CASE BRIEF/CASE DIGEST

ATTY. RYAN LEGISNIANA ESTEVEZ, MA Rel. Ed., MPP

Director II, Chief, Political Affairs Office,
Office of Senate President Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel III
 CASE BRIEF/CASE DIGEST
• Refers to the student’s condensation of an assigned case. It
is a written summary of the case. A case sometimes involves
several issues. Digesting the same would help the student in
separating one issue from another and understanding how
the Court resolved the issues in the case. The student does
not need to discuss all the issues decided in the case in his
case digest. He only needs to focus 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 aid for class
discussions and exams. A student who has a case digest
may not need to go back to the case in order to remember
what he has read.
• Important notes:
• - There is no one “correct” form of a case digest.
• - But there is a customary and generally accepted form
of a case digest.
• - Most important is that you keep your case digest brief
without shortchanging the facts.
 TYPICAL COMPONENTS OF A
CASE DIGEST/CASE BRIEF:
• 1. CAPTION
• 2. FACTS
• 3. ISSUES
• 4. RULING
 CAPTION
• This includes the title of the case, the date it was decided,
and citation. Include also the petitioner, respondent, and
the ponente.

• -CHI MING TSOI v. CA, 266 SCRA 324,

Jan. 16, 1997, J. Torres, Jr.
 FACTS
• The facts describe the events between the parties leading
to the litigation and tell how the case came before the
court that is now deciding it.
• Include those facts that are relevant to the issue the court
must decide to and the reasons for its decision.
• Remember…....You will not know which facts are relevant
until you know what the issue or issues are.
 FACTS
• INCLUDE
• - WHO the plaintiff and defendants are
• - the BASIS for the plaintiff’s suit
• - the RELIEF the plaintiff is seeking
• - the RULING of the RTC on the case
• - and whether or not the CA – AFFIRMED OR REVERSED the
decision
 ISSUES
• The QUESTION that the court must decide to resolve the
dispute between the parties in the case before it.

• HOW to find the issue?

• - Identify the rule of law that governs the dispute
• - ask how it should apply to those facts
 ISSUES
• It is usually written as a QUESTION that COMBINES the rule of
law with the material facts of the case: e.g.:

• Do the Habitual drunkeness and sexual infidelity of the

husband constitute psychological incapacity?

• Does abandonment by the petitioner for more than a year

without justifiable cause constitute a ground for legal
separation?
• Does repeated sexual violence directed against a spouse-
petitioner constitute a ground for legal separation?

• Does the RTC erred in declaring the real property acquired

by the petitioner during the marriage as the petitioner’s
exclusive property?

• Whether or not personal medical or psychological

examination of the respondent by a physician a
requirement for a declaration of psychological incapacity.
 RULING
• The court’s decision on the question that is actually before
it. It provides the answer to the question asked in the “issue”
statement.

• If there are several issues, there will also be several

holdings/rulings.

• But more important is HOW the court EXPLAINED ITS’ RULING

AND WHAT ARE THOSE THAT SUPPORTED its decision.
 RULING
• E.g. in a case of psychological incapacity:
• - REFER TO the provisions of Article 36 of the Family Code
• - STATE the substantial and procedural requirements for
psychological incapacity to exist
• - CITE earlier rulings of the Supreme Court on the subject
• - RELATE the facts of the case to the provisions of the law and
the earlier rulings of the Court.
 RULING
(CHI MING TSOI vs. CA, 266 SCRA 324)
• One of the essential marital obligations under the Family
Code is to “procreate children based on the universal
principle that procreation of children through sexual
cooperation is the basic end of marriage.”
• In the case at bar, the senseless and protracted refusal of
one of the parties to fulfill the above marital obligation is
equivalent to psychological incapacity
• Judgment AFFIRMED.
 RULING
• Concurring and Dissenting Opinions.
• - This part is optional, but it would help to include them
because there are professors who ask for separate opinions
in recitations.
 PRACTICE CASE DIGEST
• MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE – LLAMANZARES v.
COMELEC and ELAMPARO
(GR NO. 221697)

• MARY GRACE NATIVIDAD S. POE-LLAMANZARES v.

COMELEC, Tatad, Contreras and Valdez
( GR NO. 221698-700)