£722-20H ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW REMEDIAL LAW DEPARTMENT SYLLABUS: SCHOOL YEAR 2020-2021 JL LAW REVIEW I Covers Civil and Criminal Procedures ‘By: Henedino M. Brondial CIVIL, PROCEDURE (As amended by AM. No. 19-10-20SC, effective May 1, 2020) |. JURISDICTION A. Classes of Jurisdiction Jurisdiction according to its nature: original, appellate Jurisdiction according to its object; corresponding principles i._over the subject matter ii, over the persons of the partes fii, over the “res” iv. over the issues vy, over the teritory BB. Elements of Jurisdiction: subject matter, paris, issues . Jurisdiction of Regular Courts 1. Supreme Court 2. Courts of Appeals 3. Regional Trial Court {A Intellectual Property Courts B. Special Courts 4, Family Courts 5. Metropolitan Trial Cours ‘Municipal Trial Court in cities ‘Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Courts 6, Sandiganbayan ‘Hannah Serana vs. Sandiganbayan, 653 SCRA (2011) ‘Duncano vs, Sandiganbayan, 762 SCRA (2015) De Lima vs. Guerrero, 843 SCRA (2017) 7. Court of Tax-Appeals City of Manila vs, Judge Cuerdo, February 4, 2014 ‘CE Caseenan Water & Energy Co, vs. Prov. Of Nueva Ketia 759 CRA 180 ‘Quasi-hudicial Tribunals (See. 1, Rule 43) Sharia’h Courts: appellate, district, circuit Lomondot vs. Balindong, 762 SCRA 494 “Municipality of Tangkal vs. Balindong, 814 SCRA (2017). Diseuss the concept, description and application of the following: 1, Delegated jurisdiction 2. Special jurisdiction 3. Limited jurisdiction 4 Primary jurisdiction Unduran vs. Aberasturl, 823 SCRA (2017) LBP vs. Dalauta, 835 SCRA (2017) 5, Residual jurisdiction ‘Dev. Bank of the Phil, Vs. Carpio, 816 SCRA (2017) ‘©. Requisite: trial, judgment, appeal 6. Equity jurisdiction ‘Regulus Dev. Inc, v8. De la Cruz, 781 SCREA (2016) 17, Bpistolary jurisdiction Resident Marine Mammals vs. Reyes, 756 SCRA (2013) 8, Split jurisdiction City of Manila vs. Judge Cuerdo (2014) 9, Expanded/Extended jurisdiction Edel Lagman vs, Pimentel Il, 854 SCRA (2018) References 1. Section 5, Article VIIL, 1986 Constitution 2, Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980 3. BP. Big 129 4, RA 7691 5. RA 8369 (Family Courts Act) 6. SC-AO No, 113-95- Intellectual Property Courts 7. PD 1486; 1606 (Sandiganbayan) 8. RA 7975, 8249, 10660 (Sandiganbayan) 9, RA 9282 (Court of Tax Appeals) 10.RA 9084 (Sharia’h Courts) Other Cases On: Jurisdictional estoppel 1. Duero vs CA~373 SCRA 11 2. Gonzaga vs CA - 394 SCRA 472 3, Manila Bankers vs. Ng Kok Wei, 418 SCRA 4 Boston Equity Resources, Inc. vs. CA, 699 SCRA, Hierarchy of Cours ‘5. Agan vs. Piato, 420 SCRA 6. Liga Ng Mga Barangay vs. Atienza, 420 SCRA. 7. St. Mary Crusade Fndtn vs. Riel, 785 SCRA. 8 Intramuros Administration vs. Offshore Construction ‘And Development Co, 857 SCRA (2017) 9, Bureau of Customs vs. Gallegos Residual Prerogtives 10. Katon vs. Palanca, 437 SCRA. ‘Concurrent Jurisdiction: Pat-og vs. CSC, 697 SCRA (2013) ‘Actions incapable of pecuniary estimation; Firs Sarmiento Property “Holdings, Inc. vs. Phil Bank of Communications, June 19, 2018 “Justice Leonen, en bane (note: for class discussion)UL. RULES 1105 ‘A, Actions: Commencement (Sections 3 and 5, R-1) Cases: ‘Alday vs. FGU Insurance 350 SCRA Mercado vs. CA, 569 SCRA Proton Pilipinas vs. Banque Nationale de Paris, 460 SCRA Ruby Shelter Builders vs, Formaran, 578 SCRA 283 ‘St Louis University vs. Cobarrubias,626 SCRA 649 * Gipa vs. Souther Luzon Institute, 726 SCRA, June 18, 2014 * Sy-Vargas vs. Estale of Ogsos, 805 SCRA (2016) 8, Camaso vs. TSM Shipping Ine., 807 SCRA (2016) BB. One suit for one action (See. 3, R-2) Splitting a single cause of action (See. 4, R-2) Joinder of Causes of action (S-5. R-2) ‘Case: Dynamic Builders vs, Presbitero, 795 SCRA 90 (2015) = No injunction against national govt projects . Parties to Civil Actions (S-1, R-3) Joinder of Paris (S-6, 7, R-3) Indispensable and Necessary Parties (S-7.8, R-3) Class Suit ($-12, R-3) Deall or Separation of a Party (S 16,17,18, R-3) ‘Transfer of Interest (S-19, R-3) ‘Contractual Money Claims (S-20, R-3) Cases: 1. Relucio vs. Lopez, 373 SCRA 578 De Castro vs CA 386 SCRA 301 * COrquiola vs CA ~389 SCRA 461 China Banking Corp, vs Oliver ~390 SCRA 263 * David vs. Paragas, Jr 751 SCRA 648 * [Land Bank vs. Cacayuran, 757 SCRA, April 22, 2015 * [Cotte Phils. Co, Ine. vs. Dela Cruz ~ 464 SCRA 591 Carabeo vs. Dingeo, 647 SCRA 200 * De la Cruz vs, Joaquin ~ 464 SCRA 576 10, Navarto vs, Escobido, 606 SCRA 1 11, Divinagracia vs, Parla, 753 SCRA 87 12. Enrique vda de Santiago vs. Vilar, 857 SCRA (2017) . Venue of Actions: real actions, personal ations Cases: 1. Pacific Consultants Intemational Asia vs, Schonfeld - 516 SCRA. 2. Biaco vs. Counbtryside Rural bank ~ 515 SCRA 106 3. BPI Savings Bank vs. Sps. Yujuico ~ 763 SCRA 486 (7/2015) 44 Planters Dev. Bank vs. Ramos, 840 SCRA (2017) , Summary Procedure vs. Small Claims suit= What are their salient characteristics © How to determine ifthe case is summary or under small claims = OCA 45-2019: increased amount of small claims to P400,000 * ALL. Ang Network Ine. vs. Mondejar, 714 SCRA (1/28/14) IL RULE 6-Kinds of Pleadings (Sections 1-13) A. Pleadings: Complaint, Answer, Counterclaim, Cross-claim, Reply, ‘Third-Party Complaint, Counter-counterclaim, Intervention = Compulsory vs. Permissive counterclaim B, Defenses: Negative, Affirmative, Negative Pregnant Cases ‘Alba vs. Malapajo - 780 SCRA 534 ‘Lim Teck Chuan vs. Uy -752 SCRA 268 ‘Metrobank vs. CPR Promotions -760 SCRA 59 Valdez vs, Dabon - 775 SCRA 1 Republic vs. Sandiganbayan — 406 SCRA 190 CCaneland Sugar Corp. vs, Alon ~ $33 SCRA 28 IV, RULE 7; Parts and Contents of a Pleading (Sections 1-6) ‘A, Parts: Caption, Body, Retief, Date 1B, Signature and Address C. Distinguish Verification and Certification 1D, Distinguish Parts from Contents Cases: 1. Alma Jose vs. Javellana - 664 SCRA | 2, Medado vs, Heirs of Antonio Consing ~ 665 SCRA 534 3. COA ys. Paler -614 SCRA 44 Basan vs. Coca-Cola Bottlers Phils, 749 SCRA S41 5. Uy vs, CA~770 SCRA S13. 6. People vs. Arojado— 774 SCRA 193 7. Powerhouse vs. Rey, 807 SCRA (2016) 8. Heirs of osefina Gabriel vs. Segundina Cebrero, Nov, 12, 2018 \V. RULE 8: Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings (Sections 1-13) ‘A. Allegations in Pleadings: ultimate facts and evidence B. Actionable documents: how to allege, how to contest CC. Affirmative defenses inthe Answer, effects Cases: |. Femando Medical Enterprises vs. Wesleyan University, 781 SCRA 508, January 20, 20162. Go Tong Electrical Supply vs. BPI Family Savings Bank 760 SCRA 486 3. Asian Const, & Dev. Corp. vs. CA - 458 SCRA 44 Benguet Exploration Inc. vs. CA ~351 SCRA. Vi, RULE 9: Effect of Failure to Plead (Sections 1-3) A. Effect of Failure to Plead B. Waiver of defenses and objections , Default: = when to declare how to declare + Order of Default vs, Judgment by Default remedies Cases: 1, BDO Ws. Tansipek ~ 593 SCRA 456 2. Salvador vs. Rabaja— 749 SCRA 654 3. Bitte vs, Jonas ~ 777 SCRA 489 VIL. RULE 10: Amended and Supplemental Pleadings (Sections 1-9) A. Amendments: 1) a mater of right ora matter of diseretion 2) formal or substantial 'B. Amendments to conform tothe evidence, not necessary C. Effects of amendments 'D, Supplemental Pleadings Cases: 1. Yujuico vs. United Resources Asset Met. Corp. ~ 760 SCRA 2. Lisam Enterprises vs. Banco De Oro ~670 SCRA 3. Ti vs, Phil. Bank of Communications ~ 596 SCRA 432 “4 Remington Industil Sales Corp. vs. CA -382 SCRA 499 Vill, RULE 11: When to File Responsive Pleadings (Sections 1-11) Notes the changes in the periods to file responsive pleadings 1. Answer: a) 30 calendar day from summons 'b) 60 calendar days when de. is foreign private corp. ©) 30 calendar days when complaint is amended as ‘amatter of right; otherwise, 15 calendar days 4) 30/15 to amended counterciaim, cross-claim, third-party complaint, complaint-in-intervention ©) 20 calendar days to supplemental complaint 2, Reply: 15 calendar days = Extension of time to file responsive pleadings: only once, 15 eal. daysIX, RULE 12: Bill of Particulars (Sections -6) = When applied/purpose = Compliance vs, non-compliance °X. RULE 13: Filing and Service of Pleadings, Judgments and Other Papers (Sections 1-19) A. Distinguish Filing ftom Service B, Manner of Filing; Modes of Service = service by electronic means and facsimile = what is presumptive service what is conventional service is there still priority inthe mode of service? C. Completeness of Filing/Service D. Proof of Filing/Service E. Notice of Lis Pendens Cases: 1. Paileo vs, Planters Dev. Bank ~738 SCRA 2, Heirs of Numeriano Miranda vs. Miranda - 700 SCRA XI, RULE 14: Summons (Sections 1-23) 'A. What is @ Summons; Alias Summons BB, Who issues summons C. Who serves summons . To whom served = to entity without juridical personality (S-7) = to prisoners (S-8) “to minors and incompetents(S-10) to spouses ($-11) “to juridical entities: public or private; domestic or foreign E, Kinds of Summons ‘4 Service in person (S-5) ». Substituted (S-6) ce. Extraterritorial (S17) 1. personal 2. publication 3. any mode «Publication (S-16) F, Proofs of Service (S-21,22) G. Voluntary Appearance (-23) Cases: 1, Valmonte vs CA-252 SCRA . 2. Millenium Ind. & Com. Corp, vs Tan- 326 SCRA. 3. EB, Villarosa vs. Benito ~ 312 SCRA 64, Santos vs, PNOC Exploration, 566 SCRA 272 5. Mason vs. CA, 413 SCRA. 6. Jose vs. Boyon, 414 SCRA 7. Manotoc vs. CA - 499 SCRA 21 8. Ong vs. Co, February 25, 2015 9. Domagas vs. Jensen ~ 448 SCRA 663, 10.Dole Phil. Vs. Quilala~557 SCRA 433, 11 Green Star Express v. Nissin Universal Robina Corp — 761 SCRA 12. Guy vs. Gacott - 780 SCRA $79 (1/13/16) 13. GY. Florida Transit In. vs. Tiara Commercial Corporation ‘842 SCRA, October 18, 2017 On voluntary appearance: 1. Sunrise Garden Corp. vs, CA ~771 SCRA 616 2, Tujan-Militante vs. Nustad, 872 SCRA (2017) XIL RULES 15: Motions (Sections 1-13) Definition Requirements Kinds: litigious; nonlitigious ‘Omnibus Motion Prohibited Motions Dismissal with prejudice 1. Republic vs, Dimarucut, 857 SCRA (2017) 2, Acampado vss, Cosmilla, 71 SCRA 3. Laude vs. Gines-Jabalde, 775 SCRA 4.De Guzman vs. Ochoa, 684 SCRA. mrone> ro Note: Rule 16 has been deleted and/or transposed XII, RULE 17: Dismissal of Actions (Sections 1-4) ‘A. Dismissal Upon Notice (S-1) B, Dismissal Upon Motion (S-2) . Dismissal due to plaintif's fault (S-3) Cases: 1. Blay vs. VBana, 858 SCRA, 3/7/2018 2. Lim Tech Chuan, 752 SCRA 268 3. Ching vs. Cheng, 737 SCRA, XIV. RULE 18: Pre-Trial (Seotions 1-10) ‘A. When conducted . B. Nature and Purpose . NoticeNote: A. D. Effet of failure to appear E, Pre-ial BriefPre-trial Order F. Meditions G. Judicial Dispute Resolutions M. No. 03-1-09 Supreme Cour effective August 16, 2004 (Guidelines te observed by trial courts judges and clerks of court in the conduct of pre-trial and use of deposition-discovery measures) XV. RULE 19: Intervention (Sections 1-4) = Who may intervene (S-1) = When to intervene (S-2) Cases: 1. Office ofthe Ombudsman vs. Sison, 612 SCRA. Compare with Ombudsman vs. Chavez, 700 SCRA. ‘Anonuevo vs, Intestate Estate of Jalandoni, 636 SCRA. Rodriguez vs. CA, 698 SCRA 352 Femandez vs. CA, 691 SCRA 167 Yao vs. Perello, 414 SCRA Pinlac-vs. CA, 410 SCRA 7. Chipongian vs, Benitez-Lirio -768 SCRA 204 XVI. RULES 20 10 22 ‘A. Calendar of Cases (Sections 1-2) B. Subpoena (Sections 1-10) C. Computation of Time (Sections1-2) XVI. RULES 23-29: MODES OF DISCOVERY A. Rule 23: Depositions Pending Actions (Sections 1-29) 1. Use of depositions (S-4) b, Officers to take depositions (S-10, 11,12) «. Deposition upon oral examination (S-15) 4. Deposition upon written interrogatories (S-25) ¢ Effets of erors and irregularities (S-29) ‘People vs. M.C. Sergio and J. Lacanilao, October 9, 2019 = Rule 23 was applied in a criminal case (Note: for class discussion) Cases: 1, Dasmarinas Garments, Inc, vs, Reyes, 225 SCRA. 2. People vs. Webb, 312 SCRA 3. Vda de Manguerra vs. Risos, 563 SCRA 44. Disini vs. Sandiganbayan, 623 SCRA 5. Go vs, People, 677 SCRA 'B. Rule 24: Depositons Before Actions or Pending Appeal (Sections 1-7)C. Rule 25: Imerrogatories to Parties (Sections 1-6) Cases: 1. Afulugencia vs. Met bank,715 SCRA. 2. Phil, Health vs. Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital, 744 SCRA ~ Effect of faifure to serve writen interrogatories 1D. Rule 26: Admission by Adverse Party (Sections 1-5) ~ Effect to failure to file and serve request for admission (Case: Duque vs. Yu, 856 SCRA (2017) Rule 27: Production or Inspection of Documents of Things(one Section) F, Rule 28: Physical and Mental Examination of Persons (Sections 1-8) G. Rule 29: Refusal © Comply with Modes of Discovery (Sections 1-6) XVIII. RULE 30: Trial (Sections 1-9) ‘A. Schedule of Trial (5-1) B. Adjoumments and Postponement ($-2,3,4) C. Order of Trial (8-5) D. Reception of Evidence ($-9) compare with Rule 119:ril in criminal eases XIX, RULE 31: Consolidation or Severance (Sections 1-2) Consolidation ($-1) Cases: Rep. vs. Heirs of Enrique Oribello, 692 SCRA Marano vs. Pryce Gases Inc, 755 SCRA Severance (S-2) ‘Case: Metrobank vs. Sandoval, 691 SCRA XX. RULE 32: Trial By Commissioner (Sections 1-13) ~ Distinguish from tral with Assessors XXI RULE 33: Demurrer to Evidence ((Sections 1-2) ‘A, Demurrer to Evidence = Distinguish between civil and criminal actions ‘The similarities and differences between them. Bemardo vs. CA ~278 SCRA 782 (abandoned?) Radiowealth Finance Co. vs. Del Rosario ~ 335 SCRA 288 CCabador vs. People ~ 602 SCRA 760 Claudio vs, Saraza ~ 768 SCRA 356 Felipe vs. MGM Motor Trading Corp. - 771 SCRA 360 Republic vs, Gimenez ~ 778 SCRA 261 (1/11/16) Macapagal-Arroyo vs. People, July 19, 2016XXII. RULE 34 & 35: Judgment on the Pleadings (Sections 1-2) ‘Summary Judgment (Sections 1-6) Cases: 1. Republic vs. Shell Petroleum Corp. ~ 777 SCRA393 2. Comelas Corp. vs, Santos Car Check Center ~754 SCRA 481, 53 Phil Bank of Communications vs. Go. ~642 SCRA 44 Adolfo vs, Adolfo -753 SCRA 580 XXIII, RULE 36: Judgments, Final Orders and Entry Thereof (Sections 1-6) = When is judgment deemed entered? Effet? 6. Several judgments (S-4) 7. Separate judgments (S-5) 8. Judgments against entities without personality (S-6) Case: FASAP vs PAL, 858 SCRA (for clas discussion) REMEDIES AGAINST FINAL Jt ENTS XXIV, RULE 37; New Trial or Reconsideration, Grounds for New Teal (S-1) ~ Grounds for Reconsideration (S-1) “Effects of a Grant or Denial ($-6,7.8) Cases: 1, Mendezona vs. Ozamis ~ 376 SCRA 2 People vs. Lika Kim ~ 429 SCRA 169 3 Padilla Rumbaua vs, Rumbaua ~ 596 SCRA 15 44 Chua vs. People -762 SCRA 523 5. Sent vs, Peofple ~ 778 SCRA 425 (1/11/16) XXV. RULES 40-45 (APPEALS) A. Appeal from MTC to RTC (R-40) Perfection of Appeal (S-!) Docket Fees (S-5) ‘Appeals from order of dismissal (S-8) ‘De Vera vs, Santiago, 759 SCRA 431 (2015) B, Appeal from RTC to CA (R-41) ‘Modes of Appeal (S-2) Notice of Appeal vs Record on Appeal (S-5,6) Perfection of Appeal (S-9) Heirs of Arturo Garcia vs. Mun, of Iba, 763 SCRA 349 . Petition for Review from RTC to CA (R42) How appeal taken (S-1) Failure to comply with requirements (S-3) Perfection of Appeal (S-8) ‘Maravilla vs. Rios, 767 SCRA $22 2015). Appeals from QUA f0 CA (R-43) ‘Contents of Petition (S-6) ‘Action on Petition (S-8) Effect of Appeal (S-12) Galindez vs. Firmalan, 864 SCRA 282 (June 2018) . Ordinary Appealed Cases to the CA (R-#4) ‘Appellants Brief (S-7) ‘Appellees Brief (S-8) ‘De los Santos vs. Lucenio, 859 SCRA 449 (March 2018) F. Appeal by Certorari (R45) ‘Contents of Petition (S-4) ‘Requirements (S-7) ‘Mendoza vs, Palugod, 867 SCRA 299 (2018) ‘Kensonie, Inc 8. UNI-Line Muli Resources, 864 SCRA 560 G., Dismissal of Appeal (R-S0) Valderama vs. Argueles, 860 SCRA 188 (2018) Material Data Rule (S-1) Fresh period Rule: Fortune Life Insurance vs, COA, 845 SCRA (Nov. 21, 2017) - Mi 'S AGAINS rORY XXVI, RULES 38 and 47 AA. Relief from Judgments (R-38) Petition for Relief from Judgment (S-1) Petition for Relief from Denial of Appeal (S-2) “Time for filing Petition (S-3) Preliminary Injunction (S-5) Cases: 1, Mesina vs, Meer ~ 383 SCRA62S 2. The Provincial Government of Aurora Vs, Maroo — 757 SCRA 222 3. Thomasites Centr for International Studies Vs, Rodriguez ~ 782 SCRA 391 (1/27/16) B, Annulment of Judgment (R-47) Coverage. Grounds, Period (S-1,2,3) Contents (S-8) Effect ($-7) Cases: 1. Diona vs. Balangue - 688 SCRA 22 2, Santos vs, Santos - 737 SCRA 637 3. Yuk Lik Ong vs. Co ~ 752 SCRA 42 3, Lasala vs, National Food Authority ~ 767 SCRA 430 4 Manguba vs. Morga-Seva -775 SCRA 312 '5.Sibal vs. Buquel - 778 SCRA 517 (1/11/16)XXVIL RULE 39- EXECUTION AND SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENTS |A. Kinds of Execution 1. Matter of right, ministerial (S-1) 2. Diseretionary (S-2) 1. slay of discretionary execution (S-3) bi, judgments not stayed by appeal (S-4) ‘Cases on execution pending appea: Banes vs. Banes, 374SCRA 340 ‘Santos vs. COMELEC, 399 SCRA 611 FEBTC vs, Toh, 404 SCRA ‘Sironghold Insurance vs. Felix, 508 SCRA ‘Abenion vs, Shell Petroleum, 816 SCRA (2017) ‘Ocampo vs. Bnriquee, 835 SCRA484 (2017) B, Mode of Execution 1. By motion (S-6) Villareal vs. MWSS, 857 SCRA 162 RCBC vs, Sera, 701 SCRA 124 2, By independent action (S-6) ‘Davis vs. Davis, 858 SCRA 145 Panotes vs. Townhouse Dev. Corp., $12 SCRA CC. Manner of Execution 1. when party is dead (S-7) 2. when judgment i for money (S-6) 3. when judgment is for specific act (S-10) 14 when itis a special judgment (5-11) . Properties exempt from exeeution (S-13) ’D Armoured Security Agency vs. Orpia, 461 SCRA 312 , Third Party Claim (S-16) PSALM vs. Maunlad Homes, Inc, 817 SCRA (2/8/17) , Execution Sale (S-17 0 26) G. Redemption: 1 The right of redemption vs equity of redemption 2. Who may redeem (S-27) 3. Eifects of redemption ($-29) H. Other remedies to fully satisfy judgment 1. Examination of judgment obligor ($-36) 21 Examination of obligor ofjudgment-obligor (S-37) 3. Appointment of receiver (5-41) 44 Sale of ascertainable interest (S-42) 1. Judgment: principal vs surety (S46) J. Effet of Judgment (S-7) 1. in rem 2. in personam 5. res judicata City of Cebu vs. Dedamo, 689 SCRA K. Effect of foreign judgment (S-48) ‘Fwiki vs. Marinay, 700 SCRA 69 ‘BPI vs. Guevara, 752 SCRA 342IVERSITY, REMEDIAL LAW DEPARTMENT SYLLABUS LAW REVI REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW IL ‘SCHOOL YEAR 2020-2021 PROF. HENEDINO M. BRONDIAL I. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES (Rules 57-61) A Preliminary Attachment (R-S7) 1, Grounds (8-1) 2. Requirements (S-3) +3. Manner of Attaching (S-5) 44. Discharge of Attachment ($-5,12,13) ‘5. Third Party Claim (S-14) 6. Claim for damages (S-20) Cases 1. Lim Jr. Vs, Lazaro, 700 SCRA 2. Ligon vs. RIC of Makat, Br. 56, 717 SCRSA 3. Mangila vs. CA, 387 SCRA 4. Chuidian vs. Sandiganbayan, 349 SCRA 5. Alejandro Ng Wee vs. Tankiansee, $45 SCRA 6, Torres vs. Satsatin, 605 SCRA 7. Lacon Dev. Bank vs. Krishman, 755 SCRA, April 13, 201, 8. Northern Lacon Island Co. vs. Garcia, 753 SCRA 603, 9. Watercraft Venture Corp. vs. Wolfe, 770 SCRA 179 10. Phil. Airconditioning Center vs. RCJ Lines, 775 SCRA 265 B. Preliminary Injunction (R-58) Definition, Classes (S-1) 2. Grounds (6-3), TRO 3. Requirements (S-4) 4. Damages (6-8) Cases 1 Iolor vs CA, 351 SCRA 2. Gusto vs, Real 353 SCRA 5: Lagrosas vs. Bristo-Myers, $65 SCRA 4 densa. Delariare, 630 SCRA 5. Solid Builders Inc vs. China Bank, 695 SCRA, 4/3/13 6; Knights of Ral vs. DMC Homes, In, 824 SCRA (2017) 7: Noveco wx. Lim, 754SCRA 117 5. Cayatyab vs. Dinson 8305CRA 820 9, Republics. Cores, 769 SCRA 267 10, ANCA Land, ins: Wack Wack Residents" Assoc, Ine 831 SCRA 328 (requisites for hyuncton) = What cases/subject matters proscribe injunctive relief? a. Receivership (R-59) 1, When writ may issue (S-1) 2. Requirements (8-2) 3, Power of receiver (8-6) 4, Termination and Compensation ($-8) Cases: 1. Larrobis, Jr. vs. Pil Veterans Bank, 440 SCRA 2. Chaves vs. CA, 610 SCRA 3. Koruga vs. Arcenas, $90 SCRA 4 Tantano vs. Espina-Caboverde, 702 SCRA ~ 7/29/13 D.Replevin (R-60) 1. When writ may issue (1) 2. Requirements (S-2) 3. Third Party Claim (5-7) 4, Judgment and Damages (S-9,10) Cases: 1. Orasa vs. CA, 329 SCRA 2. Smart Commaniations vs. Astorga, $42 SCRA 3. Hao vs. Andres, 855 SCRA 4. Navarro vs. Escabido, 606 SCRA 5. Agner vs. BPI Family Savings Bank, 697 SCRA, 6/3/13, B, Support (R-61) 1. Application for Support Pendente Lite (S-1) 2. Comment, Hearing, Order (S-2,3.4) 3. Enforcement of Order (S-5) 4. Restitution (8-7) Cases: 1, De Asis vs. CA, 303 SCRA 2. People vs, Manahan, 315 SCRA 3. Lim ys, Lim, 604 SCRA 4. Gotardo vs. Buling, 678 SCRA 5. Republic vs. Yahon, 726 SCRA 438 6 Del Socorro vs. Van Wilsem, 744 SCRASI6 2 Lim-Lua vs. Lua, 697 SCRA 8 Salas vs. Matusalem, 705 SCRA 560 9, Abella vs. Cabanero, 836 SCRA 453 (2017) IL, SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS (Rules 62-71) ‘A. Interpleader (R-62) 1. What isan action in Interpleader($-1) 2. Requisites (S-1) 3, Procedure ($-2 10 7) Cases 1. Wack-Wack Golf and Country Club vs. Won, 70:SCRA 2. Bternal Gardens vs. IAC, 165 SCRA 23. Pasricha vs. Don Luis Dizon Realty, 548 SCRA ‘4 Bank of Commerce vs. Planters Dev. Bank, 681 SCRA B, Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies (R-63) 1. Nature; Kinds (S-1) 2. Parties (S-2) 3. Conversion into ordinary action (S-6) Cases: 1. Almeda vs. Bathala Marketing Ind, 542 SCRA 2. De Borja vs, Pinalakas na Ugnavan ng Maliit na -Mangingisda ng L, Mat V., 823 SCRA 550 (2017) 3. Malana vs. Tappa, 600 SCRA 4 Chaves vs. Judicial and Bar Council, 676 SCRA ‘5. Sabitsana ¥s.Mueriegui, 703 SCRA (85/13) 6. Dept of Finance vs. De la Cruz, Jr, 768SCRA 73. 7. Brice vs. Sison, 846 SCRA (2017) C. Review of Judgments and Final Orders of the COMELEC and COA (R- 64) ~The distinctive nature and procedure ofthis special civil action Case: Alliance for Nationalism and Democracy vs. COMELEC 705 SCRA 340, September 10, 2013 D. Certiorar, Prohibition and Mandamus (R-65) 1. Certiorari (8-1) grounds b, requirements © procedure; parties and effects Cases: 1. Ampil ys. Ombudsman, 703 SCRA, 7113. 2.-AL. Ang Network, Inc. vs, Mondejar, 714 SCRA, 1/28/14 4. Magialang vs, PAGCOR, 712 SCRA, 12/11/13. 4 People vs. Castaneda, 712 SCRA, 12/1/13. 5. UP Board of Regents vs. Ligot-Teylan, 227 SCRA 6, Tuazon vs. RD of Caloocan, 157 SCRA 7. GSIS vs. CA, 867 SCRA (2018) 5. Reyes vs, Sandiganbayan SCRA, 868:SCRA (2018) 2. Prohibition ($-2) grounds b. requirements © procedure; parties and effects Cases: 1. Vivas vs. Monetary Board of BSP, 703 SCRA 8/7/13, 2. Corales vs. Republic, 703 SCRA, 827/13, 3. Javier vs. Gonzales, 815 SCRA (2017) 4 Career Executive Service Board vs. Civil Service Commission, 819 SCRA 482 (2017) 23, Mandamus (8-3) «grounds requisites procedure; partes and effects 4. damages Cases: 1. Hipos, Sr. vs. Bay, S81 SCRA 3/17/09 2. Sanches vs. Lastimosa, 534 SCRA, 9/25/07 43, Social Justice Society vs. Atienza, 517 SCRA, 3/7107 4. Laygo vs. Mun. Mayor of Solano, N.V, 814 SCRA (2017) 5. Cuaia vs. Superintendent of PMA, February 24, 2015 6 Villanueva vs. JBC, 255 SCRA 182 E. Quo Warranto (R-66) 1. Panis ($-1 10 6) 2 Petiod (5-8) 5. Limitation ($-11) 4. Judgment for Cost ($-12) Read for class discussion: Republic vs, Sereno, May 11, 2018, 863 SCRA Cases: 1. Mendoza vs. Alias, 302 SCRA 2 Calleja vs. Pandey, 483 SCRA, 3. Lokin, Jr. vs. COMELEC, 621 SCRA 4 Aratea vs. COMELBC, 688 SCRA 5. De Casiro vs. Calos, 696 SCRA, 4/16/13 6. Velasco vs. Belmonte, 779 SCRA 81 (1/12/16) F. Expropriation (R-67) 1. The right of Eminent Domain Constitutional provision: “private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation” = RA 7160: The Local Govt. Code, See. 19 2. Who may expropriate 3. Two stages in expropriation 1. determination of public use 2. just compensation Cases: 1. City of Manila vs, Serrano, 359 SCRA 2. National Power Corp. vs. CA, 436 SCRA 43. Republic vs. Andaya, 524 SCRA 4. Asia's Emerging Dragon vs. DOTC, 552 SCRA 5. Abad vs, Fichomes Realty, 636 SCRA 6. NPCs. ¥CLA Sugar Dev, Corp, 712 SCRA $50 7. Limkaichong vs. LBP, 799 SCRA 139 (8/2/16) 8. LBP vs. Dalauta, 835 SCRA (2017) G. Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (R-68) 1 The Complain (-1) 42, The Judgment ($-2) 3. Sale of foreclosed property (S-3) = Equity of Redemption vs, Right of Redemption 4. Deficiency Judgment (S-6) Read the law on extra-judicial foreclosure: RA 3135, 4118 Cases: I. Ramirez vs. Manila Banking Corp, 712 SCRA, 12/2013, 2, Marques vs. Alindog, 714 SCRA, 1/2014 3. Ardiente vs. Provincial Sherif, 436 SCRA 4. LZK Holdings vs. Planters Dev. Bank, 714 SCRA, 1/2014 5. Goldenway Merchandising Corp. vs. Equitable PCT Bank, 693 SCRA, March 13, 2013 6, Solid Builders vs. CBC, 695 SCRA (also on injunction) 7. Robles vs. Yapeinco, 739.SCRA 75 8. MBTC vs, CPR Promotions and Marketing, In, 760 SCRA $9 9, Roldan vs. Barrios, 862 SCRA 318, April 23,2018 HL Panition (R-69) 1. The Complaint (S-1) 2. The Order (S-2) 5. Stages of Partition: 4. Rule of Commissioners ($-3 to 7) 5. The Judgment (S-11) Cases: 1, Babs vs. Balus, 610 SCRA 2 Feliciano vs. Canosa, 629 SCRA 3. Mangahas vs. Brobio, 634 SCRA 4. Vda. De Figuracion vs. Figuracion-Gerila, 690 SCRA 5. Agarrado vs, Librando-Agarrado, 864 SCRA 582, June 6, 2018 I. Forcible Entry and Unlawfil Detainer (R-70) 1. Parties (S-1) 2. Procedure: Summary ($-3t0 15) 3. udgyment (8-17) 4, Immediate Execution (S-19 vs $-21) preliminary injunction (S-20) 5. Appeals Cases: 1. Prov. of Cam. Sur vs, Bodega Glassware, 821 SCRA (2017) 2. Santiago vs. Northbay Knitting, Inc, 842 SCRA (2017) 43. Regalado vs. De la Rama vda. De dela Pena, 848 SCRA (2017) 4, Ferrer vs, Rabaca, 632 SCRA 5. CGR Corp. vs. Teves, 522 SCRA 765 6. Zacarias vs. Anacay, 736 SCRA 508, 9/24/14 7. Supapo vs. De Jesus, 756 SCRA 211, 4/20/15 9. De Gueman-Fuerte vs. Estomo, 862 SCRA (2018) 10, Iglesia de Jesucrisio Jerusalem Nueva of Manila, Phil. ne. Vs, De la Cruz, 862 SCRA (2018)J. Contempt 2-71) 1. Kinds; direct (8-1; indirect (8-3) 2. Procedure ($-4 to 9) 3. Judgment and Review ($-11) Cases: 1. Yasay vs. Recto, 313 SCRA 2. Sison vs. Caoibes, Jr, 429 SCRA 258 3. Espanol vs. Formaso, $25 SCRA 4 Marantan vs. Diokno, 716 SCRA 164, 22014 ‘5. Capitol Hills Golfand Country Club vs, Sanches, 717 SCRA 6. Tormis vs. Paredes, 749 SCRA 505, Feb. 4, 2015 7, Ocavs. Custodio, 832 SCRA (2017) 8, Causing vs. De la Rosa, 857 SCRA (2017) 9. Sps. Bayani & Myrna Partoza vs. Lilian Montano & Amelia ‘Solomon, 866 SCRA 35 (2018) IIL. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS (Rules 72 to 109) A Settlement of Estate 1. Vere vs Jurisdiction (R-73) 2. Kinds of settlement a Fxtrajudicial (1) By Agreement (Q) By selfadjudication Judicial (1) Summary (R14) (2) By Petition (R-75 to 90) Intestate bi. Testate @) By partition (R-69) 3. The Administrator or Executor (a) Special vs Regular (R-80) (&) Bonds (R-81) () Powers and Duties (R-84) (@) Accountability (R-85) 4. Claims Against dhe Estate (R-86) 5. Actions by and against Executor and Administrator (R-87) 6. Distibution and Partition (R-90) Cases: 1. San Luis», San Luis, 14 SCRA, February 2007 2. Garcia-Quiazon vs. Belen, 702 SCRA, 7/31/13 3. Agtarap vs. Agiarap, 651 SCRA, June 2011 4 Suntay IITs, Cojuangoo-Suntay, 683 SCRA, October 2012 3. Lee vs. RIC of O.C, 423 SCRA, February 2004 6, Heirs of Hilario Ruiz vs. Edmond Ruiz, 252 SCRA, January 1996 7. Unionbank vs. Santbanes, 452 SCRA, February 2005 (R86)