FEATURED POSTS

Index animi sermo. Due to difficulty in Law School Life: Getting

embedding the Started
reviewers in their iPaper
format, only their links How To Write A Case
are provided to access Digest
Top of Form them in scribd.com. Bearable Darkness of
Being

Agree or Disagree, let us

Bottom of Form Subscribe in a reader
respect SC

Waiting in Vain

How to Write a Case Digest Categories

Posted by Diory Rabajante on Sunday, April 4, 2010 Under: musings (6)

tips
reviewers - civil
A case digest or a case brief is a written summary of the case. law (3)
A case sometimes involves several issues. Digesting the same
would help the student in separating one issue from another reviewers - criminal
and understanding how the Court resolved the issues in the law (1)
case. The student does not need to discuss all the issues reviewers - political
decided in the case in his case digest. He only needs to focus law (3)
on the relevant issue or the issue related to the subject that
he is taking. A case digest may also serve as a useful study reviewers - remedial
aid for class discussions and exams. A student who has a case law (1)
digest does not need to go back to the case in order to
remember what he has read. social
commentaries (12)

tips (6)
Format of the Case Digest
Recent Posts
I. Caption. This includes the title of the case, the date it was
decided, and citation. Include also the petitioner, respondent, Recent SC decisions
and the ponente.
Election Law
II. Facts. There is no need to include all the facts. Just include
Justice League
those that are relevant to the subject.
Sa totoo lang
III. Issues. Include only those that are relevant. Issues are
usually framed in the form of questions that are answerable Pacquiao as
by "yes" or "no," for example, "Is the contract void?" lawmaker
Sometimes, students frame the question by starting it with
the word "whether," for example, "Whether the contract is How to become a law
void" or "Whether or not the contract is void." The answer to student with a doggie
the question has to be answered in the ruling. tanda mo na
IV. Ruling. This usually starts with a "yes" or a "no." This is the Kung Sakali Lang
answer to the question/s involving the issue. After the
categorical yes/no answer, the reason for the decision will be Sharing of
explained. Presidential Powers

V. Concurring and Dissenting Opinions. This part is optional, Machiavellian

but it would help to include them because there are
professors who ask for separate opinions in recitations. Blog Archive

July 2010

Sample Case Digest June 2010

DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS May 2010

226 SCRA 572 April 2010

Petitioner: Roberto Domingo March 2010

Respondents: Court of Appeals and Delia Soledad Avera

Ponente: J. Romero Your Ad Here

FACTS:

On May 29, 1991, private respondent Delia Soledad A.

Domingo filed the petition entitled "Declaration of Nullity of
Marriage and Separation of Property" against Roberto
Domingo. The petition, which was filed before Pasig RTC,
alleged the following:

(a) they were married on November 29, 1976;

(b) unknown to her (Delia), he had a previous marriage with

Emerina dela Paz on April 25, 1969 which marriage is valid
and still existing;

(c) she came to know of the prior marriage only sometime in

1983 when Emerina sued them for bigamy;

(d) since 1979, she has been working in Saudi Arabia and is
only able to stay in the Philippines when she would avail of
the one-month annual vacation leave granted by her
employer;

(e) Roberto has been unemployed and completely dependent

upon her for support and subsistence;

(f) Her personal properties amounting to P350,000.00 are

under the possession of Roberto, who disposed some of the
said properties without her knowledge and consent;

(g) while on her vacation, she discovered that he was

cohabiting with another woman.

Petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the

declaration of their marriage, which is void ab initio, is
superfluous and unnecessary. He further suggested that
private respondent should have filed an ordinary civil action
for the recovery of the properties alleged to have been
acquired by their union.

RTC and CA dismissed the petitioner's motion for lack of

merit.

ISSUES:

1) Whether or not a petition for judicial delaration of a void

marriage is necessary. (If in the affirmative, whether the same
should be filed only for purpose of remarriage.)

2) Whether or not the petition entitled "Declaration of Nullity

of Marriage and Separation of Property" is the proper remedy
of private respondent to recover certain real and personal
properties allegedly belonging to her exclusively.

HELD:

1) Yes. The nullification of a marriage for the purpose of

contracting another cannot be accomplished merely on the
basis of the perception of both parties or of one that their
union is defective. Were this so, this inviolable social
institution would be reduced to a mockery and would rest on a
very shaky foundation.

On the other hand, the clause "on the basis solely of a final
judgment delaring such marriage void" in Article 40 of the
Code denotes that such final judgment declaring the previous
marriage void is not only for purpose of remarriage.
2) Yes. The prayer for declaration of absolute nullity of
marriage may be raised together with the other incident of
their marriage such as the separation of their properties. The
Family Code has clearly provided the effects of the declaration
of nullity of marriage, one of which is the separation of
property according to the regime of property relations
governing them.

Hence, SC denied the instant petition. CA's decision is

affirmed.

In : tips

Next post: law-school-life-g...

Previous post: sales-and-lease

Tags: case digest case brief how to

Sort by