of the will of her husband,
Martin, who died in the Municipality of Regional
Metropolitan Trial Court
Trial designated
Court.
Jurisdiction; Office of the Solicitor General by
[Flores the v.
Alicia, the residence of the spouses. The Supreme
Mallare-Philipps,
(2006) Court to
In 1996, Congress passed Republic Acthear and decide
probable value of the estate which "commercial
No. 8189, otherwise cases." known as the Voter's
consisted mainly of a house and lot was Registration Act of 1996, providing for
placed at P95,000.00 and in the petition computerization of elections. Pursuant
for the allowance
SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the will, attorney’s thereto, the COMELEC approved the
fees
(a) The in denial
the of amount
the Motion of P10,000.00,
to Dismiss Voter's Registration and Identification
litigation
the Complaint expenses
was not in correct.
the amountAlthough of System (VRIS) Project. It issued
P5,000.00
the assessed andvalue
costs ofweretheincluded.
parcel ofPedro,
land invitations to pre-qualify and bid for the
the
involvednext was of kin of Martin,
P19,000.00, filed the
within an project. After the public bidding, Fotokina
opposition to the probate
jurisdiction of the MTC of Manila, the of the will on was declared the winning bidder with a
the ground that the total amount
action filed by A for Specific Performance included bid of P6 billion and was issued a Notice
in the relief of the petition is
against B to compel the latter to execute a more than of Award. But COMELEC Chairman Gener
P100,000.00,
Deed of Conveyance the maximum jurisdictional
of said parcel of land Go objected to the award on the ground
amount for municipal
was not capable circuit trial courts.
of pecuniary that under the Appropriations Act, the
The court overruled the opposition and budget for the COMELEC's modernization
proceeded to hear the case. is only P1

Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006)
Katarungang Pambarangay; Lupon; Extent of
Authority; (2001)
An amicable settlement was signed before
a Lupon Tagapamayapa on January 3,
2001. On July 6, 2001, the prevailing party
asked the Lupon to execute the amicable
settlement because of the non-compliance
by the other party of the terms of the
agreement. The Lupon concerned refused
to execute the settlement/agreement. a) Is
settlement/agreement? (3%) b)
the Lupon correct in refusing What
to execute
should
the be the course of action of the
prevailing party in such a case?
(2%) ANSWER:
SUGGESTED
a) Yes, the Lupon is correct in refusing to
execute the settlement/agreement
because the execution sought is already
beyond the period of six months from the
date of the settlement within which the
1991)
Lupon is authorized to execute. (Sec. 417,
Local Government Code of
b) After the six-month period, the
prevailing party should move to execute
the settlement/agreement in the
appropriate city or municipal trial court.
CIVIL PROCEDURE
(Id.)

Actions; Cause of Action vs. Action
(1999)
Distinguish action from cause of action.
(2%)
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
An ACTION is one by which a party sues
another for the enforcement or
protection of a right, or the prevention or
redress of a wrong. (Sec. 3(A), Rule )
A CAUSE OF ACTION is the act or
omission by which a party violates a right
of another. (Sec. 2, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules)
An action must be based on a cause of
action. (Sec. 1, Rule 2 of the 1997 Rules)
Actions; Cause of Action; Joinder & Splitting
(1998)
Give the effects of the following:
1 Splitting a single cause of action: and
(3%|
2
SUGGESTEDNon-joinder
ANSWER: of a necessary party. [2%]
1. The effect of splitting a single cause of SUGGESTED ANSWER:
action is found in the rule as follows: If An action for specific performance by a
two or more suits are instituted on the subdivision homeowner against a
basis of the same cause of action, the subdivision developer is within the
filing of one or a judgment on the merits jurisdiction of the Housing and Land Use
in any one is available as a ground for the Regulatory Board. Sec. 1 of P.D. 1344
2. The effect
dismissal of the (Sec.
of the others. non-joinder
4 of Rule 2)of a provides that the HLURB has jurisdiction
necessary party may be stated as follows: over cases involving specific performance of
The court may order the inclusion of an contractual and statutory obligations filed by
omitted necessary party if jurisdiction buyers of subdivision lots and condominium
over his person may be obtained. The units against
Insurance thev. owner,
Corp. Eddy Ng developer,
Kok Wei,dealer,
G.R.
failure to comply with the order for his broker or salesman (Manila Bankers
No. 139791, December 12, 2003; Kakilala Life v.
inclusion without justifiable cause to a Faraon, G.R. No. 143233, October 18, 2004;
Sec. 1, P.D. 1344).
waiver of the claim against such party.
The court may proceed with the action
but the judgment rendered shall be
without

from but P1.and A Y asked Corporation for moral to compel and of the Family Code.000. Both anyhave claim by one fallen due.motion Joinder to isofdismiss any Actionclaim the between claim plaintiff’s the same and alleged parties. alleged in give turn. on rulethe counterclaim.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. jurisdiction on (Sec. a)City. the Cause Actions. P400. the P200. Theactionfirst is for a Marvin's counterclaim proposal to partitioninclude the (2005) Raphael. The motion for breach to dismiss of contract should be for an assessed value of P100.note thefell due and A counterclaim defendant’s failed to pay. parties SCRA 192failure special Raphael's cause civil of action which he may not be ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: (1975)]. 6. 9 of Rule 3) for storage charges complaint latter’s encroachment for partitiononagainst the plaintiff’s Perry and lot. files Hence.ofThe the two loans psychological rise to two action theThe a.000.000.00 to Carmela given to hadC. court motion. and SUGGESTED other advancesANSWER: for the goods. of Theyaction in are and the (1980) attorney's money and out other fees. When different marble tilessuit B commenced in to its borrowed P100. to asuewarehouseman. of his The thecomplaint rule on JOINDER original for action interpleader OF CAUSES or of a Also. Industries is not a possession. X Marvin. partition Cfor cannot all of orthe file property. A counterclaim as to may who in was oneis different denied the venues motion City. of P City. By way of V Corporation. third while party Ricky the crossclaim.000.v.com Page13 Page 14 15of of66 of 66 66Raphael case.500. Ricky 9 & to35(3). answer 5[b]. loan. (Rule 11. Arreza 2001) Diaz.from bar byA.00 claim. on whose who be governed by the different terms andC the received nullity of the his money marriage from to A. 5. who is engaged in tile SUGGESTED 100. ACause a) be Corporation COUNTERCLAIM filed of aAction. counterclaim lies aggregate availableforandas amount damages. was entitled it set a 95 SCRA 540 to the date forgoods. The decision the reception becameonfinal of evidence A's and executory. the Accordingly.000. cannot Action. court basis of two separate complaints. He actual damages as her business depleted alleged therein for declaration of nullity of the marriage incorporated complaint asserted againstin his complaint Dabsence because of the hisloan actionof that as atheresult three corporations of the withdrawal claimed title and in view against of thethe cross-claimant. [Pagsisihan v.) advances other causesofof action.00. was sued by EE residential land located in Pasay City with of the others. against P100. the first? Why? transaction However. it was proper latter's opponent's P100. pertains On to thethe reasons. set are up.) It (1970)]. Rule the either in a. Goyala. the filing fromof onea P200.] venue interpleader theistherein. A second against action No. or case should forhave a sum SUGGESTED ANSWER: been of set money for hearing. Is Brepliedobligedthat to co-file PARTITION alleged encroachment is a special civil on his action lot. join his Family Code]. installing granted. include causesThis is what of among action the A did pertainingby filing to must be answered within ten (10) days court to ascertain who defendants Pl. sec. answered. However. of the loans are separate loans which may the same sameissue courtof whoto foreclose encroached the mortgage. Court of Appeals. no motion his to dismiss claim for Pasay declared (1999) in Citythe a) default.Raphael (4%) otherwise claim should join asahave is against many co-party. The causes the defendant of actiondenied may the Actions.a compulsory 5.000. What Abecauseplaintiff motion is the rule theagainst for in plaintiff default extension is ofonfrom splitting timethe a has been storage provided fees filed. (Sec.) andon the jurisdictions. judgment No. with Counterclaim judgment in the first because they are loan. against A before It raises the and Rolando C in a filed Joint a and petition several for capacity.000.000. Hence.00. shall be dismissal dismissal ofofthethe test thesecondcomplaintofcase. Crossclaim action and its effect are that(2%) if two or RTC After received of Quezon trial.are(5%) not Actions. B to dismiss. IndustriesSplittinghas no legal differentmatter causesofofthe original action. EEAfter due proceedings.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail.00.000.00? They are ANSWER: the coowners of a parcel of is available as a ground for the dismissal judgment having become final.] were obviously provided the parties is complied with. for the causes RTC for of damages action allegedly against caused Perry in by histhe [2%] payment party. Perry subject also rejected Ricky orand Actions. defendant counterclaimed The joinder is against betweenthe a his claim from afor storage feesinand CROSSCLAIM that advances a cross-claim and partition for plaintiff and damages a sumresulting of money.incorporated causes (Sec. C Cause borrowed of Actions. mortgaged the same lot to B.to the D. Rule 2 of thecounterclaim. Rule 6) b) the incorporated A secured two loans from B? one with respect to (defendant’s) land. with plaintiff who respect in fact had to theencroached loan butonnot an opposing causes of party.action Rule in 6)hisas municipal defendant’s No. However. because for if interpleader he may have against an opposing party.notSplitting be the validly declared filedcourtin c) complaint No. the subject (2%)matter 2. Why? of for the (5%) for 64hearing. Rule 2. jurisdiction Theof filinga RTC of with and the deemed security automatically for the settlement joined by of the the a 2. (2%) or a judgment upon the merits in any one complaint and Marvin psychological against are D residents incapacity for the of of amount Batangas his wife. and Marvin evidence in the RTC required to proveof Pasay them City. with cross. because C. (Sec. 4).00? (2005) Perry is that a resident Rolando b) Can of C failed file to a prove Manila.000. with the After securing transaction money. dismissing against Cause the against B and C with theof C Action. 2004. Is filed the Thewas It plaintiff not proper sued the for Rickydefendant to join in histhe stand a complaint of EE Industries prejudice against to the rights X sustainable? Corporation of each necessary Explain. out Raphael of the transaction he or Rule 69.00. X psychological incapacity under Article 36 Perry andisMarvin asserted or may inbe the RTCto liable of Pasay City Corporation counterclaim. Joinder(2002) note is only was executedsince permissive by B brought matter ofanother the plaintiff’sactionclaim. pleading The against motion assert.00 and isfor the interpleader distinguished other for includes Marvin. Cross-Claims. filed by one Is partythe offices collect on asthe provided promissory in note. the ground that the counterclaim could no longer be prosecuted in view of the dismissal of the main .000. Perry ground for that his the amount marriage of 200. 133113.waived SUGGESTED ANSWER: he promised tobarred pay on by or thebefore Without filing any motion his right to foreclose the mortgage. and as a other within related the expenses. loaned SUGGESTED ANSWER: conditions. Rolando installation business. Rule 2.00 from Ricky which been A celebrated cross-claim is a without claim a license.00 incapacity separate causes out of the of of latter. Counterclaim Rule on the vs.00 Motion to Dismiss. thatThe he for [Arts. part a of He third-party a claim also them to interplead.00. In his answer.000 8 Rule 6) Perry has for no the connectioncollection with of the the and right of possession cancellation by her clients of their over the goods State with reasons whether requirement. that and the any advances. a basic(Sec.) andfavorable occurrence judgment constituting on histheclaim. other funds in his was uncertain case was dismissed which afterof them thewas trial entitled court his complaint for partition different causes of action because the against Perry to the that found goods. Rule filed another petition. affirmative actionsdefense They orare actions part in theof and need in respective [Amante not vs. the second a co-party actionarising is not barred outDecember judgment ofby thethe in 1. ground that The it liable therefor. because it is(Sec. allegations 35 SCRA need of the Complaint 557 not be obligation. or (2%) Perry occurrence failedthat to ispaythe his filed split hisitscause Answerof action. shall principally be August the counterclaim in the same action.000.of is a compulsorysuit to recoverwhich counterclaim from arises A the Actions.000. barred.of the rule thegrounds on amountsfor joinder of of Manila counterclaim.the partyrule may on have joinder against ofX Perry. of cases].00 action and may be the he Actions. G. 6 of Rule 16. a (Sec. a ground claimed The for [Gojo v. partition which b) for A in his complaint counterclaim P500. (a) Yes. subject B The prior promissory b. action? (2%) his Corporation alleged that Raphael should have(Sec. gave Carmela A now land. motion. EE Industries opposed on counterclaim. include but may a The general rule is that a counterclaim split. for petition the Joinderon ofamount the Action ground of Distinguish the same cause a ofcounterclaim action.000. the toclaims is akin without a prejudice in all to compulsory the the causes counterclaimprosecutionofwhich. 4. action if of B commenced not No.underThe interposing party his arising claim. the that isfor his failure payablehe party on different was against barred afrom dates. C causes could plus have interests loaned deposited due contracts in his to thewarehouse filing of the andcase. capacity because it is notfiled a duly a annulment of therein marriage and on may the ground a of property. (Sec. claim that Ricky the filed against party a complaint whom against it is complaint against registered corporation. plaintiff of wasand therefore.of 8. ground against of bar splitting a causeby prior of P100.of P100. 1997 Rules) (1997) B and Actions.000. recovery 2. judgment. the causes defendant’s counterclaim. SUGGESTED ANSWER: Counterclaim judgment was registered rendered corporation and by the court therefore has the (2002) same. of action butpertain the court to because OF he ACTION counterclaim was SUGGESTED ANSWER: not is yet that certain a party therein.R. Rule 9. a motion there wasto dismiss no need theto second answer P200. is for (b) the claimantNo. joinder determinable in the shall Rules not at the may includetime be to file of cause an action answer and may its be effect filed exonparte the Batangas declared of the pleaded filing as ofan the complaint.this where ground 4. B can file a cross-claim against C this time on the Industries b. which is a marriage license.000. the he oralsolack has of jurisdictions the legal right from service. In can rendered an B action file a filed cross- judgment by A (1999) a) What more suits isarea instituted counterclaim? on the (2%) basis of b) claim Actions. Cause theorizing thatofEE Action.00 (Sec. a capacity of P500. to comply with the same? (2%) answergoverned which by special may rules. He gave a down payment an different are Answerto alleging entitled the venues goods.000.Resolve to dismissparty an opposing in the the should motion alternative while be agranted. default? rightsbe set Sunga. extension time to (See. When In thisthe case. that Ricky it wasand (1999) which a) a defending What is the complaint on the ground of res judicata. for the 30. filed plaintiff whichancannot ex parte be joinedmotionwith for could only not one claimed have complaint against storage fees Aand forother the occurrence SUGGESTED recovery of that ANSWER: is both loans? Explain. declaring no that X Corporation legal capacity to sue.000. theirhecontract. while Ricky Was and the Marvin plaintiff are validly from which dismissal 1. Third Party Claims balance out or isofconnected P1. while the the second cross. declaration B. when the warehouseman asks the b) A purchased a lot from B for counterclaim. signed a promissory note to ask whoofshould provided EE one Industries paycausefor the to of sue storageaction because fees fallsand counterclaim that raises issues which are it is not a duly registered corporation payable thirty days after date. The c) 2) A.

CA. Daway. No. v. Jovy. PJ did not comply with his criminal action for reckless imprudence undertaking. A retainership agreement injuries. a taxicab derivative suit is a representative suit. Civil Actions & Criminal Action (Sec. Actions. (Acenas 4 II v. the civil action for quasi- delict against the driver is an independent civil action under Article 33 of the Civil Code and Sec.00 2 Legal interest in the success of either was taken out of the P200. b. Derivative Suit vs. As a result thereof. ST filed a case against SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1 Is the PJ which wasdeath of PJ as docketed a valid Civilground to Case No. (2%) The action for breach of contract against 456.R. G. ST to subsequently charged before the represent him in a civil case filed by OP Municipal Trial Court with reckless against him which was docketed as Civil imprudence resulting in serious physical Thereafter. resulting in serious physical injuries. 3. driven just likeby Manssuit. G. a number which the an interest (Fortune therein Motors. for was executed between PJ and Atty. Sec.000 received of the parties. although the taxicab owner can be claimed by Atty. ST a delict. dismiss the money claim of Atty. Resolve the motion with reasons. 1. C can file a third-party complaint controversy. Jovy filed a civil action against Case No. Court rights Intervenor’s of Appeals. (Samson v. and Mans for quasi. Survives Death of the Defendant suffered serious injuries. Civil Procedure.000. held subsidiarily liable in the criminal 456? Explain (2%) case. of the Intervention. ST in Civil Case No.) interest being the corporation itself (Lint Actions. 456. if the driver is insolvent. R. 123. 138343. October 16. Lourdes and Mans filed a motion to retainer sum of P24.00 a year and to dismiss the civil action on the ground of transfer the ownership of a parcel of land litis pendentia. criminal Requisites action and regardless (2000) of the result What are the requisites for an of the latter. SUGGESTED ANSWER: 3 Intervention will not unduly delay A DERIVATIVE SUIT is a suit in equity that is filed by a minority shareholder in or prejudice the adjudication of the rights behalf of a corporation to redress wrongs or original parties. the real party in protected in a separate proceedings. 12. Atty. its passenger. while a CLASS SUIT is filed b) personal action? (2%) regarding a controversy of common or SUGGESTED ANSWER: general interest in behalf of many persons a. whereby PJ promised to pay Atty. Nos. Rule 3) It is worth noting that a ACTIONS (Rule 4. those arising from privity of contract. Mans was (2000) PJ engaged the services of Atty. court finds sufficiently representative who may sue or defend for the benefit of all. (2006) What do you mean by a) real actions. 160054-55. July intervention by a nonparty in an action 21. G. that is. 1). 76431. Lourdes. (4%) Civil Case No. which can be filed 2004) separately and can proceed independently Actions. a class hit an electric post. Section I) which include (2005) While cruising on a highway. the pendency of to Atty. Sec. ST breach of contract. Filing. SUGGESTED pending inANSWER: court? (5%) The requisites for intervention ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: 1 are: Legal interest in the matter in a Yes. Lim-Yu.com Page 16 of 66 contribution in respect to his opponent's 1 Legal interest against both. for which the 773 [1995]. February 19. the taxicab owner cannot be barred by 2 Will your answer be the same with the criminal action against the taxicab respect to the real property being driver. ST in The motion to dismiss should be denied. Real Actions & Personal Actions v. ST after presentation of PJ’s the civil action impliedly instituted in the evidence. 11 of Rule 6) 2 So situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or other Actions. Rule 19. or claim. 247beSCRA may not fully committed against it. On the other hand. During the trial of Civil Case No. (Sec.IL No. and 2001). 1997 Rules of directors refuse to sue. Class Suit disposition or property in the custody of (2005) Distinguish a derivative suit from a class the court or of an officer thereof. 1989. Rule 4. or against D because the loan of 100. the owner of the taxicab. 456? Explain. Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. suit. All other actions are PERSONAL Actions.000. REAL ACTIONS are actions affecting so numerous that it is impracticable to title to or possession of real property or join all as parties.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. or from B and hence the loan seeks . PJ died. Inc.

1. Rule 3. (Sec. 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. 20. 2 Yes. when the action is for recovery of money arising from contract. my answer is the same. An action to recover real property in any event survives the death of the defendant. it shall not be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. Under Sec. However. and the defendant dies before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action is pending at the time of such death. Rules of Court). A favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in the Rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of a deceased person. express or implied.SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1 No. a favorable judgment may be enforced . Rule 87.

7(b) Rule 39 (1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) against the executor or administrator or successor in interest of the deceased. he had three (3) days from receipt on February 3. only ten (10) days had elapsed and he had fifteen (15) days to do so.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) in accordance with Sec. 2003 when A received a copy of the decision up to January 19. the court denied A’s Motion for Reconsideration and X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal. the court’s denial of due course to A’s appeal is not correct because the appeal was taken on time. He filed a Notice of Appeal on 10 January 2003. filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision. Period of Appeal. On 20 January 2003. He filed is notice of appeal on February 5. (b) No. From January 6. 2003 when X received a copy of the adverse decision up to January 13. Appeals. or only two (2) days later. Fresh Period Rule (2003) Defendant X received an adverse Decision of the RTC in an ordinary civil case on 02 January 2003. 2003 when he filed a Motion for Reconsideration. Consequently. From January 2. On the other hand. Withdraw Notice of Appeal proper? to A’s The court denied due course Notice of court’s (b) Is the Appeal denial on theof ground that to due course he period to appeal A’s appeal correct?had already lapsed. . only twelve (12) days had elapsed. because the period of appeal of X has not yet expired. on 19 January 2003. plaintiff A received the same Decision on 06 January 2003 and. 2003 of the Order denying his Motion for Reconsideration within which to appeal. the court’s denial of X’s Motion to Withdraw Notice of Appeal is not proper. 2003 when he filed his withdrawal of appeal and Motion for New Trial. defendant X filed a Motion withdrawing his notice of appeal in order to file a Motion for New Trial which he attached. 2003. 6% SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) No. On 13 January 2003. Plaintiff A received the Order denying his Motion for Reconsideration on 03 February 2003 and filed (a) Ishis theNotice court’sofdenial Appeal of on X’s05 February Motion to 2003.

for review raising only questions of law plaintiff and admitted in evidence by the 41. appeal is by notice of appeal filed petitions due to for review fraud.It should be Declared in Default COMELEC is elevated to the Supreme default.for order lostofappeal. 2003 by and petition it was for SUGGESTED ANSWER: review or January ordinary appeal.].as Plaintiff a modewasof allowed appeal to is fifteenof order (15) days on default fromthenoticeground of that the judgment his failureorgoverned by Rule 45 of the Rules of Court present evidence in support of his final to order was answer or resolution due to fraud appealed and from. a writ of it practical to while the second is an appeal execution .) The first is a special civil action 1. (1998) A days’ After finality a complaint offor Therefore. is declared grave (3%) abuse the court of review on certiorari 45 thereof discretion amounting to lack or excess of relief for the as nullification his pleading of may warrant unless a decision of the shall proceed to render judgment the court in its in discretion requires jurisdiction. it should the evidence of the plaintiff must 65. morenumerous reason may to 1998. in which is elevated tocase the the Rules of Court instead of filing requirements of the rule.R. motion he forwentneworder of resolution of the Court of and original copies of affidavits were trial or reconsideration abroad. due time with after the Appeals. in the default. 71. identified theby RTC plaintiffor noticestill case of the judgment. be delegated andbecause the PETITION subsequentFOR REVIEW ON proceedings. Rule party45 vs. 3. final certiorari in the Supreme Court under failure. lawyer As a can mode alsoof be the subject appeal from the of days case from notice of informed is pending. Explain. Commission Mario should (CSC). (2. [Neypes G. G.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. counselexpired which X. 1 jurisdiction. Rule 45 vs. for Death of a Party. as 1 Since A’s Before Motion theforrendition Reconsideration of judgment. generally The motion be availed to setofto the Supreme Court by verified petition exhibits.with Rule 65 notice to the when that an aggrieved party the judgment is not valid because may filethe a May(Sec. except under very exceptional Default made after notice circumstances. 42. instead mayof proceed to render filing a petition for of evidence is not required. (Sec. in a case instituted while theagainst second him is basedby B. assailed the same (Sec. defendant not imp leaded. of lackFor 3 or excess failure to of seasonably jurisdiction file or grave his Answerabuse SUGGESTED CA. unless court in 3. Motion. justify the setting In the aside caseof 2 deniedAfteron judgment 20. provided for under the Rule 64 of the [1%] filed on Januaryappeal 19. (Sec. who being of 15B's dayssolewithin heir. counselcountedX to 2 45. The claim of Commission which may defendant is valid. which acquired to default? of Appeals. Said documents were offered by as a substitute aside default was for opposed a lost appeal by B under on theRules ground 40. The not mere valid The of effect order photocopies because or resolution under and the of 1997 a affidavits tribunal.ofA's the lower court. and (2%) upon motion of the governed appeals tobythe Rule 65 of Court ofthe Rules claiming Appeals of Court claiming Certiorari.of the To NULLIFY party in default A DECISION cannot takeof the part Court in theof its discretion requires the claimant to Explain. remedy As in a mode the ordinary ofcoursereview of law. periods January The6. accident. with at least Effect three Certiorari. Is the claim judgment granting under the Rule claimant such of its jurisdiction defendant defendant valid? orin default. state in and not [2%1 set Contempt. certiorari as a mode of appeal may be provided in the to Rules (Id. however. presented Sandiganbayan. while the second presented a motion under oath to set aside should be filed within the Certiorari RTC (RTC). In the on appeal. follows:Effects litigants fair opportunity rendered judgment against B. 9) (2. in court. time Upon receipt of the judgment. a) What should Mario state in his noted. under Sec. |3%] SUGGESTED ANSWER: meritorious defense. Rule 45) received the order other courts whenever authorized by law on the witness stand and marked as 3 declaring The him first incannot default. following day. Remedies. clearly the Court ofhearing Appeals imposes reclusion of the the order Civil of Service default. decisions ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: of the National Labor trial3[A]) Appeals butthe shall aggrieved be entitled party to should notice fileofa submit Relations evidence. the case of St. butwithin thethe before lower court isCertiorari as a Special Civil Action is judgment. or a judgment.5%) declarationsought to be On of default. he has or aofwhich allows appeal from judgment.CERTIORARI to the clerk SUGGESTED Constitutional of court. or B died. Rule 65 perpetua. default? (3%)decision b) In or what finalform order should or party declared ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: In default: lesser penalty for offenses committed on resolution such motion be? (2%)sought to be reviewed. 130866. 5 of Rule mistake or pro forma ofand ownership land didagainst not interrupt B who was the action from certiorari as Procedure. when there granting the claimant such relief as his is no appeal or Court of Appeals the exercise eitherthe of any other plain.5%) ANSWER: to the relief prayed for. life imprisonment or [2%] a lesser review his motion of its that judgments his failure to is answerthroughwas 3 filednotice. a Party default. 141524.was such occasion. file the noticeDid the failure of appeal in the of RTC. allowed Resolve the therefor. (2%) Sandiganbayan and the the property. ANSWER: (Sec. the Court deems Judgment became final. Martin's Funeral Home v. he undecided. (15) days X b) The motion should be under oath.5%) 3. cases. fifteenHowever. 4.RTCWhat underisRule the effect of an Orderinform from the court of receipt of theof B's orderdeath constitute dismissing direct a motion 1 Default? The (2%)first can be filed only on the grounds contempt? for a new trial (2%)or motion for reconsideration. September 16. 2003. civil action from the basis of which the RTC 4 having Under been SUGGESTED ANSWER: the declared first. Photocopies of official receipts the denial of defense. 2. Certiorari as a mode of review from it be filedholds afterthat discovery evenis before judgment was rendered. course the2003 trial. ANSWER: al. January of21. of discretion despite due notice. the Assuming that the motion the court received evidence which it can in Supreme Court under Ruleto45set of Certiorari as a mode of review of the aside complies with the othera order in its decision of own the NLRCdiscretion. with too of Rule Court. party and file proof a petition of such for SUGGESTED ANSWER: verified RTC claim petition against based of itsdefendant a judgmentis on decision. After ofa presented in court. pursuant SUGGESTED Supreme Court. the Rule 3)Court of resolution Appeals to the Supreme Court. that 43 and it was filed45.R. vs. speedy andtheadequate claimant SUGGESTED to ANSWER:submit evidence its original or appellate jurisdiction? (Id. Mode butof itCertiorari is indirect contempt errors of law (2006) Explain within each the mode purview ofofcertiorari: Sec 3 of Rule 71. Rule A SUGGESTED (2000) DefendantANSWER: was declared in default by the 65) . Rule 65 theof 1997 an Order Rulesof Default of Civil is board that has acted without or in excess that the court Procedure. day. distinctly As a special court on set theforth. the judgment. proceeded court hear and the to caseaffordand distinguished Default. him order disciplinary Regional of theorDefault action. Certiorari as an original action and 3(b) of Rule 9.com Page1817of of66 66 wasallowissued a 1 to the When Suprememay a Court party from bethe declared FRESH Court againstin PERIOD C. but before 2003. final complaint. NOTE: failed To standardize to notify after notice of the court the decision appeal of B'son death. it was its finality.tantamount A was to lack orinexcess declared No. et. a mode of with the of Court 43 of excusablethe 1997 Rules negligence of Civil and that he has a represented period byof her appeal Appeals. No. mistress who is working as a clerk inThe 2 thefirstsalashould of the be Judge filedbefore withinwhom sixty his(60)The 1. before A received notice of his 2. (2. lower citing court the rule Regional is Trial Court or the Court of renderedto the judgment in favor of the impleaded 1. A long butline before judgment of decisions of NLRC. of Rules. anytime he4afterunder fails of Rule the tonotice answer of 45)second. Order ofas Default. After his return a filed week in later. (2005) the3. meritorious the petitioner's Thereafter. when while 65).onThe theof Rule Certiorari. [Sec. Rule Commissions.) The pleading may warrant.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. default5 of Rule be made at Appeals plaintiff. (2001) Mario was declared in default but before (Sec. defaultof2005] It is not direct contempt under Sec. he decided to mention.aggrieved defending Rule 9) party. judgment? the recovery motion wasof (1998) Differentiate certiorari as an original penalty. Although such a motion may be basic in requirements of admissibility. 3[B] the Supreme 9). In cases when 1997 a) In Rules order of to Civil Procedure. certiorari not a the Commission on Audit (COA) and receipt of the file a motion to set aside the order of substitute Default. Trial Court (Sec. pass the petition for certiorari under Rule be 65 Court of Appeals under Rule as held granted. or 16. when remedies the Court Court within 30 daysaside fromofnotice of the (1998) What are the available of aof to justify motion in the ordersetting the order of Appeals imposes the death penalty.(Sec. September 14. personsbody reception or not 2. After the to appeal their under (1999) Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. No. that theA party as amay motion party to be set respondent declared aside may in(Sec.

AFTER JUDGMENT BUT BEFORE ITS FINALITY. (5%) whom a default decision is rendered are 1. appeal 3. accident. e. he may file a motion for new trial on the grounds of fraud. Rule 9). Rule 37): and thereafter. Jojie (sic) and her (sic) counsel failed to appear despite notice to both of them. mistake. or c) certiorari if the or by the judgment judicial to void record. declared in default are as follows: 2 Motion for New Trial under 1. 26 time to SCRA answer. Rule 65) or (b) he may file a petition for certiorari if he has been illegally declared in default. insufficient evidence or the decision or final order being contrary to law (Sec. b) annulment of judgment under Rule 47 for extrinsic fraud or lack of jurisdiction. excusable negligence. and if it is denied. During the pretrial. Party Declared in Default (2006) Jojie filed with the Regional Trial Court of Laguna a complaint for damages against Joe. Court of the the expiration Appeals. Joe was declared as in default and Jojie was allowed to present her evidence ex parte. mistake or excusable negligence. (Sec. the judgment. Remedies.g. BEFORE the judgment in default as follows: becomes final and executory: SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1 Motion for Reconsideration The available remedies of a party under Rule 37. mistake or excusable negligence and that he has a meritorious . to set aside the order of default on the grounds of fraud. G. he may move to reconsider. accident. to AFTER FINALITYunder available Rules 40there OF THE JUDGMENT. 83888. 85 SCRA 412. 1992. by: sirdondee@gmail. the court rendered its Decision in favor of Jojie. If the motion is denied. on its face (Balangcad vs. Justices of the Court of Appeals. No. February 12. which are:a) a petition for relief under Rule 38 on the grounds of fraud.com Page 19 of 66 defense (Sec. BEFORE THE RENDITION OF JUDGMENT Rule 37. Acosta-Ofalia vs. 3[b]. 206 8CRA 171). Upon oral motion of Jojie. Joe SUGGESTED ANSWER: hired Jose as available The remedies his counsel. or a motion for reconsideration on the ground of excessive damages. 2. Thereafter. Sundiam. and if reconsideration is denied.R. during the pendency of his motion to dismiss or (Matute before vs. to a What party are the against remedies available to him? Explain. he may file the special civil action of certiorari for grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack or excess of the lower court's jurisdiction. accident. Default. 1.) 2. and (a) he may file a motion under oath 3 Appeal under Rule 41. three ways to assail whichever to applicable. 768. or are 41.

AFTER the judgment in default becomes final and executory: 1 Petition for Relief under Rule 38.2. 2 Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47. and .

1.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. 304 SCRA 679. which are the reasons granted. (Quebral v. the appellate court reversed the order of the testimony of any person. (Sec. and (2000) Describe briefly at least five (5) modes of after Carlos has completed the discovery under the Rules of Court. v. Evidence. If he obtains leave of court and rule. 1996) time after issues have been joined. the defendant loses his right to answer on time. Carlos oral examination or written objected to the presentation No. Tolentino evidence and the case is decided on the v.com Page 20 of 66 Demurrer to c. the defendant has the right motion of LM. Should the RTC can no longer present evidence. KJ filed an unverified motion to leave of court. Baliwag Transit. Inc. Pedro filed a party or not. Consul v. the Rules of appellate Civil Procedure)court relevant facts to be answered by the party reversed the order of the trial court it served. 126258. evidence. He interrogatories. Carlos. a party may file and serve upon any other party a written request for the Version 1997-2006 by Dondee by the admission Updated latter of the genuineness of any material and relevant document or of the truth of any material and relevant matter of fact. upon In a civil case. he answer attached to the motion is verified. he waives his right to present Appeals. Court of Civil denied. (Sec.J. basis of the evidence for the prosecution. to Evidence the ground of insufficiency of the (2001) Carlos filed a complaint against Pedro in evidence on its own initiative after giving the RTC of Ozamis City for the recovery of the prosecution the opportunity to be the ownership of a car. (5%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: presentation of his evidence.R. 1997 Rules of Civil should have rendered judgment in favor Procedure. he is acquitted and the If the accused prosecution doesappeal. [b] of Rule 9. 3Citibank. any party shall file and serve reversed. 1997 N. At any SCRA 353. Civil Case vs. 1. declared KJ in default. Under (5%) dismissal is granted by the trial court but the same conditions specified in section 1 on appeal the order of dismissal is of Rule 23. Certiorari under Rule 65. G. 1 when of Rule 33. as well as his defenses.A. Modes of Discovery After the pre-trial and actual trial. No. or without such Carlos appealed the order of dismissal and leave after an answer has been served. Pedro moved Five modes of discovery under the Rules for the dismissal of the complaint on the of Court are: ground that under the facts proven and 1 DEPOSITION. In to file a demurrer to evidence without due time. Discovery. [1999]. Although the motion is unverified. cannot not obtain leave of of movant’s failure to answer as well as his court and his demurrer to evidence is defenses. 17 SCRA 667. Procedure. Substantial Compliance (2000) For failure of K. By leave of court after the law applicable to the case. 1997 Rules by Pedro. interrogatories regarding material and No. Court of Appeals. Cf. the appellate court reverses answer under oath. the Court. 66 Phil. (3%) evidence. (Rule accused has to SUGGESTED ANSWER: obtain leave of court to file a demurrer to Will the motion Yes. Criminal Case (2003) Compare the effects of a denial of demurrer to evidence (See Talsan Enterprises. 143-144 [1938]. stating in said answer the order and renders judgment for the his reasons for his failure to file an plaintiff. In a criminal present case. at the motion with the RTC asking the latter to instance of any party. because (Sec. subject of the action. by deposition upon allow himANSWER: SUGGESTED to present his evidence. 191 SCRA 783 The court may also dismiss the action on Demurrer [1992]). Inc.) motion provide Rules to present that his evidence? if the motionWhy? for 2 INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES. Remedies. If his demurrer to evidence is the order of default and the affidavit of merit should contain. Rules of v. lift the order of default without an he has the right to present evidence. to file an answer within SUGGESTED ANSWER: the reglementary period. Thereafter. may be taken. grant Pedro’s The of Civil Procedure. 4% Default. Rule 23. has the right to present evidence in his The answer contains what the motion to lift defense. If his demurrer is denied.. KJ his demurrer is granted and on appeal by however attached to the motion his the plaintiff. he shall be deemed to have upon any adverse party written ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: waived the right to present evidence. If affidavit of merit attached to it. Pedro’s motion should be of evidence denied. . (Sec. 252 3 ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY. the his demurrer to evidence is denied. whether a the trial court.) of Carlos. the33). Consul. Rule 25. Nasser v. 23 of Rule 119) answer within the reglementary period. Pedro filed his heard. Court of Appeals. defendant or over property which is the The RTC granted the motion for dismissal. there to lift the is substantial order of with compliance default the prosper? Explain. Carlos is jurisdiction has been obtained over any not entitled to the ownership of the car. in a civil case with those of a denial of 1999) demurrer to evidence in a criminal case. July 8. 671 [1966]. (Sec. 1450.

9 of former Rule 23. surveying. can also refuse to comply (Rule 27). several Y refuse to comply with the subpoena duces tecum? (b) How can A take the testimony of Y and present the documents as exhibits other than through the subpoena from SUGGESTED the RTC? ANSWER: (a) Y can refuse to comply with the subpoena duces tecum on the ground that he resides more than 50 (now 100) kilometers from the place where he is to testify. 1. Modes. 1997 Rules of Civil the note? (3%) Procedure. the defendant filed a motion for an order directing the plaintiff to produce the original of the note so that 1 Should the the defendant judge could grantitthe inspect anddefendant’s verify motion for production and inspection his signature and the handwritten entries of the original of the promissory of the dates and amounts. Discovery. Rule Procedure. the president of the shipping company. (Sec. a court may order any party to produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing of any designated documents. Rule 27 Rules of Civil 1. with the subpoena duces tecum on the ground that the documents are not relevant and there was no tender of fees for one day's attendance and the kilometrage allowed by the rules. 10 of (b) Rule new A can 21). new Rule 23) He may also file a ALTERNATIVE motion for ANSWER: the production or inspection of (a) The witness documents.) Discovery. measuring. PRODUCTION OR INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS OR THINGS. note? Why? (2%) 2 Assuming that an order for production and inspection was issued but the plaintiff failed to comply with it. the court issued a subpoena duces tecum directing Y. or order any party to permit entry upon designated land or property for inspecting. etc. the terms of which were stated in the complaint and a photocopy attached to the complaint as an annex. to appear and testify at the trial (a) andOn what valid to bring ground with him can documents. how should the defendant plead to the alleged execution of (Sec. Davao City. Subpoena Duces Tecum (1997) In an admiralty case filed by A against Y Shipping Lines (whose principal offices are in Manila) in the RTC.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) 4. 1997 thereon. (Rule 24. Upon motion of any party showing good cause therefore. Production and Inspection of Documents (2002) The plaintiff sued the defendant in the RTC to collect on a promissory note. Sec. or photographing the property or any designated relevant object or operation 27.) . Before answering.take the testimony of Y and present the documents as exhibits by taking his deposition through oral examination or written interrogatories. (Sec. Rule 26.

judgment AB’s lawfullyWhat weddedis the which consists of filing multiple suits. the truth or (Rule 27). No. 3 of Rule (2000) AB. discretion. 29 X.com Page 22 21 of 66 4. motion as the five-year period within condition which that EF may a judgment willbewithdraw enforced by his Taal. for the the judgment? b) With paternity with counterclaim for damages.. G. a) Infor Julysupport 1996. Chemphil court that (a) A can enforcein view of the the denial judgment made by by Export & Import Corp. Honey's on. failure to comply with was dismissed with prejudice on a joint the requirement of forum shopping is not motion to dismiss.R. Photocopies to produce and permit FACT is when the doubt or difference the inspection of (2000) If the photocopies of official receipts and designated arises as todocuments. December 12. 303 of SCRA the right176of trial court in the exercise of its sound [1999]). Batangas a complaint for specific performance against Bernie. The in court the certification against forum shopping. must be final. against EF. (Sec. 9 of the Revised Rule on Summary (1997) A. Questions of Law vs.R. Effects.R. minor venue because son CD. RTC of Zamboanga del Norte. EF pecuniary filed a motion to dismiss on estimation. (2%) The claim of defendant is valid. Lack of Certification dismissal of the complaint. capacity as legal entered (2006) What is forum shopping? (2. procedure husband. a res valid judicata ground is not for dismissal a defense in anof you resolve denied after the motion? hearing (5%) as expressly because. merely the submission of position papers. 131692. the action for support even if the first case provided in the Rules. Photocopies of official receipts favorable inspection judgment of the promissory in an ejectmentnote. 1997to the evidence submitted with the position dismiss Rules the Procedure.R. July 24. Office (Leyson of obtaining a of the Ombudsman. AB filed a manifestation in No. because The grounds plaintiff with for theannulment order forofproduction judgment although summary procedure requires of theinspection RTCANSWER: ALTERNATIVE and are Extrinsic of the originalFraud and Lack thereof. EF. proof loss of theDefinition originals.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. v. This was in Asis v. the counterclaim for damages. file Rule a motion 47. Yulienco v. 136100.) of Civil complaint because of the paper must be admissible in evidence. EF to befiled followed his answer by A in enforcing denying his simultaneously or successively. SUGGESTED ANSWER: brought action executed. as substantial 2035. 5. (2) of The defendant Jurisdiction. secured the production anda Procedure).may whileorder any party a QUESTION OF Evidence. 289. (Rule 8.may 2. 6 EF counter claim for damages. 281 [1940]) the actionset a certain is pending of facts. the plaintiff5-year to obey period the order (Sec.R. against A decided EF. (San 70 DiegoPhil. from Res Judicata Forum ofShopping. refusal of Enforcement. Questions of matter and of the parties. CA. If you were the judge. Nos. judgment SUGGESTED ANSWER: G. Fact (2004) 3 it must be a judgment or order Distinguish Questions of law from Questions of on the merits. Judgment. identity of SUGGESTED ANSWER: (1) Yes. a resident to Dismiss. Principles.as tothe what court in which the law is on of action. the lawyer filed a motion for reconsideration. April 15. unless otherwise provided (Sec. No. However. No. there must be between the two SUGGESTED ANSWER: cases identity of parties. 149253. 2 the court rendering the same G. Civil Code. legitimate had not minor as yetson. favorable G. sec. June 10. Court the nature of aofcompromise Appeals. what court should purpose v.of Quezon City. with the certification against forum of res judicata? (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: the ground SUGGESTED ANSWER: of res judicata. The plaintiff’s mother curable by mere amendment of the complaint agreed to the dismissal of the complaint or other initiatory pleading. Cardona. it would be futile another action reviving the Judgment to pursue the case 112438-39. De Acuna. but shall be cause for support in view of the defendant’s for the dismissal of the case. of athe resident court offor Dagupan City. asto Forum shopping is the act of a party of fathertheof enforce MTCof the CD andManila. For lack of motion has already expired. must have jurisdiction of the subject Gen. 2000. Pepsi-Cola Bottling and the position paper submitted by plaintiff in verify Co. April 27. the represented by enforcement of AB. has [19670]). dismiss. because it can ABno agreed longertobemove for the enforced by Forum Shopping. (2) so that heAnnulment The defendant of not is could intelligently Judgment. 8). 140189. and fact. SUGGESTED ANSWER: SUGGESTED of because ANSWER:the non-compliance by the plaintiff? Explain.Motion Sec. are oath the grounds the for genuineness the annulment and due court rendered judgment in favor of of a judgment execution of of the RTC (RTC)? [2%] promissory note.2005.5%) 130) guardian on 15 June of her 1991. If I were the judge. G. (Great (b) The Essential Requisites of Res Judicata considerSouthern Maritime Services the amendment Corp. Rule 7. The falsehood of photocopies of affidavits were attached to defendant alleged SCRA facts. a) Is res shopping. required Grounds to deny prepare his Municipal Trial Court on which basis the (1998) What under answer. 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure). 3(c)]. v. CA. 1995). without answer denying his paternity with a prejudice. subject to the (2006) Honey filed with the Regional Trial Court. second complaint? Explain your answer filed another Judgment is a are complaint personal action for incapable support attaching thereto an amended complaint (3%) b) What the essential requisite against of EF.R. are: 1 the judgment or order rendered compliance Chan v. the motion should be how will judicata (a) No. Uy v. 2004. [Rulecase and affidavits are not admissible without against Dismissal. v. may choose to be liberal and support which is prohibited by law. the right to inspect (Ramos v. 19the original of the promissory note an action for unlawful detainer filed with Judgment. and identity of causes showing differencegood arises cause. 134990. because A QUESTION OF LAW upon is motion when the of any doubtpartyor subject matter. Land Bank. (Sec. the dismissed RTC the case with in accordance withprejudice. MTCof the as mother and in Manila. AB and of filedA amay (b) former joint and motion institute new Rulethe to proceedings 39). A institute the proceedings? Subsequently. . February 28. (Sec. 2000). G.1999. (Art. Theherjudgment. Admissibility. the rules Laterof judge dismissed the complaint.been CD.

The court shall order the prosecutor should 39) be plaintiff (Rule That filed substituted isanot motion the case byforhis withanheirs respect order before or kind. the return foreign said that 66) plaintiff have of Fabian judgment (1998) A is filed a complaint for the recovery of their judgment. trialIn the Carlo foreign in the judgment Court of may Appeals be in brought Manilaat anyto office. sued out There the is writ still ofsomethingattachment to lack done. is A. .jurisdiction the and triallack is Accordingly. not that thewhen court the It should has respondent foundmerely no pending with Republic the at the requirements vs. Rule 8) substitution order thrumay ofa the special deceased civilby actionC.1 [c] 16 and of lastRulepar. ordering the rules for prosecuting claims against the Parties. had as are gone ANSWER: to counsel where enforce of C. because corpus where theawards custody for moral isand of minors at Phil. surety Guevarra the to pay jointlycourt v. that thefiled 129on inSCRA defendant the the due time. property for the replied for lack court that the but tounder of render judgment Rule 102day. 220 If SCRA plaintiff X and 726had notified its[1993J. the case and to (2) another accordingly court. enforced 1 of Rule execution the34. of the resident. but damages. RTC. be (R. next five years. Party. No. renderedplaintiff judgment not properly against B.Warranto G. After foreign alleged judgments. that day. The death. information Republic On October Act No. who action the because was claim accrues.ANSWER: SUGGESTED (Sec. the with Court the of MeTC- Appeals defendant. 3) ofThe Rulecourt41) execution court of theas deed of salereason can only for be million The as judgment exemplaryagainst damages. Article to 1144 intervene ofincome. RTC where petitioner’sWas theright court's is complaint the parties enforce a within extinguishes foreign marriage admits all the allegationsjudgment. 1973.) but in shall seems insteadno becogent allowed to dismiss genuine the and issuecomplaint.over C upon is de Gonzales. position motion and P1M. Octoberunder 5. whom not 104 denied order by the the defendant imminent under oath insolvency of and the the soundness Judgment.000. B afor 1 decisions of ManilaRule 4). (4%) as thetoplaintiff form amended. requirements (2005) In a and complaint ofbrought Rule for 39. was render deprived judgment of due on (2001) Petitioner Court (2004) Fabian exemplary was appointed Election damages. the in judgmentthe A complaint had localbecome judgmentmust final. the recovery Sec. plaintiff. plaintiff litigation to occupy served expenses. of the v. summons. of thethe imminent court complaint. 2)its ruling? Why? (5%) This forwarded remedy to the the is an defendant’s purely action personal. for of thedue process adjudication the court petition the truth executionmay be thereof. (10%) and be back or execution otherwise for admits lack of the due the filed MeTC's whilehis the lack court of had jurisdiction jurisdiction overover the Article Death Parties. recovery ofhismoney summary the this time proper judgment should remedy notin his quo exceed is favor upon all of P400. 9. order 2. at B8:30 died. which The Judgment. he isCarlo for a deceased proving the person. the Court and judgment of ordered Appeals. damages of Complaint all the allegations Yes. that the an action a effect motion of musttheupon death be fileda of judgment aby party the Fabian then filed athat petition for mandamus pleading. and was After due hearing. litigation therein contained. court's The the court order is to correct forward in the its case ruling. subject oldtoson.R. marriage on a resident the ground of of Bulacan. would million 241 as have [1983]) actual ordered . August 8. sufficient 8. appended deed ofCourt sale. binding. City. take an case may and She the alleged allegation in the petition concerningfiled the in sale despite appeal property. the surety Evaluate The Supreme SUGGESTED ANSWER: gave Court ina petitions special for habeas its acquired (Ferreira no us. allegations So.A. of notice the judgment the on was judgment the Pleadings not are not given fromto himthe No.000. brought SUGGESTED withinon ANSWER: the 10 defendant’s years from the18year-old time the It is basedpetition Fabian’s on goodcontending reason which that is the quo cannot motu proprio render judgment on Yes. Revilla. 8)appeal. (Thornton Mandamus vs. a pendingnot apply answer For action to to warranto is the proper remedy. refused owner theofto20. because without his only moral consent and and who exemplary refused to brought substitution summons within of 10 heirs with a copy of years and from the the judgment the complaint time theis whatever kind.P. who SCRAdemand. provisions.as with a (5%) result the family of the courts execution. (Sec. cannot 16. Petitioner material process. the answer. Appeals genuineness concurrent and due defendant P0.A. the the reglementary claim While and we the can foundedconcerning ruling clearly in law. Rule be ascertained on Copy Judgment. mandamus. L-31869. Lawas us. City. Defendant 129.residence. hold thatForeignif Malolos the Judgment lawyer failed money pending against resolution by 134 SCRA 395 (1985). the court issued to an (2005) While within Marietta 10 years was from inthe her time place ofrightwork of Mandamus the (1) RTC stating is lies proper. (Sec. Pursuant virtue to through of thesea deed counsel. The husband there (Sec. of Court the in plaintiff Baguio which City. has to the Reason. Court timeofofAppeals such set down death. 2001. the appealable (5%) court order rendered (Sec. declared Versionwe should 1997-2006 the not Updated by defendant Dondeedistinguish. Despite establishes averred. appeal offromIstheit that not the plaintiff dispose SUGGESTED ANSWER:of thehad actionno cause or proceeding of action If you As counselwereofcounsel C. (Sec. the partynon-removal exclusive interest. Is the the pleadings. Philippines. accrues. jurisdiction not when correct?it is period. Sec. before Rule filed a was 3)be costs. ofAppeals. Rule(2%) 34) must The court be against lacked SUGGESTED Pablo jurisdiction ANSWER: but the over trialthe court subject dismissed matter complaint. (Sec. 7691). jurisdiction Ibarra Vda. Makati. (5%)for (Rule judgment 57. Court of pending execution appeal pending correct? Why?The (5%) execution of on the 20) Appeals. the for Court Moreover. her estranged There husband be dismissed Supreme (268 SCRA Court 198. judgment would an not issue. filed cannot to notice the truth deny over of the the thereof. No. in his consent proper? Explain briefly. his not 2 collusion. writ court SUGGESTED May wasANSWER: proceeded defendant levied on properly to hear the defendant’s the Or.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. is the admission. where the the onlaw material motion doesof the facts not doubtful. following knowledge of or PARTIAL against (action Sec. the209 Appeals. the ofsheriff the adverseserved party'sthe subject the case matter. 8369. 143. psychological Election (2005) Under to the Article notify 1144 of the Bcourt ofhisthe a New his client's Civil Code. court granted themust writ aver of or the state habeas motion SUGGESTED ANSWER: void. must Rule Custody be theof brought Minors Yes. RTC-Manila filedfor sum Answer of money. de la Cruz vs. Advertising Whose defendant Counselors. JUDGMENTS and that heaside had are the writ would you take? of execution and [3%] the judgment forbe without the October Rules information trial? Explain. exemplary to do so Is is damages cannot also the an order admission of of execution the point (1999) a) of the of view What applicant of are procedure. 1144 of of theuntil a Party. SUGGESTED arising property fromANSWER: and contract. pleadings? Moreover. Civil Effect theCode evening which of exercise functions thereto. personal years After defendant contrary because the to the has totalfundamental amount servedof and the filed guarantee demand his on ANOTHER and ANSWER: is writnot was thereby extinguished. distinguish.ANSWER:or 2001.child 48 of to of his the real amendment except as toof the the pleading amount of but not damages to shall be enforced in the manner provided in excluded Fabian from the Office of hometown Rules property. damages. claims.aan to Manila for business and I answer foreign will assailfails judgment? to the dismiss Moreover. Corpus.in themuch judgmentless to right valid SUGGESTED the of and defendantaction binding ANSWER: accrues. for August. Rule Hence. issued not against final C. action? (Sec.movedasthe a belief for to interlocutory. Courtof B's to the of positively corpus upon the howbe shall posting it isenforceable that by theheplaintiff is ignorant of a of anywhere bond the in Marietta's contention is correct. (Rule has Enforcement. form a belief exclusive defendant Defendant as a jurisdiction. notwithstanding (Sec.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. distinction) 3[E]. In judgment on theatpleadings?his Bulacan Explain. The the court and for her failed to notify the court of B's death. Judgment on the Pleadings judgment case.5 correct? may suffer jurisdiction Explain. 8. acquired the property. trial. Lack of Jurisdiction. represented may be found by her due plaintiff for Attachment counsel by X. between the ALTERNATIVE parties exists. to have removal Partialjurisdiction Summarywithout over thecause. the court may dismiss the action continue until entry of final judgment.ofwhich maliciously.146 SCRA the(2%) judgment 173. Rule together 34). a MeTC always may tantamount be did not Interlocutory Order. The Effect remedy Marietta's requisites others. child. and the certiorari. trial. Big. for action judgment Coloma. million. or Supreme Inc. from but may said it was order? discharged upon the petition moral was erroneously and exemplary damages. 4 of judgment Rule 35). attorney's fees. A thus which concluded that plaintiff is entitled to suchdeny other is motion entitled. for lack City of thru in thea same special civil action amount of P1 amillion.trial court. thethe complaint motion on execution for the ground was of ALTERNATIVE to occupy his aforesaid position and tender Explain. dismissed. proved. {Garces259as amended v.) by claim motion was issuediswithin notbypurely the fivecourt. sufficient 2001. issue. (5%) default. in possession of the the requires (1999) What b) isNo. the for grounds damages. express How or should implied. v. The right his ordering of action unverified In comment. that the daughter.00 warranto. Lantin. judgments defendant which to appear (Sec. jurisdiction in (b) A may institute the proceeding in a damages is dependent on the outcome of the allegations counterbond of jurisdiction of B's of P1because Complaint.insolvency isand correct (2) of in defendant.com Page 25 2423 ofof 6666Yes.to 5. fora certiorari? it is writ of an son. the does not trial court evidently rendered contemplate judgment the inclusion holding ofthe defendant liable for the entire amount prayed for in the complaint. of Rulethe favorable judgment obtained by the plaintiff 65). the amount Judgment. take the After an her efforts. on theIs this heirs provision of the expenses. was 474 in incapacity. being P1. rendered judgmentIn his attachment upon a bond of P1 million. defendant alleged paythat thethat denied plaintiff the morning. election registrar. of Court. 1. After due hearing. SCRA served Court byof 99and filed his to thatseeantoactionit thatupon the evidence a judgment submitted(though is ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: (1996)] the court not defendant resolve the fabricated. property an action (2%) have involved against been heard is her Registrar Plaintiff amounts filed of remain the Municipality a complaint uncertain for of and aindefinite Sevilla sum of While situated. defendant court P1.5 million asproperly moral damages challenge saidsole and P0. salepetition. right or fact 3and office of to Carlo reason barged to exclude into her foreign house in Paranaque judgments from Rule 16. defendant the to Carlo to regain custody. Court judgment. [RCPIPablo amount of Appeals. C. CourttheRegistrar total Court. 1.5 Phil. moral 2004) and exemplary b) ALTERNATIVE surety an action A's cannottoAnswer ANSWER: annulexceed admits the the judgment the amount material for of lackits family court courts have without need exclusive of a trial. the Civil theregarding Staterequires Code in order R. enjoyment as to any material of a Under Sec.) I could against also the file Family the Courts can pleadings AH. of interest. However. sued annulment Supreme of their the supposedly to defendant replace the respondent before Judgment. theof Courtthe The No. and if there is no ANSWER: andIf to enforced it the by be action mere examined isforfor motion. ordered the its ruling. After filed October in the 1. with a copy of the MeTC original (1) record. of sale summarily against defendant for insuch to file an action of quo warranto his filed an a petition actionbyforthethe for habeas enforcement corpus against ownership name against of land Pablo against for B usurping who was the executed defendant in his offavor. certain among forward recoverable. of 309the v. contention is hasfor damages it G. the the facts the alleged. May A move on for damages accept his are aforesaidawarded transfer. except for damages of Considering whatever c. and costs. the 2004. will shouldnot be lie. heir of B. ofThe filed the answer in the judgment amounts Court pendingto an of in of the damages (Province dismissed same of thecourt Pangasinan because complaint v. Judgments case (2004) writ 1 of When be (Sec. dies motion? before entry (2%)9) Evidence of opposition final (with supporting affidavits) to the Jurisdiction. action say therein that the iscontained. and byit shall Molina order the not unlawfully excludes another from the use in Makati action accrues. Election Death of a shall Registrar. sec. the or claim. 10. without Habeas(Sec. main case. jurisdictionExamination over the of Defendant area Jurisdiction. Proper Liabilities for moral Action of and the court 47) successor motu ofproprio B. sound the trial if Judgment due andVda. Court of failure defendant. the time before the course October of 7. 8369) that rendered by the any No. 2001 Family and on the indefendant Baguio on interlocutory execution was order. his Pedro that the continued attorney's proper fees. the be the subject provision a judgment in theon of Appeals. sec. favor Pablo as a matter has not unlawfully law Percival. Inc. (2002) (Sec. The and The if defendant trial granted. Itfinding does SUGGESTED being B's sole heir. MTCwhich Judgments. as in fact he continued pleadings Philippines 30. property by Marietta. International School. to indemnify the (Phil. which Enforcement. (with exerciseIts supporting jurisdictional his affidavits) functions amount forata therein.). the and 33 B. right c) ofWhen No.000. aeven college indoesif B's student. as well locate as her the defendant posting by properly the defendant challenge of a said counterbond order of Appeals judgment as the same was served on the plaintiff onshould have been appeal Judgment from said became order because final. o'clock in the X the (2002) The complaint trial as Annex court "A" thereof. I would of C. as the May the such cases.ofthat estate pleas. move what to course set of proper Marietta the judgment. 1 of the Rule SUMMARY defendant 39 ). (2%) and they vacate hisare not dependent position in Bogo ontown other as a) applicable deceased the sheriffThe(Florendo grounds to an was toldvs. as well as the exact where (2002) ALTERNATIVE c) the process A the pleadings? real ANSWER: brought andareshouldExplain. Appeals appeal. Was the court'sPablo order was transferred to forward the withoutcase plaintiff. death. Judgment. filed failure A's complaint for annulment of theirin the the deathto answer of Philippines either the toof SUGGESTED court correct ANSWER: in applies proper only immediately.QuoThornton.of the deed ofpending Execution sale was appended to Appeal The plaintiff obtained a writ of preliminary compel time him within to 10 produce years fromtheir son. for damages As the by action within returned the unsatisfied. v. as Soundness. and who knowledge which. In thisin Judgment. his the or(Sec. award 154598. judgment must have in to thebe court presented in whichin theaccordance action was motion. defendant filed a motion to types of damages. ruled the court indeed (though upon adverse a without pending party. distinction) 1. Mandamus case (Rule therefore 39. No. the answer toofplaintiffs complaint cause.inshe property could no longer question. 88 SCRA 695. the disputed and and to investigate whether or not a collusion executor to requiring foreign orthe administrator. No. deed. still theA month law later.R. to the transferred ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: to another municipality an the When action court upon may the admitting sheriff trieda proceed judgment even to serve must without be the exclusive (1999)]. the abducted operation of their this six-year rule.

B (seller) sued him for collection before the RTC. Rule 3) Parties. Effect (1999) When A (buyer) failed to pay the remaining balance of the contract price after it became due and demandable. because the action will not be (2%) dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. (Id. (2%) 3 In the same case. Consequently.) 2 No. A perished in a plane accident. (Id. If A died while the case was already on appeal in the Court of Appeals.) . the case will continue because there is no entry yet of final judgment. what is the effect if B SUGGESTED ANSWER: died before the RTC has rendered judgment? 1 No. Death of a Party.) 3 The effect is the same. his heirs brought an action for the settlement of his estate 1 Will you and moved for grant the the motion? dismissal of Explain. The action will not be dismissed but will be allowed to continue until entry of final judgment. After both parties submitted their respective evidence. the (2%) collection suit. (Id. 2 Will your answer be the same if A died while the case is already on appeal to the Court of Appeals? Explain.

the suchmortgage case. Order does not comply with the provisions of Section 2. (Sec. from D’s L-17983.decision. Soriano thatFOR over ANNULMENT his action. enforcement affidavit of hisofto thebasis. (2004) In filing hisof complaint such later for pleading. B. andthe CD demand filed certification. money because recognize judgment. aConformably defendant To Conform inwith w/ the cause Evidenceof action or defense shall serve the (2004) should have has prescribed. by the upon 107 orcontents not? the sheriff SCRA Should of187 thewhile original AC'sthe that the Order legitimate thereof. suit. taken. set the liability in denying as AB’sto plaintiffs motion contracting praying that with CD a money Court. an 2.00. prescriptive property may to of be allowed Rule period AB knowledge served his by responsivethe party executing pleading. for without wife leave of to objection file an on of fraud. Here. is not must andyet final.effect2000. No. ANSWER:heExplain. of to fact?payReasonCD the require [1987]) for its adjudication the of However. the Court 68. which Gumabay it has v. v.maliciously dismissed A prepared appeal thea exclusive within therefrom complainthas lapsed? for recovery jurisdiction Why? of (3%) of the to conform amended induced the to the decision plaintiff evidence? declaring to file theExplain. grounds be evencounsel. allowed. demand to amended Motions. The This was should none tobe only of begin be the with. (Sec 2. jurisdictionof What non. v. ANSWER: who on allegedly should May be 1996. preliminary Yes. suit. no Baralin. the RTC would DYdismissed have that incorporated his been D’s petition. order Certificationdenying Against over the the probate Forum actionShoppingof be since a forth After in the due counterclaim pleadings hearing. 14. Amendment of Complaint. SUGGESTED over 1963. granted? counterclaim. foreclosure irrespective of that do because (Soledad AC. the since193 and defendant. jurisdiction (2003) SUGGESTED (Sec. of 140889. the 120. ALTERNATIVE no plaintiff parties.000. is and her defraud The his 18th SUGGESTED lawyer him counterclaim birthday (A). 299 SCRA 100 of the filing of the preliminary Plaintiff sheriff different inhada the civil action amendments staying for beendamages madethe later the than evidence 120cannot days from be date of entertained. The because four-year they period isdo not based onconstitute Article 285 a of the enforcement PX after filed a suit responsive of for the damages pleading against LM. retroacts to the date of mortgage to vacate and is ordering AB and jurisdictional to pay sinceCD the exercise(Ortiz justice of discretion.(Sec. plaintiff recognitionX filed in a evidence againstmotion Z. no SCRA a motion bond 282wasEven to admit if filed the by thereby increasing his total claim to the said Pleadings. SUGGESTED ANSWER: may be filed of motion University on the of the Baguio. Family In his Code. No. Before an order filling denying the the probate ofXY complaint. to him By for Leave theof Petition complaint for Reliefon & Action the ground for Annulment that the court Appeals. such as transaction to amend the naturethe or Yes. should (4%) not be sued on Y. of action. AC's is 110274. is theauthorized sheriff by levied the Rules. theX aswritten an Is the demand illegitimate ruling to of the vacate. to granted should a copy be or not? Amendment denied thereof Reason. jurisdiction. 4% does Has not the affect action the of result X pleader may amend his where No.judgment 7 of Ruleagainst 6). not [1998]) be "acting" or unless and hethus. and be ANOTHER and can indispensable complaint. child of a appeal therefrom has lapsed. action The Aftermotion the finality to dismiss of plaintiffs counsel 120 days from receipt of the Order. In his clients’ jurisdiction (2002) signatures because A default judgment was rendered by the and allowing shows an that amendment his August 22. (Ong v.judgment Third Party Claim final. 674 or otherwise [1994]).R. When a lawyer files a case Before the court could resolve the motion. evidence admitted that It iswas in that the already suitamended in the that B dismiss. the court when because shouldshould court have he have cannot been brought rendered allegeduring lack the a judgment of should issued not a writ granted of because bringing execution for the in the substantial Pleadings. maliciously attaching petition for refused to accept it on the ground that If the real L-30683. and severally Amendment of liable Complaint. a However. Injunction he would is not not be able acting to secure without legitimate children. or excusable XY signed liable [1991]) separate for the and judgment distinct against civil action.comPage by: sirdondee@gmail. no On is jurisdiction. of theevidence rules which showing is to genuineness due the counterclaim. 12 before of (Valenzuela Rule the6. The (Rule 47. Rule 7.000. 2. is party”ACTION the rule himself 1 & 3. Cafterand the D. B.to file a third-party knowledge March of its21. mayTo be avoid filed on the grounds further delays a After ejectment X has filed filedon party Zdefendant.denied the May the the lawyer directed (2000) forto areceive fee. months because after such itjudgmentmust be to the court third-party of? claim. which started to run on May 2. Heirscannot 280 be SCRA of Marcelino amended 870 Pagobo to interest and other charges later A obtained acquire jurisdiction money . still The possession SUGGESTED Metropolitan of Trial ANSWER: a parcel Court. compulsory affidavit Leonidas. 5CD. Third-Party No. induced May PX property 31. mortgage of thewhether amount the to which wasmotiontendered was duly for beyond attached its admission. of substantial plaintiff was able justice to present. secure thea plaintiff by with changing is the entitled entirely necessary reliefs. for X. court. 1994) utter lack claim.became court 299 Appeals. bring has the beenagainst Prudence suit attached. had against been DY. and whether he signed it August 25. [1997]). Hethe didamount not even deny tendered. filed as suit. a record CD. title to thethe In due time. despiteremedy G. confer jurisdiction on a court where there does status notof sufficiently an illegitimate raise an child. After purposeThe intervenean counterclaim answer of or thefile has a been amendment of DY filed. (5%) contracting with a lawyer for a fee. to theG. AB had under oath the complete a third-party relief in claim the determination over said propertiesof the On May 12. Article for a with 175 fee of Section of the P50. days SUGGESTED complaint after the ANSWER: in cannot petitioner court.petitionthe lifetime that he had for thealso Yes.of day period is the mortgage deniedby granted bythe deed. Rules of Court) Thecounsel court. of involved or leave is 28. Mamangun. favor. the as he available to sign the amended his complaint to allege a new certification of non. Sincethe deed no since action appeal he ofwas X plaintiffs enforcement counsel thereof. ANSWER: longer contracted be amended a lawyer. notto for a correct? SUGGESTED court client. filing of the mistake complaint. No. The Parties. counsel to Aevery be brought moved action to deny and in since the the collection of P250. arises property out with No. why Petition for Relief. PP filed 5 preliminary ALTERNATIVE The third-party ANSWER: injunction claimant staying should make the an alleged inter alia as follows: (1) that factual and legal of Rule 1). impleading still. JK claims that he is not a judgment. fraud. L-7076.R. Y. NO. complaint. is on or final order was entered [Rule 38. can raise the ground of fraud against C. than100 SUGGESTEDsixPhil. Civil Rule party's 10. B suit. the of 1997 of the served 2 considered Rules opposing (Sec. G. failed at the to pay discretion his ofobligation the court. of 2. AC property a motion in the same court praying that defendant DD toduly executed the filed a motion dismiss counterclaim CD be directed Version 1997-2006 receive Updated the amount by Dondee as against him on the ground that he is mortgage deed. April counsel. G.of 10 of P250. Is XY learns of the B. A without (Chavez of an additional amount of P200. grant C filed of (2005) prevent without delay and objection on equally the part promote of defendant the he did not deny of judgment. The disposition written demand of to vacate the subject document. Rule mayison notalso thea the compliance the effectwhich court. Atty. 29. v. had Basic principal complaint 2 record What and on not is August to theconfer 22. (2000) JK’s acted real for property without relief Counterclaim and is jurisdiction. to(5%) 1977. hastopossession Amendments dismiss ofthe the are attached counterclaim not proper property. within forcible (2000) trial the mortgagedentry.reasons. has before ABthe fraudulent. Parties. her 25. Under the Rules. (5%) of ANSWER: the mortgage debt including third parties of whom the court cannot As open to plaintiffs and allegation continuous no. tendered by him on the ground that the not a proper party to the case. and of C defendant filed did a motion to dismissdeny the proceeding. being to copyfrom not Consequently. In the Order. 149 SCRA claim and 265. the 10). April birth SUGGESTED the also he or petition an ANSWER: denied for admission any liability of certiorari filiation in a plaintiffs and SUGGESTED for prosper? connected While of 1955)court. 1996. a counterclaim. interest the and motion other to charges conform notto sign it(2004) by his injunction clients through a special retroact to the date (Verzosa v.000. separate isiscompulsory tocan action conferthe to of X if certiorari no the knowledge action against of the is based the mortgage on Court anddeed. (5%) matter and if based of right on before lack of the other party jurisdiction. ground defendant 306 SCRA of extrinsic with 497. a if his reliefproperty? also dissolves the writ of the CA. pleading Y may died. Rules full amount SUGGESTED briefly. present rules which allow will amendments not be granting instrument signed allegation CD’sno. as a personal Petition prescribed? of for Certiorari Explain. certification ANSWER: (6) 785 (1957)]. Thethere ALTERNATIVE action isfiled aANSWER: finding on April that the 25.AB (Sec. amount (Sec. in gives allowinga amended complaint impleading the three an action having beenfor foreclosure presented at theoftrial mortgage. of Court Civil (2005) a Procedure. 1 by prayer for asY. and 2005. [1999]) amended particulars? 2002) amend. the injunction. judgment counsel or final The sign plaintiff order thejustified and thereafter anti-forum not more in (2003) the 1 the can three When amendment file a (3) can legitimate separate a bill proposed action children of was particulars to toof enforce Y.thatwithout after his clients the leave were period of court.upon Pleadings. a later 1999. of favor should what Why? beintermust of a (3%) grantedalia. in the accident. it would Should alleging Under judgment be P’s the in then in motion said Rules his acting on an amendment beCourt. which Y. thecourt. Rule 68) The is an actionable defendant's the same to him. well foreclosure In such as case.000.000. Rule answer. or and moved disallowing against that he for PX is the and the if an took there additional place is otherwise defendant thereafter. against beingobtained It the attached would a Counsel have writ byof the been of the including very beginning.R. inthe fora cause of action consisting in the inclusion 2000. granted. effect19971999.R. part In complaint Sandiganbayan. 1999. asComplaint. complaint? however. exercising property is not a its Under will inthe August 10. be allowed because it ANSWER: the Order on hearing. though admitted on After trial. on these four-year thehismotionissues. true. issue the of fact.not possession 1. Sheriff of No. (Sec. defendant amounting to lack or not excess properly of jurisdiction jointly Pleadings. Z.Bservedspeedy already onanddefendantinexpensive a mortgage deed. of fact.(Sec. complaint of aAppeals. of date which ofthe receipt is action Annex of the"A" of Order. Excorpizo v. refused for the to Yes. of no Under conform CC. of copy necessary. Defense. property (Sec. C has not in counterclaim to the beenefforts the commencement properlyto very convince impleaded same case of them.JK with adjudged regard by the to court him to Specific on the but CD date Denial theoflatter the complaint May 30. month because The corresponding before her birthday. 2000 beyond the four-year granting detainer. therefore SCRA filing of the original complaint. thetheattaching court By Leave has party.commencement Aurelio v. the his whichcomplaint. defendant mustalleged. judgment Prescriptive Period alleging (2000) that B had (2002) May had no an jurisdiction Pleadings. and (5%) C Yes. where upon of(5%)Complaint. AB tendered the action the is commenced full amount P’s immediate of the Pleadings. responsive pleading. will may discovered be overturned the plaintiff.aproceed of billMay Failure the of to 9. Rule 68 of the Rules of Court which give AB 120 days from entry of judgment. amended negligence the certification within anda immediately period of sixty filed(60) the the a trial. pleading.the of execution Samson. unlawful CD’s prayer however. Matter of Right higher During interests trial. such the G. Remington does not substantially Industrial interference Sales alteringCorporation the with naturev. theexecution plaintiff of filed a laudable in an ejectment objectivecase. which pay the amount due. claiminga that thehad court shalltransferred order the up to December complaint in the 24. 5. Procedure. 363 SCRA 196 SCRA not alleged 779 [2001]).R. if the action is based on the coordinate cause Appeals. period XY to corresponding ALTERNATIVE third-party ANSWER: pleading claim and still be rendered amended the of lack claimed knowledge. Rule 10. court gravely As to plaintiff’s abused its allegationdiscretion no. plaintiff court. 133657. the prescriptive period. public Does The court erred document defendant's or a answer in privateissuing as to an Order handwritten plaintiff’s complaint occurrence of the action? ANSWER: before constituting 4% a responsive the subject pleading matter is Explain. (Sec. C P450.depends.no. is could authorized not have to Amendments impleading new defendants petition Pleadings. vacate Bill wascomplaint of Particulars jurisdictional. but D filed a full court amount did not acquire of the mortgage jurisdiction fromdebt the would 708. Will of because plaintiff (Rosario and jurisdiction vindicate his on it amend is v.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. Court ofThe v. secs. FOR forum RELIEF shopping.000. amendment new cause of cannot Civil Code) ALTERNATIVE AB received action. for foreclosure the demand of clients as RTC will of a ordering matter be Dright deprived to paydoesP a not of require sum substantial of money. to prevent the as ANSER: v. The conform be his signing filed histheopposition certification? to Why? the (5%) motion to trial availed shopping Asi.com Page27 2829 26of 66 of 66 of of The66 66 he motion attached. objection on the the courtof issued part the an Order defendant. the isthenot admission order G. It 2000 claim is still is In within four (4%) since the (4)rule frompleading years requires its discovery.00. jurisdiction third-party claim over him and to canhold be Bobtained.answer was ItHe presented 2000 should on anbe cannot August action be by held filed 14. his The party court to the answer. it is barred by UNLESS 2 & 3) laches or estoppel. (Sec. The motion by executed claiming to dismiss the that should be or “plaintiff the RTC denied. Rule over ANSWER: 57) The thethird-party original complaint claimant may and action Aggrieved. defendant of thanthe still. receipt The of power ofaattorney.apresence court Courtof the of of mortgage action of Xand sufficiently has raise ordering not issueAB anprescribed.00 Rule 8). sole counsel of registeredmotion the for judgment plaintiff ownerforofexecution inin his said said property. Court of Appeals.After served. the judgment personal knowledge became final as to on counterclaim the said writ. a matter Appeals. jurisdiction. to plaintiff celebratedC to As will counsel still be for overturned A. asTating. without good the reason amendment.claim one Carandang. and Pleadings. thencase. 2. which is the date of entry or not and because Where certain it is properties required under for B's the name. was the court against onboth file. 1977 2002). of landof Quezon againstCity. complaint (Note: [1998]).R.Court Court of the of 2. when whereupon discretion counterclaim involved in inPsaid immediately allowing for damages case. andchildren(2)hadthat already ofto Y prosecute becomewho final his motion are latter(1981)]. Rules confer No of Civil proceeding other jurisdiction Procedure. the sheriff is liable to C for damages. SUGGESTED ANSWER: amendment. Rule May10.beABbrought interwithin files a alia. An jurisdiction. and . a motion to dismiss v. RTC 1999 of within which Quezon City to for secure that plaintiff just. ifofthe his Isdismissal title the Jurisdiction counterclaim thereto. 2. dismissal counsel. A PETITION made After prior countless NO. RealtyDY v. an transferred illegitimate said child properties of Y. secs. (Tanongan with v. jointly be amended legitimate and itseverallyto family is conform not liable of a tocompulsory to Y the Aevidence. however. It cannot do so however. Amendment change of or alteration in the knowledge ofIn lifetimeisofappealable. Rule 36) Hence. because execution AC. Answer.Xof The the merely has stating dismiss plaintiffs the should judgment. Claim3. court denied prescribed complaint and with hisrespect made motion an toonthe integral thethreeground (3) of part serve be conferred DY such [Golez v. impleaded December in 20.

If the pleading is a reply. the court may order the striking out of the pleading or the portions thereof to which the order was directed or make such other order as it deems just. the motion must be filed within ten (10) days from service thereof. a party may move for a bill or particulars of any matter which is not averred with sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable him properly to prepare his responsive pleading. 1 of Rule 12) 2 If the order is not complied with.SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1 Before responding to a pleading. (Sec. (Sec. 4 of Rule 12) .

Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. It the genuineness makesv. of a right Apprehensive and trial other arisespersonal after the property reply not hascapablebeen (3) that in Violation esse.noticepreliminary to the Provisional Remedies. and injunction shall be liability summons. (Sec. and a the notice parcel that the of bankland to the preliminary attachment. Rule 57.Ejectment is to vs. issued ex-parte or upon motion with because this matter delves into the merits injunction without bond? (2%) (2001) Lilio filed a complaint in the Municipal notice SUGGESTED andANSWER: hearing. Remedies. (Mindanao Savings and PLAINTIFF has the duty to promptly move Provisional Remedies. (3%) Issuanceof. peace Remedies. it writ was improvidently issued because the the new matters alleged in the answer are may be attached as in into a peace agreement with the National fact it is provided obligation in question was already fully deemed SUGGESTEDcontroverted. (Sec. (1) The fact denied. thereof. option (Sec. preliminary Inc. implemented. if thewhy the order injunction that may be issued is issued is a exfinal Payment. the plaintiff the jurisdiction of the is deemed court over to havehis (1999) May damages Democratic be claimed Front. cause of action affidavit. by a wrongful attachment Main Action (2006) MTCon the Serving a ground notice of ofnon-payment garnishment. Tyrone filed a motion to enjoined. which is by aa purelyparty admitted person. needed toGM.with or theinjuriesbank.5%) specific of attachment performance that should to be enforce servedthe on Injunction improper. v. rentals. (Willman 208 AutoSCRA 108 (2006) cannot.) principal case. (2%) ANSWER: Philippines is immune from suit. complaint serving a copy adverse party injunction cannot andissuea hearing without wouldbond defeat unless (1999) thereof on Lilio. Attachment ATTACHMENT is a provisional remedy of Loan (a) (2005) a writ of Association. be set royalties for pre. damages Provisional Remedies. defendant In the event the plaintiff files a and reply. underwith the contract copies of the of sale complaint and granted without hearing and prior notice praying for the containing dismissal the(15) application of the complaint 57 to 61. of an incompetent executed. and ex Katy filed an action against Tyrone for thatparte effects thata the levycase be set forofpre-trial. Rule18). the summons. serve as a ground for resolving Yes.it(5%) can be shown that the obligation D. 1985) (Onate Yes. Javellana Attachment v. be doneNo. (Sec. O. of preliminary (2) The existence showing. cause grave Attachment and irreparable weeks afteronthe attachment thecontract followingofgrounds: sale was (i) injury(1999) In toa case. 304 judgment [1917]).writ. and requires Trial Court of Lanuza for the recovery of full-blown trial. JJ’s action 57) on BB’s complaint? or sureties. Provisional (Sec. on property a party (b) a final writ of injunction? Requisites collection of the sum of P1 Million in the (Sec. attachment.is onlyThe that prays for the remedy of permanently action to to enforce the action. that will immediately be sustained served by reason a of notice such of (2001) May Whataare (1999) writ the ofprovisional preliminaryremedies injunction under be (5) Notice violation. Injunction execution aRemedies writ of attachment. After the filing of the the purpose exempted by of the the trial provisional court (Sec. Rule restraining the adverse party from doing will not alleged suspend payment the action reason(s) Provisional for Remedies. Rules support pendente of Court).. answer of Juan. house Y filesand his served answer him denying the Rules.RTCItashould complaintbe a copy against of theBB writ for for damages main SUGGESTED action. Rule. the partythe property enjoined. (Rules Within fifteen days fromforservice writ of of to the party or person sought to be on the ground preliminary of lack of Katy's attachment. the RTC for The the SUGGESTED ANSWER: No.comPage by: sirdondee@gmail. sustained the or sheriff Provisional Provisional or Remedies. Procedure) theare court — plaintiff judgment who has the obligor or duty to prosecute. Appeals. Rule 8. Garnishment a motiontotothe answer dismiss. of even if the judgment Distinguish between is adverse to injunction as him. recovery following of of a day. which shall injunction be heardwhich with subject of the ejectment deposits are attached pursuant to the case.com Page3031 of 66 of 66 preliminary dissolve and executed the signed writ byofX and Y two injunction preliminary Provisional mayRemedies. [1985]). 10 of Rule 6). Injunctions. all that is even 37 if the Phil. The ejectment case action refers to the principal case itself Explain. 2 of Rule 57) The of the case. Attachment vs. by not thatfiling thea writ replyofdenying attachment under President upon the custodianof the Philippines from entering of such property. Upon4. as a in the not proper.The ofwrit 7[d]. to Reply. (2000) v. 197393. receivership. while when the last SUGGESTED pleading has been filed and it is the writWrit a. The reason is that it is the for the issuance of a: as security for the satisfaction of any RTC. garnishment Pleadings. The is adverse President to ofhim? the Prejudicial Abrogar. under guardianship is in President of the Philippines from entering custodia legis. 1.Tyrone or threat might of violation withdraw of his savings of manual served and delivery under a writ of filed. Explain. (3%) and (iii) said Although with the the propertyCourt Supreme of an to incompetent stop the A reply is generally optional. SUGGESTED Explain. a writ of preliminary injunction may (7) Filing application. ANSWER: (Sec. injunction. serves The as a ground latter filed for his parte is: that injunction. the court did The notcontract acquire jurisdiction of lease over was under guardianship was in custodia legis. (2001) May a writ of preliminary attachment be involves was already possession fully paid. After summons two days. lite. are be issued ex parte. an order of attachment may be [1992]). thethe motion with of reasons. (2000) writ filesHearing ofa complaint on the preliminary in attachment. 5. requiring Generally. de The factowrit only. as irregular an ancillaryorremedy refers excessive option the to purchase defendant. 5 of Rule 58) The reason is because order the contract writbyof sale was dismissofand attachment. Court non-payment of of Appeals. lease. ANSWER: may be made on account of (2. replevin. Rule agreement 57) Attachment with the National said affectcontract. w/out Bond 57) The of oftheejectment account or not doing SUGGESTED the act ANSWER: complained Supply for Corp. to purchase issued ex-parte? Briefly state the ancillary the main 13.party 32 of SCRA and a his pending surety (3) 281. Requirementsissuance of the writ. a sum however. A claim. however.Injunction (Sec. the 480). be claimed by aRemedy Ancillary party BB The (2) files writ a complaint was improperly for ejectmentimplemented. in the prejudiced vs.JJ files is This is authorized ancillary remedy by andtheinjunction Rules. whose duty is it to have and 58).your answer. enable the adverse party to abscond (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: Court of Remedies. SCRA 162 prejudiced political by a (Madarang question. the effect (ii) of the thenon-filing writ was (2003) Can a suit SUGGESTED for injunction be aptly filed ANSWER: SUGGESTED of a reply?ANSWER: improperly Explain.132 Bidin. while20. lastapar. reason Yes. (4%) Front? a copy of the writ of paid. all on parties the Effect bank of of to raffle implement Non-Filing of and Reply the issued the rules? ex-parte? (2%) Why? (3%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: (6) of X hearing. The motionsince to dismiss contract and to dissolve lease the No. Injunction(2%) reply.mayInjunctions.other his granted (1) the application A verified complaint and issued a writ credits. Question. What is the requires Plaza notice the Enterprises to the existence adverse Inc.was Rule improvidently issued if SUGGESTED ANSWER: effect (Sec. May a Regional Trial Court issue the improvident Pre-Trial.. If it is not filed. against Juan. injunction as a main writ.is served. Resolve However. an sumthe appropriate of money sheriff with bond damages proceeded andto The provisional remedies under the rules not service against thereof. preliminary As provided attachment.attachment Santamaria. oath served was the genuineness ahead of the andsummons due execution did notof Provisional into 7. the Toribio and writ. the Xwrit doeswas notservedfile a Provisional Can it be attached?Remedies. a suit for attachment shallinjunction be filed withcannot theaptlyproper be (4%) attached to the answer is the basis of be the writ of preliminary attachment should filed courtwith the Supreme and notice Court to stop of the attachment the served defense.before Requisites a writ of After the filing of the answer of Juan. of ofpreliminary Preliminary attachment. (4) such depositDamages right. an rentals against particularly before JJ. (2006) What are the requisites for the issuance distinguished from each other as follows: attachment issues. in the preliminary Tyrone's Y. 172 SCRA SUGGESTED Attachment the case set ANSWER: for and pre-trial? garnishment Why? (5%) are Provisional or dispose of his property Injunctions. Specific the February re-serve Performance 23. no preliminary injunction. There indeed is no effect. to1997-2006 Updated Version of preliminary Dondee that a superseded and attachment by aattachment contract of bond. wrongful v. What ahead of theis summons. due execution unenforceable. (Secs. attached his person to because the answer. that SUGGESTEDin such Democratic ANSWER: case. 7 57) and 8 However. remedy 4[b] of Rule Distinguish attachment from garnishment. GARNISHMENT ALTERNATIVE ANSWER:is a levy on debts due the posting Rule 58 of 1997 an Rulesattachment of Civil bond. . withANSWER: an ex-parte application for a plaintiff who knows judgment that may be recovered. duty to move including that the bankcase deposits. v. (Sec.

verified but application the SQO for may the be subject appointment of the consequence RTC in ofcriminal the crime cases. It is only in thethe Executive Rules of Judge Court who for canan automatic temporary review. 445 gave presence rise ofto the thejudgesmore of serious Branches offense. original Virginia. 76 Phil. [1946]) In of extreme Support Pendente urgency. 4[c] and [d]. 5 of Rule 58) because the question does not state motion forlite? reconsideration of the decision (2%} pendente in the criminal Explain. restraining Receivership order (TRO).of9. 5 of Rule 1999.3 Provisional cases Remedies. the (2006) Define a temporary Provisional Remedies. TRO. temporary including the original restraining order 72hour is not 10. Ruleof being IV of the on offended party. to appeal The to Judge theto petition for Executive Judgesupport may pendente issue a TRO lite. the to former his sala. when Lite the (Rule and 4. RTC to CA that there is as yet finding asbyto his in such shall becases. it did not cure the defect beendays before waived the or were no acts.122. Roldan. realizing that the Motion lacked a writ (Sec. If you were the lawyer of not yet if notice final. apply in for relation Support to Jose? Why? (5%) with the 3(c). however. for amotion.1997 quietly Rules andofTRO Civil Procedure). ST’s counsel filed a supplemental pleading.2. vs.R. action. motion a poor. CA Justice Dept. B. filedan a the right restraining of the order accused ex parte. the Provisional Remedies. Appeal. 2000. 1999. There ANSWER: SUGGESTED is no constitutional objection to death and judgepenalty thereof areimmediately elevated issued through a of his 16year irreparable old daughter.separate (Sec. the of the original latter’s mortgage mandatory injunctiveindebtedness. filed a the Court of Appeals deemed perfected? if it denied the application pendente lite may be granted by the RTC for support period. the 135425-26.when it appears as authorized Court.case3) Convictions was raffled imposing to Branch the4 (1999) Before thewill applicant RTC.L.the CA. The criminal provided case is that still motion pending was in set court ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: confirmed nature of areports cease and Joaquin desistgathered. Appeals to CAclogged years because of the heavily Knowing what Jose has been doing. because of a offended party allegedly the last because day of filing of thea issued to restrain the opposite party furniture factory with a large number of crime. Appeal Rule 58 on June1997 15. TRO reservedfor motion or Reconsideration instituted prior to filed its within filing. A TRO dies a Rule lawyer 122. On March (1999) 1 ALTERNATIVEWhen is an appeal from the RTC to ANSWER: guilt. was Rule was 58. XXX received a final writ of copy urgency a injunction of the mayRTC and be actions where the civil liability includes the applicant decision on by will June judgment suffer 9. support for the offspring as a and on irreparable the next day. (a) APPEAL TROBY CERTIORARI that the under Rule property 58 and by is Section in danger 5. left with (5%) Criminal Procedure to criminal actions where the civil liability provide for appeal SQO Jose. businessman friend who was also engaged its keep filing her on child.com Page 33 sirdondee@gmail. 6 of Rule 61. TRO. imposed No other is reclusion Judge has asked the accused to In the exercise of his regular functions support the child. The penalty imposed is reclusion aspect thereof has not been waived or perpetua or Appeals issue a TRO? (2%) life imprisonment. of In the SQO does machinery andnot. of Although seduction the by a preliminary injunction learned from reliable sources that Jose (Sec. November 14. Rulecivil 15). whatuntilaction would be rendered. by the court of one or more receivers. subject to the right of Rules provide SUGGESTED ANSWER: that receivership is proper reserved for a separate civil action.The No. What is of (2006) the personal duration ofproperty a TRO issued by the by committed filing of onthe the same aforesaid occasion or which application defendant to the plaintiff. Status Quo Orderof some of his machinery and equipment to a hearing. YYY grave injustice received it submitting the motion for the rendered after trial. If you court calendar court ifin issued days favor of Joaquin but the further same is (2002) a) What arebefore the modes the judgment of appealmay to were Joaquin’s by lawyer. A TRO isare equipment provisional. especially her be issued SUGGESTED without ANSWER: a bond. action for (2%) rape. The SQO is the Supreme Court? (2%) you take to preserve whatever remaining SUGGESTED ANSWER: Virginia. Joaquin of granting February (2001) Modesto was had accused 29 days. Provisional Remedies. Court or of complaint and filed in a multi-sala RTC SUGGESTED ANSWER: from consisting convictions of Branches imposing 1. for The a Supreme Court. by 60 the long Remedies. The sec. (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: in furniture manufacturing A status quo order (SQO) is more in the such that from pleading. The of Civil aspect thereof has not been parties Procedure). XXX 58) filed consideration of the court. Appeal to SC. accused may period? reglementary be ordered Explain. a consists in the delivery. extended. Replevin or delivery of personal property 2000). An pure (2001) questions application for of law under a writ Rule 45 of preliminary the wasted IRCA or which dissipated additionally requires or materially that injured through awithpetition for review on the action injunction a prayer for a temporary and that itsshall Provisional value Remedies. relief. the duration During of a TRO the providing No. 2000.)and motion for reconsideration was March 15 to maintain the status machinery and equipment. and (b) ORDINARY APPEAL in working day to restraining order is included in a to discharge (1999) What is Replevin?thethe absent members mortgage (2%) debt.sufferA wasgrave charged with rape injustice and B. be issubmitted probably Replevin on the next insufficient certiorari. as longer in thesufficient case oftoprohibitory answer for the or date reservedof hearing. whom the case is assigned will thenbecause it does not Reglementary accused. the SUGGESTED Rule 61) ANSWER: in an Yes. valid (Sec. the Executive Judge of a Regional Trial upon the filing arose immediately raffled the case in that out of the same occurrence the of a Court? SUGGESTEDbond. lasts until revoked. extendible. action of a justice bya the divisionmortgagee of the Court for the of the accusedaccused may of to appeal beappealordered to the Supreme to Supreme provide A. (Sec. upon the but for offenses court. showing applicant to be entitled to the consequence of the crime and the civil a Notice 2000. Would you agree provisional with remedy theof trial court support 20 The days. During the quo until a hearing if Provisional Remedies. ofNos. problem of feeding natural To death afterwhatever preserve the allowable period. 6 of (Sec. Reyes modification v. perpetua or life imprisonment urgent in nature. order. (Sec. Is the pendency issued of thebycase. On March 15. not duration Period. 4. June (Sec.2.3 andreclusion 4. Duration by order of the lesser penalty is involved who was sitting in Branch 1. to provide (5%) support (2001) Joaquin filed (2%) SUGGESTED a complaint against Jose for pendente ANSWER: liteANSWER: SUGGESTED to the child born to the A thetemporary foreclosure restrainingof a order is an order mortgage Yes. gradually disposing defective who has a because child by Modesto. (5%) consequence of the rape. Being recall Appeals. supplemental alive. exercise whether ultimate the temporary review of the judgments restraining order copy of which wasno received Remedies. March not to 15say of of a herself. (3%) support pendent elite to the child born to Court Provisionalare: Remedies. of Sec. she where hours the from penalty issuance. issued by the SC.com Page 32 ofof 66 66 Waswaived. what action should you without anyand prescriptive period b) Comment onina the proposal to take amend to machinery equipment are and left may with To help help Virginia Virginia in the meantime meantime. ST. exceeding Supplemental insists thatofPleadings a total he20cannot days. 10. it lacked Virginia a noticewas of Provisional Remedies. since the for and hearing although andthe served civil on liability the adverse aspect of Since the supplemental pleading was not machinery it does not direct and equipment the doing or leftundoing with Jose of party the at crime least has three not (3) set for hearing. 1 of Rule 59). for reconsideration unemployed young girl. Rules 1999. A TRO is Inonly the trial for the case was foreseen to take two meantime good for 20 judgment days was rendered if issued by the RTC. ex parte the daughter an Executive Judgegave of a appeal to the Court issue immediately of Appealsrestraining a temporary from the birth to a child allegedly as a temporary decisions order ofrestraining effective the only RTC fororder in valid? Why? criminal seventy-two cases (72) Regional Trial Court is 72 hours (2nd par. and where the the civil (2006) May a justice of a Division of the Court of to agreement of the parties. injury. restraining order. (Heirs G. injury. Section should 2(b). entered into a compromise on notice of hearing. Rule 58 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) . but in no case beyond SUGGESTED ANSWER: counsel on February 28. . Support Pendente Lite if February had 28 days or March 16 for determining the propriety pendency of the foreclosure suit. of the criminal cases through a notice of appeal division late for the Justice Jose ratification. In criminal SUGGESTED ANSWER: that the matter is of extreme with notice to the Clerk of Court 2 While b. remaining Section Pendente Lite asof provided the Revisedin thethe Ruleschild? Rules.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006)by: sirdondee@gmail. The modes to the foreclosure Appeals mayof issuea mortgage a TRO. through counsel. perpetua the right or or life power imprisonment to issue a subject temporary to and when over caseshe assigned refused. the Executive or where Judge. (2%) (Calo ANSWER: v. Thereafter. deprive conduct the Supreme hearing a summary Court oftothe right to determine (2000) The be made RTC rendered to give such judgment support against arguing ST. Joaquin’s lawyer should A TRO is filenota to the Court included supportof Appeals for the from the decisions offspring as a Provisional Remedies. 5. in dire the defect need of was cured pecuniary on time by assistance to (2006) Differentiate a TRO from a status quo order.

Rule 41) 2 The contention of XXX that the RTC has no more jurisdiction over the case is not correct because at the time that the motion to approve the compromise had been filed. Besides. (2%) of Appeals is deemed perfected as to the appellant upon the filing of a notice of appeal in the RTC in due time or within the reglementary period of appeal. An appeal by record on appeal is deemed perfected as to the appellant with respect to the subject matter thereof upon the approval of the record on appeal filed in due time. . 1999. On June 13. who did not appeal. filed with the RTC a motion for approval of the Compromise Agreement. The rules provide that in appeals by notice of appeal. YYY. Rule on the motion SUGGESTED ANSWER: assuming that the records have not yet 1 An appeal from the RTC to the Court been forwarded to the CA.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) June 16. (Sec. 1999. the court loses jurisdiction over the case upon the perfection of the appeals filed in due time and the expiration of the time to appeal of the other parties. the period of appeal of YYY had not yet expired. the records of the case had not yet been forwarded to the Court of Appeals. XXX changed his mind and opposed the motion on the ground that the RTC has no more jurisdiction. 9. even if that period had already expired.

Court of Appeals. plaintiff may properly take (Secs. fifth par. Ejectment judgment. Rule 45 vs. the court issued an Remedies. certiorari as a mode of appeal is governed Either certiorari or ordinary appeal may be resorted to on the ground that the by Rule 45 and is filed from a judgment or final order of the RTC. contest his ejectment on the lower court is not impleaded.) However. Proper Remedy from the injurious effects of the disputed 41) (2004) After plaintiff in an ordinary civil action order The rules also provide that prior to the before the RTC. 9. 1 and 2). The order decision it Is the order of dismissal valid? does not state findings of fact and of law. if the order of dismissal is orders or resolutions rendered or issued reversed without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion tantamount to lack or excess of jurisdiction. 9. defendant among others. a trial judge271 as SCRA when an 67) appeal will not promptly relieve petitioner (Sec. The order of dismissal for days from notice of the judgment insufficiency of the plaintiffs evidence is appealed from or of the denial of the valid upon defendant's motion to dismiss motion for new trial or reconsideration even without prior leave of court.com Page 34 of 66 there is no on appeal. within fifteen (15) Yes. the filing of a is impleaded. Appeal. The proper for certiorari in that the petition for ANOTHER remedy ANSWER: is certiorari under Rule 65. dismissal of plaintiffs complaint for the date of the filing of the motion for insufficiency of plaintiff’s evidence. However. approve compromises. on the basis of a patent. in fact. 1 and 4. NO. capricious and whimsical exercise of (Vasquez discretionvs. (2%) dismissal of plaintiff’s complaint. may be ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: the more expedient remedy.is Itvoid is sobecause ordered. Appeal. to be (Id. the lower court for him to vacate the premises? 2) In appeal by certiorari... third par. X leased the petition. A PETITION FOR REVIEW ON as required by Sec. 199 SCRA 381. the plaintiff is deemed to have appeal nor any plain. appeal is not available. Rule 65 order. with the b) May a party resort to certiorari SUGGESTED ANSWER: costs taxedoragainst him. and is filed to annul or modify judgments. A filed an unlawful detainer case the petitioner and respondent are the against X without a prior demand for X to original parties to the action and the (a) Canthe vacate X premises. 1 filed in due time on questions of law only of Rule 33). the Sandiganbayan judgment is void. if appeal is not a speedy and adequate remedy. the court may. of the CERTIORARI as a mode of appeal may be (5%) Constitution and Sec. (Secs." when appeal is still available? Explain. Void Decision. (Echaus v. 1. (b) In case the Municipal Trial Court motion for reconsideration is not renders judgment in favor of A.byRobilla-Alenio. SUGGESTED ANSWER: b.) filed within sixty (60) days from notice of the Special Civil Action. Rule Remedies. due hearing of the motion and the appears to be a clerical error) opposition thereto. On 08 June 1) In appeal by certiorari under Rule 45. or the Court of Appeals. even if appeal is available. remedy in the ordinary course of law. 14.) warehouse of A under a lease contract ADDITIONAL ANSWER: with a period of five years. while in the special civil action judgment immediately executory? of certiorari. (Sec. May (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: plaintiff properly take a. Being distinguished from a special civil action void. is the required. Rule 41) (Note: June 13. ZZ has completed transmittal of the record. certiorari may be resorted to.) Certiorari is sanctioned. because as a general rule. speedy and adequate waived his right to present evidence. without prior leave of court moved for (Sec. Rule 36. 1996. when . order or resolution subject of the (1997) On 10 January 1990. such a motion is generally required.an appeal? Article VIIIReason. In ground that there was no prior demand certiorari. After approval of the Compromise Agreement. certiorari is proper if there is no appeal (Sec. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTION an appeal because the dismissal of the FOR CERTIORARI is governed by Rule 65 complaint is a final and appealable order. presentation of his evidence. under Rule 65. Yes.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. reading as follows: The Court (1999) a) Distinguish a petition for certiorari hereby grants defendant's motion to as a mode of appeal from a special civil dismiss and accordingly orders the action for certiorari. 1 of Rule 65.

6% 1995 with the acquiescence of the lessor without a notice to the contrary. (Sec. (1998) In an action for unlawful detainer in the Municipal Trial Court (MTC).Tomassi l0 SCRA 261. it cannot be entertained by the Municipal Court. defendant X raised in his Answer the defense that plaintiff A is not the real owner of the house subject of the suit. 1670.5 million (principal plus interest) to ground that there was no prior demand to the bank. It also filed a deficiency on ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: judgment will be made with the appellate 05 January claim 2002. did not assume personal liability for the loan. if the right of possession of the plaintiff depends on his ownership then the defense is tenable. In defendant X is immediately executory that foreclosure sale.P. 19 of new the deficiency claim was opposed by A ground that since he continued enjoying Rule 70). 2 of Rule 70. Foreclosure (2003) A borrowed from the Development Bank of the Philippines (DBP) the amount of P1 million secured by the titled land of his friend B who.Cuevas. as determined by the registered with the Registry of Deeds from the land. [3%]Does the MTC have jurisdiction over P20. Sec. the land was sold to upon motion unless an appeal has been the On 10DBP for P1. B. (Revised Rule on Summary Procedure. exclusive of interest and attorney's fees.00 against A and B.2 January 2003. and filed and the periodic deposits of current the confirmation issuance of a writ of of the sale possession was to oust B rentals. the court ordered the Municipal Trial Court against the foreclosure sale of the mortgaged land.000.million. No appeal was taken by A on vacate the premises. 125 SCRA 335). If any. however. A failed to pay the judgment debt vs.000. In due course. termination of the lease on January 9. X filed a counterclaim against A for the collection of a debt of P80.) However. (Art.000 X's defenseandtenable? attorney's fees of 2. the bank. Ejectment Code). because the judgment of the Consequently. the motion for the issuance of the thing leased for fifteen days after the (b) Resolve the deficiency claim of a writ of possession. the counterclaim? [2%] SUGGESTED ANSWER:: 1. Special Civil Civil Action. 8 of former Rule 70. X can contest his ejectment on the of P1. as amended.com Page 35 of 66 summary procedure and since the counterclaim is only permissive.000 plus accrued interest 1. Big. there was an IMPLIED NEW LEASE. the Decision within the reglementary Casilan vs. the bankThe sale filed an was ex- perfected. (a) Yes. by: sirdondee@gmail. of IsP15. the court rendered judgment directing A to pay the outstanding account SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) Yes. X's defense is not tenable if the action is filed by a lessor against a lessee. No. 33.000. inasmuch as all actions of forcible entry and unlawful detainer are subject to . within the period specified in the decision. because the principal demand is P80. A defaulted and DBP filed an action for judicial foreclosure of the real estate mortgage impleading A and B as defendants.) Special Civil Action. Iesaca period. (a) andResolve B. X can contest his ejectment on the court. (Sec. The counterclaim is within the jurisdiction of the Municipal Trial Court which does not exceed P100. 2. However. 129. for P800.000. (Sec. (b) Yes. a supersedeas bond has been subsequently confirmed by the parte motion with the court for the court.

but it cannot be enforced against B. 47 of RA 8791. Sec. However. The General Banking Law of 2000). The motion for (b) The writ of deficiency possession. (Sec.SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) In judicial foreclosure by banks such as DBP. bank maybe be enforced against the mortgage filed ex parte. the mortgagor or debtor whose real property has been sold on foreclosure has the right to redeem the property sold within one year after the sale (or registration of the sale). hearing. 3 of Rule 68. . the purchaser at the auction sale has the right to obtain a writ of possession after the finality of the order confirming the sale. who did not assume personal liability for the loan. There must be a notice debtor of A.claim of the cannot however. the owner of the mortgaged property.

project. by it Summons the is defendant better to is decide was served on the the a proper case on invitations he first made to a pre-qualify genuine and effort bid to for serve the the ALTERNATIVE remedy ANSWER: appeal is not a plain. distribute / sell cars in said Carlos because it was served sheriff earlier that day had delivered the that it is null and (2002)defendant The was void because declared theonRTC- in default his in city. Go. Yes. and Identification The sheriffs A. not file v. Court of defendant an additional a motion to Appeals.warranto.first As made expressly provided a genuine in thetoRules.R. During the others. served the order with X summons of moved and default for toa set because preliminary itaside is the the not Is authorized a petition severally. Improper Venue. to declare Carlos in default computerization of elections. his He deputy announced or any to person he sued declared X. against purpose of 1999). 15. the v. b) 391 forSummons(1995) of relief from a debt must of P1 judgment. default Summons the and onprovince Carlos to set was or aside city validly in that the its mainthe office court and had operations no jurisdiction are in over Cebu his judgment. fees for the andverified deceased In his expenses need motion not tofor belift filed a manifestation that Chairman Go was signed by Carlos and his wife. Is the itmotion may be to b) the case?When instruct his secretary (2%) additional of lawyerdefendant defendant to withdraw Carlos. remedy Tina because filed with theit is nota court counterclaim plaintiff corporation assuredthrough on him thatthe he ground its wouldcashier of and instruct lack available his of motion to enforce to declare Carlos ina default contractual and to lawyer to withdraw jurisdiction over the the complaint. Is summons certiorari If (2%) you under were required theRule 65 judge. the legal that For oppose appropriate the which was received petition. of Binan. (Sec.the G. (Id. of the summons But COMELEC is to inform Chairman the defendant Gener summons the decision onin a the judgment light would the evidencemake the of Go objected to the award on the ground a hearing on the same of the complaint filed against him and to judgment the plaintiff.filed Moreover. service and of summons that In theappeal. the majority Commissioners said amount as evidenced by a promissory note attorney's substituted affidavit of merit. the Did the deceased? default? ANSWER: trialExplain. subject matter. because sec. The purpose issued a Notice declare a) defendant TheCarlos ineffect in ofdefault default can theonly absence question of furnished on Carlos. a complaint the petition on forthe action B. attempt serve (1999) a) evidencing time What his despite is diligent the effect payment of efforts and absence made that the of when the Solicitor to the summons on defendant personally General commences before summons plaintiff serve on the judgment the assured summons him thatrendered personally. purpose asof impleaded complaint. he thesaw defendant the plaintiffcan notand be or proof SUGGESTED ANSWER: does not show that the of service Summons confronted served personally him within with ahisreasonable receipt sheriff No. is A. jurisdiction would ALTERNATIVE the notANSWER: receipt have to prove jurisdiction paymentover of his the budget (1998) A.) Rule receipt Summons on showing the motion payment on a to and dismiss that domestic the the appropriate period. The motion to dismiss is meritorious.for denial motion order. 20. otherwise known as the Voter's ALTERNATIVE B. Under ordinary circumstances.the a petition person on of served on the defendant on October 1. After the public summons on the defendant. business The The such RTC-Manila as a showing that of money. correct? on him Why? because (5%)the sheriffs return (Rule the summon. he files a therein. (1994). 11. of appeared a party before Pangasinan wrongly the unless the sheriffs return shows thatthe only sheriff P1 or billion. separate 233 who can471 affidavit SCRA be of served merit. (Sec. 3. Quo Service Warranto 1.Civil Substituted Special Action. a defendant resident proper remedy voluntarily Lingayen.36). removed v. should not bidding. The the Special Civil Action. stop the operationswas served on defendant of Cars Co.was providingsufficient. on motionthe to was declared prejudice the the winning plaintiff. rendered a court. Linda. The Solicitor General filed before of service filed basis because to exerted ofit is the serve plaintiff’s in violation the same of on ex theCarlos parte rule that and with a RTCthe in court Manilaina sum verified states that for petition the presentation no judgment such No. the over hisfor Substituted the person. CA. of summons Cars Co. 2. of law. needoffrom notCourt for a those Appeals. with attached quo warranto questioning and seeking to copy of the default diligence appear CA. Service39. stating in his Itreturn issued that 65 sale. It is because summons laws.5%) court abuse (2%) its discretion the summons on time from his wife. to dismiss Mandamus is not meritorious accompanied where summons by an was affidavit servedof(Sec. (3%) sum defendant permit or license was nottohome conduct at the its time.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. mandamus compel the COMELEC for 251 the SCRA collection petitionYes. Since [2%] the obligation. Two Commissioners sided with Union from the in the judgmentRTC (RTC) of Quezonfile by default City service of summons. hearing court which on saidthe ordersdefendant affirmative him as alleged defense. a in resident default of is San either Fernando to appeal La public authorized made Meanwhile. merit. acts. the complaint.athat genuinethe by theVRIS Fotokina court. Hence. his appearance is equivalent to the aside.com Page3637ofof 6666 claiming the ground that Serviceofofoutside order income. deny efforts the haveOn motion the been sheriffs return or proof as such.it wasAnot for accompanied P80. It did not incorporate itself under the secretary and the requirements for summons to her at said residence because Manila the RTC did for not failure his acquire to jurisdiction file an answer overto law nor did it have any government substituted a person? service SUGGESTED ANSWER: hiscomplaint Why? for ashould have not been followed. Rule or 14) a petition on service for the husband. him 16with of complaint 15-day reglementary 2 his d) Rule 3. 7 of Rule 66) ANSWER: c) A. Rule 65). to his secretary.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. summons. because the merits corporation's rather than on technicality. [3%] No. and due execution of the with Mago [Capuz summons v. defendant because cannot the court invoke ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: that under the Appropriations Act. G. in the summons and by whom may it be served?the Court of Appeals or in that summons defendant’s person in charge motion be ofbecause served defendant's upon it was him?not Explain. so the that trial courtcourt gravely abused its raising therein improper venue as an sum ground of money that amounting mandamus to P1does Million not against lie to jurisdiction over him. to doSeptember denying a legal 18. G. among affirmative voluntary appearance. Validity butof the Service. that Carlos borrowed from Tina the counterclaim c) because No. was immediately done obligorthroughresides upon in Substituted receipt Bulacan. required despite AngPingdue by tov. On October 10. representative filed of athe deceased to tosummons.000 against defendant who by A was a separate for proceedings. The latter at his defendant. (Mapa bidder v. attempt project filed to hasthe effect with been personal RTCseta court. trialto court is it be a denied necessary competent in this case. unless discretion or acted without or in excess of he makes a Carlos Corro. (Sec.was no Is the valid contention service of of alleged the that judgment it that. million. COMELEC's service It maybecannotmodernization served be effected by the person obligation ofto the defendant. Congress passed Republic Act upon aTina's defendant because the defendant actually received remedy? grant 14). Courtwith of a ordinary SUGGESTED officer course ANSWER: sufficient? Explain. Rule 14) They have been incorporated in the verified motion. he would in serving the the action it thrufor hisquo wife.5%) filed an action for its revival. He in denying the defendant’s motionalso filed a enforce contractual obligations. under duty 2002. attempt 130974. 214 SCRA 417/1992). The 7. the 151992. andofafter conducting Award. the plaintiff on Carlos? (2. dismiss appear However. The complaint alleges. which served such upon Inobligor himhis ifmotion.be The likewise in the shown action. (Sec. impleaded in the dismiss for uphold (2006) Tina Solicitor the General Guerrero contract. Pursuant corporation organized jurisdiction in denying the defendant’s under Philippine (Boticano v. 12% per Summons. Petition for by revival of the judgment contending Certiorari Cars C. shall 16. ReturntheIn defendant will this showcase personCity andas nottherein Manila. must is the brought dismiss in meritorious? a RTC in Whatthe City is theof Manila. Is Explain. (2004) Summons group was (2001) A of issued businessmen by the MM formedRTC and an actually received on time Can the defendant ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: successfully oppose association in Cebu City by callingdefendantitself The summons was not validly served on from histowife at their residence. defendant Why?filed a who (2%) motion towas special substituted declare civil Carlosfor action in for No. the resides. opposed Laguna. certiorari If under Rule 65 challenging the or I were d) the actA without sued judge.Tina's of itsa Registration Service on Act the ofwife 1996. speedy If itand was cashiershown and adequate that director. allow her toMandamus present is evidence directed ex only parte. suitable the ground ageofand discretion improper venue then residing 2001. The Office of to Summons. 8189.to be the will served properyou Special The Civil motion Actions. summons remedy Would was ineither the you consider validly served. Seven fully years paid his after loan the entry with interest of at judgment. enforce 1 Rule immediately A upon on the themotionaffirmative receipt of the defensethe of contractual SUGGESTED ANSWER: his part. filed the Regional representing SUGGESTED improper ANSWER: venue the but filed can his acquire answer Trial ChairmanCourt Go. office the Supreme SUGGESTED (5%) Court. a person complaint. Carlos obligations? failed to file(5%) an answer to the improper he thevenue.R. ALTERNATIVE examination The ANSWER: concerning defaulthisjudgmentproperty and was residence filed a motion thruto his dismiss wife. XX or I will in not Corporation grant excess (XXC). Julyfor v. filed with (OSG). System negligence (VRIS) in not Project. SCRA 600 Summons promissory note and contending that he has Cashier was substituted by treasurer. deceased. of has obligor August evidence. 148 SCRA 541 [1987]). there was to No. (COMELEC oath Sec. Court for a domestic of Appeals. the The petition complaint for had certiorari already former as stipulated in their contract of under been Rule filed.R. 303 corporation. Defendant moved to dismiss on verified motion to lift the . fortospecific motion lift the was performance not order ofwhen properly defaultthe thereto. jurisdiction defense. Was the summons validly served annum. 2001. ANSWER: failed Why? to (3%) a verified deliver T-shirts answer to the to Voter's Registration sufficiency of the service. Fotokina Yes. on X Chairman to implement the contract. Chu. directing Carlos filed or his commanding verified answer rules. Compulsory Counterclaim enable the court to acquire Yes. Rule (2006) In 1996. the Venue. genuineness Quijano-Padilla. before was (Manotoc No. the duty the of theCOMELECcourt to approved look into the the served SUGGESTED latter judgment? and anyway. but if the theofplaintiff.) (1999)]. 126947. the petition within for the mandamus is not an andsaw counterclaim substitute plaintiff forthelackand of confronted jurisdiction.majority Effects voted the did Inc. (2%) was duly bid of P6 billion and was Appeals. be served[Jao. (2. jointly and litigation. Carlosbywas theforCOMELEC served withEn mandamus Banc summons anto judgment. to Five director are not valid under the present good defense of the defendant was already ministerial days thereafter.failed bejudgment 2006. nullThe and voidmotion. remedy by Linda.

amount. In an original action before the RTC. It must be filed in the residence of either the plaintiff. A can file his complaint either in Angeles City where he resides or in Pasay City where X resides. SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1. which is in Pangasinan.Personal Actions (Sec. (Id). the counterclaim may be considered compulsory regardless of the Venue. 2 of Rule 4). (c) Yes. 13 resides.thereof. which is in San Fernando. 7 of Rule 6) (1997) X." venue Rule 44)ofHence. a resident of Pasay City. which was filed in Quezon City. as file amended hisCircular by complaint in Angeles City where he No. 2 of Rule 4) The fact that it was not raised in a motion to dismiss does not matter because the rule that if improper venue is not raised in a motion to dismiss it is deemed waived was removed from the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. where can A file his complaint c) againstSuppose X? the parties stipulated in their loan agreement that "venue for all suits arising from this contract shall be the courts in Quezon City. by: sirdondee@gmail. The motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter should be denied. is a personal action. (Sec. 4 of new (Sec. The case for a sum of money. any of the grounds for dismissal may be pleaded as an affirmative defense in the answer." a) In case hisofcomplaint non-paymentto collect of thethe loancan loan. (Sec. There is improper venue. (b) If the parties did not stipulate on the venue.com Page 38 of 66 2. borrowed P300. The counterclaim for attorney's fees and expenses of litigation is a compulsory counterclaim because it necessarily arose out of and is connected with the complaint.) . because the wording of the stipulation does not make Quezon City the exclusive venue. The new Rules provide that if no motion to dismiss has been filed. A can Rule 4. 6 of Rule 16." can A file his SUGGESTED complaintANSWER: against X in Pasay City? (a) Yes. fromA file X in Angeles City? b) Suppose the parties did not stipulate in the loan agreement as to the venue. the parties stipulated that "the parties agree to sue and be sued in the City of Manila. or of the defendant. because the stipulation in the loan agreement that "the parties agree to sue and be sued in the City of Manila" does not make Manila the "exclusive 95: Sec.000. La Union. (Sec. a resident of Angeles City.00 from A. In the loan agreement.

the Judge granted his other evidence. because there was no valid the police officers (Philbanking with an230 v. BP22. Theand in accused chartered was time asked for such an investigation. duly subscribed by him. statement the conviction happened. Blg. He because filing thethe was acquitted information. injunction prosecution charging will Victor notwith lie adduce incident. 22 shall be deemed proper? Yes. Quezon May the City Fiscal thebeexclusive compelled venueby very least. contending the thatpolice the civilofficeractionarrested is deemed AX. Jeopardy be actions. ANSWER: Discretionary Feb. the court’s order granting the motion due for inquest. last it c) paragraph]. 2. which she allegedly sustained when she to the Secretary of Justice. the because police arrested B Delia’s injuries? Why? (3%) .without he was aentitled firearm was in custodia legis. during theCommencement search of ofthe an Action.Arrests is not stated in the & Searches 22question. before arraignment. Effectis within the discretion of probable cause be denied.. the thelustcourt may receivee)it for vengeance. charged the case in twohas to be commenced Informations. houseDouble of B. Rule 111.000 to file a thereafter. the injuries police violation of B. (Sec. physical injuries. wasTwo notdays entitled after the to As a general criminal rule. a) Can the gun search When omission necessary from whichforthe the orderly used by B in shooting A. 7 to of thereof.. 254Action SCRA deemed included and 307 [1996] (Secs.)included the and timely objection commencement of a criminal action? by Delia. the prosecutor filed the for reconsideration reconsideration correct? is correct. the ground(Go of of vs. Victor Thefor personal remedy is aninjuries appeal to evidence exceed 4 years applied and 2 only months. Here.com Page 39 40 ofof6666hewithout filed his a a) To If the afford judgment adequate ofprotection acquittal toin thethe warrant demurrerofto arrest evidence and without searched leavehis of house court. of receive When double in evidence over the jeopardy objectionis admitted (2004) in evidence? b) Is the arrest of B ALTERNATIVE clearly ANSWER: d) Where the charges SPO1 CNC filed with the MTC can in Quezon by Delia. Soon the crime has in fact just been committed AX courtswindled that he RY in the amount is reserving his rightof P10. widow of A. Drug Revised Act”. which was seized civil liability mayjustice arise or administration does toofnot avoid oppression exist. is notThe admissible Judge of the in evidence. the issuance a writ of Inc. City Prosecutor of Manila reconsidered its order and ruled that a complaint for (c) RGRYes.apparent. cases cited (Art. The court arrested following grounds: a) theto demurrer warrant adduce (See Sec. a quarrel (Sec. (b) firearm writ Was Explain. as required by arrested giving rise hasto committed the slight physical it. ANSWER: ALTERNATIVE reinvestigation. second of the case par. moved to quash Demurrer the information to Evidence by information. he is entitled to a preliminary The City police because officers the usemoved of the to dismiss word the "shall" information? Explain. legal? c) Under the circumstances. constitutional criminal case rights finds ofthat the the accused. to theUnder criminal Sec. court? 83 controverting evidence on the civil denied No. v. withcourt the has RGR. alleged of theoffenseas required crime has not charged. the denial (2%) valid? of replevin. application SCRA 413. cities. injunction to restrain over proper the Arrest. and of the motion tofor another quash the illegal on (2003) In an the actiongroundforthat the prosecutor violation of Batas attempted homicide The accused possession of filed firearms. Procedure). controverting and upon complaint evidence on of the to restrain SUGGESTED a criminal ANSWER: prosecution hit-and-run driving in connection with except: civil liability. Warrantless Pambansa penalty Blg. of Batas (Note: The the court (1999) Will receive inlieevidence. 192 SCRAaction against 183 [1990]. Rule as on No. said Rule.) by a car Injunction driven by Victor. the court or may multiplicity Actions. conduct filed The awarrantless without preliminary leave of investigation arrest is not before court. Saturnino manifested to the Procedure in criminal cases. sec. 4 Rule aspect 1. Warrantless Arrests & Seizures requisite information with the MM RTC.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. CA. Resolve the Motion for compelled by mandamus to file the case in He is not entitled dismiss proper? 6% Reconsideration. A double because Court jeopardy the of Appeals.noInsuch duepersonal time. May the criminal action investigation is not for violation required. The motion public and prosecutor mayissued not the be He can move for a CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Rule 112).an information action for recovery on the suffered Pambansafrom Big.copy(2%) SUGGESTED of a judgment of acquittal in a ANSWER: (b) hostess 111). Procedure] action separately shall be allowed. one only for However. arrest requires that (2004) arraignment. Art. 112. Civil of Appeals. Revised Rules of Criminal the accused Actions. byjust the he. Rulebefore 113). Pasay 5 (b) of The investigation the check. a certified (1997) A was killed bycivil corresponding B during action. 119657. case.in Torres. in the If his Complaint parties stipulated that the been Rules however. Summarythe grant amended. CR- replevin. 1997) Power of that Fiscalhe was a alleged (c) No. Rule not correct because a preliminary was struck Actions. 7. slight seized physical from himinjuries a sachet is of proper shabubecause and an of the information and the accused at no information correct? Reason (5%) and that no reservation to file such civil in Metropolitan unlicensed Manila firearm. Why? The (5%) Rules motion. On issued an order declaring that the case to a lawful arrest of a person under Sec.act b) (Sec. separate civil action. Jr.a22. of the motion to liability.) Moreover. the After motion rely 138). The court allowed On the strength of of the case for the reason that it was not knowledge Sometime later. violation of the “Dangerous (Sec. for No. evidence because in such primathefacie civil actual resident SUGGESTED ANSWER: of Cebu City) with the action case the for damages which may accused and a motion to quash on that offense of slight against be (a) No. the Fiscal Yes. 2 and 3[2]. III of Constitution). the City the Prosecutor crime has filed not just withbeen the in mid-2004. Arrest. SUGGESTED ANSWER: (6%) to a preliminary court because the determination of (a) The Motionbecause investigation for Reconsideration the penaltyshould for Acquittal. evidence applied only too the SCRA 297). and without Alex filed a motion for reconsideration securing a committed same MeTC-QC since a period of two days had an information for warrant. committed. before knowledge because arraignment. After the (Sec. only a preponderance of the house of B without inflicted on SPS (an actual resident of a search of the (See evidence. warrant. was112. authority A cannot filetohiscarry complaint said in firearm. B be If the judgment are manifestly false of andacquittal is based on City (MeTC-QC) a sworn written statement convicted of homicide? reasonable motivated by doubt. on testimonial or due hearing. value of Complaint for estafa against B. charging RGR (an in Where there is clearly no case. A warrantless Rule 126. Was the dismissal of the Arrest. Enrile. of facts basedthatonthe theperson same to factsbe the Saturninosworn statement to file a civil action givenseparately by RY commenced by information. of Court. BP22. 1(b). Tensuan. SUGGESTED mandamus (a) Wasthe (Hoechst ANSWER: the Philippines to seizure file theinstead ofcasethe vs. Thein accused a nightclub. was requiredIsThethecrime warrantless by the was court allegedly arrest to pay (1999) A filed with the Office of the Fiscal aa military venue informer "shall be inwhothe had courtsbeen in issued Quezon committed of theAX valid?complainant private one Is heyearentitled beforeto a the the preliminary face arrest. the operatives Was the dismissal arrested grant of of the the the complaint accusedmotionand to for conducted either before or after the filing quash the attempted homicide to include the corresponding civil action. injuries 5. Yes. 1(b)over a of Rule true Explain. The gun physical seized during injuries theallegedly search instituted requires ground has been denied. estafa is the Thesum ground that the does of P10. ALTERNATIVE Actions. (2001) Saturnino filed a criminal which the case was raffled thereupon Brocka v. Civil Code). (Sec. Court warrant Quezon City).000 demurrernot (2002) Delia sued the prosecutor. Roberts. want the of authority court granted to the file ground of double jeopardy was not of the firearm in another court against the information accused’s SUGGESTED demurrer ANSWER: because of his failure to evidence which he to correct.and court 206 SCRA may after SUGGESTED ANSWER: and Is the other court’s documentary order granting evidence.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. the search was not an incident Alex for the latter’s bouncing check. (5%) Reconsideration regarding the order to dismissed thetheComplaint forthelack of criminal complaint on ground that subject pay the aspect investigation face becauseof the value ofhecase. [Sec. [Rule 111. Rule personally and proceeded to SPO1 to hearJuanthe Ramoscriminalsometime case. written City". he was moved The not to gun present is not quash theindispensable when the incident information onin estafa Saturnino supported by RY"s sworn could not file a separate action. homicide and the policethe against arresting same Forthwith included inthe the police officer criminal filedThe case. 11. in29. branch to Actions. complaint for slight physical provide that the criminal action for No preliminary investigation was (2003) In a buy-bust SUGGESTED ANSWER: operation. already attempted lapsed.P. Preliminary after the hearing Investigation the shall be governed by the Rule on Summary (b) 12 ofNo. accusedthe filedfiling a Motion of the of preliminary investigation. 113). date the Warrantlessof Arrest. Although valid he prosecution Unimasters forofslight Conglomeration. thewas and notb)lawfully check at the on the makes merit. the Judge ordered the dismissal and the police arresting has personal sometime in mid-2003. 23 ofaRule or without 119). vs.

a capital (1999) In what forms may bail be given? When is bail a matter of right and when it did not show (1) that defendant was offense. SUGGESTED ANSWER: evidence municipalin trial his defense courts.a After upon showingpreliminary investigation. or hasapplicable to him. X When is bail a matter of right and when filed a demurrer to bail is needed the Court to secure of Appeals his appearance. as[2%] thethat killersa (a) Yes. ANSWER: The foregoing facts. refuse (Articles Airlines. 12 and 13 of Rule 126) A [1%] search warrant 1. of Should for breach or recognizance. 6. witness and Finally. Version 1997-2006 was inby custodia Dondee legis . (People v. or has violated the Solicitor General. cannot 129 be the RTC of an offense not punishable by Demurrer SCRA 95onto Evidence. (3%) deemed waived when he pleaded not D may apply among others. evidence of the perpetua 266 Upon refusal to post bail.ofitAppeals.) The benefit will Procedure. have the discretion to acquitting A on the ground that the SUGGESTED ANSWER: deny theBail demurrer A's satisfied. accused. the court shall SCRA 607 had the himdiscretion to until do so. The court mayCourtrequireofa Appeals. death. arrested. the law violated. is it a matterAfterof arraignment. of Criminal 4.) Discretion Bail. order the witness to post bail in (Sec. sec.who 1985did Rulesnot of Criminal appeal. The court had no right. vs. After 17). Court uponof Appeals? motion of [3%] either of a valid arrest in a buy-bust operation. deny Proof such presentation before conviction by couldthe itRTC determine of an defendant's that Bail. PAL. plaintiff’s evidence is insufficient because (2002) D was (2006) charged with murder. can be was notice charged to the accused.of (People thereclusion v. The When bailmotionis to a recover matterthe of firearm he could ANSWER: SUGGESTED be convicted of the capital Upon shouldconviction discretion: be filed in by the RTC courtofwhere an offensethe In criminal offense. 1170to Inc. Bail. Ifpersons All the seizure the answer circumstances in to theof mentioned custody the firearm preceding shall above? (a) question (2%) before or material 2 Canwitness B andwill C be not benefited testify when right: by the valid because it was seized in the course of the victim. arraignment. Court Phil. by thewith (2004) AX.) written ANSWER: statement charging a perpetua or life imprisonment. Objection If the penalty bail because offended party.. 2000 Rules petition for bail. (Obosa procedure. Warrantless application of theArrests. case is deposit on the ground conviction by that only on the the inferior basis(b) courts. was (5%) isthe proximate entitled as a cause matter of offense not evidence punishable of D’sbyguilt was death. Rule 114. may. while on probation. thereof subject common carrier for breach of is available. with sufficient is legally discharged after his testimony Rule 114. to is bail. 3. 4. ANSWER: Abeto v. the Matter defendant of demurrer Right was to negligent evidence? and that whether the such (1999) When Reason negligence the accused briefly. the judge may use in fixing a reasonable serving his SUGGESTED sentence but C escaped and is ANSWER: prosecution manifested that it was not amount of bail is the probability of the Yes. (2%) guilt is strong for purposes of bail . Is the ruling the of Civil collision rightCode. (Sec. denied A's application for bail. applicationuponforproof bail When is a tomatter evidence ofunderwas the evidence pointed to theproper? or NPAoath. fatal head previously void because escaped he was from illegally legal confinement.he was bailwalking shall be in adenied busy of murder is not enforcement of strong. sworn ALTERNATIVE SCRA 281. Id. by the can X adduce metropolitan and decision ofitthe required. of Discretion post applied bailforif he bailis buta material was denied. 11 [a]. against the about a warrantless arrest after trial is or if no judge. is a Aboitiz matter v. offense. and C did (2%)not. denial be admitted motion to bail to dismiss Complaint was convictedvs. is after in conviction the affirmative. the common carrier filed a pendency of the appeal. One of the guidelines that the the decision bail? Explainbut your B answer. since he X as for a Murder? matter (2%) of was not proper. SUGGESTED ANSWER: street. offense. Forms of Bail 199. Matter another of Rightcrime. Id. (Sec. 2000 Rules of Criminal to Baildetermine whether Upon is discretionary: the evidence conviction of D’sby SCRA171 SUGGESTED U 968]. the conditionsManila charging D with homicide and the counsel strong impact of the collision between he SUGGESTED ANSWER: of forhis the bailPeople withoutofvalid the justification. not (Mendoza may required. that he22 (Sec. (Sec. Did by denied SUGGESTED the thecourt ANSWER: court. Matterappearing of Right vs. (Sec.ofCourt right. [1997]). B and C were by the prosecution but after hearing the court can do is to increase the amount of convicted (1999) May the Courtof Homicide. 2. died instantly on also apply to on C account even ifofhis the appeal is 2 On appeal. the Court of Appeals properly 3. The Rules the court. filed in quasi-re- the writing Appeals charging a which Contract person is with favorable an offenseand cidivist Demurrer subscribed to Evidence.ground that Batangas there correct? when theWhy? (3%) of guilt is not strong evidence present as much evidence as is necessary Transportation exists a high degreeCo.after andthe (b)denial before of party. or under conditionalExplain. 266 is a not criminal punishable by death.convicting him. a Makati-bound paying passenger of committed guilty. B started scheduled hearing on the merits. the accused may the accused. (Sec. Matter of 1. ofv. The court the sole punishable basis by death. On or habitual delinquent. he Rule 2. A is subscribed entitled by to the Arrest. PBU. as amended by Circular on recognizance is taken. him bail 836 on the [1952]. Rule 119) No. City in TY’s where he was action arrested. T is too late to complain his case indicate the probability of flight ifRTC-Quezon heir of AX.for werebail dulyin the RTC-Manila established on pardon. any he peace was officer convicted or other of (2000) FGimprisonment of was arrestedexceeds withoutsixa years warrantbut notby homicide peace and officer hence the charged evidence with of guilt the policemen more than while 20 years. Procedure).2-92. of Information homicide only.with by the prosecution. Cabiles. If wounds (2002) he sustained If an information was as filed a result in theofRTC. 5. Witnesspolicemen Posting Bail A. The trial court ordered the negligent No. No. canofthe thecourt legally convict commit to prison he Although complies or A or (b) life Theimprisonment. was (1999) resting its case. he pleaded not Rule 122. require aAwitness appealed from to post court granted bail to X.com Page 42 41 of 66 or not.probability Caguimbal. of thethe cash collision.reclusion perpetua or life denied the ground that there exists a (1998) Facing a charge of Murder.in the sole 4 That the circumstances of the accused or the question. of Appeal Criminal Procedure). w/o Leave of Court [1984]). parole. Rule 114. 114. municipal 5 [1999]) That there is undue risk that during thecontract 114. will abscond or escape? Explain. happened in what Any objection to the illegality of the arrest 3 would Thatrefute the accused committed the offensewhilecourt the or bus courts wasmay still hetravelling apply on for EDSAbail? of theyou accused said claim? without a(5%)warrant is towards SUGGESTED Makati.) circumstance court rendered of judgment reiteration. high degree of probability that the imprisonment (Sec. and by the prosecutor of Carriage filed RTC. the v. reclusion imprisonment.110. Rules (1999) Distinguish was charged a with Complaint a capital from Information. dismissed the bus Application. of carriage. SUGGESTED ANSWER: prosecution Bail is a matter to present of right its (a) evidence before orin full after was demurrer or the through proximate to a evidence property causebecause bond. reclusion action is pending. prosecution. Yes. demurrer (Ruleto evidence. Philippines. discretion? (5%) he applied for (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: bail. 8). vs. sec. In the accused trial.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. contending that Bail commit Bail.or municipal circuit trial judge TY had rested judgment of conviction rendered against trial his judge case. That FG theclaimsaccused that the found tois haveboard is judgment Bail. 115 SCRA Procedure). or commenced and completed and a any metropolitan trial judge. how bus was and arrested a dump truck that in Quezon City. Courta ofcomplaint Appeals. with ofrape and the following theor while benefited an information by the decision is an of accusation the Court ofin 1 That the corresponding other similar accused is awas information circumstances: recidivist. authority or beof released Court. rendered a decision evidence is it a matter without leave of court of discretion? (2%) but it was The 1 rulesWas provide the that Court when of the Appeal's court is denial of 1. 284 SCRA therein.) to issue the writ of replevin (2%) appeal as prescribed whether the by firearm law Updated or Rule 114.Phil. with released on bail. X filed a Bail. On the first the bail. the prosecution is only required to and 90 grant 2201. was not necessary. on Under person Circular with an No. Salazar. guilty at the arraignment without raising where the evidence-in-chief information by the was filed plaintiff or TY. his Without demurrer conviction by further to evidence? the RTC proceeding of an offenseand not on such sum as may be deemed proper. witness toA adducing additional Bail. What the Murder. SUGGESTED ANSWER: strong forperpetuapurposesoroflife bail. 12-94. (Sec.. the evaded you were sentence. B.inMatterevidence and that it at large. becauseVenue of his escape. 4.(Rule 489 If bail[1982]. The petition was opposed (1998)an information charging them of In accused will abscond or escape. Trial the on the crimemerits aggravated ensued. the of court contract grant of or carriage. on sureties. Bail The may court be andgiven (2) by should that not such defendant's grant a corporate negligence surety. a public utility bus.

Court Rule of 119. can it later be refilled? evidence. w/o Leave of Court Information on the ground that with (2004) The information for illegal possession of private complainant’s desistance. ALTERNATIVE beyond the before ANSWER: reasonable accused doubt. the court or permit to possess the caliber . Failure accused. 23 of v. the accused in a theft case. the effect of filing it without leave while isthe to Yes. People v. of the offense charged beyond reasonable for the the offended trial party toinquire court should give heras consent to why doubt and accordingly imposing on him the thereto. the private complainant case. 8filed of Rule the117).) dismissal had already waive the presentation of the evidence become for valid.com Page 43 of 66 The trial a) Was the evidence presented provisionalby the dismissal prosecution of the at court denied the demurrer to evidence and the hearing case proper? for b) Resolve bail was thenot Motion strong. demurrer without penalty prescribed therefor. which is fatal to the (2001) Carlos. in sum contending that the the 1. 7 of Rule 117). the prescriptive the accused. The court denied the demurrer to (2003) a criminal case is dismissed on When evidence and Carlos moved to present his nolle prosequi. primawas facie no evidence of the double jeopardy 269 SCRAevidence. SUGGESTED evidence for the defense. Fores. to deemed the accused as having waived his without any Quash. motion and provisionally dismissed the the prosecution established the fact that case. theThere prescribed. Court of for the same Appeals. Is the judgment (b) leave Theandmotion whether to quash the information his lawyer knew that SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the trial court valid and proper? Reason. 23 of prosecutor filed a Motion to Quash the Demurrer Rule to Evidence. (Sec. of the evidence because the for the prosecution? demurrer to the [1994]). when a criminal case is motion to present evidence and instead dismissed on nolle prosequi before the judgment on the basis of the evidence for accused is placed on trial and before he is the prosecution. he did firearm filed against the accused not have evidence sufficient to convict the specifically alleged that he had no license accused. The accused did not ask for leave to permanent. Dismissal. Unit of the Philippine National Police that the accused has a permit to own or Demurrer to Evidence. The public Procedure) evidence for the prosecution. the accused (Sec. Flores. 278 SCRA 782 [1997]. On 02 January 2001. 237 SCRA(Galvez 685 SUGGESTED ANSWER: basis Yes. Provisional Dismissal (2003) Before the arraignment for the crime of The Rules provide that when the demurrer to evidence is filed without murder. However. SUGGESTED ANSWER: evidence. filed a conviction of the to Dismissal. present 62 [1997]. He is 3. Why? (5%) evidence was filed without leave of court. (Sec. case for judgment on the basis of the was proper because the accused 2. Rule offended rendered judgment finding the accused guilty party was of 119. Because he filed the demurrer gave histo prosecution evidence. promised for the execution of the Affidavit The prosecution on such evidence rested of Desistance. w/o Leave of Court possess the firearm. The offended party was notified of accused. case Revised Rules of for judgment on Criminal the basis of the who killed her husband. Court Prosecute demurrer to evidence without leave of of Appeals &People. that the the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable provisional dismissal because although of bythe theUpdated Version 1997-2006 case had Dondee doubt and so prayed that he be acquitted already become permanent. ThefiledCourt a Motion had theto Quash the discretion to prosecution evidence has not established Information on the ground deny the demurrer to the evidence. CriminalIt Procedure. No. the court express consent thereto and the the evidence without leave. of guilt is not strong and (Sec. offense. had pleaded to the the judgment is not proper or is erroneous If the evidence charge. without murder charge because the accused failed consent. because there was no showing from the beyond reasonable doubt then the court proper office like the Firearms Explosive cannot legally convict X for murder. . while the pistol was urged the public prosecutor to refile the the dismissal but she refused to give her tucked at his waist in plain view. should be denied because. Yes. the filing Withoutmurderany evidence charge fromhad the not deemed to have waived his right to accused. (People period for vs. this is not equivalent to preventing Carlos from presenting his an acquittal and does not bar a subsequent evidence and rendering judgment on the prosecution v. Was the court correct in called on to plead. the accused being able to present any to pay the consideration which he had license or permit to possess the firearm. In due time. Rules notified. In its evidence-in-chief. The accused gave his express the subject firearm was lawfully seized by consent to the provisional dismissal of the the police from the possession of the Subsequently. (6%) of the offense charged. 269 SCRA file the demurrer to evidence. accused Yes. The judgment of the trial court is (5%) provisional 62.45 pistol without further proceedings granted the mentioned therein. prosecution because thehas been first converted case to proof was dismissed Appeals. (Mallari v.) was not necessary However.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. Bernardo (Sec. the accused filed a demurrer to against the accused on 01 February 2003.265 SCRA 456[1996]). court. The public prosecutor its case and within a period of five days obliged and refiled the murder charge therefrom. it ANSWER: right to present evidence and submitted the (a) couldThebeprovisional sufficient for dismissal of the case conviction. that is. 15. the accused waives the an Affidavit of Desistance stating that she right to present evidence and submits the was not sure if the accused was the man 119. The court denied Carlos’ (4%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: As a general rule. the private complainant executed leave of court.

would on the arrest and (Government of thebail United are States not of basically America sec. III. Athe opposes few minutes later. I would make a stipulation ofthe complainant’s Information. Petitioner Provincial Prosecutor with the Secretary prays that Juan physical injuries unlicensed firearms butin with an the added Information (2002) A. it an urgent Secretary of motion. D and E were charged with be extradited of Justice who. issue (6%) a warranta) Wasof SUGGESTED offended ANSWER: party and the court states its prayers? (5%) motion (2005) For the The to ground quash multiple for the themotion stab Information. the not waived if not raised in a motion to proper criminal court of State XX in The information in the RTC. a amending motion toB.45 caliber ofgranted hisand-adutieson. injuries guilty a fine theplea. information Resolve the toa information.com Page45 sirdondee@gmail. him to a had motion done into unlicensed thequash firearms: should performance a . 7[a] of Rule 117). offense petition for comply with extradition. 140 SCRA 425 (1985)]. ofinformation notNoel less was thanforconvicted P15. (4%) Explain. this ground is an party.00. 14). trial opposition that of the Provincial however. Court of Appeals. thesuppose . jurisdiction SCRA [GalvezWhen 685v. At the of (1998) 1 prosecutorGive two received(2) grounds a copy to quash of the an opposed the motion claiming that the unlawful entry in pre-trial. Before Before the Provincialthe RTC Prosecutorcould act on couldthe inspectors. to post A.assaultof the Motion based intereston to ofQuash of the the same offended facts for homicide against (Sec. (Sec. Dacuycuy. to this (1) and (2} Art. Double Jeopardy. Motion totheQuash.isyou was charged (Rule charged 110. Bail prosecution. homicide Extradition not of Here. Justice.that the (4%) caliber granted. victim the. as to matters of form. case for filedtaxa protection direct Information. 117. Secondly. Dionaldo A can in bethe former complaint convicted only of reconsidered its order areand directed for DBC. moved the to groundUnder amend of ofdouble the information jeopardy because to warrant for withdraw the Information. ofBChismoves the trial counsel.Jeopardy. 129) No. (Sec. Rule RTC. Yes. if any. made? Why? the court did not acquire (5%) Extradition Treaty.000. the directive Juan filedofbefore the information gun the is punishable prosecution. The amendment is physical injuries against motion Amando. Before they authorities reversing Resolution of State XX thefor trial. case.000. Provincial former or may (b) bethe done facts only dismissed Prosecutor the case.onWhat the constituting us. 284 alleging leave of court with notice motion. Amendment. gun Canwere is the punishable prosecution byre-fileprision the Quash against him on his motion (hence Juan be the application ofWarrant allowed the to post of bail Secretary Arrest ofinJustice the and fortoa event correctional information in its although maximum consent) this period and histime and a for Withdraw thearrest Information. possession B. provided notice is givenCharges to file thea Should the court grant deny Juan's counsel Double of the accused.14 The prosecutor of Rule 110. He pleaded itnot guilty (a) No. BC found out that the on the part Criminal Procedureof the . there aThe b) If legal you provisions basis wereforinthe thecounsel the Rules to court fordeny of the Court reasons ground by the that more for orthan victim. the beprosecution to preventProsecutor Provincial Juan's flight andindirecting the interim. there is a legal basis for the court an unlicensed that B. admission of the amended information would abode facts with hasthetoprosecution be specified whichinwould the (a) Can 2 SUGGESTED If the the ANSWER:publicInformation prosecutor move is for not placeThe him inamended double jeopardy. its maximum murder in Because period substitution of and his of against of arrest Joseand to forwithdraw slight physical the information. Prosecutor Amendmenthad no authority to accused convictedshall not be a bar to another of parricide? injuries sign andinfile the MTC. During trial. accused neither has the the Prosecutor nature had offense the no authority could be file the validly (2004) RP and State XX have a subsisting In of ordercame.alleging 462 (Crespo thatv. homicide. The signing it lacked prosecution the then same act or omission constituting the after plea. Court prosecution of offenses237 Appeals.com sirdondee@gmail. (4%) of moving homicide Information. butthe Mogul. frustrated the information.that Juan Bail Kwan is the subject of SCRA 173 [1999]). information the set the case continuation against him be ofdismissed the hearing on on the marriage is not a supervening when: (a) the graver offense developed fact arising manifested his willingness to admit from another that ground date. account of of his stabbefore wounds.2000 objection Rules of accused Double should have been charged with but before Jeopardypre-trial. prosecutor As presented provided ininthe second evidence prosecutor is not correct because the Provincial Prosecutor. slight physical SUGGESTED ANSWER: Provincial Information. homicideofbecause frustrated It is the no alleging The courtthe actsbound is not constituting by the the offense Resolution homicide MTC thatand double has meted jeopardy exclusive hasthe as corresponding and original yet attached.granting grounds the should Noeloffense one same. in the 3[f].charge. homicide (Sec. and Juan of thecannotSecretary beorallowed of Justice. Rules Court). necessarily includes the offense charged homicide. Upgrading. wounds to sustained quash What is motion? arrest. 14 of Rule 110. Upon2000 you pursue? 389 SCRA 623 [2002]) applicable. committed after Jose’s unlawful entry in victim's death.32 was The Public Prosecutor filed and aandMotion to because the two dismissals of the case warrant Under the beExtradition set for hearing Treaty (2) Law. Blg. as a balikbayan. punishable learned of the by [1987]). amend Events the information (1997) would surrender the information correctly prepared by the accused and apply to A was accused upgrade the of homicide charge from for the killing frustrated Information. After arraignment paragraph the marriage of certificate Sec. (Sec. what remedies. then Revisedfiled Rules an of After the requisiteduly (2003)arrest warrant issued by the proceedings. 2. Yes. Was theI R. chargeSuppose preliminary A with instead the crime offrom investigation frustrated parricide? has for been the ALTERNATIVE (2000) ANSWER: BC is 110. ANSWER: argument Before the to to next refute date the frustrated graver homicide offense. the Noel No. Grounds for bail because SUGGESTED prosecution? ANSWER: the offense is merely Why? (5%) homicide to consummated homicide. Information thevoid?accused [3%] the in The information prepared by the firearms under an Information signed by a double public jeopardy.00. on the by ground instead prision that of filingmayor its a filing in motion its ALTERNATIVE [Draculan ANSWER: v. Before he entered his plea and from had presented During upon the the advice its evidence. physical the injuries. who After has the such prosecution authority. substantial the SCRA 108 because graver 736). Rules of Criminal he Procedure) entered a Likewise. Motion considered to Quash (Sec. Rulewithout 117. take so that SUGGESTED ANSWER: the amended information (b) No. does Isof the not the placeinformation. evasion party alleged (2005) Rodolfo andisinto charged prevent the informationpossible abuse with possession for by the slight of Petition for Review of the Resolution to and fraud before his return of RPthe Information.P Supervening .the OnInformation the date scheduled having committed the offense of serious is defective for due tothe act constituting supervening facts arising the charge from the of hearing. and over the subject matter of the offense prosecution should file a Acceding motion to ask for forthe accusation Extradition against him. On the D an charged of moved facts to quash unlicensed above is necessarily stated. Puruganan. MM 1.[2%] marriage certificate of A and B. the conviction defense. Information The court before nature plea of the was entered offense. 1987 charged. of P30. charged Revised Ruleswith illegal possession of of Criminal homicide amendment conducted.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. it fine SUGGESTED murder? a speedy of not ANSWER: Explain less trial was(3%) than not violated. How D’s amend. theIf I complainant’s were the counselabode. Neither the no jurisdiction over courtthe nor second the prosecution offense of . couldof Abe the qualified (2002) D was trespass charged towith dwelling. Hence. filed an amended information for serious on The motion of D. to the propera issued allegation filed in the thatRTC. D inflicted It was allegedthe injuries therein out homicide in one information.his immediate arrest be as caliber. the in sum court praying issued(1) a had minimum to placed him period in and double a fine jeopardy.not imprisonment it filed exceedingwithin six fifteen years. the amendedD moved information that the Prosecutor? court nor the constitutional prosecution rights of duewas processaware and thatto information. Information. the (Secs. election 8294. with a criminaltimely however. (15) days (Sec. was The made. would Amando against argueIf that youwhich since counsel the Provincial downgrades the or information.it was penalty.P15. court would the motion.theYes. for the accused. Pursuant thereto RP's which last (5%)order downgrades be set asidethe on thenature ground of thatthe the be victim informed had of died the two nature days and earlier the cause on jurisdiction over the person of the accused Secretary of Justice (SOJ) filed a Petition offense could beof the the reinstatement validlycase made. attaching with his express right to the courtofwould warrant issue need an not arrest setto for bewarrant.plea of guilty the SUGGESTED ANSWER: to said RTC hascrime.32had caliber died two prosecution gun. new rule is for the Provincial Prosecutor filed an Information quash and could be raised at the pretrial.000. motion tomoved quash to should withdraw be denied the that warrant SoJ'sof SUGGESTED ANSWER: application arrest against X. aggravating The a non-capital circumstance offense. therefrom 7691. 32 chairman the Republicboard ActofNo. Donato.for an arrest should while information D’s motion possession altogether to quash of an and its bemotion unlicensed resolved? . to Iarraignment. and in delivered due time. of without 151anymore Secretary SCRA of Justice. thatcourt the he in thehomicide former complaintto parricide.A.comPage Page 4644 ofof66 of6666 possession was awareof Information a.public of B. b. the court again dismissed the to the offended Information. 8 of Rule as aggravating. when parricide the which plea is to a present what SUGGESTED his isof yourevidence. The latter. it cannot the amendment accompanied by of a the information certification that to Procedure) motion (b) with consummated reasons. The forInformation cannotwhich be (2001) Amando wasthecharged information withas frustrated was the prosecution amended to change an the offense offense charged and went City Prosecutor to trial. RTC 14 him twice in jeopardy. or Firstly. be otherwise.45 second caliber the motion included intothe amend?second Why? (2%) charged. Amendment. homicide. As the Resolution hearing. because the officer prosecutor failed to appear. invoke? with in accused. andofthat resolution the of resentment that Rodolfo SUGGESTED ANSWER: wasfor what the complainant in possession of two could D’s be arraigned. charging D with Criminal Procedure). 7. arraignment. had placed the Constitution).over theall (1994)].00. Rule 117. pre-trial. connection X. exclude the E therefrom. (Cudia v. show that no offense was committed. first offense Can the court grant issued. amendments whereupon authority tothe docourt. you intend Original The bail court denied if theReason.days canpunishable earlier the re-file by on (2001) Thedeny to prosecution the motion filed to quash an the information warrant account prision correctional of his stab information for in wounds. so. v. 8. charge became it will only change the ground prosecutor of estoppel arrivedas steps or action should the prosecution BC and did opposed not move the to known or were discovered afterthea dismissal quash of the the case.

purposes. The court can never lose jurisdiction h) That the accused has been so long as its decision has not yet been previously convicted or in jeopardy of fully implemented and satisfied. Rule (Sec. court denied the motion on the ground that it f) That the criminal action or had lost jurisdiction over the case after its liability has been extinguished. the RTC.Complex Crimes she asks you how her uncle ZZ can be (2003) In complex crimes. his counsel should attend to the trial of another criminal case file: (a) a petition for habeas corpus for against him in Tarlac. Jurisdiction. On expeditious release of Mariano from the said date. and Garcia. Prosecution of Offenses served upon the accused or counsel. an orphan. b) G. What remedy/remedies should the Judgment. Rules does not Procedure. (2%). the Judgment Version in the Updated by Dondee 1997-2006 . She tells you that (b) No. Procedure. 8353. his failure to grandparents. offense 117. Promulgation of Judgment counsel of Mariano take to secure his (1997) X. Rules (Sec. The court retains Procedure. No. Rule 112. Victoria and meted the penalty of reclusion c) That the incompetent officer who or incapable to filed doing theso perpetua. promulgation shall be made by recording 1950) despite the finality of the judgment. Feeling very much aggrieved. in any event. is not an indispensable part of necessary appropriate for these 1999) the information. ANSWER: excuse or justification. XX the trial court having jurisdiction to SUGGESTED ANSWER: asks you if she can initiate the impose the maximum and most serious 1.com Page 47 of 66 criminal docket and a copy thereof Parties. (2000) Your friend YY. Dagupan Cay. 160 SCRA 302 16 b)years That of age. how is the made to answer for his crime. or acquitted of the a judgment cannot operate to divest a Rule charged. Tarlac. Rules of Criminal to that extent. Finality of being convicted. he had to attend to another criminal case their son. SUGGESTED ANSWER: In a complex crime. to nullify the execution of judgment in the absence of the accused? his sentence or the order of his (b) Can the trial court also order the commitment on the ground that a arrest of X? SUGGESTED ANSWER: (a) In the absence of the accused. L-3580. if true. Would your penalty imposable on an offense forming Information are: a) That the facts [1988]).of Criminal court of its jurisdiction.) SUGGESTED ANSWER: an interest in seeing the proper execution 2. Secretary of Justice. by (3%)your b) Suppose the crime committed against YY mutual friend XX.would court for his release from the penitentiary on e) advise That XX to more than the initiate one complaint offense is his claim that under Republic Act No. except in those cases in criminal action against him for rape. and in Sec. 4. But this time. that when she told her acquittal and. of an orphan an offense. 13205. minority. against him.. they told her to just keep appear was with justifiable cause since quiet and not to file charges against ZZ. That itPersons 110. a) What jurisdiction of a court determined? 4% uncle would ZZ advice your is rape. or (b) a motion in the court which (a) X toHow shall the postpone thepromulgation. her uncle. jurisdiction over the YY was by her prevailed upon by her whole complex crime must be lodged with grandparents not to file charges.R.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail.) vs. the trial court cannot order the ZZ. charged or the because person ofshe is not the accused. Mariano filed a motion in said Rapesubstantially Law of 1997 to the(RAprescribed 8353). People. and No. decision had become final and executory. 3. SUGGESTEDTwoANSWER:grounds to quash an complaint against ZZ. would constitute a legal SUGGESTED Explain. as well as which existing laws prescribe a single the penalty imposed on him. 6. 255 SCRA(People 85. X was not present as he had to National Penitentiary. (Cuyos v. March 22. was personally SUGGESTED ANSWER: notified of the promulgation of judgment To secure the proper and most in his case set for 10 December 1996. Mariano and Victoria d)5. While serving sentence at the (b) information upon rapehad grounds Since is no other now authority than her to do asso. the minor. the supervening development had occurred (Melo v. No. may issue such orders No. Lapura. third par. (Sec. the punishment for various offenses. subjected her to acts of arrest of X if the judgment is one of lasciviousness. classified a National Penitentiary. Iform. The trial the illegal confinement of Mariano (Rule court denied the motion of the counsel of 102). (Echegaray v. However. (7%) g) That it contains averments a) Is the filing of the court correct? which. the accused in a homicide case before proper and most expeditious release from the National Penitentiary? Explain. be?witnessed Explain. 16 years old.R. Rule 120) seeks your legal advice. the to file trying court the complaint the case Jurisdiction. his marriage to Victoria extinguished the charged against ZZ. (a) answer I would charged be the same? do advise not constitute Explain. and January 19. G. Finality of a Judgment herself independently has no jurisdiction over the of offense her (2005) Mariano was convicted by the RTC for raping grandparents. court promulgate the convicted him. The certification which is provided and implementation of its judgments.) of Criminal conform Crime Against under the Anti- were married. part of the complex crime.

(Sec. briefly SUGGESTED ANSWER: discuss your grounds in support of your As the prosecutor.000. Upon being arraigned.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) depositing the amounts in his (CX’s) personal bank account. As the prosecutor in the criminal case.00 is not necessarily included in theft of an article worth Prejudicial P15. because a plea of guilty to a lesser change his plea? Why? (2%) offense may be allowed if the lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged. Rule Plea of Guilty.00. by . he asked the court to allow him to change his plea of not guilty to a plea of guilt but only to estafa involving SUGGESTED ANSWER: P5.000. Thereasons: civil case filed by CX against MM following 1 for accounting and damages does not involve an issue similar to or intimately related to the issue of estafa raised in the criminal action.000. Thereafter.00 Question (1999) What is a prejudicial question? (2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: A prejudicial question is an issue involved in a civil action which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action. to a Lesser Offense (2002) D was charged with theft of an article worth p15. before trial commenced. Estafa involving P5.000. I will argue that the opposition to the motion to suspend motion to suspend is not in order for the proceedings. Prejudicial Question (2000) CX is charged with estafa in court for failure to remit to MM sums of money collected by him (CX) for MM in payment for goods purchased from MM. (Rule 116. (Sec. 2 The resolution of the issue in the civil case for accounting will not determine whether or not the criminal action for estafa may proceed. the resolution of which determines whether or not the ANOTHER ANSWER: criminal action may proceed. 2). 5 of A prejudicial Rule 111. (5%). sec.) question is one based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime but so intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt or innocence of the accused. 5.00. CX files a motion to suspend proceedings pending resolution of a civil case earlier filed in court by CX against MM for accounting and damages involving the amounts subject of the criminal case. Can the court allow D to No. he pleaded not guilty to the offense charged.

(5%) because the court had jurisdiction to needed. his favor because be declared the judge valid.thehesearch the was (2004) AX was charged before the YY RTC with article warrant to is be not seized important. A. 4 of pre-trial property applied fortoa Bsearch and warrant that his inpurported the RTC 78). former Rule 20. when Pre-Trial Agreement estafa. which is one important the sale accusation that was against the subject him. In a criminal case. it conviction became final. 2case. The documentary 260 evidence is allowed by the SCRA 25 [1996]).) team be no found double sale Roberto that he had lost his records of the case. 391 SCRA review the decision of conviction? render judgment.[3%]2 of Rule The 118. District. would The information necessarily suspension Search Warrant. 20. (Rule 117.com Page 48 ofof6666implicated alia. 8). contending the judge 3. Hernandez. as pre-trial follows: in a criminal case is The civil judgment action for of conviction of nullification is the reviewable second included in the other. "Motion Withforthe mistake of Suspension in Rule 18). 1996). If D’s possession SUGGESTED ANSWER: Ombudsmanof ten grams of TG Prosecutor shabu. Criminal Case vs. inter . Remedies. One a criminal case and a pre-trial in a civil which A later also sold to X.v.com Page 49 sirdondee@gmail. due anprocess Information and his for right estafatowas be does not consider the possibility of a informed filed against of theA basednature on and the cause the same double of compromise. Roman. (Lauro Three distinctions between a pre-trial in A allegedly Rule 120). is determinative team arrived at of the his prosecutor moved for the postponement of guilt orofinnocence. there Instead. His lawyer Yes. of the criminal action in suspension civil action. punishable by imprisonment 2003) SUGGESTED ANSWER: The Trial. thatQR Resolve a particular forthwith thepersonmotion filed a be with motion punishable with Version 1997-2006 Updated by Dondee reasons. 5 of conducted only "where the accused and by salecertiorari and asked even thatifthe nosaleappeal made had by been A in taken. and void. 181 SCRA 487) . If not violate his an accused who right against self- was sentenced to of conviction valid?ofIsconviction the said judgment incrimination. The motion to quash issue a pre-trial order but after some should be denied. the agreement may be order? Explain. violating describing his right against material facts duly established during the the shabu in an Should self-incrimination. Civil Case judgment of conviction is substantial since (1997) Procedure. sold to B a parcel of land Santos v. motion? January (People Reason.Rule former signatures for the search in the of the first deedofof house JuansaleSantos were Provisional Dismissal forgeries. thedefense Western of AIs in the (Sec. The pre-trial in a criminal case violating Thereafter.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. Rule 118." After trial. However. The elements of (1999) case.such was grossly and blatantly erroneous. mayor under the Revised Penal Code. A filed avoid. QR as defense with It is sufficient not even theft of jewelry valued at P20. served.of1 the aspect of former Rulein20. 4)." alleging that it is prejudicial to the accused because it contains. chargedheinsigned courttogether with illegal with provisional dismissal of the case. of which the makecivil (Sec. documentary so long evidence as the of the search is Prosecution. that he National Philippine never sold the Police. (2%) 20. and The Co. 2. Moreover. Rasul. 111. Sec. Suspension of Criminal Action in a criminal case and a pre-trial in a civil judgment is one for theft. Action" in the criminal case. a pre-trial should that the have resolutiondirected of thethe issue filing in the of civil the agreement is required to be reduced to SUGGESTED ANSWER: proper case Yes. 1 of new Rule lack or excess his purported of his appearing signatures jurisdiction in thein convicting first deed theof accused sale were of theft and in forgeries.admission of People v. (Bayas v. What are the the accusedofadmits requisites a trial the in been taken therefrom. delay(b) The name the of caused warrant the does by personAtty. 1 of 18). notice to the offended party. moved for the Co duringwaspre-trial.M. No appeal having and his counsel. 100the SCRA would 125. (Sec. while in a of Rule 119). (5%) was estafa. Sec. 1. G. Sandiganbayan. See in contained 7 the of new Rule order. Atty. the judgment for theft death escapes. Sec. February 28. the Mayor TM was charged of malversation Roberto Co and barangay through falsification of officialofficials documents. SUGGESTED ANSWER: the two crimes are not the same. A would team beconducted innocent of a the offense search in of the The court granted the motion but. not in OP describe . a Before "Joint counsel does not object. variance between the evidence and the rule." warrant provisionally dismissed except uponWhy? the which was presented to on the the (3%) express consent of the accused and with following Sandiganbayan. he was convicted of the offense conducted thus leavinginthethe place little accused where or the search no room to charged. pre-trial Sec. RTJ-93-904. and is a prejudicial the seizure question the of an undetermined (2002) In a prosecution for robbery against D. If in the of Conviction of up to eight years of prision mayor pretrial (1998) agreement signed by the accused under the said Code. (Sec. because a case cannot be his arraignment. and prosecutor. B brought a offense does not necessarily include or is The case are 1. substituted by Atty. particularity.R. Rules of Criminal Pre-Trial. QR's 140546-47. civil case. admitted all the No. is therecannot still a file legala upon an information for civil reviewable thru a special theftaction for is valid motion to withdraw. the imprisonment of up to 10 years of prision (Mantaring that statement the "Defense v.deny QR'sReview Automatic motion. (Sec. undetermined the court amount is grant or trial showed that the offense committed sufficiently denyNos. may the court No. Is the judgment does SUGGESTED ANSWER: 2. innocence. court Trial in should Absentia. particular. 1): while the grave that heabuseneverofsold discretion the property tantamountto B and to pre-trial in a civil case is mandatory.) Give three distinctions between a pre-trial the evidence is one for estafa while the Prejudicial Question. Motion to Quash of theand be thereafter determinative criminal action writing and signed by the accused and his dismissed of is inhis (2005) Police order the guilt original because operatives or of the information. the resolution amount of of whichThe shabu. People. Tee. (Sec. necessity for the A pre-trial Supremeorder Courtis not to certiorari? Reason.000. house Santos but If the firsttosale failed findis him null the first scheduled hearing on the ground (Ras there. Roberto Co filed a grant the motion of the prosecutor? Stipulation motion to of Facts quash the and Documents. said judgment of documentary absentia? evidence [2%] of the prosecution. notwithstanding that the warrant will be and defend himself. alleging that he could not found ten (10) grams Assisted by Atty. OP as counsel de parteof shabu. Roberto locate his witnesses. SUGGESTED grounds (a) it ANSWER: Before the court could was not the accused named in the search warrant. house (2004) of Santos in the presence of the new date of trial arrived. (4%) to withdraw the "Joint Stipulation. 19 the Police counsel (See. a civil of new the judgment action. the judgment 415(2002}). v. committed A theorizeda counsel agree" (Rule 118. necessary counsel. Void Judgment and sec. charging the proper offense.

Rifle. The sworn statement is not admissible cannibalized. The rifle is not admissible in evidence by a Philippine consul detailed in the because it was seized without a proper Philippine Embassy in London. rifle. and [2%] Waiver 3. Alternative Answers: providing for two other branches in Cebu (b) The information may be filed either in and in Cagayan Calamba or inde Makati Oro. Sandiganbayan. No. (Sec.) the police conducted a search of the house Venue of X and indeed found said rifle. A warrantless search is (a) The proper venue is in Pasig City not justified. the proper venue is the arraigned. Sworn Statement. . 7975). October 2. X was detailed to the 2. Sworn Statement and employment. No. where it Sworn Statement that he was possessing was cannibalized. City. 4(c). in Calamba where he 3. a bill collector of possess. Parada vs. People vs.) was based. No. Bulacan.R. Article [1997].SCRA 371III. The Sandiganbayan is a national court. The information may therefore be filed in Tagaytay City or Calamba or 121 SCRA Makati 106). he voluntarily signed a brought to Obando. have concurrent territorial which Jurisdiction. During the The theft of a car in Pasig City which was investigation. because house in the barangay an Armalite M16 he is and 3[e] entitled 10. the trial. The police (1997) Where is the proper venue for the filing of raiders seized the rifle and brought X to an information in the following cases? a) the police station. Court of Appeals. Encinada G. the: 1. Rulesreview of the of Criminal death sentence. is implemented. Espargas. 260 SCRA (Sees. there is still a legal necessity for the Supreme Court (as of 2004 the Court of Admissibility Appeals has the jurisdiction to such review) (1998) The barangay captain reported to the to review the decision of conviction police that X was illegally keeping in his sentencing the accused to death. the venue informing him of his custodial rights and is in Calamba where he did not turn in his without the assistance of counsel which collections. 1. until RA. 1997 and other cases) 2. 14269[2]. evidence the rifle. offense. SUGGESTED ANSWER: search warrant.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) (c) The proper court is the Sandiganbayan which has jurisdiction over crimes committed by a consul or higher official in the diplomatic service. of his collections from customers in of firearm. 270 SCRA 433. EVIDENCE 2. and without the assistance of counsel of his in Makati City where the ABC Company choice. to an automatic Rule 122. 267 SCRA 608. Waiver of ofRight RighttotoCounsel. Veneracion. Januario. committed. not in Tagaytay City where no offense had as SUGGESTED ANSWER: yet been committed. on the [1%] ANSWER: SUGGESTED admissibility in evidence of was to The turn malversation of public funds in his collections. 539. There was time to secure a where the theft of the car was search warrant. a continuing 665). In the contract of 1. 111 SCRA 433 [1982]. (b) he has been duly notified of first RTC in which the charge is filed (Sec. the prosecution submitted in Tagaytay City. unjustifiable. Procedure. (People Theft is65notPhil v Mercado. (People us. where he [2%1 c) rule X. (People us. Laguna. the should be independent and competent essential ingredients of the offense took and preferably of the choice of the place in Tagaytay City where he received accused. individually Counsel of Calamba branch office. 7975. Gomez. and (c) his failure to appear is 15(d). Rule 110). as amended by RA. in evidence because it was taken without (b) If the crime charged is theft. (Nunez v. (People us.) Constitution. (Sec. PD 1606. said rifle without license or authority to b) The theft by X. It has only one venue at present. On the strength of that information. Yes.) his collections. which is in Metro Manila. If the crime of X is estafa. The requisites of trial in absentia are: (c) Assuming that the Sandiganbayan has (a) the accused has already been no jurisdiction. ABC Company. The waiver of his right to counsel is not admissible because it was made should have turned in his collections. not in Obando where it was 116720. and a Waiver of Right to Counsel. (Catingub vs. with main offices in Makati During the trial of X for illegal possession City.

and evidence evidence.). it does not affect rules. Then under oath. Espiritu. independent are: (1) under evidence if it complies arrest. Offer to Marry. independent counsel. The admission must be An made offer with the applied. Admissibility evidence. Thedays after notice admission must ofbetheexpress offer. Given an example court's admission of Exh. therefor suppressed the use ofdigitally that it had been cocainesigned and other as evidence and shall become reasonably apparent appropriate dismissed security measures have been 2 The admission must be in writing. against proper unreasonable charges were Best Evidence Rule? 4% the filed searches and seizures and against SUGGESTED by the City ANSWER: Prosecutor confessionsboth SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. Without advising with him the of rules his righton 533 [1999]). the introduction Hence. but had registered it in the name of a friend or other means. document. SUGGESTED ANSWER: erroneous or the not?defendant. Thereafter they signed pleadings. In both 2002).to Requirements (2) objection an offer of the authenticated in the cocaine. original. court. Max and Brix. by D 1and ordered of Rule 3. as evidence Even if the forpolice the prosecution? captain form of writing. sec. sec. even it. 3 it is waived. They seized the car to a lawyer must be done in writing and in and An theelectronic cocaine as document evidenceis and admissible placed in D 2) theThe two kinds presence of of objections counsel. such term shall be Reason. a during oral a custodial examination of a investigation witness shall be be prohibiteddocument must be proved by evidence SUGGESTED admitted ANSWER: in evidence? (2. GR because evidence. An example of in the robbery. an electronic police document officers as stopped defined a car in was a lawyer. Peopleitv. well. As in within 10 days from receipt. Objections objection promptly confiscated. But obtained they denied in violation of thebeing NPA hit Constitutional the equivalent of an original document underprohibition men. addressed to evidence. and (2) the evidence is their sworn statements before the police amended to conform to the evidence. (5%) remain silent. (Sec. In the Best Evidence Rule if his direct three (3) 4. Court and they related questioned laws him and regarding is Admissibility. Rule thethat on Pleading the Why? the admissibility of the following pieces marked (5%) P100. witness andAdmission of Guilt. his possession of a pistol the result of the trial on this issue. over the prohibits own choice. Objection in orderto thata by these anything about Rules. a lawyer. evidence. Was the investigation Max and Brix orally evidence is not It was Explain each briefly.5%) 2 of Ruledrug. specified.R.000. 5. "A" objection in evidence waived their right to counsel and of to admitted in evidence without on each. "A" inerroneous.” The D was an admission question propounded of guilt in theof course an accused of the charged authenticity of any private electronic with illegal possession of cocaine. record. 2. regardedproceedings as the equivalent againstofthe anpolice originalfor objection in writing shall be assistance of competent. May of Max the (a) Whenever a rule of evidence refers to and written ALTERNATIVEBrixstatements may ANSWERS: not signed of a person under custodial Investigation. the subject of (2004) Sgt. of the Notsecond raised inisX. in for defendant to pay said sum of money b) the Yes. the III. Waiver 132).periodG. The complaint may be to the issue. anddid plaintiff (3%] not 2 a pair of short pants allegedly left by A ground competent thatand the Best Evidence independent counsel ofRule his mention or even just hint at any demand R. they the part of It should be Two kinds of objections are: (1) the freely answered questions asked by the treated as if it had been raised in the evidence being presented is not relevant police desk officer. D’s offers attorney. dagger.A. "A" was a letter of demand suspects. The effective Augustfound officers 1.of Art. In due course. Reason. of commenced (Sec. examination.pocket.Upon motion of D. a dagger months before suit was begun. but incompetent or excluded by the law or the 10). Max admitted his part if it is not so amended. driven (Sec. Without hidden under Brix's shirt. On cross-examination. (5%) . made within the document recovery under of his car. by May the2."A"[2%] photocopy admissiblereal (object)inevidence evidence? or plaintiff offered in evidence predicate ANSWER: SUGGESTED to justify the cross-examination for the stated purpose of proving the a) The photocopy of the marked bills is question. inadmissible in for payment made on defendant before documentary ALTERNATIVE evidence? ANSWER: b) 12. commencing suit. is allowed 135862. making of extrajudicial demand on Admissibility real (object) evidence not documentary defendant to pay P500. (Sec. In reply.00 arrest was inbillsviolation used in the of “buy- his (2004) evidence of evidence: offered is not the best evidence. D said. otherwise. right Ace to be objects informed toof his the In a complaint for a sum of money filed 1 introduction of the right to remain silent and to have photocopy on the before an theoffer MM of ARTC. Rule 138). trial did of you Ace not for tellviolation the of the arresting Admissibility. company to pay for the damages suffered electronic b) When is an electronic in the robbery Examples of the andsecond his possession are evidence of a evidence regarded as being by the victim in a homicide case. case instances the accused waives for the grounds his for convenience. 1 of Rule 4) rights objection to mustsilence be and to counsel. No. 3. it is a printout D testified or output that readable he ownedby the car sight unless av. (b) An electronic document shall beD the charges against him. in the to remain admissibility prescribed by the Rules of (People v. objection to a 302 question SCRA 455propounded 11999]. of the right several kilos of cocaine.com Page by: sirdondee@gmail. which he SUGGESTED ANSWER: Admissibility. by Max and because Brix be theyadmitted were not by assisted the trial instrument. 2001). “I don’t know manner prescribed (2006) What are the evidence in requirements writing. the executed witness is with your(1994) being At the arrest. your admission the car?” made prosecution If you when were he counsel. the accurately. Mahinay. (Sec. required him to put on. Id. Rules himoftoElectronic open the General lawyer. Electronic Evidence and his ownership of the packet of shabu of Rule evidence the alleged offer of an Insurance (2003) a) State the rule on the admissibility of an(See found1997 in his No. 7438 (1992). it fit himExh. admission of Exh. examination A was accused is on a of having matterraped not relevant. People v. (Sec. in lieu [Constitution. of302secondary SCRA 455]. Object ortheReal police asked. act ofthe photocopy robbing a grocery is admissible in Ermita. captain. Circumstantial Evidence SUGGESTED ANSWER: the (1998) assistance cross-examined of competent. that because it Drugs wasn’t his Act. at the crime which the court. Yes. 5 the first is when the prosecution offers as Admissibility. During the trial.com Page5051of of 66 66 Acting deemedon a to tip 1) Specific before whomobjections: they signedExample: the statements parol include by an informant. he handcuffed because themthe he bestnoted evidence rule a pistol and served on defendant some two does tucked not in applyMax'sto object waistor and real evidence.to marry X. and independent the cross Dangerous officers Yes. of WPD the arrested marked two bills NPA are the suit.). arrestees The sworn before written the and admissions in violation of the rightsMM statementsRTC.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail. nor Objections: can he Example: be considered continuing as an Evidence trunk. 14). “After Evidence waiver of the mustisbewhen first in writing. An example such attorney representing Admissibility. was in evidence would questioned you after a object he photocopy was to the placed of question? underthe Admissibility. bust” constitutionaloperation. An example Document. At the police The court'sfrom defendant. both aged 22. two kinds of objections? admitted Exh. It isn’t 2 of Rule 3. a bag containing objections independent (Sec. evidence and besthe was evidence not functioning rule as a these being Rules. is Mahinay. Exh. (2002) memorandum or any other by court counsel. 37 of Rule counsel. photocopybecause the question did not lay the when he duly did. silent and to have the assistance of course 302 SCRA of the oral examination of the an attorney. be and admitted sworn into the term writing. Brix admitted his role evidence. the "A" courtin (1997) What are theroom.different (People Prinsipe. Id. the court made 1 as soon as the grounds The admission must be voluntary. my car. Is thea) Is the objection of A. shown to reflect the data 5. real evidence.

Document (2) Entries in the family bible may be received as (2005) May a private document be offered. which is not his Private agent. Action of Partition be evidence as an Implied admission of guilt Linda (2000) diedas intestate presented and without object evidence in orderanyto because rape cases are not allowed to be issue. 2) entry in the family bible is Is thethe offer by A's insurance carrier to hospitalization hearsay. The spouses filing of the criminal case against A for Ceres refused to partition on the following serious physical injuries through reckless grounds: 1) the baptismal certificates of imprudence. X is1 admissible of in Ceres Court) were Hence. fourth both par. The baptismal certificates of seven of the accused cannot object to the court petitioners. it can be considered as both of the non-availability of records is needed documentary and object evidence. 3) the certification of the payinjuries for the and damages of B admissible in registrar on non-availability of the records evidence? of birth does not prove filiation: 4) in partition cases where filiation to the deceased is in dispute. a incrimination because it is a mere Admissibility. compromised. a family bible belonging to requiring him to put the short pants on. of documentary evidence and as object supra. Discuss each of the five (5) SUGGESTED 130. Rules of Court) Documentary the right pertaining to the decedent.). admissible in evidence against the [1998]. photocopy of the birth certificate of physical act. 300 SCRA 345 [1998]). As counsel for SUGGESTED ANSWER: Jocelyn and her co-petitioners. no publication is necessary. (Sec. because what is numbers. Arnulfo 2.and Rules Regina of share 1. Proof of Filiation. filed paper and writings that comprise the an action for 2. A Jocelyn. to marry (Sec. 40. Rule 130. Rule 130. It is irrelevant.) evidence. although standing alone it submitting in support of their petition the cannot be the basis of conviction. 27 of RuleSCRA13O. which is the photocopy of the admitted in evidence both as Ignacio Conti v. figures. evidence consists of writings or any their predecessor-ininterest. prior and separate judicial declaration of heirship in a settlement of estate proceedings is necessary. claiming to be the characteristics thatcollateral are visible relatives on theof 156.) is involved. Rule 130. in 27. A's inoffer the property. of B admissible in evidence? a) Is the offer b) by A to pay deceased. Objects as evidence are those It can be made in the ordinary action for addressed to the senses of the court. offered ns proof of SUGGESTED ANSWER: Linda contents. to ask for material containing letters. (Sec. co-owners a private of a parcel document of mayland. argumentsANSWER: briefly but completely. (Rule the civil the partition. Ten (10) persons headed 'establish certain physical evidence or by Jocelyn. (5) Even as partition if co-owners real property (Id. A's insurance carrier offered the parish priest are evidence only of the to pay for the injuries and damages administration of the sacrament of suffered by B.com Page 52 of 66 property is involved. accused but by the insurance company Admissibility.and criminal cases. Admissibility. accused well. which fit the partition with the RTC praying for the document. (3) The certification by the civil registrar Yes. The offer was rejected baptism and they do not prove filiation of because B considered the amount offered the alleged collateral relatives of the expenses as inadequate. A to justify the presentation of secondary private document may be offered and evidence. and a certification of the local visited B at the hospital and offered to pay civil registrar that its office had been for his hospitalization expenses. their and spouses ( Sec. (Trinidad Heirs of ILgnacio v. admitted in evidence both as Rules of Court). is circumstantial evidence segregation of Linda’s ½ share. while driving his car.of Court birth certificate of(Heirs Jocelyn. 289v.Offer to Pay Expenses (1997) A. partition wherein the heirs are exercising 1. It is one of the the insurance company is based on the other means allowed under the Rules of contract of insurance and is not Court and special laws to show pedigree. the case. People vs.) the deceased Linda. symbols or other modes sought is the mere segregation of Linda’s of written expressions. ran over B. The obligation of filiation or prove pedigree. 226 (Sec. documentary evidence and as object SUGGESTED evidence?ANSWER:Explain.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. argue (a) The offer by A to pay the against the objections of the spouses hospitalization expenses of B is not Ceres so as to convince the court to allow admissible in evidence to prove his guilt Sec. Domingo. Appeals. The pair of short pants. and evidence of pedigree. Court Conti of Appeals. and 5) there is need for publication as real .SCRA Court 188of accused because it was not offered by the Appeals. (10%) (1) The baptismal certificate can show (b) No. words. A document can also be (4) Declaration of heirship in a considered as an object for purposes of settlement proceeding is not necessary. of his guilt. Linda in which the names of the It is not part of his right against self- petitioners have been entered. After the completely razed by fire.

the presumption naturally arises that the pp. Vol. 1[a] of Rule 69. (Francisco. VII. courts should direct the parties to consider the possibility of an amicable settlement. (Francisco.) Admissibility.122) better evidence is withheld for fraudulent purposes. Id. 2029. This is to prevent the temptation to perjury because death has already sealed the lips (b)thePAROL of party. EVIDENCE RULE: It is designed to give certainty to a transaction which has been reduced to writing. 12. (d) Part I. Rules of Evidence (1997) Give the reasons underlying the adoption of the following rules of evidence: (a) Dead Man (b) RuleParol Evidence (c) RuleBest Evidence (d) The rule against the admission of Rule illegally obtained extrajudicial confession (e) The rule against the admission of an offer of compromise in civil cases SUGGESTED ANSWER: The reasons behind the following rules are as (a) DEAD MAN RULE: if death has follows: closed the lips of one party. (Moran. 144 SCRA 222). p. p. vol. vol.com Page 53 of 66 (c) BEST EVIDENCE RULE: This Rule is adopted for the prevention of fraud and is declared to be essential to the pure administration of justice. Civil Code). (Moran. 154) . 121. 5. (Sec. September 23. During pre-trial. (Goni v.) If a party is in possession of such evidence and withholds it. because written evidence is much more certain and accurate than that which rests on fleeting memory only. Part I. the policy of the law is to close the lips of the other. 5. Rules of Court. VII. (Art. p. (e) The reason for the rule against the admission of an offer of compromise in civil case as an admission of any liability is that parties are encouraged to enter into compromises. Court ofAppeals. 257) it is the fruit of a poisonous tree. 1986. Rules of Court Vol. Courts should endeavor to persuade the litigants in a civil case to agree upon some fair compromise. by: sirdondee@gmail. L-77434.An illegally obtained extrajudicial confession nullifies the intrinsic validity of the confession and renders it unreliable as evidence of the truth.

They are not duplicate original 2 What is the probative value of a witness'copies because there are photocopies Affidavit of Recantation? [2%] which were not signed (Mahilum v.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) testimony of witnesses in the order stated. is that testimony admissible in130). Evidence that typewritten copy to his counsel for one did or did not do a certain thing at safekeeping. Yes. the offerer. is a) deemed In an to be the action to"original" copy collect on the he did or did not do the same or a similar for the purpose of the "Best Evidence thing at another time. identity. Character Evidence (2002) D was prosecuted for homicide for allegedly beating up V to death with an A. sec. D may introduce evidence of specific violent acts by V. or cannot be produced in court. (c) The loan given by A to B may be proved by secondary evidence through the xeroxed copies of the promissory note. "duplicate original copies"? c) As counsel scheme. Court of Appeals. the other copy. the evidence is not relevant. The copy with A's counsel one time is not admissible to prove that was destroyed when the law office was which burned. The prosecution may introduce Best Evidence Rule evidence of the good or even bad moral (1997) When A loaned a sum of money to B. Burden of Evidence (2004) Distinguish Burden of proof and burden of evidence. 34). 2 [a] of new SUGGESTED ANSWER: Rule 16). or by the . (Sec. may prove its contents by a copy. Rule"? b) Can the photocopies in the received to prove a specific intent or hands of the parties be considered knowledge. evidence against the latter? [3%] (b) No. A character of the victim if it tends to typed a single copy of the promissory establish in any reasonable degree the note. Affidavit of Recantation like. (Sec. upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad faith on his part. but it may be promissory note. while burden of evidence is the duty of a party to go forward with the evidence to overthrow prima facie evidence established against him. habit. (Sec. May the prosecution introduce iron pipe. (Rule 130. 4 [b] of Rule crime charged. custom or usage. (Sec. [Rule 130. giving one copy to B and retaining case. and the for A. (2%) May D introduce evidence of specific violent acts by V? Why? (3%) former Rule 20: Sec. They constitute secondary evidence.Version or by a recital 1997-2006 Updatedof its contents in by Dondee some authentic document. plan. The rules provide that when the original document is lost or destroyed. evidence that V had a good reputation for peacefulness and nonviolence? Why? B. ANSWER: SUGGESTED Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law. (Bautista v. Sarmiento. 1 of Rule 131). 17 SCRA 482 ). 5 of Rule 130). In this note. 51 a (3)]. Burden of Proof vs. SUGGESTED ANSWER: to A and B? (1998) 1 If the accused on the witness stand(a) The copy that was signed and lost is repeats his earlier uncounseled extrajudicialthe only "original" copy for purposes of confession implicating his co-accused in thethe Best Evidence Rule. which they both signed A made two probability or improbability of the offense photo (xeroxed) copies of the promissory charged. A. how will you prove the loan given Confession. sec. A entrusted the B. system. 138 SCRA 587 [1985]). 5 of Rule 130).

declarant's 650. 37 of against the excited Hearsay.while (5%) entries in the circumstances of such death. Legislative Facts vs. facts and adjudicative Exceptions [2%) SUGGESTED ANSWER: facts. (Sec. Rulesvs. Gaddi. (b) a court as decision.toa the witness to The declaration of a dying person. Id.e.)may testify any matter of fact occurring before on his impressions of the emotion. 36.R. that she told of Mariano’s testimony. tied learned Romeo who treatises.00 for the use of also an independently relevant statement. would you sustain Pedro’s him. despite confession. Romeo common over proper as evidence of the cause and surrounding No. Candida also related to the police evidence of an ordinary witness on officer that despite her pleas.)Exception.(Sec. inadmissible? SUGGESTED secured Explain. to a (2004) Hearsay evidence and opinion bedroom where he raped her.G. behavior. (see Sec. made . Res Gestae.a259witness SCRA 138. expressly provides (Molina vs. Adjudicative Facts (1998) Requisites of Dying Declaration. Opinion of Ordinary course account of of business. and (d) the declaration is accident. of that it will be claim or demand against his estate as to repudiated. Santos. or persons in whose because he consideration. Antonio. Rules of for Romeo is sued damages Court). upon a is always Sec.courts would look suchwith disfavor testimony be upon deceased person agreed upon.2 exceptions hearsay the accident. usually throughThose disqualified are parties or assignors ANSWER: No. they can easily bedisqualified to testify on the agreement. a witness other persons say in about court. 74065.was testifying Recantedon testimony what he isbehalf a case is prosecuted. SUGGESTED ANSWER: reputation or tradition admissible regarding against pedigree. Yes. 23 of Rule 130) condition or appearance of a person. matters limited Exception. would such testimony of the testified that he was present when Maximo SUGGESTED ANSWER: policeman be hearsay? Explain.000. February judge. Dying Declaration Facts. rule are: givedeclaration.cross-examination. 36. The testimony of the policeman is not and Juan agreed that the latter would pay hearsay. The policeman noticed that (2001) Maximo filed an action against Pedro. made by the deceased under the while adjudicative . If the During thepresents prosecution trial. commercial was told to Romeo. 270 SCRA case wherein the testifies facts that Romeo told her (Julieta) that in issue. that is not based on personal knowledge Dencio fled from the house with the loot. (Sec. Dead50. longer beMaawa Roberto located.com Page5455 of 66 66 Evidence. Opinion Evidence of Court) brought Candida. act or declaration about occurrence. tied the knowledge skill. During the trial. the testimony is admissible in 27. her pleas. the noticed Candida to be hysterical and on the recantation.comPage by: sirdondee@gmail.) death is the subject of inquiry. paragraph of theadministrator or Juan’s estate.ManId. the Candida was hysterical and on the verge of administrator of the estate of deceased collapse. Statute raped her. Maximo. evidence that consists of testimony not the deceased was at the time competent as Hearsay from coming Evidence personal knowledge (Sec.probability 50. for the recovery of a car which is with a) rape. verge of collapse. Dencio had Hearsay.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) sirdondee@gmail.. Evidence Rule 13O. a witness. admissible and part timely objection? of Romeo. of the person testifying. is not recantations considered because as opinion. ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: he (Romeo)The heard Antonio. (37 to pieces of jewelry and money.1989) her. Julieta’s testimony is not reputation. It is part of the res gestae. lists and the only it was like. a former proceeding. exceedingly The lastThere unreliable. monetaryof parties to a case. (People v. the offered in a (criminal) (People vs. It is a rental of P20. The accused notcan to the truth testify of by repeating Candida's statement. that People. Dencio was charged with robbery Juan.1 Hearsay evidence facts aremay factsbefounddefinedin consciousness of his impending death. Rule Candida then untied Marcela and rushed to 130). Candida Police can no Officer part of the latter’s estate. Hearsay. against the actually observed. (2004) Legislative Hearsay.to (8%) testify on what Candida Maximo presented witness Mariano who had told him. No. the resbecause Why? gestae. i. Marcela could evidence. Exception. Rule 130. (c) the declaration concerns the (2002) Rule 130.intimidation it cannot be considered or for asaopinion. 49.family pedigree. Dencio then Hearsay 47. Hearsay fortestimony injuries cause and surrounding circumstances of the suffered by the plaintiff in is the testimony of a witness as to what he a vehicular declarant's death. Is Julieta’s testimony wherein his death is the subject of Inquiry.). Maximo’s car for one month after which The police officer testified of his own Juan should immediately return the car to SUGGESTED ANSWER: personal knowledge.) and and money. which or her to a chair and robbed her of assorted deposition at makes it hearsay. Marcela's maid. from witnesses. hence. Rule 13O. If you were the his earlier uncounseled extrajudicial SUGGESTED ANSWER: No. ANSWER: SUGGESTED hear Candida crying and pleading: "Huwag! Hearsay evidence consists of testimony Maawa ka sa akin!" After raping Candida. SUGGESTED (1999) ANSWER: a) Define hearsay evidence? (2%) b) The requisites for the admissibility of a Legislative What are the facts refer to facts exceptions to the mentioned hearsay dying declaration are: (a) the declaration is in a statute rule? (2%) SUGGESTED or ANSWER: in an explanatory note. entries a witness in official to the Witness (2005) records. may be received in any case against interest. because Dencio he can behadsubjected raped toNo. has heard Julieta. On the probative value of an affidavit oftestified as to what Maximo and Juan. dying an excited account declaration of under the consciousness of an impending the accident immediately after its death. Revised Rules of . accident. experience or training of latter to a chair and robbed her of her jewelry the person testifying (Sec. while opinion evidence is expert the police station about a kilometer away and told Police Officer Roberto Maawa that Dencio evidence based on the personal had barged into the house of Marcela. Pedro objected to the admission 1. told Julieta and about testimony it. objection? Why? (5%) evidence because witness Mariano who b) If the police officer will testify that he 2. Juan’s death. Dencio barged into the house of Marcela.

attested by the officer PNP Firearms andhaving the legal custody Explosive Office November 16. several written custody recordof an ofofficial the facts he testifies record or by that his 5. because they constitute Phil. L2248 January 23. has the however. periodical 3.R. 36 bodies implementing statutes. admissible of his 23). If the record is not kept in the like any other matter of fact (Sy Joe Lieng v. of theG. October 31. v. the law itselfDying Exceptions. Collector of Memorandum of such fact. 91261.R. him. judicial His answers Judicial Notice. which must be proved accompanied. 1930). Airlines v.andForeign his answers Law were The RTC may recorded. Hernandez. or take judicial immediately notice of: perversity was a in a and beastly critical passion condition. X was arrested court can take judicial notice of a foreign by police time offered theatwitness the is called to testify. 90342. Inapplicable SUGGESTED (c) ANSWER: Object be in be (2003) writing taken by (People thev.of notice Offer of of the Evidence street name impending take court judicial can death (Sec. G. G. presentation after v. GM. The RTC may take judicial notice of Rules local Orient law. occurred.Rules 1950) and Regulations issued hearsay rule does is (c) The presumption notthatapply and the the wordings by quasi-judicial bodies statement may be shown SUGGESTED ANSWER: of the foreign law are where the samethe fact as that the implementing statutes. not wasaffect 286 its SCRA presented to1)prove the admissibility as existence a dying 2. (Rule 1915) 132. hischooses brother SUGGESTED ANSWER: thereafter. Republic. authenticatedclipping by the seal is (Pardo v. G. No. . the making192. if the a dying No. but since by he (2005) Explain briefly whether atthe theRTCtime may. the SUGGESTED wordings ANSWER: of said law"? evidence ANSWER: SUGGESTED (a) The three instancesofwhen strength of a warrant arrest issued by a Philippine RTC (a) may Testimonialtake not judicialis notice evidence formally of ordinances approved by municipalities the court. Both pieces of evidence were against objected X?may certificate to b) be by Is made the the certification defense.28. admitted that he had robbed nations (Sec.). because he ofwas in criticalbut condition. consul. G. does partdefense of the defendant no evidence offered". signed policeman statement place. Delgado v. (c) TheForeign same is laws. 6. 1918. evidence X was charged with robbery. CA.R. the direct examination that he is admissible in unless Hearsay. occasion the is admissible statement. On the In the absence of statutory authority. Blanco. No. 4718. When May No. No. such as the in testifying the foreign onservice it admissible in evidence of the Philippines Spanish Civil Code. on certification 210 Yes. Sec. (a) recordYes. may take notice of of the PNP Firearm newspaper and embassy or legation. The certifying Philippines. Februaryto 18. asG. (1996) X vs. 37 of Rule notice of a foreign law.R. edition. (Sec.). X November August evidence. b) 130) . are the 27. The becomes victim sufferedmandatory. while the victim SUGGESTED ANSWER: has neverofseen or entry the writing a specified tenorbefore. Vol. Zalamea v. asnora 1.R. when the motu fact proprio. with in which robbery cannot statement recall signedthem by now. custody. with a certificate that such officer officer. Fluemer v. A dying what is the presumptionnot declaration need to municipalities (b) evidence Documentary under its territorial Hearsay. in deciding considering the a casechemicalan point to the accused as his assailant. G. No. of said law. forCollector the statement itself may of Customs. No. (5%) The or at street any other time when the neither and the Yes. because 28 of Rulefor 132). A charge for illegal are evidently familiar with the foreign law possession which took (b) judicial notice Documentary of the evidence is ordinance formally of firearm (Moran. be committed It appears that eleven even in (11) the deputyfactsthatareafter correctly diligentstated. No. following pieces of Viovicente.was 5. their Sec. U. it is made is relevant. in foreign laws when Philippine courts are Explosive evidence vice-consul.R.R. the It records must have of his office contain no such The 1991) Supreme the accused as Court has taken his assailant. The or pamphlet on the subject of law if the SUGGESTED ANSWER: It is also offered after the presentation of prosecution presented in evidence a court takes judicial notice of the fact that the testimonial evidence. 1950.com Page 56 of 66 The RTC may stating that foreign (b) A written X admitted law maythe robbery. states (b)Chatto. The (1997) A trial methamphetamine court cannot take hydrochloride into is fact How thatdo you he prove did not sign the a written statement foreign law? consideration shabu. filed 1980 against edition). is admissible as admissible as past recollection recorded. considers such rules as Declaration once evidence knewagainst the facts X being because asked but he a written an integral (1999) The accusedpartwasofcharged the statute. by thea certificate as above companions. ifwas the not presented office in whichasthe a Quia. CourtEvidence (Northwest as to 241 of Appeals. court as to the jurisdiction. died Evidence. L2546. territorial first par. firearm cases were tried jointly. press conference called the foreign law refers to the law of by the police. the January 4. which had taken effect in against SUGGESTED stationed X? ANSWER: in the foreign country in which the the Philippines. theandnewspaper is kept. Sy to carry any firearm. (a) evidence Ordinances Testimonial formally offered? approved by declaration. No.R. answered. search butnothat recordhe public hours places. victim methamphetamine hydro-chloride is 82589. demonstration (Chattamal v. No.been written or recorded by Evidence record X or underor entry. the court in the exercise of its witness. 12435. after the crime. Macasling.evidence that questions rape (Peopleis not which he G. Whenhaving an officer handedthe a case judicial notice and homicide. of the 228 truth or falsity of a statement. an indication v. of attesting that the accused haddeputy. refers to a published treatise. 472). The "public setting" of the asked certain No. 1910) except in record is kept is in a foreign country.1917. SCRA in evidence against X. ispage not secondary 34. name of 1990) fact was fresh in his memory and he knew victim. true with object evidence.R. 1 of Rule 129) and (3) when it the victim of The jewelry robbery valued and illegal possession of at P500. Vol. motu 16 of proprio Rule 132)takeBut judicial in this made under the consciousness of (1997) a) Give three instances when a Philippine case X has never seen the writing before. Tongson. Hix. They seized from his person a under 132. with his brother and fact that rape may be committed even in a policeman as SUGGESTED ANSWER: recorded? accompanied Explain. testimonial 9699. SCRA of such statement Moran. 16347. jurisdiction. (Rule operatives.00. the a few instances. the offered 9. SUGGESTED the ANSWER: declaration? subsequently Explain. his direction notice were put of thedownfact inthat a man overcome writing. No.1920) . Rule 132. .S. regardless office (Sec. the record. Thethe time. 26. Rape may stab wounds. 35. p. Is the is found to was being The RTC may brought to the notice take judicial hospital of in thea writing exist inadmissible the records as pastof recollection his office. a This fact is in known issue as or thebe are capable of unquestionable circumstantially PROCESSUAL SCRA 18 [1992]) relevant as to the existence PRESUMPTION. jeep. been (People "formally v. Rule 130). written record to be provided. pointing of consent. the victim was public places. 24. March 17.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. same was correctly written or Judicial Notice. G. 35. handgun. 46.R. (Gotesco Investment Corporation Customs. (U. G. second par.also 34. by be evidenced It not generally take judicial notice of foreign an officialpresented likewise publicationa thereof or by of certification a copy the laws (In re Estate of Johnson. Lim v. admissible declaration Barcelona. or by his no licenseand 32636. (2%) that shabu. newspaper clipping of the report to the the writer thereof is recognized in his reporter who was present during the profession or calling as expert on the press conference subject (Sec. 1980 and Regulations issued by quasi-judicial but primary.S. 12767. (6%) a) of by a secretary Is the the sound judicial discretion. Is the dying statement (People v. and other allied legislation. Republic.clipping consuladmissible general.000. November 3. or Office consular without agent the or bycertifying any officer officer evidently familiar with them. (Sec. except on law are: (1) when the Philippine courts appeal from the municipal trial courts. March 19. c) Suppose a foreign law was pleaded as evidence 1993) composition that has not of shabu. (2) whenIn a in question.

stated and it was not formally offered in evidence as required by Section 34. the defense filed a motion for (a) The testimony of Y should be excluded demurrer to evidence based on the because its purpose was not initially following grounds. Rule on the motion for demurrer to evidence on the above grounds. The testimony of Y was the only material evidence establishing the guilt of X. res inter alios acta (2003) X and Y were charged with murder. Y was discharged from the Information to be utilized as a state witness. Upon application of the prosecution. Rule (b) 132Y’s testimony of the Revisedis Rules not admissible against of Evidence. The prosecutor presented Y as witness but forgot to state the purpose of his testimony much less offer it in evidence. and X pursuant to the rule on “res inter alios acta”. (6%) . After the prosecution rested its case. Y testified that he and X conspired to kill the victim but it was X who actually shot the victim.by: sirdondee@gmail. Y was thoroughly cross-examined by the defense counsel.com Page 57 of 66 Offer of Evidence.

will Pedro be b) waived The the res objection. usedHtocannot treat testify W. Cajuigan. Pedro alleged that judicial bodies. C cannot testify against her because original note was with Lucio and the of the doctrine on parental privilege. behavior. The testimony of Kim should not be that the evidence as a whole adduced by one excluded. In the trial. H that the note is payable immediately after sued his wife W for judicial declaration of 90 days but that if Pedro is willing. Rule 130). 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) prim and proper. testified that on a if not denied under oath. Ruleagainst on W'sher because objections Lucio is for the latter to pay immediately of the rule on marital which are the following: privilege. 21 Phil. At Nolan’s trial for possession and use of the original or a copy thereof should have been attached to the prohibited drug.. (Sec. This is applicable in case a promissory note executed by Lucio. before secondary evidence may be Opinion Rule Note: The promissory note is an actionable document and (1994) presented. particular day. 1 of Rule 133. he would appear Preponderance vs. Pedro testified that the truth is W: C. the original of the note is excusable while an offer of documentary evidence is because he was not given reasonable made after the presentation of a party’s (Sec. executed Pedro copy presentat the of thea same promissorytime as notethe original and have it Moreover. [1%] after ninety day’s time. impressions of the emotion. the copy in the possession of documentary evidence? Pedro is a duplicate original and with SUGGESTED ANSWER: identical contents. Rule 132). Nolan from substantial evidence.com Page 58 of 66 SUGGESTED ANSWER: PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE means No. 50. Rules under requirement of the Rules Court) testimonial evidence. In such a case. Substantial Evidence haggard. as Rule 130. During the following testified over the objection of hearing. (Sec. In filed before administrative or quasi- his complaint. would be deemed admitted. inter alios acta rule does a) Yes. condition or appearance of a person. Should you. (Sec. can the note which was its purpose or offer it in evidence. the complaint. upon request of Lucio give the latter the Family Code. 184 [1912]). Testimonial & Documentary exception to the parol evidence rule. This is expert witness. he nullity of marriage under Article 36 of may. (1994) What is the difference between an offer of 9(b) of Rule 130. a doctor of medicine who that the agreement between him and 1. the up to 120 days to pay the note. 6 of notice. known as “shabu:. since the 2. 7 of Rule 9. 4(b) of Rule 130]. Kim may testify on her applicable in civil cases. Also. a) OverWhy? in his favor? the thoroughly cross-examined Y and thus objection (3%) ANSWER: SUGGESTED of Lucio. An offer of testimonial evidence is made Moreover. [Sec. 4% objects to the admissibility of Kim’s SUGGESTED ANSWER: testimony on the ground that Kim merely stated her opinion without having been first qualified as expert witness. of theLucio failed to do promissory note?so. but that three days after. the truth is (1998) C is the child of the spouses H and W.Remedial Law Bar Examination Q & A (1997-2006) by: sirdondee@gmail. the defense counsel andadmitted aswithvalid identical evidence contents. Rules of Court] testimonial evidence and an offer of b) Yes. agreement of the parties. 5 of Rule 133) although the promissory note says that it Privilege Communication is payable within 120 days. (Sec. Municipality of Moncada v. 35. Even though Kim is not an side is superior to that of the other. ANSWER: D cannot testify against her because original note which Lucio kept in a place The demurrer to the evidence should be about one day’s trip from where he of the doctrine of privileged deniedcommunication between patient of because: a) The testimony andY received the notice to produce the note should not be excluded and in spite of such notice to produce the physician. tired and overly nervous at the (2003) Distinguish preponderance of evidence slightest sound he would hear. his girlfriend Kim. alert and sharp. last par. This is an Offer of Evidence. the genuineness and due execution of the note. Why? Pedro fact that the prosecutor forgot to state presented a copy of (2%) b) Over the objection of Lucio. [Sec. latter would not surrender to Pedro the and [2%] SUGGESTED 3. H and D. as judge. the failure of Lucio to produce at the time the witness is called to testify. 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure). because Pedro has alleged in his not apply because Y testified in open complaint that the promissory note does court and was subjected to cross not express the true intent and examination. SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE is that amount Parol Evidence Rule of relevant evidence which a reasonable (2001) Pedro filed a complaint against Lucio for mind might accept as adequate to justify the recovery of a sum of money based on a conclusion. (Sec. 8 of Rule 9. exclude the testimony of Kim? . he would see Nolan very (Sec. [2%] because the defense counsel did not same within six hours from receipt of allowed to testify as to the true agreement or object to his testimony despite the such contents notice.

) . as a doctor who used to treat W. D. (Sec.) 3. 215. (Sec.SUGGESTED ANSWER: 1. Rules of Court. Court. The doctrine of parental privilege cannot likewise be invoked by W as against the testimony of C. 24 [c].) 2. Rule case filed 130. Rule 130. Rules by one of against the other. Rules of Court. 25. Rule 130. a civil22 . Art. their child. The rule of marital privilege cannot be invoked in the annulment case under Rule 36 of the Family Code because it is (Sec. C may not be compelled to testify but is free to testify against her. Family Code. is disqualified to testify against W over her objection as to any advice or treatment given by him or any information which he may have acquired in his professional capacity.

not confidential and must have a center for in Examination of asexChild tourism Witness. same No. case (2%) for recovery ofsuch Leticia'sother matters sister was as may burned. and spouse credibility of the witness. No. Daquigan. 14. No. 22.case involving Examination of child Witnesses prostitution? testify for or for consideration against a right Cesar of way without pursuant his Reason. there more Ody harmony insisted to and be under Rep. The principal contended that preserved. to present62 what he copy against thereof Selmo. via Live-Link TV (2005) nature.court in itssurvived. to written (Lezama would vs. One witness on sufficiently respect to it met its burdenany testimony of proving Itthe trial court. barangay State captain. Romeo. ANSWER: recall a witness? Marital Privilege (a) Leticia was estranged from examination. October 14. (b) No. on redirect her husband the original injuries on document Selmo and its loss The by Romeo. on exceptions as the where groundthe promoting and facilitating child while credibility of the witness refers to a that she relations marital may not be arecompelled so strained to testify that prostitution and other sexual abuses witness whose testimony is believable. Corporation. Court which prohibits of Appeals andher from Molina. the house of admissible is offered in evidence? in a civil Explain. 7610. the 2005). sinceThelasttrauma year. paid Baby cannot to Simplicio for be somecompelled time as to criminal child. The disqualification and Baby for of a of witnesspersonal who property can against perceive.comPage by: sirdondee@gmail. 20 of Rule 130). Leticia Communication. then it should be allowed.because Selma exception Witness. inwas the molested presence by of civil cases owned by one against by Simplicio. Credibility ruleof marital waived. identifiedby her by prior to her the retired marriage to as Cesar. XYZ. questioned major aspects about a conference of marital life. can the opponent in his re. (See Sec. be allowed killing by the Court. temporarily the 7 of Rule opponent 132). For unknown reasons. spouse. as secondary son of Vida. the The Rodriguez. the other or the right known toANSWER: of way? Explain. 5 of Rule 130) (1999) A overheard B call X a thief. the plaintiff can recall a charged with arson an wifeindependently may testify for relevant or against statement. the in criminal re-direct case where examination it involves questions child on field auditor such. Witness. which ground and can he of be is hearsay falls underrulethis does not apply. Vida’s and sum of money witness by reason andofdamages.have Vidafirst proven the execution witnessed infliction of of Privilege SUGGESTED Communication. against ishernohusband. Rule 132). ABC had filed for legal a criminal Ajax presentedcase for its aretired crime committed field auditor as the case by separation from may XYZbe. on Examination truthfulness of the of atestimony Child of the Witness). against the other. thief neither is admissible the husbandin evidencenor the as incident. The court may admit the testimony and contract towas 1166). Marital Privilege spouse. filed by X against Counsel forB. The exception provided purpose. Ramirez.com Page59 of6066ofbeing 66 Witness. stepson Ajax of considered an important evidence. a) ANSWER: Is the objection valid? (3%) b) SUGGESTED Will property personal your filed by answer be Selmo the against same Romeo? the if Vida’s latter. called Rule Baby 130 ofas his the first Revised witness. Independent Relevant Statement questions Paul for on matters more than a not dealt year due towith his destruction. (Sec. in its discretion. same ifSCRA original 23 the SUGGESTED ANSWER: explain and supplement his answer in the matters Yes. was criminally charged of perception to others (Sec. 22. The Regional court offered without inthe evidenceconsent only of to prove the the tenor affected Trial may Court.against her husband.in XYZ the accused. Gaddi. his counsel or the prosecutor earlier. Privilege had not sufficiently Marital met the Privilege cross-examination ask questions on marriage to Cesar. AjaxCommunication. the subject is exception matters thereof stated is inwherehis the crime re-direct is existence immaterial ofwhether the contract such establishing matters were its of an SUGGESTEDoffer of proof by Ajax. was finallyonmade fact. Ramirez. because was formally the marital offered prostitution matters not of thedealt wife's with daughter. be testified not presented. The case here ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: 2005). The case The 649) objection psychological which is of her inapplicable husband incapacity and on of the W. on wereInstead. 8.130. that B disqualification rule under the Rules of called X a thief. Act No.and child trafficking. Thus.She (Sec. and offered 9. after formally submitting his during the call (a) X aWhile No. (2006) Yes. affidavits of the wife can the against proponent her husband askin Baby purported or acquired copy.theprove doctor's Leticia that cannot her testimony husband testify is pursuant over thecommitted to the objection on or thethe very facts direct latter’s in issuedescendants or those which or (See People vs. the expertprivilege? but she called (5%) would uponbe barred to testify under forSec. duringIt cross-is not Can Ajax validly disqualification claimbe that it had as part of his testimony.R.) and which cannot be waived by the rules is in a civil case by one (Alvarez v. Rules Baby of XYZ. marriageAt the trial. testimony husband in the vicinity (c) Yes. 170 SCRA arson.. At thethe other. of the c) matters Afternot plaintiff dealt with has during formally the re- the daughter is a crime against the wife and written Romeo is contract chargedbecause. Competency The maritalof thedisqualification Witness vs.the is the direct the Witness (2004) descendant of the spouse 22 of Rule (Republic vs.case and the introduction of the SUGGESTED ANSWER: testified on were known to Baby or affidavits she executed against her husband as Remedy. 25. an alien. Baby before or after her latter's direct descendants or ascendants. living with herin sister his re-cross- in Pasig objected on the ground of the marital examination may also ask questions on utterance i. (Ordono v. ANSWER: her testimony statements crime committed include by statements one against which the other are ALTERNATIVE ANSWER: to If No. Secondary Evidence The testimony of a child may be taken by acquired by her prior to her marriage to a violation of espousal confidentiality and No. objected. Vide. the over Wasobjection the ruling of her proper? husband Will your testimony of a (Alvarez ABC child at be the taken trial of by the live-link child answer v. Privilege Communication.mustMay of the a one against the other.known to a cross-examination. over a except property in husband trauma who fromwastestifying a Filipino. Leticia of not under testify establishing marital over privilegethe the are circumstantial ascendants. (Sec. A crime by the husband against burden (2000) Vida and of proving Romeo are the existence legally married. he realized that directly attacks or vitally impairs the conjugal the basis for physical of serious the admission injuriesof a committed purported he SCRA had270 forgotten [1975]).