1

CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

MODULE 4 – SUMMONS AND MOTIONS

TOPIC CASE DOCTRINE
Service of EB VIllarosa & Partner Co v. Benito
Summons Strict compliance with the mode of service is necessary to confer jurisdiction of the court over a corporation. The officer
upon whom service is made must be one who is named in the statute; otherwise the service is insufficient. . . . .

The purpose is to render it reasonably certain that the corporation will receive prompt and proper notice in an action
against it or to insure that the summons be served on a representative so integrated with the corporation that such person
will know what to do with the legal papers served on him.
Service Lhuillier v. British Airways
Consistent It is settled that the Warsaw Convention has the force and effect of law in this country. Our Courts have to apply the
With principles of international law, and are bound by treaty stipulations entered into by the Philippines, such as those regarding
International the place where actions involving damages to plaintiff is to be instituted.
Conventions
Service upon Orion Security Corp v. Kalfam Enterprises
Domestic Note that in case of substituted service, there should be a report indicating that the person who received the summons in the
Private defendant's behalf was one with whom the defendant had a relation of confidence ensuring that the latter would actually
Juridical Entity receive the summons. Here, petitioner failed to show that the security guard who received the summons in respondent's
behalf shared such relation of confidence that respondent would surely receive the summons

Vlason Enterprises Corp v. CA

Summons to a domestic or resident corporation should be served on officers, agents or employees, who are responsible
enough to warrant the presumption that they will transmit to the corporation notice of the filing of the action against it.
Rules on the service of motions should be liberally construed in order to promote the ends of substantial justice. A rigid
application that will result in the manifest injustice should be avoided. A default judgment against several defendants cannot
affect the rights of one who was never declared in default. In any event, such judgment cannot include an award not prayed
for in the complaint, even if proven ex parte
Service upon Palma v. Galvez
Residents Substituted service of summons under the present Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court in a suit in personam against
Outside the residents of the Philippines temporarily absent therefrom is the normal method of service of summons that will confer
Philippines jurisdiction on the court over such defendant
Remedy if Phil. Commercial International Bank v. Alejandro – IMPORTANT mentioned in lecture
defendant is a “In case the defendant does not reside and is not found in the Philippines (and hence personal and substituted service
non-resident cannot be effected), the remedy of the plaintiff in order for the court to acquire jurisdiction to try the case is to convert the
and not found action into a proceeding in rem or quasi in rem by attaching the property of the defendant.”
in the PH,
action involved
is personal
Substituted Sps Galura v. Math-Agro Corp – mentioned in recit
Service The summons must be served to the defendant in person. It is only when the defendant cannot be served personally
within a reasonable time that a substituted service may be made.

Impossibility of prompt service should be shown by stating the efforts made to find the defendant personally and the fact
that such efforts failed. This statement should be made in the proof of service – in the Return. This is necessary because
substituted service is in derogation of the usual method of service. It has been held that this method of service is “in
derogation of the common law; it is a method extraordinary in character, and hence may be used only as prescribed and in
the circumstances authorized by statute.”

Pascual v. Pascual
The jurisdiction over the person of the respondent was never vested with the RTC, because the manner of substituted
service by the process server was apparently invalid and ineffective. As such, there was a violation of due process.
Jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired either upon a valid service of summons or the defendant's voluntary appearance
in court. When the defendant does not voluntarily submit to the court's jurisdiction or when there is no valid service of
summons, "any judgment of the court which has no jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is null and void."

Robinson v. Miralles
The statutory requirements of substituted service must be followed strictly, faithfully, and fully and any substituted service
other than that authorized by the Rules is considered ineffective, however, the Court frowns upon an overly strict
application of the Rules. It is the spirit, rather than the letter of the procedural rules, that governs.
Constructive Santos v. PNOC Exploration Corp
Service (by The rule in Sec. 14, Rule 14 authorizes summons by publication in any action and the rule obviously does not distinguish
publication) whether the action is in personam, in rem, or quasi in rem. The tenor of the rule authorizes summons by publication whatever
the action may be as long as the identity of the defendant is unknown or his whereabouts are unknown

Service of summons by publication is proved by the affidavit of the printer, his foreman or principal clerk, or of the editor,
business or advertising manager of the newspaper which published the summons. It is complemented by service of
summons by registered mail to the defendant's last known address.
 2
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

Extraterritorial Perkin Elmer Singapore v. Dakila Trading Corp

Service There are only four instances wherein a defendant who is a non-resident and is not found in the country may be served with
summons by extraterritorial service, to wit:
(1) when the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff;
(2) when the action relates to, or the subject of which is property, within the Philippines, in which the defendant claims a lien or an
interest, actual or contingent;
(3) when the relief demanded in such action consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the defendant from and
(4) when the defendant non-resident's property has been attached within the Philippines.

Undoubtedly, extraterritorial service of summons applies only where the action is in rem or quasi in rem, but not if an
action is in personam.
Proof of Service Mapa v. CA
It must be emphasized that the absence in the sheriff’s return of a statement about the impossibility of personal service does
not conclusively prove that the service is invalid. While the sheriff’s return carries with it the presumption of regularity of
duties, it does not necessarily follow that an act done in relation to duty was not done simply because it was not disclosed
Voluntary La Naval v. CA – OVERTURNED RULING
Appearance SC definitively ruled that there is no voluntary appearance if defendant files a motion to dismiss citing therein several
grounds including lack of jurisdiction over the defendant
Bill of Virata v. Sandiganbayan – mentioned in lecture
Particulars It is the function or purpose of a bill of particulars to define, clarify, particularize, and limit or circumscribe the issues in the
case, to expedite the trial, and assist the court

Tan v. Sandiganbayan – mentioned in recit

The proper office of a bill of particulars is "to inform the opposite party and the court of the precise nature and character of
the cause of action . . . the pleader has attempted to set forth, and thereby to guide his adversary in his preparations for trial
and reasonably protect him against surprise at the trial."

Dismissal of Lim v. Vianzon

Actions: Litis Litis pendentia requires the concurrence of the following requisites:
Pendentia (1) identity of parties, or at least such parties as those representing the same interests in both actions;
(2) identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs being founded on the same facts; and
(3) identity with respect to the two preceding particulars in the two cases, such that any judgment that may be rendered in
the pending case, regardless of which party is successful would amount to res adjudicata in the other case.
Motion to Halimao v. Villanueva - mentioned in recit
Dismiss 1. Hypothetical Admission -When it appears on the face of the complaint that the plaintiff is not entitled to any relief
under the facts alleged, the defendant may file a motion to dismiss hypothetically admitting the facts alleged in the
complaint. By filing such a motion, the defendant in effect says that even assuming the facts to be as alleged by the
plaintiff, the latter has failed to prove that he has a right which the former has violated
2. Limited Hypothetical Admission - Motion to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction of the court or tribunal over the
person of the defendant or over the subject matter or over the nature of the action; or on improper venue; or on lack of
capacity to sue of the plaintiff or on litis pendentia, res judicata, prescription, unenforceability, or on the allegation that
the suit is between members of the same family and no earnest efforts towards a compromise have been made -
hypothetical admission is limited to the facts alleged in the complaint which relate to and are necessary for the
resolution of these grounds as preliminary matters involving substantive or procedural laws, but not to the other facts
of the case.
3. Actual Admission - Motion to dismiss is based on payment, waiver, abandonment, release, compromise, or other form
of extinguishment - motion to dismiss does not hypothetically, but actually, admits the facts alleged in the
complaint

Tan v. Court of Appeals- mentioned in recit

While conveniently echoing the general rule that averments in the complaint are deemed hypothetically admitted upon the
filing of a motion to dismiss grounded on the failure to state a cause of action, it did not take into account the equally
established limitations to such rule

A more judicious resolution of a motion to dismiss, therefore, necessitates that the court be not restricted to the
consideration of the facts alleged in the complaint and inferences fairly deducible therefrom. Courts may consider other
facts within the range of judicial notice as well as relevant laws and jurisprudence which the courts are bound to take
into account, and they are also fairly entitled to examine records/documents duly incorporated into the complaint by the
pleader himself in ruling on the demurrer to the complaint.
Motion to Sunville Timber Products v. Abad – mentioned in recit
Dismiss – The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies calls for resort first to the appropriate administrative authorities
Failure to in the resolution of a controversy falling under their jurisdiction before the same may be elevated to the courts of justice for
Invoke review. Non-observance of the doctrine results in lack of a cause of action, which is one of the grounds allowed in the Rules
Doctrine of of Court for the dismissal of the complaint.
Exhaustion of
Administrative Instances when the doctrine may be dispensed with and judicial action validly resorted to immediately. Among these
Remedies exceptional cases are:
1) when the question raised is purely legal;
 3
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

2) when the administrative body is in estoppel;

3) when the act complained of is patently illegal;
4) when there is urgent need for judicial intervention;
5) when the claim involved is small;
6) when irreparable damage will be suffered;
7) when there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy;
8) when strong public interest is involved;
9) when the subject of the controversy is private land; and
10) in quo warranto proceedings.
Motion to Saw v. CA
Intervene While a share of stock represents a proportionate or aliquot interest in the property of the corporation, it does not vest the
owner thereof with any legal right or title to any of the property, his interest in the corporate property being equitable or
beneficial in nature. Shareholders are in no legal sense the owners of corporate property, which

Strategic Alliance Devt Corp v. Radstock Securities Limited

Allowance or disallowance of a motion for intervention rests on the sound discretion of the court after consideration of
the appropriate circumstances.
MODULE 5 – PRE-TRIAL, INTERVENTION AND SUBPOENA
Pre-Trial LCK Industries v. Planters Development Bank
A claim which is not expressly made an issue at the pre-trial order and is raised for the first time by a party in its
memorandum is valid and must be resolved if such claim or issue can be inferred from the stipulations of the party.
In this case, the claim by the debtor for the return of overpayment resulting from the auction sale of mortgaged properties,
which were worth a lot compared to the debt they secured, was inferred by applying simple mathematical operation. In
addition, the return of overpayment was proper under the principle against unjust enrichment.

Generally, pre-trial is primarily intended to make certain that all issues necessary to the disposition of a case are properly
raised. Thus, to obviate the element of surprise, parties are expected to disclose at the pre-trial conference all issues of law
and fact they intend to raise at the trial. However, in cases in which the issue may involve privileged or impeaching matters,
or if the issues are impliedly included therein or may be inferable therefrom by necessary implication to be integral parts of
the pre-trial order as much as those that are expressly stipulated, the general rule will not apply.

Calalang v. CA – mentioned in recit

A pre-trial cannot validly be held until the last pleading has been filed, which last pleading may be the plaintiff's reply,
except where the period to file the last pleading has lapsed.

That it is plaintiff’s failure to appear on the date of the presentation of his or her evidence in chief, and not the
absence of his lawyer, which may warrant the dismissal of his case

Pioneer Insurance and Surety Corporation v. Hontanosas – mentioned in lecture

Where the last pleading has not yet been served and filed, the case is not yet ready for pre-trial.

The Philippine American Life & General Insurance v. Enario - mentioned in lecture
A pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated promptly. It is not a mere technicality in court proceedings for it
serves a vital objective which is the simplification, abbreviation, and expedition of the trial, if not indeed its dispensation

Ramos v. Sps. Lavendia - mentioned in lecture

The judge should not allow the termination of a pre-trial simply because of the manifestation of the parties that they cannot
settle the case. Instead, he should expose the parties to the advantages of pre-trial. He must also be mindful that there are
important aspects of the pre-trial that ought to be taken up to expedite the disposition of the case.
Notice of Pre- Agulto v. Tecson - mentioned in lecture
Trial Sending a notice of pre-trial stating the date, time, and place of pretrial is MANDATORY. Its absence will render the pre-trial
and subsequent proceedings void. This must be so as part of the party’s right to due process.
Pre-Trial Brief Ramos v. Sps. Lavendia - mentioned in lecture
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial. The dismissal of the complaint
for failure to file pre-trial briefs is discretionary on the part of the trial court.
Characteristic First Philippine Holdings Corp. vs Sandiganbayan - mentioned in lecture
of It is a legal proceeding by which a third person, who is not originally impleading in the action is permitted by the court to
Intervention become a party by intervening in a pending action after meeting the conditions and requirement set by the rules of court.
Time to GR: motion for intervention can be filed at any time before the rendition of a judgement by the trial court
intervene: XPNs: even after rendition of a judgement, intervention was allowed
XPNs 1. With respect to indispensable parties, intervention may be allowed even on appeal. (Falcasantos v. Falcasantos)
2. When the intervenor is the Republic (Lim v. Pacquing)
3. Where necessary to protect some interest which cannot otherwise be protected, and for the purpose of preserving
the intervenors right to appeal (Pinlac v. CA)
4. May be allowed during the pendency of the appeal where the interest of justice so requires (Tahanan Devt Corp v.
CA)
Remedy of Otto Gmur v. Revilla
 4
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

Denial of GR: The granting or refusal of a motion to intervene is a matter of judicial discretion. Once exercised, the decision of the
Motion to court cannot be reviewed or controlled by mandamus however erroneous it may bes
Intervene
MODULE 6 – MODES OF DISCOVERY
Nature and Fortune Corp v. CA
Purpose of The rules providing for pre-trial discovery of testimony, pre-trial inspection of documentary evidence and other tangible
Discovery things, and the examination of property and person, was an important innovation in the rules of procedure. The
promulgation of this group of rules satisfied the long-felt need for a legal machinery in the courts to supplement the
pleadings for the purpose of disclosing the real points of dispute between the parties and affording an adequate factual basis
in preparation for trial.

Tinio v. Manzano
The modes of discovery are designed to serve as an additional device aside from pre-trial, to narrow and clarify the
basic issues between the parties, to ascertain the facts relative to the issues and to enable the parties to obtain the fullest
possible knowledge of the issues and facts before civil trials and thus prevent the said trials to be carried on in the dark and
that all issues necessary to the disposition of a case are properly raised.

Republic v. Sandiganbayan
The time-honored cry of “fishing expedition” can no longer provide a reason to prevent a party from inquiring into the facts
underlying the opposing party’s case through the discovery procedures. Probably if one would avail the discovery devices, a
party would be able to determine the basis for complaining party in filing the case and found later on, that he has no
evidence to base his claim upon then there is opportunity for defending party to have the case dismissed outright for failure
of complaining party to be able to establish a basis for his claim, hence the term “fishing expedition”.

Ong v. Mazo
Indeed it is the purpose and policy of the law that the parties – before the trial if not indeed even before the pre-trial – should
discover or inform themselves of all the facts relevant to the action, not only those known to them individually, but also
those known to their adversaries; in other words, the desideratum is that civil trials should not be carried on in the dark;
and the Rules of Court make this ideal possible through the deposition-discovery mechanism set forth in Rules 24-29

Koh v. IAC
This mutual discovery enables a party to discover the evidence of the adverse party and thus facilitates an amicable
settlement or expedites the trial of the case. All parties are required to lay their cards on the table so that justice can be
rendered on the merits of the case
Importance of Republic v. Sandiganbayan
Discovery Justice, later on Chief Justice, Andres Narvasa lamented that among far too many lawyers (and not a few judges), there are, if
not a regrettable unfamiliarity and even outright ignorance about the nature, purpose, and operation of the modes of
discovery, at least a strong yet unreasoned and unreasonable disinclination to resort to them – which is a great pity for the
intelligent and adequate use of the deposition – discovery mechanism, coupled with pre-trial procedure, could, as the
experience of other jurisdictions convincingly demonstrates, effectively shorten the period of litigation and speed up
adjudication

Marcelo v. Sandiganbayan
To ensure that availment of the modes of discovery is otherwise untrammeled and efficacious, the “law imposes serious
sanctions on the party who refuses to make discovery, such as dismissing the action or proceeding or part thereof; taking
the matters inquired into as established in accordance with the claim of the party seeking discovery; refusal to allow the
disobedient party support or oppose designated claims or defenses”

Lanada v. CA
The application of the rules on modes of discovery rests upon the sound discretion of the court. In the same vein, the
determination of the sanction to be imposed upon a party who fails to comply with the modes of discovery rests on the same
sound judicial discretion. It is the duty of the courts to examine thoroughly the circumstances of each case and to determine
the applicability of the modes of discovery, bearing always in mind the aim to attain an expeditious administration of
justice.
Modes of Fortune Corp v. CA
Discovery are The fact that a party has resorted to a particular method of discovery will not bar subsequent use of other discovery devices
Cumulative On the other hand, leave of court is required as regards discovery by
a. Production or inspection of documents or things in accordance with Rule 27
b. Physical and mental examination of persons under Rule 28
Which may be granted upon due application and a showing of due cause ()
Discovery Still Republic v. Sandiganbayan
Applies even if That the matters on which discovery is desired are the same matters subject of a prior motion for bill of particulars denied
Motion for Bill for lack of merit is beside the point. Indeed xxx a bill of particulars may elicit only ultimate facts, not so called
of Particulars evidentiary facts. The latter are without a doubt proper subject of discovery.
is Denied
Limitations to Republic v. Sandiganbayan
Modes of Limitations inevitably arise when it can be shown that the examination is being conducted in bad faith or in such a manner as
 5
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

Discovery to annoy, embarrass or oppress the person subject to the inquire. Further limitations come into existence when the inquiry
touches upon the irrelevant or encroaches upon the recognized domains of privilege.

The liberty of a party to make discovery is well nigh unrestricted if the matters inquired into are otherwise relevant and not
privileged, and the inquiry is made in good faith and within the bounds of law.

San Luis v. Rojas

While there are limitations to the rules of discovery, even when permitted to be undertaken without leave and without
judicial intervention, such limitations inevitably arise when it can be shown that the examinations is being conducted in bad
faith; or in such a manner as to annoy, embarrass, or oppress the person subject to the inquire; or when the inquiry
touches upon or encroaches upon the recognized domains of privilege.
Definition and Ayala Land Inc v. Tagle
Purpose of Technically – a deposition is the testimony of a witness, put or taken in writing, under oath or affirmation, before a
Deposition commissioner, examiner or other judicial officer, in answer to interlocutory and cross-interlocutory, and usually subscribed
by the witnesses

People v. Webb
Testimony of [a] witness, taken in writing, under oath or affirmation, before some judicial officer in answer to questions or
interrogatories ...." and the purposes of taking depositions are to:
1.] Give greater assistance to the parties in ascertaining the truth and in checking and preventing perjury;
2.] Provide an effective means of detecting and exposing false, fraudulent claims and defenses;
3.] Make available in a simple, convenient and inexpensive way, facts which otherwise could not be proved except with great difficulty;
4.] Educate the parties in advance of trial as to the real value of their claims and defenses thereby encouraging settlements;
5.] Expedite litigation;
6.] Safeguard against surprise;
7.] Prevent delay;
8.] Simplify and narrow the issues; and
9.] Expedite and facilitate both preparation and trial.

Dasmarinas Garments Inc v. Reyes

Depositions are chiefly a mode of discovery. They are intended as a means to compel disclosure of facts resting in the
knowledge of a party or other person which are relevant in some suit or proceeding in court. Depositions may be taken at
any time after the institution of any action, whenever necessary or convenient. There is no rule that limits deposition-
taking only to the period of pre-trial or before it; no prohibition against the taking of depositions after pre-trial.

Republic v. Sandiganbayan
The various modes or instruments of discovery are meant to serve:
(1) as a device, along with the pre-trial hearing under Rule 20, to narrow and clarify the basic issues between the parties,
(2) as a device for ascertaining the facts relative to those issues.

San Luis v. Rojas

Depositions serve as a device for ascertaining the facts relative to the issues of the case. The evident purpose is to enable the
parties, consistent with recognized privileges, to obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the issues and facts before civil
trials and thus prevent the said trials from being carried out in the dark.
Functions of 1. Depositions are chiefly a mode of discovery
Deposition Pajarillaga v. CA
Deposition is allowed as a departure from the accepted and usual judicial proceedings of examining witnesses in open court
where their demeanor could be observed by the trial judge, consistent with the principle of promoting just, speedy and
inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding; and provided it is taken in accordance with the provisions of the
Rules of Court, i.e, with leave of court if summons have been served, and without such leave if an answer has been submitted;
and provided further that a circumstance for its admissibility exists

2. An alternative mode of testimony

Use of Sales v. Sabino
Depositions The Court held that while depositions may be used as evidence in court proceedings, they are generally not meant to be a
substitute for the actual testimony in open court of a party or witness. Stated differently, a deposition is not to be used
when the deponent is at hand. Indeed, any deposition offered during a trial to prove the facts therein set out, in lieu of the
actual oral testimony of the deponent in open court, may be opposed and excluded on the ground of hearsay

San Luis v. Rojas

Depositions are allowed as a departure from the accepted and usual judicial proceedings of examining witnesses in
open court, where their demeanor could be observed by the trial judge; and the procedure is not on that account rendered
illegal nor is the deposition, thereby taken, inadmissible.

Ilao-Quianay v Mapile
A party’s objection to the admission in evidence of the testimony of the notary public who supposedly notarized the deed of
sale taken in another case in which petitioners were not parties is persuasive. Such testimony does not qualify as an
exception to the hearsay rule under Sec. 47, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court. None of the circumstances for the admission of
 6
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

the testimony given at a former proceeding obtains in this case. IOW, the court said that the case does not fall under any of
the instances. Not only were petitioners not parties to the former proceeding and hence without opportunity to cross-
examine the notary public, there was also no proof that the notary public was already deceased or unable to testify. Hence,
the testimony should not have been accorded any probative weight

Jonathan Landoil International Co Inc v Spouses Mangudadatu

Depositions may be used for the trial or for the hearing of a motion or an interlocutory proceeding. When we say
interlocutory proceeding, matters are to be taken up not for the purpose of disposing the case if it only involves incidents.
The present case involved a circumstance that fell under the above-cited Section 4 (c) (2) of Rule 23- the witnesses of
petitioner in Metro Manila resided beyond 100 km from Sultan Kudarat, the place of hearing. Petitioner offered the
depositions in support of its Motion to Quash (the Writ of Execution) and for the purpose of proving that the trial court’s
Decision was not yet final. As previously explained, despite the fact that trial has already been terminated, a deposition
can still be properly taken.

Carriaga v. CA
The testimony or deposition of a witness given in a former case or proceeding may be given in evidence against the
adverse party where the witness is deceased, out of or cannot with due diligence be found in the Philippines, unavailable or
otherwise unable to testify. The preconditions set forth must be strictly complied with. The inability to testify does not cover
the case of witnesses who were subpoenaed but did not appear, because in such, the remedy is contempt. The inability
must proceed from a grave cause, almost amounting to death, as when the witness is old and has lost the power of
speech.

Pajarillaga v. CA
There is nothing in the ROC or in jurisprudence which restricts a deposition to the sole function of being a mode of discovery
before trial. Under certain conditions and for certain limited purposes, it may be taken even after trial has commenced
and may be used without the deponent being actually called to the witness stand. There is no rule that limits deposition-
taking only to the period of pre-trial or before it; no prohibition exists against the taking of depositions after pre-trial. There
can be no valid objection to allowing them during the process of executing final and executory judgments, when the material
issues of fact have become numerous or complicated.

Harry Go v. People of the Philippines

Section 17, Rule 23 of the Rules of Court on the taking of depositions of witnesses in civil cases cannot apply
suppletorily to criminal cases since there is a specific provision in the Rules of Court with respect to the taking of
depositions of prosecution witnesses in criminal cases, which is primarily intended to safeguard the constitutional rights of
the accused to meet the witness against him face to face.

Cuenco vs. Risos

It is true that Section 3, Rule 1 of the Rules of Court provides that the rules of civil procedure apply to all actions, civi l or
criminal, and special proceedings. In effect, it says that the rules of civil procedure have suppletory application to criminal
cases. However it is likewise true that the criminal proceedings are primarily governed by the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure. Considering that Rule 119 adequately and squarely covers the situation in the instant case, we find no cogent
reason to apply Rule 23 suppletorily or otherwise.
Leave of Court Veran v. CA
for Use of Leave of court for taking deposition which is not necessary after answer has been filed unless the deponent is confined in
Deposition prison should be distinguished from use of deposition where the court has occasion to exercise its discretion, the proper
time being when the deposition is formally offered in evidence
Waiver of Sales v. Sabino
Objections to The act of cross-examining the deponent during the taking of the deposition cannot be considered a waiver of the right to
Admissibility object to its admissibility as evidence in the trial proper. A party is not estopped from challenging the admissibility of
(Sec. 6) the deposition just because he participated in the taking thereof. Under Section 29, Rule 23 of the Rules of Court, while
errors and irregularities in depositions as to notice, qualifications of the officer conducting the deposition, and manner of
taking the deposition are deemed waived if not objected to before or during the taking of the deposition, objections to the
competency of a witness or the competency, relevancy or materiality of testimony may be for the first time at the
trial and need not be made at the time of the taking of the deposition, unless they could be obviated at that point. Certiorari
will not lie against an order admitting or rejecting a deposition in evidence, the remedy being an appeal from the final
judgement
Deposition Heirs of Pedro Pasag vs. Sps. Parocha
Must Be A formal offer is necessary because judges are mandated to rest their findings of fact and their judgement only and
Formally strictly upon the evidence offered by the parties at the trial. Its function is to enable the trial judge to know the purpose
Offered in or purposes for which the proponent is presenting the evidence. On other other hand, this allows opposing parties to
Evidence (Sec. examine the evidence and object to its admissibility. Moreover, it facilitates review as the appellate court will not be required
8) to review documents not previously scrutinized by the trial court
Commission of Dulay v. Dulay
Letters It would be illogical and unreasonable to expect respondent to comply with the letters rogatory without the cooperation of
Rogatory (Sec. the very institution or personality named in the letters rogatory and requested to examine the witnesses. While a court had
12) the authority to entertain a discovery request, it is not required to provide judicial assistance thereto.
 7
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle

American Airlines vs. Court of Appeals

The subsequent appearance of the said security officer before the Philippine consul in Geneva on September 19, 1994 and
the answer to the cross-interrogatories propounded by the private respondent was transmitted to the trial court by the
Philippine consul in Geneva on September 23, 1994 should be deemed as full compliance with the requisites of the right
of the private respondent to cross-examine the petitioner’s witness. The deposition filed by the petitioner should be
reinstated as part of the evidence and considered together with the answer to the cross-interrogatories
Admission by DBP vs. Court of Appeals
Adverse Party The rule authorizing a party to call on the other party to make an admission implies the making of demands for admission of
(Rule 26) relevant and material matters of fact and NOT for admission of matters of LAW, CONCLUSIONS, or OPINIONS

Duque v. CA
The request for admission must be served on the party, not the counsel. This is an exception to the general rule that notices
shall be served upon counsel and not upon the party.
Production or Solidbank Corp. (now known as Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company) v. Gateway Electronics Corp
Inspection of Rule 27 permits “fishing” for evidence. The lament against a fishing expedition no longer precludes a party from prying
Documents or into the facts underlying his opponent’s case. Mutual knowledge of all relevant facts gathered by both parties is essential to
Things (Rule proper litigation. To that end, either party may compel the other to disgorge whatever facts he has in his possession.
27) However, fishing for evidence that is allowed under the rules is not without limitations.

Security Bank Corp (SBC) v. CA

The rule on discovery “requires the parties to play the game with cards on the table so that the possibility of fair
settlement before trial is measurably increased”

Air Philippines Corp v. Pennswell

The provision shows that the production or inspection of documents or things as a mode of discovery sanctioned by the
Rules of Court may be availed of by any party upon a showing of good cause therefore before the court in which an action is
pending. The court may order any party:
(a) to produce and permit the inspection and copying or photographing, by or on behalf of the moving party, of any
designated documents, papers, books, accounts, letters, photographs, objects or tangible things, not privileged, which
constitute or contain evidence material to any matter involved in the action and which are in his or her possession,
custody or control;
(b) to permit entry upon designated land or other property in his or her possession or control for the purpose of inspecting,
measuring, surveying, or photographing the property or any designated relevant object or operation thereon.

Capitol Hills Golf & Country Club v. Sanchez

Under Sec. 3, Rule 29 of the Rules, if a party or an officer or managing agent of a party refuses to obey an order to
produce any document or other things for inspection, copying or photographing or to permit it to be done, the court
may make such orders as are just. The enumeration of options given to the court under Sec. 3, Rule 29 of the Rules is not
exclusive, as shown by the phrase “among others”.

Eagleridge Devt. Corp v. Cameron Granville 3 Asset Management, Inc.

All documents mentioned in a Deed of Assignment transferring the credit of the plaintiff in a pending litigation should be
accessible to the defendant through a Motion for Production or Inspection of Documents under Rule 27. Litigation is not a
game of skills and stratagems. It is a social process that should allow both parties to fully and fairly access the truth of the
matters in litigation.
Undoubtedly, the trial court had effectively placed petitioners at a great disadvantage inasmuch as respondent effectively
suppressed relevant documents related to the transaction involved in the case a quo. Furthermore, the remedies of discovery
encouraged and provided for under the Rules of Court to be able to compel the production of relevant documents had been
put to naught by the arbitrary act of the trial court.
Refusal to Jaravata v. Karolus
Comply with The CA rightly held that the court a quo erred in rendering a judgment by default against the defendants for refusal or failure
Modes of to answer written interrogatories, without first requiring an application by the proponent to compel an answer. This is
Discovery the requisite procedure under Section 1 of Rule 29 of the 1997 Rules of Procedure.
(Rule 29)
Capitol Hills Golf & Country Club v. Sanchez
The enumeration of options given to the court under Sec. 3, Rule 29 of the Rules is not exclusive, as shown by the phrase
“among others”.

To ensure the availment of the modes of discovery is otherwise untrammeled and efficacious, the law imposes serious
sanctions on the party who refuses to make discovery, such as dismissing the action or proceeding or part thereof, or
rendering judgment by default against the disobedient party; contempt of court, or arrest of the party or the agent of the
part; payment of the amount of reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining a court order to compel discovery; taking the
matters inquired into as established in accordance with the claim of the party seeking discovery; refusal to allow the
disobedient party to support or oppose designated claims or defenses ; striking out pleadings or parts thereof ; staying
further proceedings.

Solidbank Corporation v. Gateway Electronics Corporation


It is not fair to penalize Gateway for not complying with the request of Solidbank for the production and inspection of
documents, considering that the documents sought were not particularly described. Gateway and its officers can only be held
liable for unjust refusal to comply with the modes of discovery if it is shown that the documents sought to be produced were
specifically described, material to the action and in the possession, custody or control of Gateway.
Lanada v. CA and Nestle v. CA
The determination of the sanction a court should impose for failure of a party to comply with the modes of discovery
rests on sound judicial discretion, taking into account the overriding interest of justice and the circumstances of each case.
SUMMONS
Summons on foreign private
juridical entities:
- registered: Resident agent; if no
agent, government official or any of its
officers, agents, directors or trustees
within ph
- not registered: (with LoC) personal
service thru DFA; publication;
facsimile; electronic means; others.
Service upon public corporations:
- defendant is Republic of Ph: SolGen
- defendant is LGU or pubcorp:
executive head
Service upon defendant whose
identity or whereabouts are
unknown:
- (1) whereabouts are unknown; (2)
cannot be ascertained by diligent
inquiry
- publication within 90 days (with
LoC)
- answer or responsive pleading shall
be filed in not less than 60 days.
Extra-territorial service
- (1) action affects the personal status
of the plaintiff; (2) defendant claims a
lien or interest over property in the
ph; (3) relief excludes defendant from
interest in the property; (4) property
attached in the ph.
- applies only to actions in rem or
quasi in rem
- HOW? (1) personal service; (2)
provided in intl conventions; (3)
publication + copy via registered mail;
(4) other manner
Temporarily outside PH
- (with LoC) In rem or quasi in rem =
extraterritorial service; in personam =
substituted service
- convert the action into in rem or
quasi in rem by attaching the property
of the defendant to avail of
extraterritorial service.
How LoC is made
- (1) made by motion in writing; (2)
supported by affidavit; (3) grounds
for application
Return
- within 30 days from issuance of
summons, sheriff or process server to
person authorized by the court shall
complete its service
- within 5 calendar days from service,
file a return
- if via substituted service: (1)
impossibility of prompt personal
service within 30 days; (2) date and
time of the 3 attempts on 2 different
dates (3) details of inquiries made to
locate defendant; (4) name of person
served.
Proof of Service
- HOW? (1) writing; (2) set forth the
manner, place and date of service; (3)
specify papers served and shall be
sworn to
- if served via email: (1) printout; (2)
copy of summons; (3) affidavit
- if served via publication: (1) affidavit
of the publisher or editor; (2) copy of
the publication
- No proof of service = dismissal on
the ground of lack of jurisdiction
Voluntary Appearance
- VA = equivalent to service of
summons
- Inclusion in a motion to dismiss of
other grounds aside from lack of
jurisdiction = VA
MOTIONS
Motion
- application of relief other than by a
pleading.
- there must be a prayer
- pleading is a written statement of
the claims and defenses of the parties
- there must be proof of service
- FRIDAY = motion day
Form
- GR: in writing (caption, designation,
signature)
- XPN: those made in open court or in
the course of the trial (must be
resolved immediately after adverse
party is given an opportunity to argue
his opposition)
- Motions based on facts not in record
= court MAY hear (discretionary)
8
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
Contents
- (1) relief sought; (2) grounds; (3)
supporting affidavits and other papers
Non-litigious motion
- the court may act upon without
prejudicing the rights of adverse
parties
- (1) alias summons; (2) extension to
file an answer; (3) postponement; (4)
issuance of writ of execution; (5)
issuance of alias writ of execution; (6)
issuance of a writ of possession; (7)
issuance of an order directing the
sheriff to execute the final certificate of
sale; (8) other similar motions
Litigious motion
- there is a need to protect a party’s
right in a pending case
- (1) bill of particulars; (2) motion to
dismiss; (3) new trial; (4)
reconsideration; (5) execution pending
appeal; (6) motion to amend after a
responsive pleading has been filed; (7)
motion to cancel statutory lien; (8)
motion for an order to break in or writ
of demolition; (9) motion for
intervention; (10) motion for judgment
on the pleadings; (11) summary
judgment; (12) demurrer to evidence;
(13) motion to declare defendant in
default; (14) other similar motions
- How served: (a) personal service; (b)
accredited private courier; (c)
registered mail; (d) electronic means
- resolved within 15 days from its
receipt
- important: once a motion is filed, the
only pleading allowed after filing the
motion is the opposition of the
opposing party which is filed within 5
days from receipt.
Notice of Hearing
- hearing discretionary on the part of
the court
- notice is sent to ALL parties
concerned and it must specify the date
and time of hearing
Omnibus Motion Rule
- GR: motion attacking a pleading or
judgment or order must include ALL
objections in 1 motion, otherwise

waived.
- XPN: (1) lack of jurisdiction; (2) lites
pendentia; (3) res judicata; (4)
prescription
Prohibited motions
- mere scrap of paper if filed. It will
not be entertained
- (1) MOTION TO DISMISS (except
JLRP) [alternative remedy: cite in
affirmative defenses in your Answer or
Responsive Pleading if not part of the
exceptions of MD]
- (2) MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF THE COURT’S
ACTION ON THE AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES (and motion to hear
affirmative defenses)
- (3) MOTION TO SUSPEND
PROCEEDINGS WITHOUT A TRO OR
INJUNCTION ISSUED BY THE HIGHER
COURT
- (4) MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF
TIME TO FILE PLEADINGS,
AFFIDAVITS OR ANY PAPER
(extension for Answer is allowed)
- (5) MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT
INTENDED FOR DELAY (except acts of
God, Force Majeure, or physical
inability)
- motion for postponement must be
accompanied by receipt of
postponement fee
Dismissal with prejudice
- GROUNDS: (1) Res Judicata; (2)
Statute of Limitations; (3) claim or
demand has been paid, waived,
abandoned, or extinguished; (4)
statute of frauds
Pro-forma motion
- a motion which does not comply
with the rules and is considered as
one filed merely to delay the
proceedings
- no legal effect
BILL OF PARTICULARS
- if a pleading fails to satisfy the
requirement of definite allegations or
statements, the remedy is motion for
a BoP (if a pleading does not
sufficiently state a cause of action -
MD)
- PURPOSES: (1) to limit the pleading
(2) make a detailed account (3) so
that the opposing party and the court
will know the precise nature of the
cause of action (4) apprise adverse
party of the scope of evidence (5)
avoid surprises and needless
preparations (6) adverse party can
make intelligent answer.
- filed before responding to a pleading
(within 30 days); if the pleading is the
reply, filed within 10 days from
service.
- ACTION OF THE COURT: (1) deny;
(2) grant outright; (3) allow parties to
be heard
- IF MOTION IS GRANTED - there must
be compliance within 10 days from
notice. It may be filed either in a
separate or in an amended pleading.
- EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE : (1)
court may order striking out of the
pleading or portions thereof ; (2)
dismissal based on Rule 17 [plaintiff -
strike out his complaint; effect is
dismissal)(defendant - strike out his
answer; effect is default]
- Once he files a motion for BoP, it will
stay the period and suspend the
running of the period to file a
responsive pleading.
DISMISSAL OF ACTIONS
- If MD is denied, file MR
- If affirmative defense is denied,
cannot file MR
- LITIS PENDENTIA: (1) identity of
parties; (2) identity of relief and rights
asserted; (3) any judgment that may
be rendered in the pending case
would amount to res judicata in the
other case.
- RES JUDICATA: (1) former judgment
must be final; (2) court has
jurisdiction; (3) identity of parties
Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff
- plaintiff files a notice of dismissal (as
a matter of right)
- at any time before service of the
answer
- court shall issue an order confirming
the dismissal
- without prejudice except two-
dismissal rule
Two-Dismissal Rule
- A notice operates as an adjudication
upon the merits when filed by a
plaintiff who has once dismissed in a
competent court an action based on or
including the same claim.
- Plaintiff can only exercise his right
twice. Once there is already a
dismissal the second time around, it is
already with prejudice.
Dismissal upon motion of plaintiff
- motion must have the approval of
the court
- if a counterclaim has been pleaded
before the motion for dismissal :
DISMISSAL SHALL BE LIMITED TO
9
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
THE COMPLAINT; effect is that
dismissal is without prejudice and
defendant may prosecute his or her
counterclaim in a separate or same
action.
- If he prosecutes his counterclaim in
the same action, he must manifest
such within 15 days from notice of
motion, otherwise he loses his right to
do so. But this will not bar him to
prosecute his counterclaim in a
separate action.
- CLASS SUIT- cannot be dismissed or
compromised without approval of
court.
Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff
- upon motion of defendant or upon
court’s own motion.
- (1) no justifiable cause, plaintiff fails
to appear in the presentation of
evidence-in-chief; (2) fails to
prosecute his or her action for an
unreasonable length of time; (3) fails
to comply with the Rules or orders of
the court.
PRE-TRIAL
- procedural device by which the court
is called upon
- after the filing of the last pleading
- to compel parties and their lawyers
to appear
- negotiate an amicable settlement
- or embody in a single document the
issues of fact and law involved
When conducted
- after the last responsive pleading
has been served and
filed(answer/reply)
- Notice of Pre-trial issued by clerk of
court within 5 days; set pre-trial not
later than 60 days.
Nature and Purpose
- pre-trial is mandatory and should be
terminated promptly
- What to consider:
(1) amicable settlement or submission
to ADR;
(2) simplification of the issues;
(3) obtaining stipulations or
admissions of facts and of documents;
(4) limitation of the number and
identification of witnesses and the
setting of trial dates;
(5) preliminary reference of issues to
a commissioner;
(6) propriety of rendering judgment
on the pleadings, or summary
judgment, or dismissing the action;
(7) mark, examine, compare, and

reserve evidences (testimonial
evidence - give name of witness and
nature of testimony; most important
witness rule) (documentary evidence -
particular description)
(8) other matters
- failure without just cause to APPEAR
= waiver of any objections
- failure without just cause to BRING
EVIDENCE = waiver of presentation of
evidence
Notice of Pre-trial
- issued by clerk of court within 5
days; set pre-trial not later than 60
days.
- MANDATORY; its absence will
render the pre-trial and subsequent
proceedings void.
- shall include dates for pre-trial, CAM,
and JDR
- served on counsel OR party if no
counsel (notice to counsel is notice to
party)
- Effect of non-appearance in ADR =
deemed as non-appearance at pre-
trial (waiver of objections)
Appearance of parties
- when non-appearance is excused:
(1) acts of God; (2) force majeure; (3)
physical inability
- Both parties and their counsel must
appear.
- a representative may appear if
AUTHORIZED to (a) enter Amicable
Settlement; (b) submit to ADR; (c)
enter into stipulations or admissions
of facts and documents.
Effect of Failure to Appear
- FAILURE TO APPEAR BY PLAINTIFF
AND COUNSEL - dismissal with
prejudice
- COUNSEL APPEARED ON BEHALF
OF PLAINTIFF BUT WITHOUT VALID
CAUSE - dismissal with prejudice
-REMEDY: appeal the order /
re-file the complaint if the order of
dismissal is without prejudice
- FAILURE TO APPEAR BY
DEFENDANT AND HIS COUNSEL -
allow the plaintiff to present evidence
ex party and the court can render
judgment based on the available
evidence.
-REMEDY: MR / if the denial is
tainted with GAD, petition for
certiorari
Pre-trial Brief
- a pleading that the parties are
required to file before the conduct of
the pre-trial
- filed with the court and served on
the adverse party and ensure their
receipt thereof
- at least 3 days before pre-trial
- contents: (1) concise statement of
the case and the reliefs; (2) summary
of admitted facts and proposed
stipulations of facts; (3) main actual
and legal issues; (4) propriety of
referral of factual issues to
commissioners; (5) documents or
other object evidence; (6) names of
witnesses and the summary of their
respective testimonies; (7) bride
statement of points of law and citation
of authorities.
- failure to file a pre-trial brief =
failure to appear at pre-trial
Pre-trial Order
- upon termination of the pre-trial,
issued by the court within 10 days
- it will recite in detail matters taken
up in the pre-trial
- contents: (1) enumeration of the
admitted facts; (2) minutes; (3) issues
to be tried; (4) applicable law and
jurisprudence; (5) evidence marked;
(6) specific trial dates = 180 days ; (7)
case flowchart; (8) a statement that
the one-day examination of witness
rule and most important witness rule
shall be strictly followed; (9)
statement that the court shall render
judgment on the pleadings or
summary judgment.
- ONE-DAY EXAMINATION WITNESS -
if a witness is being presented in a
given trial date, his testimony must be
completed on the same date. A motion
for a continuance in order for the
cross examination to be conducted
next time is prohibited.
- DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THE
WITNESSES FOR THE PLAINTIFF = in
the form of judicial affidavit (JA =
statements made by a witness in the
form of a question and answer format)
- postponement of presentation of
witnesses is only allowed in acts of
God, force majeure, or physical
inability.
- failure to appear of opposing party -
presentation of witness will proceed
with the absent party being deemed
to have waived the right to object or
cross-examine.
Court-Annexed Mediation
- not more than 30 days; no extension
- if successful = mediator submits
report and attach terms of settlement -
> court will issue an order approving
10
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
compromise agreement -> case
terminated (end)
- fail to settle = return the matter to
the court -> JDR
- pre-trial must be terminated first
before CAM be conducted
Judicial Dispute Resolution
- conducted within a non-extendible
period of 15 days from CAM.
- Court will act as mediator but not
the judge handling the case. (Another
court)
- JDR fails = trial before the original
court shall proceed
- successful JDR = referred back to
original court for approval of
compromise agreement -> end
- CAM AND JDR SHOULD BE
CONFIDENTIAL (should not be
presented in trial)
Judgment after pre-trial
- WHEN SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS
ORDERED w/in 90 days from
termination of pre-trial : (1) No more
controverted facts; (2) no more
genuine issue as to any material fact;
(3) absence of any issue; (4) answer
fails to tender an issue.
- no appeal or certiorari (still
premature)
INTERVENTION
- legal proceeding by which a third
person, who is not originally
impleading in the action is permitted
by the court to become a party
- optional on the part of the party
- initiated by a party not an original
party to the case but for some reason
he has to protect his interests by
including himself to be part of the
proceedings
- not an independent proceeding; but
merely ancillary or supplemental to
an existing litigation
- intervention cannot alter the theory,
nature of the action, and issues
already joined by OG parties
Who may intervene
- (1) person who has legal interest in
the matter or the success of either
parties; (2) interest against both
parties; (3) someone adversely
affected
- with LOC
- discretionary on the part of the court
- REQUISITES: (a) Motion for
intervention filed BEFORE judgment;
(b) movant has legal interest; (c)
intervention will not unduly delay or
prejudice the original parties; (d)

inter tenors rights cannot be fully
protected in separate proceedings.
Time to intervene
- GR:before judgment is rendered
- done by attaching a copy of pleading-
in-intervention to the motion and
serve to original parties
- XPN: (1) indispensable parties =
allowed even on appeal; (2)
intervenor is Republic; (3) necessary
to protect some interest; (4)
Pleadings-in-intervention
- COMPLAINT-IN-INTERVENTION =
against either or all of the original
parties
- ANSWER-IN-INTERVENTION =
collaboration with the defending
party
- an answer to the complaint-in-
intervention is filed within 15 days
Remedy for denial of motion to
intervene
- GR: grant or refusal is discretionary;
cannot be subject to mandamus
- XPN: GAD
SUBPOENA
- UNDER THE PAIN OF PENALTY
- Directive to appear and testify or
present a document or evidence
SUBPOENA AD TESTIFICANDUM
- to attend, testify, and take deposition
- at any investigation conducted by
competent authority
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
- to bring books, documents, or other
things under his or her control.
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM AND AD
TESTIFICANDUM
- both
Who can issue a subpoena
- (1) court where witness is required
to attend; (2) court of deposition; (3)
officer/body who investigates; (4) SC
or CA
- application for subpoena to a
PRISONER: judge or officer shall
examine and study carefully such
application to determine whether the
same is made for a valid purpose.
XPN: (a) sentenced to death; (b) RP;
(c) LI
Forms and contents of subpoena
- (1) name of court; (2) title of the
action or investigation
Quashing a subpoena
- QUASH A SUBPOENA DUCES
TECUM: (1) unreasonable or
oppressive; (2) the relevancy of books
etc does not appear; (3) failure to
advance reasonable cost of the
production thereof.
- QUASH A SUBPOENA AD
TESTIFICANDUM: (1) witness is not
bound thereby
- Either case: (1) the witness fees and
kilometrage were not tendered
SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITIONS
- DEPOSITION FOR SAT: Proof of
service of notice of deposition =
AUTHORIZATION for issuance of
subpoena
- DEPOSITION FOR SDT: there must
be an order of the court for issuance
of subpoena
Service of subpoena
- same as service of summons
(personal or substituted)
- required to make a tender
Personal Appearance in Court
- a person present in court may be
required to testify as if he or she were
in attendance upon a subpoena.
Failure of witness to attend
- (1) court may issue a Warrant of
Arrest; (2) pay cost of warrant &
seizure; (3) contempt of court
- exception to the sanctions: (a)
witness is residing more than 100km
from his or her residence to court; (b)
detention prisoner without
permission of the court.
MODES OF DISCOVERY
- essential in trying to abbreviate the
proceedings by determining through
this device, the real issues to be taken
up by the court in the course of the
trial
- very important tool to determine
real issues and weed out all other
matters that are deemed irrelevant.
- so that adverse party will have no
choice but to unearth or lay all his
cards on the table
- MANDATORY; there are sanctions
for unjust refusal to the modes of
discovery
- PURPOSE: (1) narrow and clarify the
basic issues between the parties; (2)
ascertain the facts
- (1) deposition; (2) written
interrogatories; (3) requests for
11
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
admission; (4) inspect relevant
documents or object and lands; (5)
physical or mental exam
- these modes are cumulative - a party
who has resorted to a particular
method of discovery is not barred for
the subsequent use of other discovery
devices.
Fishing expedition
- means there is no basis for the claim
or no sufficient evidence to establish
his claim
- what is sought to be prevented by
modes of discovery
- if no basis = ground for summary
judgment
Bill of particulars v. Modes of
Discovery
- BOP = ultimate facts
- MOD = evidentiary facts
LIMITATIONS
- (1) Bad faith; (2) Annoy, embarrass,
or press the person; (3) irrelevant; (4)
encroaches on recognized domains of
privilege
DEPOSITIONS
- Any written statement verified by
oath; testimony of witness in writing
under oath or affirmation
- technically, it is a testimony but not
in open court
- Depositions v. Affidavits: D = compel
disclosure of facts ; A = ex party
statements without formal
interrogation and cross-examination.
- not meant as a substitute to
testimony made in open court
- it is also an alternative mode of
testimony in view of: (1) distance, (2)
death, (3) disability .. of deponent
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION
- EXAMINATION OF CHILD WITNESS:
Allowed especially with respect to
child witnesses that are of tender
years.
- judge shall preside at the videotaped
deposition of the child.
PURPOSE OF A DEPOSITION
(1) Assist parties in ascertaining the
truth and preventing perjury
(2) detect and expose false, fraudulent
claims, and defenses
(3) make available in a simple,
convenient and inexpensive way, facts
which are difficult to prove
(4) educate the parties in advance of
trial as to the real value of their claims

and defenses
(5) expedite litigation
(6) safeguard against surprise
(7) prevent delay
(8) simplify and narrow the issues
(9) expedite and facilitate both
preparation and trial
DEPOSITION PENDING ACTION
- through ex party motion
- oral examination or written
interrogatories
- Deposition of prisoner: Only by leave
of court
SCOPE OF EXAMINATION
- (1) Matter relevant to the subject of
the pending action; (2) not privileged;
(3) not restricted by a protective
order - Sec 16/18
PROTECTION ORDERS BEFORE
EXAMINATION (SEC 16)
- How to get protection order under
sec 16: (1) after notice is served for
taking a deposition by oral
examination; (2) upon motion
seasonably made by any party ; (3) for
good cause shown.
PROTECTION ORDERS DURING
EXAMINATION (SEC 18)
- How to get protection order under
sec 18: (1) anytime during the taking
of the deposition; (2) on motion or
deposition; (3) upon showing that the
examination is being conducted in bad
faith or to unreasonably annoy,
embarrass, or oppress the deponent.
Use of depositions
- AGAINST WHOM? = (1) party who
was present ; (2) party represented;
(3) person who has due notice thereof
- PURPOSES =
(a) ANY PARTY - for
contradicting or impeaching the
testimony if deponent as witness
(b) ADVERSE PARTY - any
purpose where the deponent is a
party or at the time of taking the
deposition was an officer, director, or
managing agent of a public or private
corporation, partnership, or
association which is a party.
(c) ANY PARTY - any purpose
where the deponent is a witness in
case of death, non-residence of
deponent, disability, non-
procurement of subpoena, and
exceptional circumstances
- PARTIAL DEPOSITION = if only a
part of a deposition is offered in
evidence by a party, the adverse party
may require him to introduce all of it.
- any deposition offered during trial in
lieu of the actual testimony (deponent
is at hand) = excluded on the ground of
hearsay
When deposition of a witness from
a former case be admissible
- witness is (1) deceased; (2) not in
the Philippines; (3) unable to testify
(inability must be a grave cause)
Leave of Court for Deposition
- only for prisoners
Effect of substitution of parties
- does not affect the right to use
depositions previously taken
- all depositions lawfully taken and
duly filed in the former action may be
used in the latter as if originally taken
therefor.
Objections to admissibility of
depositions
- WHEN MADE? = (1) at the trial or
hearing; (2) if witness were present
and testifying
- A party is not estopped from
challenging the admissibility of the
deposition just because he
participated in the taking thereof.
- Errors and irregularities in
depositions as to notice, qualifications
of the officer conducting the deposition,
and manner of taking the deposition
are deemed WAIVED if not objected to
before or during the taking of the
deposition.
- but objections to the competent of a
witness or the competency, relevancy
or materiality of testimony may be
made for the first time at the trial and
need not be made at the time of the
deposition-taking. Any party may
rebut deposition at the trial or
hearing.
- orders of the court admitting or
rejecting the deposition can only be
questioned on appeal, not through a
special civil action.
Effect of taking depositions
- a party shall not be deemed to make
a person his to her own witness for
any purpose by taking his or her
deposition (wa ko kasabot ani
hahahaha chatti ko kung kasabot ka)
Effect of using depositions
- introduction of deposition by a party
makes the deponent his witness
- except: (1) if deposition is used to
12
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
contradict or impeach the deponent;
(2) the deponent is a party or at the
time of taking the deposition was an
officer, director, or managing agent of
a public or private corporation,
partnership, or association which is a
party.
- deposition must be formally offered
in evidence
Persons before whom depositions
may be taken within the Ph
- (1) judge; (2) notary public; (3)
person authorized to administer oath.
Persons before whom depositions
may be taken outside of Ph
- (1) secretary of embassy, consul
general, consul, vice-consul, or
consular agent the Ph; (2) person or
officer appointed by commission or
letters rogatory; (3) person
authorized to administer oaths.
COMMISSION OR LETTERS
ROGATORY
- issued only when necessary or
convenient, on application and notice
- must be just and appropriate
- COMMISSION - (1) issued by a court
of justice or competent tribunal to
authorize a person to take
depositions; (2) issued to a non-
judicial foreign officer who will
directly take the testimony; (3)
resorted to if with permission of the
foreign country; (4) no need for LoC.
- LETTERS ROGATORY - (10 sent in the
name and authority of a judge or court
to another requesting the latter to be
examined; (2) issued to the
appropriate judicial officer of the
foreign country who will direct
somebody to take down the
testimony; (3) resorted to if the
execution of the commission is
refused in the foreign country; (4)
need LoC
Disqualification by interest (cannot
be a deposition officer)
- (1) related within 6th degree of
consanguinity or affinity; (2)
employer or attorney of one of the
parties; (3) related to the attorney of
deponent or employee of attorney; (4)
financially interested in the action
Stipulations regarding taking of
depositions
- if parties so stipulate, depositions
may be taken before any person to
administer oaths

Deposition upon oral examination
- REQS: (1) give reasonable notice in
writing; (2) give to every other party
to the action.
- Contents of Notice: (1) time and
place; (2) name and address of person
examined if known; (2) if unknown,
general description.
Record of examination
- Duty of officer before whom
deposition is taken: (1) put witness
under oath; (2) record testimony of
the witness; (3) take note of
objections if any.
- testimony shall be taken
stenographically
MOTION TO TERMINATE OR LIMIT
EXAMINATION
- WHEN: anytime during deposition-
taking through a motion or petition
- GROUNDS: (1) Bad faith; (2) to
unreasonably annoy, embarrass, or
oppress
Actions after deposition (after fully
transcribed)
- (1) deposition to be submitted to
witness for examination; (2) must be
read to or by him … UNLESS BOTH
ARE WAIVED.
Changes in form or substance
- (1) entered upon the deposition by
the officer + statement of reasons; (2)
signed by witness UNLESS waived, ill,
cannot be found, refuse to sign; (3) If
deposition is not signed, officer will
sign it and state why
Duty of officer after submission
- (1) certify the deposition that
witness was duly sworn to by him and
deposition is a true record of
testimony; (2) promptly file it with
the court
FAILURE TO ATTEND OF PARTY
GIVING NOTICE
- pay reasonable expenses +
attorney’s fees
FAILURE OF PARTY GIVING NOTICE
TO SERVE SUBPOENA AND
WITNESS FAILS TO ATTEND
- pay reasonable expenses +
attorney’s fees
DEPOSITION UPON WRITTEN
INTERROGATORIES
- NOTICE -> within 10 days cross-
interrogatories -> within 5 days re-
direct interrogatories -> within 3 days
recross-interrogatories
DEPOSITIONS IN CIVIL CASES V.
CRIMINAL CASES
- Criminal = the testimonial
examination should be made before
the court or at least before the judge
where the case is pending as required
by the Revised Rules of Criminal
Procedure.
- Civil = deposition is allowed within
the Ph or outside
- rules of civil procedure have
suppletory effect or application to
criminal cases. If there is no specific
provision provided in the Rules of
Criminal Procedure, the rules of civil
procedure may be applied. But if there
is an express provision, no need to
apply suppletorily.
EFFECT OF ERRORS AND
IRREGULARITIES IN DEPOSITIONS
- NOTICE = waived unless written
objection is promptly served
- DISQUALIFICATION OF OFFICER =
waived unless made before the taking
of the deposition begins or as soon
thereafter as the disqualification
becomes known
- COMPETENCY OR RELEVANCY OF
EVIDENCE = NOT waived by failure to
make them before or during the
taking of the deposition unless the
ground of the objection is one which
might have been obviated or removed
if presented at that time.
- ORAL EXAMINATION AND OTHER
PARTICULARS = waived unless
reasonable objection thereto is made
at the taking of the deposition.
- FORM OF WRITTEN
INTERROGATORIES = waived unless
served in writing upon the party
propounding them
- MANNER OF PREPARATION =
waived unless a motion to suppress
the deposition or some part thereof is
made.
DEPOSITIONS BEFORE ACTION OR
PENDING APPEAL
- perpetuam rei memoriam
- objective is to perpetuate the
testimony of a witness for use in the
future
- most common ground: witness is
already frail or advance in age and it
cannot be ascertained if he can still
survive by the time the case will be
filed against a party.
- should be used conditionally,
13
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
meaning used at the trial only if
deponent is not available.
- mere contingent measure
Nature and purpose
- (1) perpetuate his own testimony;
(2) perpetuate the testimony of
another person
- petition should be (1) verified; (2)
filed in the place of residence of any
expected adverse party.
Notice and service
- SERVICE: serve a notice upon each
person named in the petition; same
manner as service of summons.
- NOTICE: set the date for the hearing
of the petition at least 20 days before
the date of the hearing.
Order and Examination
- Contents: (1) designates or describes
the persons whose deposition may be
taken; (2) specifies the subject matter
of the examination; (3) specifies
whether the depositions shall be
taken upon oral examination or
written interrogatories.
Reference to court
- Rule 23 (pending action) - referred to
the court where the action is pending
- Rule 24 (before action) - referred to
the court in which the petition for
such deposition was filed (court
where the residence of the expected
adverse party is located)
DEPOSITIONS PENDING APPEAL
- WHEN APPLICABLE: (1) appeal is
filed and the appellate court directs
parties to adduce additional evidence;
(2) appellate court will order the case
to be tried further and remanded to
the lower court and parties are
directed to adduce more evidence.
INTERROGATORIES TO PARTIES
- procedure wherein the party can ask
the opposing party questions for
purposes of eliciting facts from him.
- can only be availed through ex parte
motion
- the person who is going to be
subjected to interrogatories is the
adverse party only.
BILL OF PARTICULARS v.
INTERROGATORIES
- BOP = to get clarification or ask to
state allegations with particularity
- I = not limited to the allegations in
the pleading; to elicit the material or

relevant facts from any adverse party
to get a clearer picture of the evidence
that may be presented by the adverse
party.
WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES
- can be made at any stage upon an ex
party motion; no need for a hearing.
Failure to serve written
interrogatories
- GR: party may not be compelled by
the adverse to give testimony in open
court or give deposition pending
appeal
- XPN: good cause and to prevent
failure of justice
Answer to interrogatories
- (1) in writing; (2) signed and sworn
to by the person making them; (3)
filed and served within 15 days after
service
- may be extended for good cause on
motion
Objections to interrogatories
- presented to the court within 10
days after service with notice
- answers shall be deferred until the
objections are resolved which shall be
at as early a time as is practicable
(depends on the discretion of the
court)
Number of interrogatories
- ONLY 1 SET OF INTERROGATORIES
unless with LoC (discretionary on the
court)
- no limit as to number of questions
but it can only be 1 SET of
interrogatories.
- piece-meal = unnecessarily dragging
the proceedings further.
Scope and use of interrogatories
- (1) matters relevant to the subject of
the pending action; (2) not privileged;
(3) no protective order
Depositions v. Written
Interrogatories
- D: (1) delivered to officer duly
authorized to take the deposition; (2)
cross-interrogation available; (3)
answers are binding on any party who
was present, represented, or duly
notified; (4) no specific period to
answer.
- WI: (1) served only to an adverse
party; (2) no cross-interrogation; (3)
answers are binding only on the party
served; (4) answer within 15 days
after service.
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO SERVE
WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES
- party not served may not be
compelled to give testimony in open
court or give a deposition pending
appeal
- PLAINTIFF FAILS OR REFUSES TO
ANSWER THE INTERROGATORIES =
GROUND FOR DISMISSAL (non-suit)
- DEFENDANT FAILS OR REFUSES TO
ANSWER THE INTERROGATORIES =
RULE 29 SEC 5 (strike out, dismiss,
default, pay fees)
ADMISSION BY ADVERSE PARTY
- either of the parties requests the
adverse party to make some
admissions
- if there is admission on the opposing
party, then the party requesting for
admission need not adduce evidence
- ADMISSION OF FACTS, not
conclusion of law or opinions
REQUEST FOR ADMISSION
- at any time after the issues have
been joined (after the answer or
responsive pleading has been filed by
the defendant)
- party may file and serve upon any
other party a written request for the
admission by the latter of the
genuineness of any material and
document
- NO NEED TO FILE A MOTION; must
be served directly upon the party.
- it can relate to any document as long
as it is material or relevant to the
issues
- if a proper request is made upon the
party and if he fails to make an
admission, the effect is there is an
implied admission.
- where there is a request for
admission but it does not comply with
the requirement that it should be
served directly upon the party, the
failure if the opposing party to make a
denial or admission as the case may
be will NOT result in an implied
admission.
SCOPE
- (1) Genuineness of any material and
relevant document; (2) truth of any
material and relevant matter; (3)
matter of fact not related to any
documents for admission or denial.
Implied admission
- GR: each of the matters in the
14
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
request for admission are deemed
admitted
- XPN: SWORN STATEMENT
specifically denying or admitting or
neither and state the reason why
within 15 days
- party can also FILE AN OBJECTION -
will suspend the running of period to
make a sworn statement
- if request is redundant and
unnecessarily vexatious = no implied
admission
- Remedy: motion to be relieved of
consequences of implied admission
Effect of admission
- cannot be used for other purposes or
in another proceedings.
Withdrawal
- party making an admission may be
allowed (discretionary) to withdraw
or amend his admissions whether
express or implied
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE AND
SERVE A REQUEST FOR ADMISSION
- GR: cannot be permitted to present
evidence on such facts
- XPN: for good cause shown and to
prevent failure of justice
PRODUCTION OR INSPECTION OF
DOCUMENTS OR THINGS
- a party will be able to compel the
opposing party to produce for
production and inspection of
documents or things or property in
order for him to be able to explore all
possible factual issues that may be
covered.
MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OR
INSPECTION
- should not demand a roving
inspection of a promiscuous mass of
documents
- should be limited to those
documents designated with sufficient
particularity in the motion
- must be upon motion of a party
showing good cause.
- not privileged!
- order shall specify time, place and
manner of making the inspection.
Production or inspection of
documents v. Subpoena Duces
Tecum
- P = (1) mode of discovery; (2)
limited to the parties in the action; (3)
may be asked before and/or during
the trial; (4) issued only upon motion
with notice to the adverse party

- SDT = (1) means of compelling
production of evidence; (2) may be
directed to a non-party; (3) only
during trial; (4) may be issued upon
an ex party application
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL
EXAMINATION OF PERSONS
When applicable
- (1) pending action; (2) a party’s
mental or physical condition is in
controversy;
- examples: guardianship proceedings,
petitions for declaration of incapacity
Order of examination
- REQs: (1) motion; (2) good cause;
(3) notice to the party to be examined
and to all other parties; (4) specify
time, place, manner, conditions, and
scope of examination and person or
persons by whom it is made.
- an order to submit to a physical
examination is an interlocutory order,
thus no appeal is allowed.
Waiver of privilege
- PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION
CANNOT BE INVOKED because the
main issue is his mental or physical
condition.
REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH THE
MODES OF DISCOVERY
- MoD is mandatory so no one can
refuse compliance of such.
REFUSAL TO ANSWER
- ORDER TO COMPEL AN ANSWER;
- If there is an order to compel but he
still refuses = Direct Contempt +
expenses
- when there is not basis to file an
application = reimburse the opposing
party for expenses incurred
IF PARTY DENIES THE MATTER OF
FACT BUT LATER ON, THE OTHER
PARTY PROVES THE GENUINENESS
AND TRUTH OF THE MATTER
- reasonable expenses + attorney’s fees
- XPN: for good cause
- REQS: (1) a party is served with a
request to admit; (2) party serves a
sworn denial; (3) the party requesting
the admissions thereafter proves the
genuineness of such;
15
CIVPRO CASE DOCTRINE | Izelle
OTHER CONSEQUENCES
(a) order that matters shall be taken
to be established (proven already)
(b) order refusing to allow the
disobedient party to support or
oppose designated claims or defenses
(c) order prohibiting from introducing
evidence
(d) order striking out pleadings or
parts thereof
(e) order staying further proceedings
until the order is obeyed
(f) order dismissing the action or
proceeding or any part thereof
(g) order of default
(h) order directing the arrest
FAILURE OF PARTY TO ATTEND OR
SERVE ANSWERS
(1) STRIKE OUT ALL OR ANY PART
OF THE PLEADING
(2) DISMISS THE ACTION OR
PROCEEDING OR ANY PART
THEREOF
(3) ENTER A JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT
(4) ORDER HIM OR HER TO PAY
REASONABLE EXPENSES INCURRED
BY THE OTHER INCLUDING ATTY’S
FEES