8. Introducing the Issues After completing pre-work, you are now ready for the write-up stage. You cannot submit your outline of argument to the court because it will probably not make any sense to the judge. You alone would be able to understand your outline, Consequently, you have to flesh out your outline-argument, give it color and shape, and make it strong and convincing to your reader Need for Introduction At the start of this book, we defined legal writing as the things that lawyers write to win others over to their point of view. But you cannot just hit your reader with your point of view respecting an issue without felling him the circumstances of the case that brought about the issue. He just would not be able to see your point of view. An argument set forth without some preamble of facts can be likened to an answer that a student writes on his examination notebook, It represents his point of view on the question that the professor asked in the test paper. To illustrate this point, take this, answer in a political law question. 3. He is not right. Although the Constitution provides that no law shall be passed impairing the obligations of contract, the Supreme Court has ruled that the police power of the state empowers the legislature to enact laws regulating contracts in the interest of the public welfare. Every contract* PUNDAMENTALSOF LEGAL WRITING is presumed to carry with it the reservation that it shall be subject to laws passed subsequent to their perfection. In this case, the law in question is a valid exercise of police power since it seeks to protect the interest of the poor. Therefore, Gregorio is wrong. The law is constitutional. Can you fully grasp what the student's argument above is all about? Not likely, since you do not have the benefit of knowing the background facts and the issue behind the answer. This is not to say, of course, that a direct answer like the above will not work in a classroom setting. It will. We may presume that the professor who will check the answer knows the question that the student addresses. It will make no sense, therefore, for the student to repeat the professor’s question in his answer Unfortunately, most lawyers bring into their law practice their mindsets as students. They would often hit the judge directly with their argument without adequately introducing the issue that they present to him for resolution. They wrongly assume that the judge has the background facts planted firmly in his head and that he has been waiting with bated breath to read the pleadings as soon as these are filed. Quite often, the assumption is wrong, The judge may have read the previous pleadings in the case, he may have conducted the trial, and he may have heard the testimonies of the witnesses, but he cannot be expected to remember all these each time he reads a party’s pleading as it reaches his hands. The odds are that he would not because: a. The attention span of human beings is quite limited. Hence, the judge might be present in the course of the testimony but it is too much to expect him to have listened to everything that had been said. You cannot assume that he barred inner thoughts and other distractions during every proceeding in a case. Consequently, you have to lay to him those facts that are relevant to the issue that he would resolve. INTRODUCING THE ISSUES b. Hearings in the Philippine system a piecemeal. ‘The judge hears the testimonies of the ‘arious witnesses over some period of time, from one to five years in certain cases. Consequently, when some facts make up the issue in the case or its incident, you need to restate those facts to the judge. cts possible that the judge had gotten the facts wrong from past pleadings or during the hearing. ‘You may have to correct those impressions by recalling, the facts as they were. d. In the case of the justices of an sppelite y 's of the case +, you need to apprise them of the facts o! Simply because they did not hear the evidence and they rely on the lawyer's summaries of them. lie 1s on which he seeks Even if your own client supplied the fact your opinion zegarding an issue arising from them, you sll need {o restate those facts to him to insure that he and you ive a shared understanding of the facts. In this way, you would have no misunderstanding with him. ; cl ident’s answer in the Now, let us go back to the stu examination notebook. Since you are not the professor conectng that answer, we will reproduce for you the question asked the student. See if you can appreciate the student's answer better. ion.] The legislature enacted a law fixing, ye impose upon their tenants. Gregorio, an apartment owner, assails the Jaw as unconstitutional in BS setting the rates of rentals is not a proper an constituent function of government. Besides, the law violated the freedom of contract between apartment owners and their tenants. Is he right? Explain. wer] He is not right Although the eens provides that no law shall be passed impairing the obligations of contract, the SupremeFUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING Court has ruled that the police power of the state empowers the legislature to enact laws regulating contracts in the interest of the public welfare. Every contract is presumed to carry with it the reservation that it shall be subject to laws passed subsequent to their perfection, In this case, the law in question is a valid exercise Of police power since it seeks to protect the interest of the poor. Therefore, Gregorio is wrong, The law is constitutional. Does it not help to state the background of the legal dispute between the parties and the issue that it presents before you state your opinion or point of view on that issue? It does. Without that background, you can never hope to get your reader to understand your opinion or argument. Sufficiency of Introduction But how much background facts do you put into your Pleading or opinion to introduce the issue or issues that you will address? There is but one answer: only as much background facts as are needed for an understanding of the issue or issues that the parties present. The rules governing ordinary appeals provide the standard for sufficiency. They recognize the need for {two statements to introduce the issue or issues in a case: (a) the statement of the case; and (b) the statement of the facts. This might well be the model for other legal writings like memoranda, comments, position papers, petitions, and even decisions. The Statement of the Case The purpose of a statement of the case is to provide a clear and concise statement of the nature of the action, asummary ofthe proceedings so far had, any challenged order or decision issued in the case, and other matters necessary to an understanding of the controversy. INTRODUCING THE ISSUES, ase “necessary to an You should underline the phrase “necessary fo an ing of the controversy” because many lawy‘ d per ea wed and elaborate “statement Sean Javariably, they also throw in a detailed summary iinet ie rties allege in the complaint and the answer wher hardly needed in most cases. Take an appellant's brief that the losing party filed wa the Court of Appeals in an appeal from a Regional Trial Court's decision. The only issue the ease presented was whether ae the defendant maligned the plaintiff by Hey ecole ct her jewelry. See if this simple issue justifies t ‘teat fled up the appellants statement ofthe ease, edited to protect the identities of the persons involved. Statement of the Case ji filed a civil Plaintiff-appellee Celia De Leon action against defendant-appellant Laura coset fee damages before the Regional Trial Court of Manila where it was docketed as Civil Case No. 45678. ‘ntiff De Leon alleged in her complaint that e March 10 at the Hotel Intercontinental, in the presence of a certain Ms. Rita Young and other persons, defendant Casal maliciously, recklessly, or in bad faith injured her good name and busine reputation by accusing her of stealing her jewelry and that in making the accusation, defendant Ca allegedly stated: “Tkaw lang ang lumabas ng kwarto kanina, Nasaan ang dala mong bag? Saan ka pumunta? Ikaw lang ang lumabas ng Kuwarto; ikaw ang kumuha.’ Plaintiff De Leon further alleged ies ie ame ts were false, untrue, and malicious, by defendant Casal knowing at he Ue she wtered them that they were false and untrue; that she utteres2 FUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING them with actual malice and ill will which caused the dishonor, discredit, and contempt of plaintiff De Leon; that because of the accusation, plaintiff De Leon was bodily searched, her bag and car were also searched, and these were seen and witnessed by her friends, acquaintances, and the general public. Plaintiff De Leon likewise alleged that all the above acts committed against her were instigated and initiated by defendant Casal with actual malice and ill will, causing her dishonor and placing her in public contempt. After summons was served on defendant Casal, she filed an answer with counterclaim. She denied plaintiff De Leon’s charge, claiming that at no time was the latter singled out for confrontation or investigation much less did defendant Casal accuse her or utter the subject remarks. For filing a malicious suit against her, defendant Casal sought payment of attorney's fees by plaintiff De Leon. Later, the lower court set the case for pre-trial conference. Both parties filed their respective pre- trial briefs in compliance with an order of the lower court that calendared the case for pre-trial conference. ‘The pre-trial conference having been terminated, trial commenced with plaintiff De Leon testifying, followed by corroborating witnesses. During defendant Casal’s turn to present evidence, she had no witness but herself. The lower court rendered a decision dated August 21 holding defendant Casal liable for publicly maligning plaintiff De Leon and ordering the former to pay the latter actual and moral damages. Considering that the decision was contrary to law and the evidence, defendant Casal appealed from it to this Honorable Court. Probably, Casal’s lawyer thought that the bits of infor- ‘mation he provided in his above statement of the case would INTRODUCING THE ISSUES 8 i ing and resolving the Court of Appeals in understanding and cl that he pati lee, They would not. Firstly, the ove fe Jigned De Leon by publicly ly whether or not Casal maligi y pul ea ane her of stealing her jewelry. Making reference in the aoe rent of the case to the service of summons, to the holding of sie trial conference, and to the number of witnesses presente te either side provides no help to the court in understanding the e sf, Casal's k ould in his brief, Casal's lawyer wi Secondly, down the road in his ; vou be waitng a statement of fet that summarizes the conflicting evidence of the partes regarding the alleged “defamatory semarks, This is the place to introduce the factual issue, not i the statement of the case. P it would usually serve ides, where trial has taken place, it woul veel mee to recite in the statement of the case the allegations of the parties in their pleadings. with the evidence adduced at the trial, the court would render its d = a on the basis of those allegations but on the basis of the evi ence 0 adduced. It should be sufficient for the purpose of identifying the principal issues tendered by the pleadings to simply mention the basic legal disputes that the claims of the parties produce: Rewritten, the statement of the case, purged of non- essentials, might look like this: Statement of the Case Plaintiff-appellee Celia De Leon filed a complaint for damages against defendant-appellant Laura Casal before the Regional Tal Court of Manila in Civil Case 45678 for falsely accusing hero stealing Casal’s jewelry. Casal denied this charge in her answer and asserted a counterclaim for attorney's fees against De Leon for having filed an unjustifi suit. After trial, the lower court rendered a decision, holding defendant Casal Tiable in actual and mora damages for aligning De Leon. This prompted the latter to appeal the decision to this Court.a FUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING At times, specific allegations in a pleading constitute evidence of judicial admission and, therefore, may be vital to the case. But these allegations need not be in the statement of the case. It will usually be enough that you cite them in the argument section of your memorandum or paper. Of course, where a judgment on the pleadings or a summary judgment has been sought by one or both parties, a recitation of the allegations of the complaint and answer in the statement of the case will be useful In criminal cases, lawyers also often quote the criminal information as part of their statement of the case. Is this needed? Itis not. Unless the allegations in the information are in issue, it will be pointless to quote the contents of the information in your statement of the case. It will be sufficient to point out that the accused has been charged with a particular crime like theft or homicide. The Statement of Facts The statement of the case describes the nature of the action and the proceedings it had gone through. The “statentent of facts,” on the other hand, narrates the transaction or event that created the legal dispute and led to the filing of the suit. In an eviction case, the stalement of facts may be expected to recite that the landlord and the tenant came to an agreement over the lease, that the tenant violated the agreement, that the landlord made a demand on the tenant to vacate the property, and that the latter refused to do so. The statement of facts may also be expected to narrate the tenant's defense for declining to leave the landlord’s property. The usual concern here is whether or not your statement of facts should present only your client's version of the facts of the case. A great majority of lawyers believe that since you are expected to champion your client's side of the case, you are not required to do your opponent the favor of reciting his version of the facts in your brief. It is up to each side to present a statement of facts based on his client's version, INTRODUCING THE ISSUES any favor with a two- But you do not do your opponen ‘ sided statement of facts. Actually, you do: ae id the oat the favor of better understanding the issue and the argum: you present when you show the conflicting caims ofthe parties. Yerd this is what will serve your case well. The statement of faels, like the statement of the case, is neither intended as nor is, the place for arguments, Its function is to introduce the issue or issues that the case presents. - You may look at the structure of a memorandum, opinion, brief, petition, comment, position paper, decision, or similar legal writing as follows: STATEMENT OF THE CASE STATEMENT OF FACTS DEFENDANT'S VERSION: OF THE FACTS PLAINTIFF'S VERSION OF ‘THE FACTS ‘THE ISSUE OR ISSUES BODY OF ARGUMENTS: RELIEF ou can see from the flow of thoughts in the above diagram hax tryout purpose were to build up your facts to enable your reader or the court to have a full grasp of the issue or aie you intend to argue, then it makes no sense to present only one side's version of the facts. Issues are the product of alsserecin a Only by fairly showing the conflicting claims of the penile the court or your reader truly understand the issues that er ‘Jude their ‘ides, the Rules of Court require parties to include thei conticting claims in their respective statement of facts. Section 13(@) of Rule 44 requires the appellant’ statement of facts to make “a clear and concise statement in a narrative form ee he facts admitted by both parties and of those in conker i the case of the appellee’s brief, Section 14(b) requires the appelle8 FUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING merely to state whether he accepts the statement of facts in the appeliant’s brief, which includes the conflicting versions. If he does not, he should merely point out its insufficiencies or, inaccuracies without repeating the matters in the appellant's statement of facts. Since the background facts are meant to give the judge or the reader a fair understanding of the case and the issues that the Parties present, you should fairly state your opponent's version Of those facts. You should not report that version with a slant in your favor, whether obvious or subtle, believing that you will gain some advantage in this way. The background facts are not the place for argument or for opinionated narrative. The reader will eventually see your unfair tactics and your distortions may boomerang on you. The next question is how much details must go into your statement of the facts? The test of sufficiency of the statement of facts of your pleading is its ability to enable the judge or the reader to understand, with minimum words, the issue or issues that you want him to resolve and the arguments that you adduce on those issues. Many students and lawyers feel insecure about an austere statement of facts. They strongly feel that, unless the statement of facts includes all the details that the evidence yields, whether or not these are remotely relevant to the issue or issues presented, their facts would be incomplete. A good number of them also feel that, unless evidence favorable to their case is included in their statement of facts, they could not use it in their arguments. They forget that the purpose of the statement of facts is merely to provide a background of the transaction or event involved to enable the court or the reader to see the issues in their proper context. Remember the defamation case discussed above? The appellant's brief (also edited) has been reproduced below. Its statement of the case and statement of facts are quite lean but observe how the argument section pours out all the needed evidentiary details, including quotations from critical portions INTRODUCING serve, too, how the recital transcripts of testimonies. Observe, too, Fi Be two vcaeie of the facts of the case does not result in the of giving of advantage to the opposite side. [CAPTION OMITTED] Defendant-appellant Laura Casal, by counsel, respectfully states: Statement of the Case intiff-appellee Celia De Leon filed a Laura Casal before the Regional Trial Court of Manila in Civil Case 45678 for falsely accusing her of stealing Casal’s jewelry. Casal denied this charge in her answer and asserted a counterclaim for attorney's fees against De Leon for having filed an unjustified suit. After trial, the lower court rendered a decision, holding Casal liable in actual and moral damages for maligning De Leon. This prompted the latter to appeal the decision to this Court. Statement of Facts Plaintiff De Leon testified that at 4:30 p.m. on March 10 she dropped in, as wedding coordinator, at a room at the Hotel Intercontinental in Makati to see the bride who was then preparing for her wedding at anearby church.’ De Leon left after a few minutes to attend to the venue of the reception? At about 5 p.m., she returned to the bride's room where defendant Casal, the bride’s cousin, confronted her, claiming, that she must have taken her jewelry becauseFUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING she alone came in and out of the room. Casal’s jewelry was missing.’ The hotel called the police to investigate the matter. They searched De Leon and took her fingerprints. Casal testified, on the other hand, that she brought with her to the bride's room a paper bag containing the things that she would wear and a set of jewelry valued at about P1 million.’ She waited for her turn to be made-up and, meantime, placed her paper bag on a table.’ The others in the room were the bride’s parents, other relatives, the couturier, and the make-up artists. De Leon came in but left after some minutes.’ After she had been made-up, Casal went to the bathroom to put on her gown. When she later searched the paper bag for her jewelry, it was gone.” ‘The police searched the room but did not find it. ‘They investigated those who had access to the room, including De Leon.” Casal denied confronting the latter and implying that she took the jewelry.” Later after the wedding, the police came and took the fingerprints of all the people who had access to the bride's room at the time of the loss.” Statement of the Issue The only issue in this case is whether or not Casal maligned De Leon by publicly accusing her of stealing her jewelry. 3a, p24 ss, p. 27 Hdl, p29. TSN, May 27, 9.9. 4d, p10 Mid, p12 Mia, p. 14 “d..p. 17. id p 18 “ia p.21 eden INTRODUCING THE ISSUES L CASAL DID NOT PUBLICLY ACCUSE DE LEON OF STEALING HER JEWELRY ‘The trial court gave credence to De Leon’s testimony that Casal singled her out as the jewelry thief, telling her in the presence of others, “Ikaww lang ‘ang lumabas ng kwarto, nasaan ang dala mong bag? Saan ka pumunta? Tkaw lang ang lumabas ng kuwarto, ikaw ang kumuha.” The trial court concluded from this that Casal indeed publicly humiliated her without justification. But the trial court ignored the other significant portions of De Leon’s testimony. She said in Contradiction to the above that she learned she had been suspected because a certain Noel later told her that the group of Casal had their eyes on her. Thus, Q: What did Mr Sanchez, the bridegroom's father, tell you? A: He said, “What happened at the hotel? It is a shame that someone from the bride’s side lost her jewelry.” Q: Then what did you answer? ‘A: I told him that what happened to me is more shameful because I was merely going about my work and I had been suspected. He then told me, “Suspected, who told you that you had been suspected?” I pointed to Noel and I said, “He told me that I had been suspected.” And then Mr. Sanchez faced Noel, “Young man, from whom did you learn that Celia had been suspected as the jewelry thief?” And Noel said, “From Mrs. Casal’s group, sir.” * TEN, May 22. 2003, pp. 19-20. 9FUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING ‘The above is a revelation. For, if it were true that Casal had publicly accused her of taking the jewelry when she went into the bride’s room, what was the point in her claiming after that public confrontation that it was from Noel that she learned she had been suspected? This is absurd. Clearly, De Leon’s initial statement had been a lie. Basic is the rule that, to be believed, a testimony should be in accord with the common order of things."* Besides, Mrs. Villanueva, De Leon’s own witness did not confirm what De Leon said. Mrs. Villanueva testified that what Casal said was, “Siya lang yung nakita kong galing sa C.R.’" However interpreted, this statement did not at all suggest that Casal had publicly and maliciously accused De Leon of stealing, the jewelry. Further, De Leon admitted in the course of her testimony that she learned of Casal’s loss of her jewelry only on the following day, March 11. Indeed, ‘as she testified, she could not believe what Mr. Mariano told her concerning such loss. Thus: Q: After that what happened next? A: Mr Mariano said, “The reason, young lady, is that Mrs. Casal had lost her jewelry worth P1 million.” Q: And then what happened? A: And then I said, “She lost it? She should have been careful considering how expensive the jewelry was.” Our conversation ended there.” "People v Baquiran, |-20153, June 29, 1967; People v. Acusar, 82 Phi 490 Pople v Maron, G.R. 56858, December 27, 1982 ‘TSN, June 18, pp. 8-10, TSN; May 22, pp. 35-36. INTRODUCING THE ISSUES Q: While you were still in the room the people there were excitedly talking about what happened, is that right? [Az Yes. But I did not know what was missing at that time. Q: But later you were informed that what was missing was the jewelry in the paper bag? A: No. I was informed the following day. Q: And who informed you the following day that what got lost was the jewelry of Mrs. Casal? ‘A: Mr. Mariano, He was the father of the bride." If De Leon learned of the fact of loss of the jewelry only on the following day, March 11, what Was her basis in claiming that in the afternoon of ‘October 10 when she stepped into the bride’s room at the hotel a second time, Casal publicly accused her of taking her jewelry? Her claim makes no sense. ASSUMING CASAL SAID THE WORDS IMPUTED TO HER, IT IS NOT SHOWN THAT SHE DID SO MALICIOUSLY AND IN BAD FAITH. ‘The trial court ruled that by the words she used, “Tkaw lang ang Iumabas ng kwarto, nasaan ang dala ‘mong bag? San ka pumunta? Tkaw lang ang lumabas ng kutvarto, ikaw ang kumuha,” Casal implied by this that only De Leon could have taken the jewelry. She made this accusation with malice and bad faith since she did so without any solid proof. But, assuming that Casal indeed uttered those words, the circumstances show that she did not do so TB ne 9. 28:27 onFUNDAMENTALS OF LEGAL WRITING maliciously or in bad faith. Malice is defined as the intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause or excuse, with intent to inflict an injury or under circumstances that the law will imply an evil intent.” In libel and slander, malice involves an evil intent or motive arising from spite or ill will or personal hatred.” In the law of malicious prosecution, it is the intentional doing of a wrongful act without legal justification, and may be inferred from the absence ‘of probable cause." It cannot be said that an accusation expressed during a startling event, when the person who made it was in a state of shock or disbelief at her loss, made it with deliberate malice. Things happened spontaneously. Casal could not have had the opportunity to reflect and deliberate on her action upon discovering her loss. She uttered what first came into her mind, a natural thing under the circumstances. Besides, her suspicion of De Leon was not altogether baseless. Admittedly, the latter went in and out of the room hurriedly.” She said so herself. Clearly, Casal was not motivated by any ill will or personal hatred when she supposedly uttered her suspicion. And when she supposedly sought an investigation of the incident focusing on De Leon, she merely exercised her right. Qui jure suo utitur nulum damnum facit. One who exercises his rights does no injury. Even if damage results from a person's exercising his legal rights, it is damnum absque injuria. Blocks Law Dicionary, 6th Ed, 1900. ‘Becker v. Brinkop, 290 Mo. App. 871, 78 SW. 24538, 541 Palermo v. Coltom, Mo. App, 625 S.W. 20 758, ETSN, May 27, p. 9 TSN, May 27, pp. 11-12 INTRODUCING THE ISSUES 3 In fact, however, the investigation did not single ‘out De Leon. All the people in the room at that time were interviewed, their bags were searched, and their fingerprints taken. The relatives of Casal were not spared from the interrogation, the body and bag search, and the fingerprinting.” Closing Statement It does frequently happen that some valuable things are suddenly discovered stolen in a big household, in a classroom, or in an office full of personnel. Since it is likely that only one was a thief, would it be best that the loss be endured and overlooked for the sake of protecting the sensibilities of the greater number who are presumably innocent? Surely not, since it is finding out the truth by investigating and searching everyone who had the opportunity of committing the offense that will remove the cloud of suspicion from him, Feelings might get hurt but the truth will set every one free. Relief WHEREFORE, defendant-appellant Laura Casal respectfully prays the Court to set aside the decision of the trial court dated August 17 and dismiss the ‘complaint against her. ‘The next question is: in preparing your statement of facts, must you source your facts from both the direct and cross- examination of the witnesses from either side? Where the parties have conflicting versions, it would seem best when you prepare the background or introductory facts to extract your facts *TSN, June 4, pp. 19:21SOF LEGAL WRITING testimonies of the witnesses from either of witnesses, as a rule, embody the When the cross-examinations have done some damage to the testimony of your opponent's witnesses, use these in the argument portion where they would have greater impact and telling effect Short Introductions o introduce the issue with some background facts or ar circumstances (the equivalent of the statement of facts) is not limited to a memorandum that a party submits tial, They work, too, for incidental issues brought up in after the course of the proceedings. Take for example this motion to quash a criminal information filed in an estafa case. The motion sae nly be understood if the argument is preceded by a recital che information that the party seeks to quash. Observe how the issue then flows into the argument. {CAPTION OMITTED] MOTION TO QUASH ‘Accused Sergio M. Lazaro, by counsel, respectfully states: ‘The Charge ‘The prosecution has accused Sergio M. Lazaro of estafa by misappropriation or conversion under ‘Article 315, paragraph 1(B), of the Revised Penal Code. The information reads: ‘That on or about August 15 in Makati City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, while acting for and in behalf of Lovely Garments Corporation, obtained from Asiatic Bank a Joan in the amount of ONE HUNDRED