NOTES FOR LEGAL WRITING

UST reviewer

Mandatory parts of a pleading

1. Caption
2. Body
3. Signature and address
4. Verification
5. Certification against forum shopping
6. Affidavit of service
7. Explanation

Caption
The caption sets forth the name of the court, title of the action, and the docket number if
assigned. The title of the action indicates the names of the parties. Names of all the parties
must be indicated in the original complaint or petition but in subsequent pleadings, it is enough
that the name of the first party of each side be stated, together with an indication that there are
other parties. The parties’ respective participation in the case shall be indicated.
Also included in the caption are the specific branch of the court, its judicial region, and the title
of the case—although this one is not required.

Body
The body of the pleading sets forth its designation, allegations of the party’s claims or defenses,
the relief prayed for, and the date of the filing of the pleading.
Paragraphs should adopt the deductive method of reasoning and should include details about
the five Ws and 1H of the case (who, what, where, when, why, and how).
Every heading means one cause of action. There is no prohibition for the parties in filing several
causes of action. One paragraph must include one thought.
Relief sought must be based on a law. A party can ask for a general relief but this is not
guaranteed. Although a court may grant a general relief, this is limited to that which is allied to
the specific relief asked, and not entirely distinct from it.
Every pleading shall be dated.

Signature and address

Every pleading must be signed by the party or the counsel representing him, stating in either
case his address, which should not be a post office box.
Lack of signature is fatal. In legal and judicial ethics, the signature of the counsel signifies that
he read the pleading and that to the best of his knowledge and belief, there is good ground to
support it. It also provides that he prepared the pleading and that he is filing it in good faith.
Moreover, the signature means that the counsel is not committing any fraud, and that he
considered all the facts in the pleading before filing it.
An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court may allow this deficiency to
be remedied if it shall appear that it was due to mere inadvertence and not meant to cause
delay.
An address must also be included in the pleading. If no address was provided, then notices from
the court will not be received, and periods will run to the prejudice of the lawyer and his client. It
must be remembered that the negligence of a lawyer binds his client. Should a counsel change
his address, he shall immediately report to the court about it, otherwise he shall be subjected to
appropriate disciplinary action. This goes the same for counsels who deliberately file an
unsigned pleading or signs a pleading in violation of the Rules of Court.

Verification
Except when required by law or a rule, pleadings need not be under oath, verified or
accompanied by affidavits.
A pleading is verified by an affidavit when the affiant attests that he read the pleading and that
the allegations therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on authentic
records. This personal knowledge refers to knowledge acquired by our senses.
A pleading required to be verified which contains verification based on information and belief or
upon knowledge, information and belief, or lacks a proper verification, shall be treated as an
unsigned pleading.
In other words, a verification is an attestation of the party or his counsel that the allegations in
the pleading are true. Hence, a pleading may be thrown out by the court if the verification is
defective or there is no verification at all.

Certification against forum shopping

A certification against forum shopping is a certification under oath by the plaintiff or principal
party in the complaint or other initiatory pleading asserting a claim for relief or in a sworn
certification annexed thereto and simultaneously filed therewith (a) that he has not commenced
any action or claim involving the same issues in any other court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial
agency, and that to the best of his knowledge, no other same action or claim is pending therein;
(b) if there is a pending action or claim, a complete statement of its present status; and (c) if he
shall thereafter learn that a same action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report
that fact within five days upon learning about it to the court where his complaint or initiatory
pleading has been filed.
Failure to comply with the foregoing requirements shall not be curable by mere amendment of
the complaint or pleading, but shall be a cause for the dismissal of the case without prejudice,
unless otherwise provided, upon motion and hearing.
The submission of a false certification or non-compliance with the requirements shall constitute
indirect contempt of court, without prejudice to administrative and criminal sanctions. If the acts
of the party or his counsel clearly constitute a willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same
shall be a ground for summary dismissal with prejudice, and shall constitute direct contempt of
court and a cause for administrative sanctions.

Affidavit of service
A notarized document that contains the facts and circumstances of the service of the pleading to
the other party, which may primarily be done personally or through courier. The affidavit serves
as an attestation by the plaintiff or his counsel that the pleading was filed in good faith, and that
the other party would not be deprived of due process.

Explanation
It contains the statement of the party on why he did not serve the pleading personally to the
other party. Various reasons may include the pandemic and the distance of the other party’s
place from that of the plaintiff.

Model of legal reasoning

Questions:
1. What is the first party’s proposition? What is the second party’s proposition?
2. What are the key facts?
3. Do the established facts justify the propositions of the parties or do they justify some
other propositions?
4. As to the justification, is the citation of the law and jurisprudence by each party
accurate?
5. Which Supreme Court decision is exactly similar to the present case? Is that decision
ratio decidendi or obiter dictum?
6. Where jurisprudence is lacking, what do foreign decisions suggest? What is suggested
by legislative history or contemporaneous executive construction?