LEGAL RESEARCH AND WRITING

Question 1
1. Which among these options contains an effective procedural history? (3 points)
a. This is a petition for review on certiorari filed by Ernesto J. San Agustin of the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 71925 dismissing
his petition for certiorari.
b. This is a petition for review on certiorari filed by Ernesto J. San Agustin of the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 71925
dismissing his petition for certiorari assailing the July 24, 2002 Order of the RTC where he raised in his petition the issue on whether
respondent Judge De Leon acted arbitrarily and in grave abuse of discretion in not granting petitioner's "Urgent Motion to Quash
Information" dated 01 July 2002.
c. This is a petition for review on certiorari filed by Ernesto J. San Agustin of the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 71925 dismissing
his petition for certiorari where Luz Tan executed a notarized criminal complaint and filed the same with the National Bureau of Investigation
(NBI) charging the petitioner, the Barangay Chairman of Barangay La Huerta, Parañaque City, with serious illegal detention alleging that the
petitioner detained her husband on June 19, 2002, without lawful ground therefor.

The correct answer is:

This is a petition for review on certiorari filed by Ernesto J. San Agustin of the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 71925
dismissing his petition for
certiorari.

Question 2. Which of these options completes the statement: A memorandum ---? (3 points)
a. attempts to persuade the court to decide the case in favor of one party.
b.explains specific points of law.
c.is also known as legal drafting.
The correct answer is:
explains specific points of law.

Question 3. Which among these statement is true?

a. When a case has multiple issues, identify only the major issue, its rule, relevant facts, holding and reasons, and policies supporting the
court's decision.
b. When the issue is different from the precedent in a significant way, the precedent should be controlling.
c.To determine whether a case is controlling as precedent, the issue should be essentially the same as the one in the new problem.
The correct answer is:
To determine whether a case is controlling as precedent, the issue should be essentially the same as the one in the new problem.

Question 4. Which among these options contains the standard sections of a legal memorandum? (3 points)
a. Name of the Addressee, Question Presented, Facts, Discussion of the facts, Brief Answer, Mini-Conclusion, and Conclusion
b. Heading, Question Presented, Brief Answer, Facts, Discussion, and Conclusion
c. Office logo and address, Question Presented, Brief Answer, Facts, Discussion of the Legal Issue, and Conclusion
The correct answer is:
Heading, Question Presented, Brief Answer, Facts, Discussion, and Conclusion

Question 5. Alden and Stela were both former Filipino citizens. They were married in the Philippines but they later migrated to New York City,
USA where they were naturalized as American citizens. In their union they accumulated several real properties both in the USA and in the
Philippines. Unfortunately, they did not have children. In the USA, they executed a joint will instituting as their common heirs- Alden’s five
siblings and Stela's seven siblings - to divide their combined estate in equal shares. Alden passed away in 2013 and a year later, Stela also
died. Alden’s siblings who were all American citizens instituted probate proceedings in a US court impleading Stela's siblings who were all in
the Philippines. Which amongthese options contains the principal legal issues? (3 points)
a. Was the joint will that Alden and Stela executed valid when both were former Filipino citizens?
b. Can the spouses Alden and Stella institute their siblings as their common heirs?
c.Is the will executed in the USA valid in the Philippines?
The correct answer is:
Was the joint will that Alden and Stela executed valid when both were former Filipino citizens?

Question 6. The Roman Catholic Church accepted a donation of a real property located in Cagayan de Oro City. A deed of donation was
executed, signed by the donor, Fred Hegarty, and the donee, the Church, as represented by Fr. Allan Xavier. Before the deed could be
notarized, the donor died. What is the main legal issue and the irrelevant issue in this case? (3 points)
a. The main legal issue is whether the donation is valid. The irrelevant legal issue is whether the church can accept a donation of real property located in
Cagayan de Oro City.
b. The main legal issue is whether the church can accept a donation of real property located in Cagayan de Oro City. The irrelevant legal issue is
whether the donation is valid.
c. The main legal issue is whether the donor’s death affects the validity of the donation when the donor died. The irrelevant legal issue is whether the
church can accept a donation of real property through a representative.
The correct answer is:
The main legal issue is whether the donation is valid. The irrelevant legal issue is whether the church can accept a donation of real property
located in Cagayan de Oro City.

Question 7. Which among these options is true? (3 points)

a. Underlying the legal decisions are the holdings or goals that the decision maker wishes to further.
b. Only issues that when resolved determine the outcome of the legal dispute are relevant to the case.
c. Legal memorandums and legal briefs may sometimes discuss only those questions necessary to resolve the question presented.
The correct answer is:
Only issues that when resolved determine the outcome of the legal dispute are relevant to the case.

Question 8. Which of these statements contains an explanation of policy-based reasoning? (2 points)

a. A conclusion is reached by pointing out relevant differences between the researched case and the client's facts.
b. A conclusion is reached from general truths to particular instances of that truth.
c. A conclusion is reached by connecting the facts of the case to the state's existing policy.
The correct answer is:
A conclusion is reached by connecting the facts of the case to the state's existing policy.

Question 9. Which among these statements is false? (3 points)

a. The Issue section states the question asked by identifying the aspect of law in dispute along with the key facts triggering that question.
b. A legal memorandum presents the lawyer's research and applies this to particular facts.
c.In your legal memorandum using IRAC, after you stated the issue, you have to establish the governing legal rule that the court will employ to
resolve the issue.
The correct answer is: A legal memorandum presents the lawyer's research and applies this to particular facts.

Question 10. Which between these options continued in Re in a legal memorandum is a correct inclusion in an effective heading? (3 points)
a. Re: Possible abuse of discretion by the trial judge in enjoining landfill operation, Department of Environmental Resources v. Uniting, file no.
2021-103
b. Re: Abuse of discretion by the trial judge in enjoining the operation, Department of Environmental Resources v. Uniting, August 12, 2021, No.
2021-103
b. Re: Possible abuse of discretion by the trial judge in enjoining landfill operation, Department of Environmental Resources v. Uniting, August 12, 2021
The correct answer is:
Re: Possible abuse of discretion by the trial judge in enjoining landfill operation, Department of Environmental Resources v. Uniting, file no.
2021-103

Question 11. Which among these statements is true? (3 points)

a. Most legal letters have all these primary purposes: to counsel a client about available options, to persuade someone to a course of
action, and to inform someone of something.
b.Legal writers generally assume that their readers know little or nothing about the relevant law or facts and they design their explanations
accordingly.
c. The tone in a legal letter may often be an extension of the writer's persona and is never partial by notions of professional decorum.
The correct answer is:
Legal writers generally assume that their readers know little or nothing about the relevant law or facts and they design their explanations
accordingly.

Question 12. Which among these statements is true? (3 points)

a. A letter to a client usually begins with the Brief Answer to alert the reader to the specific issues addressed.

b.The Re in a legal letter contains the short identification of the matter for which the letter was written.
c. In most cases, the holding rarely helps identify the issue.
The correct answer is:
The Re in a legal letter contains the short identification of the matter for which the letter was written.

Question 13. Carlos, an OFW in New York, sent his partner Dodong in Davao City USD500 through their joint savings account at BDO Claveria
Branch. The teller paid Dodong USD5,000 instead of USD 500. When BDO discovered its mistake, it demanded from Dodong to return the
USD4,500; he refused contending it was not his mistake. Which is the best holding for the legal issue of these facts? (3 points)
a. Dodong is entitled to retain the USD 4,500 because he received the money in good faith.
b. BDO is entitled to recover USD4,500 considering that it was delivered through mistake and that Dodong had no right to demand the delivery of
the excess.
c. Since the mistake was that of the BDO teller's, it is she who must return to BDO the excess USD4,500 she released to Dodong.
The correct answer is:
BDO is entitled to recover USD4,500 considering that it was delivered through mistake and that Dodong had no right to demand the delivery
of the excess.

Question 14. Javier leased a studio unit from Ishmael for P50,000 a month. In the contract of lease he signed, there was no stipulation with
respect to the duration of the lease. Two years later, Ishmael decided to eject Javier from the unit by refusing to accept Javier's payment of
his monthly rental. Javier then deposited the money to Ishmael's BDO account and promptly notified Ismael of his deposit. After the lapse of
three months, Ishmael filed a complaint against Javier for ejectment on the ground of non-payment of rent. Which among the options
presents the best opinion of the court in this case? (3 points)
a. Ishmael cannot eject Javier from the studio unit which he rented from the former because it is he who refused to accept Javier's payment of his
monthly rental.
b. Ishmael can eject Javier out of his studio unit because the contract of lease that Javier signed did not contain a stipulation of e duration of the lease.
As property owner, Ishmael can remove anyone from his property.
c. Ishmael cannot eject Javier from the studio unit the latter rented from the former because Javier deposited the monthly rental fee to Ishmael's BDO
account and promptly notified the latter of the deposit.
The correct answer is:
Ishmael cannot eject Javier from the studio unit the latter rented from the former because Javier deposited the monthly rental fee to Ishmael's
BDO account and promptly notified the latter of the deposit.

Question 15. Bert and Joe, both male and single, lived together as common law spouses and agreed to raise a son of Bert's living brother as
their child without legally adopting him. Bert worked while Joe took care of their home and the boy. In their 20 years of cohabitation they were
able to acquire real estate assets registered in their names as co-owners. A few years later, Bert died of diabetic complications, leaving no
will. Bert was survived by his biological siblings, Joe, and the boy. Which among these options contains the principal legal issue and the
relevant subordinating issue? (3 points)
a. The principal legal issue is whether the law on co-ownership whereby all properties they acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by their
joint industry and shall be owned by them in equal shares applies when they lived together as husband and wife; the relevant subordinating issue is
whether Joe and the child are Bert’s compulsory heirs.
b. The principal legal issue is whether Bert and Joe can live together as married partners and informally adopt Bert’s brother’s son; the relevant
subordinating issue is whether Bert and Joe’s informally adopted child can be Bert’s compulsory heir.
c. The principal legal issue is whether whether Joe and the child are Bert’s compulsory heirs; the relevant subordinating issue is whether the law on co-
ownership whereby all properties they acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by their joint industry and shall be owned by
them in equal shares applies when they lived together as husband and wife.
The correct answer is:
The principal legal issue is whether the law on co-ownership whereby all properties they acquired will be presumed to have been acquired by
their joint industry and shall be owned by them in equal shares applies when they lived together as husband and wife; the relevant
subordinating issue is whether Joe and the child are Bert’s compulsory heirs.

Question 16. Which among these options contains the first step in solving a legal problem? (3 points)
a. The first step is to select the questions that require analysis from the given facts of the case.
b. The first step is to check the close relationship between reason and policies of the case.
c. The first step is to identify the rule, relevant facts, holding and reasons, and policies supporting the holding of the court.
The correct answer is:
The first step is to select the questions that require analysis from the given facts of the case.

Question 17. Which of these facts is a legal conclusion and not a legal statement of fact? (3 points)
a. Dunkin' is a fast food that caters to customers who want to purchase Dunkin' donuts and coffee or Dunkin' donuts only.
b.The change of name from Dunkin' Donuts to Dunkin' is frowned upon because it destroys the brand reputation of Dunkin' Donuts to its customers.
d. Dunkin' does not sell coffee only because its name naturally includes donuts.
The correct answer is:
The change of name from Dunkin' Donuts to Dunkin' is frowned upon because it destroys the brand reputation of Dunkin' Donuts to its
customers.

Question 18. Legal writing requires clarity and simplicity in the choice of words. Which among these options will restate the wordy
expression taking into consideration the fact that ? (3 points)
a. since
b. because
c.however
The correct answer is:
Since

Question 19. Which of these Statement of Fact options does not support the legal issue? (2 points)
a. It may be inferred that Verano had consciousness of his impending death since he suffered gunshot wounds to his chest which would necessarily be
mortal wounds.
b. Immediately before he died of gunshot wounds to his chest, Verano told the attending physician, in a very feeble voice, that it was Arnold, his co-
worker, who shot him.
c. Verano added that it was also Arnold who shot Vicente, the man whose cadaver was lying on the bed beside him.
The correct answer is:
Immediately before he died of gunshot wounds to his chest, Verano told the attending physician, in a very feeble voice, that it was Arnold, his
co-worker, who shot him.

Question 20. Issue: Whether Ms. Torre, owner of Torres Fitness Center (TFC) and developer of a unique personalized Pilates training method
has claim against Ms. Ferrer, a former TFC employee, for misappropriation of a trade secret resulting from her unauthorized use of a similar
training method at another fitness center. What is an effective Brief Answer to the Question Presented? (3 points)
a. No, the court had not known that Ms. Ferrer's acquisition of the method as proper since she helped Ms. Torre develop the personalized Pilates
method.
c. It depends whether the court sees Ms.. Torre's personalized Pilates training method as a trade secret.
d. Yes, the court would most likely find Ms. Torre's personalized Pilates plan could be a trade secret and Ms. Ferrer's use of the method at another
fitness center constitute misappropriation of the trade secret.
The correct answer is:
Yes, the court would most likely find Ms. Torre's personalized Pilates plan could be a trade secret and Ms. Ferrer's use of the method at
another fitness center
constitute misappropriation of the trade secret.

Question 21. Simon was drinking with his buddies, Inigo and Benjamin, when he saw Gabriel with his former girlfriend, Yama Rose. Already
drunk, Simon declared in a loud voice that if he could not have Yama Rose, no one can. He then proceeded to the men’s room but told Inigo
and Benjamin to take care of Gabriel. Benjamin and Inigo asked Simon what he meant but Simon simply said, “You already know what I want,”
and then left. Benjamin and Inigo killed Gabriel and hurt Yama Rose. Simon denied any criminal liability for Gabriel’s death and Yama Rose’s
injury. Which is the appropriate opinion for the legal issue in this case? (3 points)
a. Inigo and Benjamin killed Gabriel and hurt Yama Rose upon Simon’s order gathered from his statement that Inigo and Benjamin were “to take
care of Gabriel.” The words he uttered were powerful and threatening so as to amount to physical or moral coercion.
b. Inigo and Benjamin are liable for Gabriel’s death. They were the ones who directly took part in the killing of the victim. Simon is not criminally
liable because his statement that Inigo and Benjamin were “to take care of Gabriel” was not made directly with the intent of procuring the
commission of the crime. The words he uttered to Inigo and Benjamin: “You already know what I want,” may not be considered as powerful
and threatening so as to amount to physical or moral coercion.
c. Simon, Inigo, and Benjamin are liable for Gabriel’s death. All three killed Gabriel and hurt Yama Rose The words were the motivation for Inigo and
Benjamin to kill; his words pointed to physical or moral coercion.
The correct answer is:
Inigo and Benjamin are liable for Gabriel’s death. They were the ones who directly took part in the killing of the victim. Simon is not criminally
liable because his statement that Inigo and Benjamin were “to take care of Gabriel” was not made directly with the intent of procuring the
commission of the crime. The words he uttered to Inigo and Benjamin: “You already know what I want,” may not be considered as powerful
and threatening so as to amount to physical or moral coercion.

Question 22. Which among these options is true? (3 points)

a. The resolution of the principal issue in a case depends on how a subordinate issue in a case depends on how a subordinate issue raised in
connection with it is resolved.
b. There is no legal dispute when one party complains of a violation of his right by another, who, on the other hand, denies such a violation.
c. The holding of the court contains the application of the law and the cases to resolve the legal issue.
The correct answer is:
The resolution of the principal issue in a case depends on how a subordinate issue in a case depends on how a subordinate issue raised in
connection with it is resolved.

Question 23. Which of these statements about a legal memorandum is false? (2 points)
a. Context usually includes background information related to a more specific issue.
b. The Issue section states a general legal recommendation that ties up the discussion.
c. Legal readers expect to see a reference to legal authority to support every statement of law in a memorandum.
The correct answer is:
The Issue section states a general legal recommendation that ties up the discussion.

Question 24. Which among these statements is false? (2 points)

a. It is important to isolate the court's reasoning from the facts and the holding of the case.
b. One way of arranging relevant introductory material in a paragraph is to identify the claim or defense in your legal issue.
c. When you write a case brief, you focus on how the facts of that case are relevant to the issue and the reasons for the court's holding.
The correct answer is:
It is important to isolate the court's reasoning from the facts and the holding of the case.

Question 25. Mina and Carlos entered into a verbal contract whereby the former agreed to sell to the latter her studio unit at Verdon
Condominium for P4.2M. Carlos agreed, went to BPI, withdrew the amount in Manager's Check, and returned to Mina for the consummation of
the contract. However, Mina changed her mind and refused to go through the sale. Which among these options offers a most effective
holding for the legal issue of these facts? (3 points)
a. The verbal agreement is not valid unless it is ratified as to the object and the purchase price.
b. In a verbal agreement, a seller can still refuse to sell even if both agreed to the object and the purchase price.
c. A verbal agreement to sell is valid as long as there is an agreement with respect to the object and to the purchase price.
The correct answer is:
A verbal agreement to sell is valid as long as there is an agreement with respect to the object and to the purchase price.

Question 26. Which among these options is not a legal fact? (3 points)
a. Even without the documents being offered in evidence, the court considered them and dismissed the complaint.
b. Even assuming that Clef did not actually identify Mario as the driver of the getaway motorcycle, sufficient circumstantial evidence was established to
uphold his conviction.
c. While he alleged that he was at the scene of the incident and he participated in some aspects of the fight, he denied that he had anything to do with
the death of the victim.
The correct answer is:
Even assuming that Clef did not actually identify Mario as the driver of the getaway motorcycle, sufficient circumstantial evidence was
established to uphold his conviction.

Question 27. Which among these options states an effective Statement of Facts for this legal issue: Did Amanda's action prescribe? (3 points)
a. Amanda expects to inherit the 5-hectare fishpond from her Uncle Lewis; Myrna had hereditary rights in the estate of her father, Uncle Lewis. However,
Uncle Lewis gave the fishpond to Elle, Myrna's sister. Therefore, Amanda sued Elle. Myrna waived, renounced, and quitclaimed her share in her father's
estate in favor of her younger sister Aurora. Amanda then filed an action against all the heirs.
b. Amanda expects to inherit the 5-hectare fishpond from her Uncle Lewis; Myrna had hereditary rights in the estate of her father, Uncle Lewis. However,
Uncle Lewis gave the fishpond to Elle, Myrna's sister. Therefore, Amanda sued Elle. Myrna waived, renounced, and quitclaimed her share in her father's
estate in favor of her younger sister Aurora. Amanda then filed an action against Myrna.
c. Amanda expects to inherit the 5-hectare fishpond from her Uncle Lewis; Myrna had hereditary right in the estate of her father, Uncle Lewis. Amanda
and Myrna executed a deed of exchange where any property being ceded, transferred, conveyed, and unclaimed be given to one of them who can
manage it well. However, Uncle Lewis gave the fishpond to Elle, Myrna's sister. Therefore Amanda sued Elle but later they both decided to compromise
and Amanda received the 5-hectare coconut land. Myrna waived, renounced, and quitclaimed her share in her father's estate in favor of her younger
sister Aurora. Amanda then filed an action against Myrna.
The correct answer is:
Amanda expects to inherit the 5-hectare fishpond from her Uncle Lewis; Myrna had hereditary right in the estate of her father, Uncle Lewis.
Amanda and Myrna executed a deed of exchange where any property being ceded, transferred, conveyed, and unclaimed be given to one of
them who can manage it well. However,
Uncle Lewis gave the fishpond to Elle, Myrna's sister. Therefore Amanda sued Elle but later they both decided to compromise and Amanda
received the 5-hectare coconut land. Myrna waived, renounced, and quitclaimed her share in her father's estate in favor of her younger sister
Aurora. Amanda then filed an action against Myrna.

Question 28. Which among these statements in a legal memorandum asserts how your client would like the issue to be resolved? (3 points)
a. The court should find that SPO2 Dante used excessive force under the balancing test of the Anti-Torture Law.
b. The court will need to employ the balancing test in the Anti-Torture Law to decide whether SPO2 Dante used excessive force.
c. The balancing test in the Anti-Torture Law warrants a finding of excessive force because SPO2 Dante responded to an unthreatening suspect with a
serious intrusion of his human rights.
The correct answer is:
The court will need to employ the balancing test in the Anti-Torture Law to decide whether SPO2 Dante used excessive force.

Question 29. Which among these options is true? (3 points)

a. A policy is not a law; it evolves the principles that are needed for achieving the goal that benefits society.
b. A law and a policy are formal sets of rules derived for the welfare and equity in society.
c. Laws are made for the people in a given society; policies are not made in the name of the people in a given society.
The correct answer is:
A policy is not a law; it evolves the principles that are needed for achieving the goal that benefits society.
Question 30. Which among these options explains reasoning in legal writing? (3 points)
a. When we talk of reasoning in legal writing, we mean the process of drawing conclusions from facts or evidence.
b. When we talk of reasoning in legal writing, we mean the process of attempting to influence the court to favor one's client.
c. When we talk of reasoning in legal writing,, we mean the process of following the rules on the observance of grammatical rules as well as the rules of
court.
The correct answer is:
When we talk of reasoning in legal writing, we mean the process of drawing conclusions from facts or evidence.

Question 31. In January 2018, Mrs. Andes, a married woman on her sixth month of pregnancy, was crossing a street when she was suddenly
hit by a car being recklessly driven by Mr. Baste. As a result, Mrs. Andes sustained a series of injuries and also an unintentional abortion. Mrs.
Andes was hospitalized for two months, during which she incurred P400.000.00 in medical fees. Her expenses were all duly substantiated by
official receipts. During the two-month period of her confinement, she was unable to report for work and earn any salary, which was
established at the rate of P50,000.00 per month. Mrs. Andes then filed a civil case for damages against Mr. Baste. Which among these options
is a persuasive discussion of
the legal issue? (2 points)
a. Mrs. Andes can claim actual damages amounting to P500,000. Article 2199 of the Civil Code provides that one is entitled to actual or compensatory
damages only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. The medical fees totaling P400,000 were duly substantiated by official
receipts, Article 2200 of the Civil Code also provides that indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the value of the loss suffered, but also
that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain. The rate of her salary was established at P50,000 per month; thus, her inability to report for work
and earn salary for two months entitled her to a total of P100,000. Mrs. Andes, therefore, can claim her expenses for medical fees and two months’
worth of salary, the total of which is P500.000.
b. Article 2199 of the Civil Code supported Mrs. Andes’s medical fees of P500,000; these were duly substantiated by official receipts. Article 2200 of the
Civil Code provides the rate of her salary, which was already established in the law; thus, her inability to report for work and earn salary for two months
entitled her the damages she is claiming. Mrs. Andes, therefore, can claim her expenses for medical fees and two months’ worth of salary. Claiming
reimbursement for her medical fees and two months salary is a certainty.
c. Both Article 2199 and Article 2200 of the Civil Code clearly do not support Mrs. Andes’s claim for reimbursement. Even though she was unable
to report for work and earn salary for two months she is not entitled to receive her the damages she is claiming because there is no law that
supports this. It is fruitless to claim these because she is not untitled to these.
The correct answer is:
Mrs. Andes can claim actual damages amounting to P500,000. Article 2199 of the Civil Code provides that one is entitled to actual or
compensatory damages only for such pecuniary loss suffered by him as he has duly proved. The medical fees totaling P400,000 were duly
substantiated by official receipts, Article 2200 of the Civil Code also provides that indemnification for damages shall comprehend not only the
value of the loss suffered, but also that of the profits which the obligee failed to obtain. The rate of her salary was established at P50,000 per
month; thus, her inability to report for work and earn salary for two months entitled her to a total of P100,000. Mrs. Andes, therefore, can
claim her expenses for medical fees and two months’ worth of salary, the total of which is P500.000.

Question 32. On July 7, 1969, Annie and Dereck, claiming to be Xavier's illegitimate children, filed an action for recognition against him. In his
Answer, Xavier denied paternity. On February 3, 1970, during the pendency of the suit, Xavier died. Mario was ordered substituted for Xavier
as the only surviving heir mentioned in Xavier’s Last Will and Testament, which was probated on March 10, 1969, before Xavier’s death. Annie
and Dereck contested this and claimed that it is Mario who is Xavier’s illegitimate child. Which among these options is the best legal issue? (3
points)
a. Whether Mario is Xavier’s only surviving heir.
b. Whether the institution of MARIO as sole heir is null and void.
c. Whether Xavier’s Last Will and Testament is null and void.
The correct answer is:
Whether the institution of MARIO as sole heir is null and void.

Question 33. In 1975, Arbasa purchased an unregistered parcel of land from Roble. The deed of sale showed that the property had a total land area of
240 square meters; however, due to efforts since 1960 in reclaiming a portion of the sea using stones, sand, and gravel, the original size of 240 square
meters increased to 884 square meters. Arbasa claims that she owns the entire 844 square meters because the deed of sale describes the sale
pertaining to a “whole parcel of land.” Roble countered that the deed of sale specifically describes the area purchased as only 240 square meters. Which
among these options states the relevant legal facts in this case? (3 points)
a. In 1975, Arbasa purchased an unregistered parcel of land from Roble. The deed of sale showed that the property had a total land area of 240 square
meters; however, due to efforts since 1960 in reclaiming a portion of the sea using stones, sand, and gravel, the original size of 240 square meters
increased to 884 square meters.
b. In 1975, Arbasa purchased an unregistered parcel of land from Roble. Arbasa claims that she owns the entire 844 square meters; Roble states
that the deed of sale specifically describes the area purchased as only 240 square meters.
c. In 1975, Arbasa purchased an unregistered parcel of land from Roble. Arbasa claims that she owns the entire 844 square meters because the
deed of sale describes the sale pertaining to a “whole parcel of land.”
The correct answer is: In 1975, Arbasa purchased an unregistered parcel of land from Roble. The deed of sale showed that the property had a
total land area of 240 square meters; however, due to efforts since 1960 in reclaiming a portion of the sea using stones, sand, and gravel, the
original size of 240 square meters increased to 884 square meters.

Question 34. Which among these statements in a legal memorandum presents the neutrality of the facts while it also persuades the
judge to rule in your client's favor (3 points)
a. The court will likely rule that SPO2 Dante used unconstitutionally excessive force under the Anti-Torture Law as applied to the facts of the case.
b. Did SPO2 Dante use excessive force under the Anti-Torture Law?
c. The court must then decide whether the balancing act in the Anti-Torture Law warrants a finding of excessive force.
The correct answer is:
The court will likely rule that SPO2 Dante used unconstitutionally excessive force under the Anti-Torture Law as applied to the facts of the
case.

Question 35. Which among these statements is true? (3 points)

a. Facts are relevant or irrelevant in relation to the legal rules at issue.
b. Implied holdings are easy to identify because these are announced.
c. A legal letter to a client includes an evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of each party's arguments, and reaches a conclusion based
on that analysis.
Your answer is correct.
The correct answer is:
Facts are relevant or irrelevant in relation to the legal rules at issue.