Replevin

Insufficiency of Bond= not a mode of extinguishment of writ of replevin. Redelivery Bond

Expropriation .

5. Yes. Upon filing of complaint, the writ of possession can be granted upon deposit equivalent to zonal
valuation. Wag mong sabihin just compensation.

If No yung answer mo. Mandamus is only directed against a ministerial function, and determination is
not a ministerial function, not discretionary function.

6.

Decided plaintiff’s appeal.

 IN Unlawful dEtainer and Forcible Entry is unlawful possession. When issue of ownership is
raised in pleading, the court must resolve the ownership only to resolve the issue of possession.
The determination here is only provisional. Can there be another action of recovery of
ownership. The determiniation of RTC on issue of ownership is correct. There is no excess of
jurisdiction here.
 The resolution is valid on ownership, for purpose of resolving possession

Assume that the appellate court reverse the judgment of trial court, (meaning appeal na sa CA).

 Petition for Review under Rule 42 w/ prayer for Injunction

7. Yes. Judgment for money na ito. Under Rule 86 ito.

8.

Will the petition before the RTC prosper?

 Yes. This is on the assumption that parent did not file. 4 yung pwedeng magfile relative, spouse,
ascendant’s, descendants and organization. It is not an issue of jurisdiction.

How will the Criminal action affect?

 Suspend the amparo petition w/o prejudice to consolidation. However, if the criminal action will
filed first, the amparo prescribe and will file by motion.

9. Tinatanong ditto ay requisite ng Adoption and Change of Name (Rule 103, as amended by RA 9048)

Icite ang requisite of Adoption (9 Requisites) and Change of Name

10. Yes. Doctrine of Interlocking Confession. It is one of the exception which is not cited in the Rule.
Doctrine of Interlocking confession apply here w/c is an exception to Res Inter Alius Acta Rule.

11. “Identification”. Make a distinction based on Doctrine of Incomplete testimony. Admissible

depending of who is at fault. Right to cross examine is clearly a statutory right. When a party is not given
a chance to cross examine not due to his fault, not afforded his right.

b. Evidence is inadmissible due to lack of due processNote: Hindi pwedeng pareho ang sagot dito.

12.

a. May Erlinda testify on this statement.

> Yes. When you are in Articulo Mortis (@ the point of death), hindi sinabi that he died. Kung ang sagot
mo Dying Declaration, this is on the assumption that he died. It cannot be res gestae, after 3 days.
(Jurisprudence: maximum of 6hrs.)

Yes. Under the new Rules on Evidence. Original Duplicate is considered as original. This is not hearsay
because this is consider as public records. (1) regularity of performance (2) personal knowledge.

13. In what instances if any may Deed of Sale be altered by Parole Evidence?= (Note: Always arrive at
the conclusion, sabihin mo Therefore…). True Intention (“it must be raised in the pleading”).

14. Defense is not valid. Conclusive Presumption.