WESTERN MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF LAW

HOW TO PREPARE
CASE DIGESTS

Atty. RYAN B. DELEÑA

Visiting Lecturer
WHAT IS CASE DIGEST
 A case Digest or a Case Brief is a written summary of
the case;

 Digesting cases would help a student in:

(1) Separating one issue from another;
(2) Understanding how the Court resolved the issues in the
case; and
(3) How the legal provisions are applied in a particular
case given a set of facts;
WHAT IS CASE DIGEST
 You do not need to discuss all the issues in a case.

 Focus only relevant issue in relation to the subject

matter.

 A student who has a case digest does not need to go back

to the entire case to remember what he has read
PARTS OF A CASE DIGEST
FORMAT:

I. CAPTION
II. FACTS
III. ISSUE
IV. DECISION/RULING
V. CONCURRING/DISSENTING OPINION
(OPTIONAL)
CAPTION
This includes the title of the case, the date it was decided,
citation, include also the Petitioner, Respondent, Ponente
(Optional)

Example:
Petitioner Respondent
ALFREDO RIGOR vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Citation Date Promulgated
G.R. No. 144887.  November 17, 2004
Ponente (Optional)

AZCUNA, J.:
FACTS OF THE CASE
 REMEMBER: A Case Digest is a CASE BRIEF

 SUMMARIZE the facts of the case.

 There is no need to include everything.

 DO NOT INCLUDE facts which are irrelevant to the

case.
ISSUE/S
 Include only those issues that are relevant.

 Issues are usually framed in a form of questions that are

answerable by “YES” or “NO”

Example:

“Whether or not the contract is void”

“Whether Juan Dela Cruz is guilty of murder”
DECISION/RULING
 This usually starts with a “YES” or “NO”

 This answers the question involving the issue

 After the categorical yes or no answer, the reason for the

decision should be explained.
 Generally include/s the provision/s used as the basis of the
case.
 Relevant facts to support the conclusion
 Includes other decisions/jurisprudence that the SC cited/used
SAMPLE OF A CASE DIGEST
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Ponente: J. Romero

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 Emerinadela 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;
SAMPLE OF A CASE DIGEST
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Ponente: J. Romero

(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.

SAMPLE OF A CASE DIGEST
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Ponente: J. Romero

ISSUES:
1) Whether or not a petition for judicial declaration 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.
SAMPLE OF A CASE DIGEST
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Ponente: J. Romero

Decision:
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.
SAMPLE OF A CASE DIGEST
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Ponente: J. Romero

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

ATTY. RYAN B. DELEÑA
PARTNER
Tendero Mendoza Pagteilan Babiera & Delena
Law Offices

VISITING LECTURER
WMSU College of Law

VISITING LECTURER
ADZU School of Management and Accountancy

VISITING LECTURER
Philippine Public Safety College –
Regional Training Center No. 09