Bar Examination Questionnaire for Remedial Law Set A (1) Anna filed a petition for appointment as regular administratrix

of her fathers' estate. Her sister Sophia moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the parties, as members of the same family, have not exerted earnest effort toward a ompromise prior to the filing of the petition. Should the petition be dismissed! (A) "es, sin e su h earnest effort is #urisdi tional in all estate ases. ($) %o, sin e su h earnest effort is not re&uired in spe ial pro eedings. (') "es, sin e su h earnest effort is re&uired prior to the filing of the ase. (() %o, sin e su h earnest effort toward a ompromise is not re&uired in summary pro eedings. ()) A pending riminal ase, dismissed provisionally, shall be deemed permanently dismissed if not revived after ) years with respe t to offenses punishable by imprisonment (A) of more than 1) years. ($) not ex eeding * years or a fine not ex eeding +1,,,,.,,. (') of more than * years or a fine in ex ess of +1,,,,.,,. (() of more than * years. (-) Angie was onvi ted of false testimony and served senten e. .ive years later, she was onvi ted of homi ide. /n appeal, she applied for bail. 0ay the 'ourt of Appeals deny her appli ation for bail on ground of habitual delin&uen y! (A) "es, the felonies are both punishable under the 1evised +enal 'ode. ($) "es, her twin onvi tions indi ated her riminal in linations. (') %o, the felonies fall under different titles in the 1evised +enal 'ode. (() %o, the harges are both bailable. (2) 3hi h of the following is %/4 '/%S5S46%4 with the rules governing expropriation pro eedings! (A) 4he ourt shall de lare the defendant who fails to answer the omplaint in default and render #udgment against him. ($) 4he ourt shall refer the ase to the $oard of 'ommissioners to determine the amount of #ust ompensation. (') 4he plaintiff shall ma7e the re&uired deposit and forthwith ta7e immediate possession of the property sought to be expropriated.

(() 4he plaintiff may appropriate the property for publi use after #udgment and payment of the ompensation fixed in it, despite defendant8s appeal. (9) 3hi h of the following is a orre t statement of the rule on amendment of the information in a riminal pro eeding! (A) An amendment that downgrades the offense re&uires leave of ourt even before the a used pleads. ($) Substantial amendments are allowed with leave of ourt before the a (') /nly formal amendments are permissible before the a used pleads. used pleads.

(() After the plea, a formal amendment may be made without leave of ourt. (*) :ary who lived in 4aguig borrowed +1 million from 1ey who lived in 0a7ati under a ontra t of loan that fixed 0a7ati as the venue of any a tion arising from the ontra t. :ary had already paid the loan but 1ey 7ept on sending him letters of demand for some balan e. 3here is the venue of the a tion for harassment that :ary wants to file against 1ey! (A) 5n 0a7ati sin e the intent of the party is to ma7e it the venue of any a tion between them whether based on the ontra t or not. ($) 5n 4aguig or 0a7ati at the option of :ary sin e it is a personal in#ury a tion. (') 5n 4aguig sin e 1ey re eived the letters of demand there. (() 5n 0a7ati sin e it is the venue fixed in their ontra t. (;) 3hi h of the following is %/4 within the power of a #udi ial re eiver to perform! (A) $ring an a tion in his name. ($) 'ompromise a laim. (') (ivide the residual money in his hands among the persons legally entitled to the same. (() 5nvest the funds in his hands without ourt approval. (<) 3hi h of the following pre epts forms part of the rules governing small laims! (A) +ermissive ounter laim is not allowed. ($) 4he ourt shall render its de ision within - days after hearing. (') =oinder of separate laims is not allowed. (() 0otion to de lare defendant in default is allowed.

(>) 4he 0etropolitan 4rial 'ourt onvi ted ?irgilio and (ina of on ubinage. +ending appeal, they applied for bail, laiming they are entitled to it as a matter of right. 5s their laim orre t! (A) %o, bail is not a matter of right after onvi tion. ($) "es, bail is a matter of right in all ases not involving moral turpitude. (') %o, bail is dependent on the ris7 of flight. (() "es, bail is a matter of right in the 0etropolitan 4rial 'ourt before and after onvi tion. (1,) As a rule, the #udge shall re eive the eviden e personally. 5n whi h of the following ir umstan es may the ourt delegate the re eption of eviden e to the ler7 of ourt! (A) 3hen a &uestion of fa t arises upon a motion. ($) 3hen the trial of an issue of fa t re&uires the examination of a long a (') 5n default or ex@parte hearings. (() Apon motion of a party on reasonable grounds. (11) 3hi h of the following is in a ord with the appli able rules on re eivership! ount.

(A) 4he ourt may appoint the plaintiff as re eiver of the property in litigation over the defendant8s ob#e tion. ($) A re eiver may be appointed after #udgment if the #udgment obligor refuses to apply his property to satisfy the #udgment. (') 4he trial ourt annot appoint a re eiver when the ase is on appeal. (() 4he filing of bond on appointment of a re eiver is mainly optional. (1)) $earing in mind the distin tion between private and publi do ument, whi h of the following is admissible in eviden e without further proof of due exe ution or genuineness! (A) $aptismal ertifi ates. ($) /ffi ial re ord of the +hilippine 6mbassy in Singapore ertified by the ?i e@ 'onsul with offi ial seal. (') (o uments a 7nowledged before a %otary +ubli in Hong Bong. (() Anblemished re eipt dated (e ember ),, 1><9 signed by the promisee, showing payment of a loan, found among the well@7ept file of the promissor. (1-) 1amon witnessed the ommission of a rime but he refuses to testify for fear of his life despite a subpoena being served on him. 'an the ourt punish him for ontempt! (A) %o, sin e no person an be ompelled to be a witness against another.

($) "es, sin e publi interest in #usti e re&uires his testimony. (') %o, sin e 1amon has a valid reason for not testifying. (() "es, sin e litigants need help in presenting their ases. (12) 4he right to intervene is not absolute. 5n general, it 'A%%/4 be allowed where (A) the intervenor has a ommon interest with any of the parties. ($) it would enlarge the issues and expand the s ope of the remedies. (') the intervenor fails to put up a bond for the prote tion of the other parties. (() the intervenor has a sta7e in the property sub#e t of the suit. (19) 3hi h of the following grounds for dismissal invo7ed by the ourt will %/4 +16'CA(6 the plaintiff from refiling his a tion! (A) 1es #udi ata. ($) Ca 7 of #urisdi tion over the sub#e t matter. (') Anenfor eability under the Statutes of .raud. (() +res ription. (1*) 3hen may a o@owner %/4 demand the partition of the thing owned in ommon! (A) 3hen the reditor of one of the o@owners has atta hed the property. ($) 3hen the property is essentially indivisible. (') 3hen related o@owners agreed to 7eep the property within the family. (() 3hen a o@owner uses the property as his residen e. (1;) 4he ity prose utor of 0anila filed, upon Soledad8s omplaint, a riminal a tion for estafa against her sister, 3ella, before the 14' of 0anila for selling to ?i tor a land that she previously sold to Soledad. At the same time Soledad filed a ivil a tion to annul the se ond sale before the 14' of DueEon 'ity. 0ay the 0anila 14' motu proprio suspend the riminal a tion on ground of pre#udi ial &uestion! (A) "es, if it may be learly inferred that omplainant will not ob#e t to the suspension of the riminal ase. ($) %o, the a used must file a motion to suspend the a tion based on pre#udi ial &uestion. (') "es, if it finds from the re ord that su h pre#udi ial &uestion exists.

(() "es, if it is onvin ed that due pro ess and fair trial will be better served if the riminal ase is suspended. (1<) 3hi h of the following onforms to the appli able rule on replevin! (A) 4he appli ant must file a bond exe uted to the adverse party in an amount e&ual to the value of the property as determined by the ourt. ($) 4he property has been wrongfully detained by the adverse party. (') 4he appli ant has a ontingent laim over the property ob#e t of the writ. (() 4he plaintiff may apply for the writ at any time before #udgment. (1>) :erry sued F"G $us 'o. and 1i o, its bus driver, for in#uries :erry suffered when their bus ran off the road and hit him. /f the two defendants, only F"G $us 'o. filed an answer, alleging that its bus ran off the road be ause one of its wheels got aught in an open manhole, ausing the bus to swerve without the driver8s fault. Someone had stolen the manhole over and the road gave no warning of the danger it posed. /n :erry8s motion and over the ob#e tion of F"G $us 'o., the ourt de lared 1i o, the bus driver, in default and rendered #udgment ordering him to pay +9,,,,, in damages to :erry. (id the ourt a t orre tly! (A) %o, sin e the ourt should have tried the ase against both defendants upon the bus ompany8s answer. ($) %o, the ourt should have dropped 1i o as defendant sin e the moneyed defendant is the bus ompany. (') "es, the ourt an, under the rules, render #udgment against the defendant de lared in default. (() "es, sin e, in failing to answer, 1i o may be deemed to have admitted the allegations in the omplaint. (),) 3hi h of the following has %/ +CA'6 in an appli ation for a replevin order! A statement (A) that the property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party. ($) that the property has not been distrained for a tax assessment or pla ed under ustodia legis. (') of the assessed value of the property. (() that the appli ant owns or has a right to the possession of the property. ()1) ,,<@>>;@,,,1 5n whi h of the following instan es is the &uantum of eviden e 611/%6/ASC" applied! (A) in 3rit of Amparo ases, substantial eviden e. ($) to satisfy the burden of proof in ivil ases, preponderan e of eviden e.

(') to over ome a disputable presumption, lear and onvin ing eviden e. (() to rebut the presumptive validity of a notarial do ument, substantial eviden e. ())) 4he a used #umps bail and fails to appear on promulgation of #udgment where he is found guilty. 3hat is the onse&uen e of his absen e! (A) 'ounsel may appeal the #udgment in the absen e of the a used. ($) 4he #udgment shall be promulgated in his absen e and he loses his right of appeal. (') 4he promulgation of the #udgment shall be suspended until he is brought to the #urisdi tion of the ourt. (() 4he #udgment shall be void. ()-) 3hat should the ourt sheriff do if a third party serves on him an affidavit of laim overing the property he had levied! (A) As7 the #udgment obligee to file a ourt@approved indemnity bond in favor of the third@ party laimant or the sheriff will release the levied property. ($) As7 the #udgment obligee to file a ourt@approved bond for the sheriff8s prote tion in ase he pro eeds with the exe ution. (') 5mmediately lift the levy and release the levied property. (() As7 the third@party laimant to support his laim with an indemnity bond in favor of the #udgment obligee and release the levied property if su h bond is filed. ()2) 3hi h of the following is %/4 16:A1(6( as a suffi ient proof of personal servi e of pleadings! (A) /ffi ial return of the server. ($) 1egistered mail re eipt. (') 3ritten admission of the party served. (() Affidavit of the server with a statement of the date, pla e and manner of servi e. ()9) A sued $ for e#e tment. +ending trial, $ died, survived by his son, '. %o substitution of party defendant was made. Apon finality of the #udgment against $, may the same be enfor ed against '! (A) "es, be ause the ase survived $8s death and the effe t of final #udgment in an e#e tment ase binds his su essors in@interest. ($) %o, be ause ' was denied due pro ess. (') "es, be ause the negligen e of $8s ounsel in failing to as7 for substitution, should not pre#udi e A.

(() %o, be ause the a tion did not survive $8s death. ()*) 3hat is the proper remedy to se ure relief from the final resolutions of the 'ommission /n Audit! (A) +etition for review on ertiorari with the Supreme 'ourt. ($) Spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari with the 'ourt of Appeals. (') Spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari with the Supreme 'ourt. (() Appeal to the 'ourt of Appeals. ();) 3hi h of the following is a duty en#oined on the guardian and overed by his bond! (A) +rovide for the proper are, ustody, and edu ation of the ward. ($) 6nsure the wise and profitable investment of the ward8s finan ial resour es. (') 'olle t ompensation for his servi es to the ward. (() 1aise the ward to be ome a responsible member of so iety. ()<) $erto was harged with and onvi ted of violating a ity ordinan e against littering in publi pla es punishable by imprisonment of one month or a fine of +1,,,,.,,. $ut the ity mayor pardoned him. A year later, he was harged with violating a ity ordinan e against #aywal7ing whi h arried the same penalty. %eed $erto post bail for su h offense! (A) "es, his previous onvi tion re&uires posting of bail for the present harge. ($) "es, sin e he may be deemed to have violated the terms of his pardon. (') %o, be ause he is presumed inno ent until proven otherwise. (() %o, one harged with the violation of a ity ordinan e is not re&uired to post bail, notwithstanding a previous pardon. ()>) 3hi h of the following laims survive the death of the defendant and need not be presented as a laim against the estate! (A) 'ontingent money laims arising from ontra t. ($) Anenfor ed money #udgment against the de edent, with death o urring before levy on exe ution of the property. (') 'laims for damages arising from &uasi@deli t. (() 'laims for funeral expenses. (-,) 5n a ase, the prose utor as7ed the medi al expert the &uestion, HAssuming that the assailant was behind the de eased before he atta 7ed him, would you say that trea hery attended the 7illing!H 5s this hypotheti al &uestion permissible!

(A) %o, sin e it as7s for his legal opinion. ($) "es, but onditionally, sub#e t to subse&uent proof that the assailant was indeed behind the de eased at that time. (') "es, sin e hypotheti al &uestions may be as7ed of an expert witness. (() %o, sin e the medi al expert has no personal 7nowledge of the fa t. (-1) 4he ity prose utor harged $en with serious physi al in#uries for stabbing 4eren e. He was tried and onvi ted as harged. A few days later, 4eren e died due to severe infe tion of his stab wounds. 'an the prose ution file another information against $en for homi ide! (A) "es, sin e 4eren e8s death shows irregularity in the filing of the earlier harge against him. ($) %o, double #eopardy is present sin e $en had already been onvi ted of the first offense. (') %o, there is double #eopardy sin e serious physi al in#uries is ne essarily in luded in the harge of homi ide. (() "es, sin e supervening event altered the 7ind of rime the a used ommitted. (-)) Arvin was aught in flagrante deli to selling drugs for +),,,,,,.,,. 4he poli e offi ers onfis ated the drugs and the money and brought them to the poli e station where they prepared the inventory duly signed by poli e offi er /s ar 0oreno. 4hey were, however, unable to ta7e pi tures of the items. 3ill this defi ien y destroy the hain of ustody rule in the drug ase! (A) %o, a brea h of the hain of ustody rule in drug ases, if satisfa torily explained, will not negate onvi tion. ($) %o, a brea h of the hain of ustody rule may be offset by presentation in ourt of the drugs. (') "es, hain of ustody in drug ases must be stri tly observed at all times to preserve the integrity of the onfis ated items. (() "es, omplian e with the hain of ustody rule in drug ases is the only way to prove the a used8s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. (--) A sued $ in the 14' of DueEon 'ity, #oining two auses of a tionI for partition of real property and brea h of ontra t with damages. $oth parties reside in DueEon 'ity but the real property is in 0anila. 0ay the ase be dismissed for improper venue! (A) "es, sin e auses of a tion pertaining to different venues may not be #oined in one a tion. ($) %o, sin e auses of a tion pertaining to different venues may be #oined in the 14' if one of the auses of a tion falls within its #urisdi tion. (') "es, be ause spe ial ivil a tion may not be #oined with an ordinary ivil a tion.

(() %o, sin e plaintiff may un&ualifiedly #oin in one omplaint as many auses of a tion as he has against opposing party. (-2) 3hat is the do trine of #udi ial stability or non interferen e! (A) /n e #urisdi tion has atta hed to a ourt, it an not be deprived of it by subse&uent happenings or events. ($) 'ourts will not hear and de ide ases involving issues that ome within the #urisdi tion of administrative tribunals. (') %o ourt has the authority to interfere by in#un tion with the #udgment of another ourt of oordinate #urisdi tion. (() A higher ourt will not entertain dire t resort to it unless the redress sought annot be obtained from the appropriate ourt. (-9) 3hi h of the following admissions made by a party in the ourse of #udi ial pro eedings is a #udi ial admission! (A) Admissions made in a pleading signed by the party and his ounsel intended to be filed. ($) An admission made in a pleading in another ase between the same parties. (') Admission made by ounsel in open ourt. (() Admissions made in a omplaint superseded by an amended omplaint. (-*) 3hat defenses may be raised in a suit to enfor e a foreign #udgment! (A) 4hat the #udgment is ontrary to +hilippine pro edural rules. ($) %one, the #udgment being entitled to full faith and redit as a matter of general omity among nations. (') 4hat the foreign ourt erred in the appre iation of the eviden e. (() 4hat extrinsi fraud affli ted the #udgment. (-;) 'indy harged her husband, :eorge, with bigamy for a prior subsisting marriage with 4eresa. 'indy presented 1i and +at, neighbors of :eorge and 4eresa in 'ebu 'ity, to prove, first, that :eorge and 4eresa ohabited there and, se ond, that they established a reputation as husband and wife. 'an 'indy prove the bigamy by su h eviden e! (A) "es, the ir umstantial eviden e is enough to support a onvi tion for bigamy. ($) %o, at least one dire t eviden e and two ir umstantial eviden e are re&uired to support a onvi tion for bigamy. (') %o, the ir umstantial eviden e is not enough to support a onvi tion for bigamy.

(() %o, the ir umstantial eviden e annot over ome the la 7 of dire t eviden e in any riminal ase. (-<) 4o prove payment of a debt, $ong testified that he heard Ambo say, as the latter was handing over money to 4essie, that it was in payment of debt. 5s $ong8s testimony admissible in eviden e! (A) "es, sin e what Ambo said and did is an independently relevant statement. ($) %o, sin e what Ambo said and did was not in response to a startling o (') %o, sin e $ong8s testimony of what Ambo said and did is hearsay. (() "es, sin e Ambo8s statement and a tion, sub#e t of $ong8s testimony, onstitutes a verbal a t. (->) 'onsidering the &ualifi ations re&uired of a would@be witness, who among the following is 5%'/0+646%4 to testify! (A) A person under the influen e of drugs when the event he is as7ed to testify on too7 pla e. ($) A person onvi ted of per#ury who will testify as an attesting witness to a will. (') A deaf and dumb. (() A mental retardate. (2,) Arthur, a resident foreigner sold his ar to $ren. After being paid but before delivering the ar, Arthur repla ed its original sound system with an inferior one. $ren dis overed the hange, re#e ted the ar, and demanded the return of his money. Arthur did not omply. 0eantime, his ompany reassigned Arthur to Singapore. $ren filed a ivil a tion against Arthur for ontra tual fraud and damages. Apon his appli ation, the ourt issued a writ of preliminary atta hment on the grounds that (a) Arthur is a foreignerJ (b) he departed from the +hilippinesJ and ( ) he was guilty of fraud in ontra ting with $ren. 5s the writ of preliminary atta hment proper! (A) %o, Arthur is a foreigner living abroadJ he is outside the ourt8s #urisdi tion. ($) "es, Arthur ommitted fraud in hanging the sound system and its omponents before delivering the ar bought from him. (') "es the timing of his departure is presumptive eviden e of intent to defraud. (() %o, sin e it was not shown that Arthur left the ountry with intent to defraud $ren. (21) 3hat is the movant8s remedy if the trial ourt in orre tly denies his motion to dismiss and related motion for re onsideration! (A) Answer the omplaint. ($) .ile an administrative a tion for gross ignoran e of the law against the trial #udge. (') .ile a spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari on ground of grave abuse of dis retion. urren e.

(() Appeal the orders of denial. (2)) (uring trial, plaintiff offered eviden e that appeared irrelevant at that time but he said he was eventually going to relate to the issue in the ase by some future eviden e. 4he defendant ob#e ted. Should the trial ourt re#e t the eviden e in &uestion on ground of irrelevan e! (A) %o, it should reserve its ruling until the relevan e is shown. ($) "es, sin e the plaintiff ould anyway subse&uently present the eviden e anew. (') "es, sin e irrelevant eviden e is not admissible. (() %o, it should admit it onditionally until its relevan e is shown. (2-) $en testified that =aime, harged with robbery, has ommitted bag@snat hing three times on the same street in the last six months. 'an the ourt admit this testimony as eviden e against =aime! (A) %o, sin e there is no showing that $en witnessed the past three robberies. ($) "es, as eviden e of his past propensity for ommitting robbery. (') "es, as eviden e of a pattern of riminal behavior proving his guilt of the present offense. (() %o, sin e eviden e of guilt of a past rime is not eviden e of guilt of a present rime. (22) 3hat is the right orrelation between a riminal a tion and a petition for 3rit of Amparo both arising from the same set of fa ts! (A) 3hen the riminal a tion is filed after the Amparo petition, the latter shall be dismissed. ($) 4he pro eeding in an Amparo petition is riminal in nature. (') %o separate riminal a tion may be instituted after an Amparo petition is filed. (() 3hen the riminal a tion is filed after the Amparo petition, the latter shall be onsolidated with the first. (29) Alex filed a petition for writ of amparo against 0elba relative to his daughter 4oni's involuntary disappearan e. Alex said that 0elba was 4oni's employer, who, days before 4oni disappeared, threatened to get rid of her at all osts. /n the other hand, 0elba ountered that she had nothing to do with 4oni's disappearan e and that she too7 steps to as ertain 4oni's whereabouts. 3hat is the &uantum of eviden e re&uired to establish the parties' respe tive laims! (A) .or Alex, probable auseJ for 0elba, substantial eviden e. ($) .or Alex, preponderan e of eviden eJ for 0elba, substantial eviden e. (') .or Alex, proof beyond reasonable doubtJ for 0elba, ordinary diligen e. (() .or both, substantial eviden e.

(2*) 5n whi h of the following situations is the de laration of a de eased person against his interest %/4 A(05SS5$C6 against him or his su essors and against third persons! (A) (e laration of a #oint debtor while the debt subsisted. ($) (e laration of a #oint owner in the ourse of ownership. (') (e laration of a former o@partner after the partnership has been dissolved. (() (e laration of an agent within the s ope of his authority. (2;) (efendant (ante said in his answerI H1. +laintiff +erla laims that defendant (ante owes her +2,,,, on the mobile phone that she sold himJ ). $ut +erla owes (ante +*,,,, for the dent on his ar that she borrowed.H How should the ourt treat the se ond statement! (A) A ross laim ($) A ompulsory ounter laim (') A third party omplaint (() A permissive ounter laim (2<) How will the ourt sheriff enfor e the demolition of improvements! (A) He will give a 9@day noti e to the #udgment obligor and, if the latter does not omply, the sheriff will have the improvements for ibly demolished. ($) He will report to the ourt the #udgment obligor8s refusal to omply and have the latter ited in ontempt of ourt. (') He will demolish the improvements on spe ial order of the ourt, obtained at the #udgment obligee8s motion. (() He will inform the ourt of the #udgment obligor8s non omplian e and pro eed to demolish the improvements. (2>) 3hen may the bail of the a used be an elled at the instan e of the bondsman! (A) 3hen the a used #umps bail. ($) 3hen the bondsman surrenders the a used to the ourt. (') 3hen the a (() 3hen the a used fails to pay his annual premium on the bail bond. used hanges his address without noti e to the bondsman.

(9,) 3hi h of the following 05SS4A46S a re&uisite for the issuan e of a sear h warrant! (A) 4he warrant spe ifi ally des ribes the pla e to be sear hed and the things to be seiEed.

($) +resen e of probable ause. (') 4he warrant issues in onne tion with one spe ifi offense. (() =udge determines probable ause upon the affidavits of the omplainant and his witnesses. (91) 1anger 0otors filed a replevin suit against $art to re over possession of a ar that he mortgaged to it. $art disputed the laim. 0eantime, the ourt allowed, with no opposition from the parties, 0idway 1epair Shop to intervene with its laim against $art for unpaid repair bills. /n subse&uent motion of 1anger 0otors and $art, the ourt dismissed the omplaint as well as 0idway 1epair Shop8s intervention. (id the ourt a t orre tly! (A) %o, sin e the dismissal of the intervention bars the right of $art to file a separate a tion. ($) "es, intervention is merely ollateral to the prin ipal a tion and not an independent pro eeding. (') "es, the right of the intervenor is merely in aid of the right of the original party, whi h in this ase had eased to exist. (() %o, sin e having been allowed to intervene, the intervenor be ame a party to the a tion, entitled to have the issue it raised tried and de ided. (9)) 4he a used was onvi ted for estafa thru falsifi ation of publi do ument filed by one of two offended parties. 'an the other offended party harge him again with the same rime! (A) "es, sin e the wrong done the se ond offended party is a separate rime. ($) %o, sin e the offense refers to the same series of a t, prompted by one riminal intent. (') "es, sin e the se ond offended party is entitled to the vindi ation of the wrong done him as well. (() %o, sin e the se ond offended party is in estoppel, not having #oined the first riminal a tion. (9-) Henry testified that a month after the robbery Asiong, one of the a used, told him that 'arlos was one of those who ommitted the rime with him. 5s Henry8s testimony regarding what Asiong told him admissible in eviden e against 'arlos! (A) %o, sin e it is hearsay. ($) %o, sin e Asiong did not ma7e the statement during the onspira y. (') "es, sin e it onstitutes admission against a o@ onspirator. (() "es, sin e it part of the res gestae.

(92) (orothy filed a petition for writ of habeas orpus against her husband, 1oy, to get from him ustody of their 9 year old son, =eff. 4he ourt granted the petition and re&uired 1oy to turn over =eff to his mother. 1oy sought re onsideration but the ourt denied it. He filed a noti e of appeal five days from re eipt of the order denying his motion for re onsideration. (id he file a timely noti e of appeal! (A) %o, sin e he filed it more than ) days after re eipt of the de ision granting the petition. ($) %o, sin e he filed it more than ) days after re eipt of the order denying his motion for re onsideration. (') "es, sin e he filed it within 19 days from re eipt of the denial of his motion for re onsideration. (() "es, sin e he filed it within ; days from re eipt of the denial of his motion for re onsideration. (99) Angel Bubeta filed a petition to hange his first name HAngel.H After the re&uired publi ation but before any opposition ould be re eived, he filed a noti e of dismissal. 4he ourt onfirmed the dismissal without pre#udi e. .ive days later, he filed another petition, this time to hange his surname HBubeta.H Again, Angel filed a noti e of dismissal after the publi ation. 4his time, however, the ourt issued an order, onfirming the dismissal of the ase with pre#udi e. 5s the dismissal with pre#udi e orre t! (A) "es, sin e su h dismissal with pre#udi e is mandatory. ($) %o, sin e the rule on dismissal of a tion upon the plaintiff8s noti e does not apply to spe ial pro eedings. (') %o, sin e hange of name does not involve publi interest and the rules should be liberally onstrued. (() "es, sin e the rule on dismissal of a tion upon the plaintiff8s noti e applies and the two ases involve a hange in name. (9*) A omplaint without the re&uired Hverifi ationH (A) shall be treated as unsigned. ($) la 7s a #urisdi tional re&uirement. (') is a sham pleading. (() is onsidered not filed and should be expunged. (9;) 4he de isions of the 'ommission on 6le tions or the 'ommission on Audit may be hallenged by (A) petition for review on ertiorari filed with the Supreme 'ourt under 1ule 29. ($) petition for review on ertiorari filed with the 'ourt of Appeals under 1ule 2). (') appeal to the Supreme 'ourt under 1ule 92.

(() spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari under 1ule *9 filed with the Supreme 'ourt. (9<) 3hi h of the following states a orre t guideline in hearing appli ations for bail in apital offenses! (A) 4he hearing for bail in apital offenses is summaryJ the ourt does not sit to try the merits of the ase. ($) 4he prose ution8s onformity to the a used8s motion for bail is proof that its eviden e of his guilt is not strong. (') 4he a used, as appli ant for bail, arries the burden of showing that the prose ution8s eviden e of his guilt is not strong. (() 4he prose ution must have full opportunity to prove the guilt of the a used. (9>) Apart from the ase for the settlement of her parents' estate, $etty filed an a tion against her sister, Sigma, for re onveyan e of title to a pie e of land. $etty laimed that Sigma forged the signatures of their late parents to ma7e it appear that they sold the land to her when they did not, thus pre#udi ing $etty8s legitime. Sigma moved to dismiss the a tion on the ground that the dispute should be resolved in the estate pro eedings. 5s Sigma orre t! (A) "es, &uestions of ollation should be resolved in the estate pro eedings, not in a separate ivil ase. ($) %o, sin e &uestions of ownership of property annot be resolved in the estate pro eedings. (') "es, in the sense that $etty needs to wait until the estate ase has been terminated. (() %o, the filing of the separate a tion is properJ but the estate pro eeding must be suspended meantime. (*,) 3hat is the onse&uen e of the un#ustified absen e of the defendant at the pre@trial! (A) 4he trial ourt shall de lare him as in default. ($) 4he trial ourt shall immediately render #udgment against him. (') 4he trial ourt shall allow the plaintiff to present eviden e ex@parte. (() 4he trial ourt shall expunge his answer from the re ord. (*1) 3hat is the remedy of the a used if the trial ourt erroneously denies his motion for preliminary investigation of the harge against him! (A) 3ait for #udgment and, on appeal from it, assign su h denial as error. ($) %one sin e su h order is final and exe utory. (') As7 for re onsiderationJ if denied, file petition for ertiorari and prohibition. (() Appeal the order denying the motion for preliminary investigation.

(*)) 3hi h of the following renders a omplaint for unlawful detainer defi ient! (A) 4he defendant laims that he owns the sub#e t property. ($) 4he plaintiff has tolerated defendant8s possession for ) years before demanding that he va ate it. (') 4he plaintiff8s demand is for the lessee to pay ba 7 rentals or va ate. (() 4he lessor institutes the a tion against a lessee who has not paid the stipulated rents. (*-) 5n a #udi ial fore losure pro eeding, under whi h of the following instan es is the ourt %/4 ACC/36( to render defi ien y #udgment for the plaintiff! (A) 5f the mortgagee is a ban7ing institution. ($) if upon the mortgagor8s death during the pro eeding, the mortgagee submits his laim in the estate pro eeding. (') 5f the mortgagor is a third party who is not solidarily liable with the debtor. (() 5f the mortgagor is a non@resident person and annot be found in the +hilippines. (*2) 5n whi h of the following ases is the plaintiff the real party in interest! (A) A reditor of one of the o@owners of a par el of land, suing for partition ($) An agent a ting in his own name suing for the benefit of a dis losed prin ipal (') Assignee of the lessor in an a tion for unlawful detainer (() An administrator suing for damages arising from the death of the de edent (*9) 4he defendant in an a tion for sum of money filed a motion to dismiss the omplaint on the ground of improper venue. After hearing, the ourt denied the motion. 5n his answer, the defendant laimed pres ription of a tion as affirmative defense, iting the date alleged in the omplaint when the ause of a tion a rued. 0ay the ourt, after hearing, dismiss the a tion on ground of pres ription! (A) "es, be ause pres ription is an ex eption to the rule on /mnibus 0otion. ($) %o, be ause affirmative defenses are barred by the earlier motion to dismiss. (') "es, be ause the defense of pres ription of a tion an be raised at anytime before the finality of #udgment. (() %o, be ause of the rule on /mnibus 0otion. (**) 3hat is the effe t of the failure of the a used to file a motion to &uash an information that harges two offenses! (A) He may be onvi ted only of the more serious offense.

($) He may in general be onvi ted of both offenses. (') 4he trial shall be void. (() He may be onvi ted only of the lesser offense. (*;) 3hi h of the following is a orre t appli ation of the rules involved in onsolidation of ases! (A) 'onsolidation of ases pending in different divisions of an appellate ourt is not allowed. ($) 4he ourt in whi h several ases are pending involving ommon &uestions of law and fa ts may hear initially the prin ipal ase and suspend the hearing in the other ases. (') 'onsolidation of ases pending in different bran hes or different ourts is not permissible. (() 4he onsolidation of ases is done only for trial purposes and not for appeal. (*<) Summons was served on H0'0 4heater,H a business entity with no #uridi al personality, through its offi e manager at its pla e of business. (id the ourt a &uire #urisdi tion over 0'0 4heater8s owners! (A) "es, an unregistered entity li7e 0'0 4heater may be served with summons through its offi e manager. ($) %o, be ause 0'0 has no #uridi al personality and annot be sued. (') %o, sin e the real parties in interest, the owners of 0'0 4heater, have not been served with summons. (() "es sin e 0'0, as business entity, is a de fa to partnership with #uridi al personality. (*>) .raud as a ground for new trial must be extrinsi as distinguished from intrinsi . 3hi h of the following onstitutes extrinsi fraud! (A) 'ollusive suppression by plaintiff8s ounsel of a material eviden e vital to his ause of a tion. ($) Ase of per#ured testimony at the trial. (') 4he defendant8s fraudulent representation that aused damage to the plaintiff. (() Ase of falsified do uments during the trial. (;,) Apon review, the Se retary of =usti e ordered the publi prose utor to file a motion to withdraw the information for estafa against Sagun for la 7 of probable ause. 4he publi prose utor omplied. 5s the trial ourt bound to grant the withdrawal! (A) "es, sin e the prose ution of an a tion is a prerogative of the publi prose utor. ($) %o, sin e the omplainant has already a &uired a vested right in the information.

(') %o, sin e the ourt has the power after the ase is filed to itself determine probable ause. (() "es, sin e the de ision of the Se retary of =usti e in riminal matters is binding on ourts. (;1) Anexplained or un#ustified non@#oinder in the 'omplaint of a ne essary party despite ourt order results in (A) the dismissal of the 'omplaint. ($) suspension of pro eedings. (') ontempt of ourt. (() waiver of plaintiff8s right against the unpleaded ne essary party. (;)) 3hi h of the following 'A%%/4 be disputably presumed under the rules of eviden e! (A) 4hat the thing on e proved to exist ontinues as long as is usual with things of that nature. ($) 4hat the law has been obeyed. (') 4hat a writing is truly dated. (() 4hat a young person, absent for 9 years, it being un7nown whether he still lives, is onsidered dead for purposes of su ession. (;-) ,,<@2*2@,,,1 3hi h of the following is %/4 16DA516( in a petition for mandamus! (A) 4he a t to be performed is not dis retionary. ($) 4here is no other ade&uate remedy in the ordinary ourse of law. (') 15:H4 A%S361 4he respondent negle ts to perform a lear duty under a ontra t. (() 4he petitioner has a lear legal right to the a t demanded. (;2) 3hen is the defendant entitled to the return of the property ta7en under a writ of replevin! (A) 3hen the plaintiff8s bond is found insuffi ient or defe tive and is not repla ed. ($) 3hen the defendant posts a redelivery bond e&ual to the value of the property seiEed. (') 3hen the plaintiff ta7es the property and disposes of it without the sheriff8s approval. (() 3hen a third party laims the property ta7en yet the appli ant does not file a bond in favor of the sheriff. (;9) 'hara ter eviden e is admissible

(A) in riminal ases, the a used may prove his good moral hara ter if pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense harged. ($) in riminal ases, the prose ution may prove the bad moral hara ter of the a used to prove his riminal predisposition. (') in riminal ases, the bad moral hara ter of the offended party may not be proved. (() when it is eviden e of the good hara ter of a witness even prior to impea hment. (;*) F8s a tion for sum of money against " amounting to +<,,,,,.,, a rued before the effe tivity of the rule providing for shortened pro edure in ad#udi ating laims that do not ex eed +1,,,,,,.,,. F filed his a tion after the rule too7 effe t. 3ill the new rule apply to his ase! (A) %o sin e what applies is the rule in for e at the time the ause of a tion a rued.

($) %o, sin e new pro edural rules over only ases where the issues have already been #oined. (') "es, sin e pro edural rules have retroa tive effe t. (() "es, sin e pro edural rules generally apply prospe tively to pending ases. (;;) A motion for re onsideration of a de ision is pro forma when (A) it does not spe ify the defe ts in the #udgment. ($) it is a se ond motion for re onsideration with an alternative prayer for new trial. (') it reiterates the issues already passed upon but invites a se ond loo7 at the eviden e and the arguments. (() its arguments in support of the alleged errors are grossly erroneous. (;<) 3hi h of the following orre tly states the rule on fore losure of mortgages! (A) 4he rule on fore losure of real estate mortgage is suppletorily appli able to extra#udi ial fore losures. ($) 5n #udi ial fore losure, an order of onfirmation is ne essary to vest all rights in the pur haser. (') 4here is e&uity of redemption in extra@#udi ial fore losure. (() A right of redemption by the #udgment obligor exists in #udi ial fore losure. (;>) 4he information harges +%+ 'hief Cuis Santos, (Salary :rade )<), with Hta7ing advantage of his publi position as +%+ Head by feloniously shooting =/S6 /%A, infli ting on the latter mortal wounds whi h aused his death.H $ased solely on this allegation, whi h ourt has #urisdi tion over the ase! (A) Sandiganbayan only

($) Sandiganbayan or 1egional 4rial 'ourt (') Sandiganbayan or 'ourt 0artial (() 1egional 4rial 'ourt only (<,) (istinguish between on lusiveness of #udgment and bar by prior #udgment. (A) 'on lusiveness of #udgment bars another a tion based on the same auseJ bar by prior #udgment pre ludes another a tion based on the same issue. ($) 'on lusiveness of #udgment bars only the defendant from &uestioning itJ bar by prior #udgment bars both plaintiff and defendant. (') 'on lusiveness of #udgment bars all matters dire tly ad#udgedJ bar by prior #udgment pre ludes all matters that might have been ad#udged. (() 'on lusiveness of #udgment pre ludes the filing of an a tion to annul su h #udgmentJ bar by prior #udgment allows the filing of su h an a tion. (<1) 3hi h of the following matters is %/4 A +1/+61 SA$=6'4 of #udi ial noti e! (A) +ersons have 7illed even without motive. ($) 0uni ipal ordinan es in the muni ipalities where the 0'4' sits. (') 4ele onferen ing is now a way of ondu ting business transa tions. (() $ritish law on su ession personally 7nown to the presiding #udge.

(<)) 4he 14' of 0alolos, $ran h 1, issued a writ of exe ution against 1ene for +), million. 4he sheriff levied on a s hool building that appeared to be owned by 1ene. 0arie, however, filed a third party laim with the sheriff, despite whi h, the latter s heduled the exe ution sale. 0arie then filed a separate a tion before the 14' of 0alolos, $ran h ), whi h issued a writ of preliminary in#un tion en#oining the sheriff from ta7ing possession and pro eeding with the sale of the levied property. (id $ran h ) orre tly a t in issuing the in#un tion! (A) "es, sin e the rules allow the filing of the independent suit to he 7 the sheriff8s wrongful a t in levying on a third party8s property. ($) "es, sin e $ran h ), li7e $ran h 1, is part of the 14' of 0alolos. (') %o, be ause the proper remedy is to see7 relief from the same ourt whi h rendered the #udgment. (() %o, sin e it onstitutes interferen e with the #udgment of a o@e&ual ourt with on urrent #urisdi tion. (<-) 3hat is the effe t and ramifi ation of an order allowing new trial! (A) 4he ourt8s de ision shall be held in suspension until the defendant ould show at the reopening of trial that it has to be abandoned.

($) 4he ourt shall maintain the part of its #udgment that is unaffe ted and void the rest. (') 4he eviden e ta7en upon the former trial, if material and ompetent, shall remain in use. (() 4he ourt shall va ate the #udgment as well as the entire pro eedings had in the ase. (<2) 3hi h of the following is suffi ient to disallow a will on the ground of mista7e! (A) An error in the des ription of the land devised in the will. ($) 4he in lusion for distribution among the heirs of properties not belonging to the testator. (') 4he testator intended a donation intervivos but unwittingly exe uted a will. (() An error in the name of the person nominated as exe utor. (<9) As a rule, the estate shall not be distributed prior to the payment of all harges to the estate. 3hat will #ustify advan e distribution as an ex eption! (A) 4he estate has suffi ient residual assets and the distributees file suffi ient bond. ($) 4he spe ifi property sought to be distributed might suffer in value. (') An agreement among the heirs regarding su h distribution. (() 4he onformity of the ma#ority of the reditors to su h distribution. (<*) A party aggrieved by an interlo utory order of the 'ivil Servi e 'ommission ('S') filed a petition for ertiorari and prohibition with the 'ourt of Appeals. 0ay the 'ourt of Appeals ta7e ogniEan e of the petition! (A) "es, provided it raises both &uestions of fa ts and law. ($) %o, sin e the 'S' 'hairman and 'ommissioners have the ran7 of =usti es of the 'ourt of Appeals. (') %o, sin e the 'S' is a 'onstitutional 'ommission. (() "es, sin e the 'ourt of Appeals has #urisdi tion over the petition on urrent with the Supreme 'ourt. (<;) 3hi h of the following is appealable! (A) An order of default against the defendant. ($) 4he denial of a motion to dismiss based on improper venue. (') 4he dismissal of an a tion with pre#udi e.

(() 4he disallowan e of an appeal. (<<) 3hi h of the following is %/4 16DA516( of a de laration against interest as an ex eption to the hearsay rule! (A) 4he de larant had no motive to falsify and believed su h de laration to be true. ($) 4he de larant is dead or unable to testify. (') 4he de laration relates to a fa t against the interest of the de larant. (() At the time he made said de laration he was unaware that the same was ontrary to his aforesaid interest. (<>) 4o prove the identity of the assailant in a rime of homi ide, a poli e offi er testified that, Andy, who did not testify in ourt, pointed a finger at the a used in a poli e lineup. 5s the poli e offi er8s testimony regarding Andy's identifi ation of the a used admissible eviden e! (A) "es, sin e it is based on his personal 7nowledge of Andy8s identifi ation of the a used. ($) "es, sin e it onstitutes an independently relevant statement. (') %o, sin e the poli e had the a used identified without warning him of his rights. (() %o, sin e the testimony is hearsay. (>,) 5n whi h of the following ases is the testimony in a ase involving a de eased barred by the Survivorship (is&ualifi ation 1ule or (ead 0an Statute! (A) 4estimony against the heirs of the de eased defendant who are substituted for the latter. ($) 4he testimony of a mere witness who is neither a party to the ase nor is in privity with the latter. (') 4he testimony of an oppositor in a land registration ase filed by the de edent8s heirs. (() 4he testimony is offered to prove a laim less than what is established under a written do ument signed by the de edent. (>1) 4he prose ution moved for the dis harge of 1omy as state witness in a robbery ase it filed against Goilo, Amado, and him. 1omy testified, onsistent with the sworn statement that he gave the prose ution. After hearing 1omy, the ourt denied the motion for his dis harge. How will denial affe t 1omy! (A) His testimony shall remain on re ord. ($) 1omy will be prose uted along with Goilo and Amado. (') His liability, if any, will be mitigated. (() 4he ourt an onvi t him based on his testimony.

(>)) 5n pro eedings for the settlement of the estate of de eased persons, the ourt in whi h the a tion is pending may properly (A) pass upon &uestion of ownership of a real property in the name of the de eased but laimed by a stranger. ($) pass upon with the onsent of all the heirs the issue of ownership of estate asset, ontested by an heir if no third person is affe ted. (') rule on a laim by one of the heirs that an estate asset was held in trust for him by the de eased. (() res ind a ontra t of lease entered into by the de eased before death on the ground of ontra tual brea h by the lessee. (>-) 3hi h of the following stipulations in a ontra t will supersede the venue for a tions that the rules of ivil pro edure fix! (A) 5n ase of litigation arising from this ontra t of sale, the preferred venue shall be in the proper ourts of 0a7ati. ($) Should the real owner su eed in re overing his stolen ar from buyer F, the latter shall have re ourse under this ontra t to seller " ex lusively before the proper 'ebu 'ity ourt. (') ?enue in ase of dispute between the parties to this ontra t shall solely be in the proper ourts of DueEon 'ity. (() Any dispute arising from this ontra t of sale may be filed in 0a7ati or DueEon 'ity. (>2) Allan was riding a passenger #eepney driven by $en that ollided with a ar driven by 'esar, ausing Allan in#ury. %ot 7nowing who was at fault, what is the best that Allan an do! (A) .ile a tort a tion against 'esar. ($) Await a #udi ial finding regarding who was at fault. (') Sue $en for brea h of ontra t of arriage. (() Sue both $en and 'esar as alternative defendants. (>9) A surety ompany, whi h provided the bail bond for the release of the a used, filed a motion to withdraw as surety on the ground of the a used8s non@payment of the renewal premium. 'an the trial ourt grant the withdrawal! (A) %o, sin e the surety8s underta7ing is not annual but lasts up to #udgment. ($) "es, sin e surety ompanies would fold up otherwise. (') %o, sin e the surety ompany te hni ally ta7es the pla e of the a used with respe t to ourt attendan e.

(() "es, sin e the a used has brea hed its agreement with the surety ompany. (>*) 4o prove that Susan stabbed her husband 6lmer, 1i o testified that he heard Ceon running down the street, shouting ex itedly, HSinasa7sa7 daw ni Susan ang asawa niyaK (5 heard that Susan is stabbing her husbandK)H 5s Ceon's statement as narrated by 1i o admissible! (A) %o, sin e the startling event had passed. ($) "es, as part of the res gestae. (') %o, sin e the ex ited statement is itself hearsay. (() "es, as an independently relevant statement. (>;) 3hi h of the following %/4 41A6 regarding the do trine of #udi ial hierar hy! (A) 5t derives from a spe ifi and mandatory provision of substantive law. ($) 4he Supreme 'ourt may disregard the do trine in ases of national interest and matters of serious impli ations. (') A higher ourt will not entertain dire t re ourse to it if redress an be obtained in the appropriate ourts. (() 4he reason for it is the need for higher ourts to devote more time to matters within their ex lusive #urisdi tion. (><) +laintiff 0anny said in his omplaintI H-. /n 0ar h 1, ),,1 defendant Cetty borrowed +1 million from plaintiff 0anny and made a promise to pay the loan within six months.H 5n her answer, Cetty allegedI H(efendant Cetty spe ifi ally denies the allegations in paragraph - of the omplaint that she borrowed +1 million from plaintiff 0anny on 0ar h 1, ),,1 and made a promise to pay the loan within six months.H 5s Cetty8s denial suffi ient! (A) "es, sin e it onstitutes spe ifi denial of the loan. ($) "es, sin e it onstitutes positive denial of the existen e of the loan. (') %o, sin e it fails to set forth the matters defendant relied upon in support of her denial. (() %o, sin e she fails to set out in par. ) of her answer her spe ial and affirmative defenses. (>>) 3hen may an information be filed in ourt without the preliminary investigation re&uired in the parti ular ase being first ondu ted! (A) .ollowing an in&uest, in ases of those lawfully arrested without a warrant. ($) 3hen the a used, while under ustodial investigation, informs the arresting offi ers that he is waiving his right to preliminary investigation.

(') 3hen the a arraignment.

used fails to hallenge the validity of the warrantless arrest at his

(() 3hen the arresting offi ers ta7e the suspe t before the #udge who issues a detention order against him. (1,,) 5n a ivil a tion involving three separate auses of a tion, the ourt rendered summary #udgment on the first two auses of a tion and tried the third. After the period to appeal from the summary #udgment expired, the ourt issued a writ of exe ution to enfor e the same. 5s the writ of exe ution proper! (A) %o, being partial, the summary #udgment is interlo utory and any appeal from it still has to re 7on with the final #udgment. ($) "es sin e, assuming the #udgment was not appealable, the defendant should have &uestioned it by spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari. (') %o, sin e the rules do not allow a partial summary #udgment. (() %o, sin e spe ial reason is re&uired for exe ution pending rendition of a final de ision in the ase.

4he Cawphil +ro#e t @ Arellano Caw .oundation