Q: Distinguish Exchequer rule from Harmless error rule.

English Exchequer rule- it provides that a trial court's error as to the admission of evidence was presumed to have caused prejudiced and therefore, almost automatically required new trial. Harmless Error Rule- The appellate court will disregard an error in the admission of evidence unless in its opinion, some substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has been occassioned. Q: What is the "equipoise rule"? Give an example of its application. When the scale shall stand upon an equipoise and there is nothing in the evidence which shall incline it to one side or the other, the court will find for the defendant. Under said principle, the plaintiff must rely on the strength of his evidenc may

be stronger than than that of the defendant,there is no preponderance of evidence on his side if such evidence is insufficient in itself to establish his cause of action.(Sapu-an,et al. Vs. CA, Oct.19,1992, 214 Scra 701, 705-706) Q: What is Chain of Custody Rule in relation to Sec. 21 of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002? And when is it necessary to establish a chain of custody?

A: It is a method of authenticating evidence. It requires that the admission of an exhibit be preceded by evidence sufficient to support a finding that the matter in question is what the proponent claims it to be. It would include testimony about every link in the chain, from the moment the item was picked up to the time it is offered into evidence, in such a way that every person who touched the exhibit would describe how and from whom it was received, where it was and what , dition in which it was received and the condition in which it was delivered to the next link in the chain. These witnesses would then describe the precautions taken to ensure that there had been no change in the condition of the item and no opportunity for someone not in the chain to have possession of the same. It is necessary when the object evidence is non-unique as it is not readily identifiable, was not made identifiable or cannot be made identifiable, e.g. drops of blood or oil, drugs in powder form, fiber, grains of sand and similar objects.

Q: Is there an automatic admission of DNA evidence obtained in the testing for the same? Answer; None. By the terms of sec 5 of the rules on dn evidence, the grant of the DNA testing shall not be construed as an automatic admission into evidence of any of the component of the DNA evidence. Thies necessarily means that the court will still have to evaluate the probative value of the proposed evidence before admission. Q: Determine how will the court appreciate the following DNA test results: a. exclude the putative parent from paternity b. Probability of Paternity is less than 99.9% c. Probability of Paternity is 99.9% or higher Answer: a. conclusive proof of non-paternity b. corroborative evidence c. disputable presumption of paternity Sec. 9c of AM No. 06-11-5-SC Q: (March 8) - Policemen brought A to a hospital and requested one of its surgeons to immediately perform surgery on him to retrieve a packet of 10 grams od shabu which they alleged was swallowed by A. Suppose the hospital agreed to, and did perform the surgery, is the package of shabu admissible as evidence? (there are also two possible answers to this question) A1: No, the package of shabu extracted from the body of A is not admissible in evidence because it was obtained through surgery which connotes forcible invasion into the body of A without his consent and absent due process. The act of the policemen and the hospital surgeon involved, violate the fundamental rights of A, the suspect. A2: Yes, it is admissible in evidence because the constitutional right against selfincrimination is addressed only to extracting admission of guilt from the lips of the suspect where otherwise no incriminating evidence exists. In the past, the Supreme Court has already declared many invasive and involuntary procedure (such as DNA testing) as constitutionally sound (Agustin vs. CA, G.R. No. 162571, June 15, 2005)

Q: What is estoppel in pais? Answer: The principle of estoppel in pais applies wherein one, by his acts, representations or admissions, or by his own silence when he ought to speak out, intentionally or through culpable negligence, induces another to believe certain facts to exist and such other rightfully relies and acts on such belief, so that he will be prejudiced if the former is permitted to deny the existence of such facts. (Hanopol v. Shoemart, Inc., G.R. No. 137774, October 4, 2002, 390 SCRA 439; Phil. Realty Holdings Corp. v. Firematic Phils. Inc., G.R. No. 156251, April 27, 2007, Callejo, J). Question: Distinguish clearly but briefly between Burden of Proof and Burden of Evidence. Answer: Burden of proof is the obligation of a party to present evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law (Sec. 1, Rule 130). Burden of evidence is the duty of a party to go forward with the evidence to overthrow any prima facie presumption against him. Q: On a flight from Bangkok to Rome, onboard an Air France airplane, the plaintiff Carrascoso was forced to give up his first class seat for another passenger. Apparently, Carrascoso was made to give up his seat because a "white man" had a better right to the seat. During the trial, Carrascoso testified that the purser of the plane had told him that he - the purser - had made an entry in his notebook, relating the incident, thus "First class passenger was forced to go to the tourist class against his will, and that the captain refused to intervene." The notebook itself was not presented. The defense moved to strike the testimony on the ground that the notebook itself would be the best evidence. The trial court denied the motion to strike. Issue: Whether the trial court erred in its decision to allow the testimony without the production of the document in question. Ruling:, Petitioner charges that the finding that the purser made an entry in his notebooks reading "First class passenger was forced to go to the tourist class against his will, and that the captain refused to intervene" is predicated upon evidence (Carrascoso's testimony) which is incompetent. The court disagreed, holding that the subject of inquiry was not the entry, but the ouster incident. Testimony of the entry does not come within the proscription of the best evidence rule. Such testimony is, therefore, admissible.

Disqualification by reason of privilege communication (Physician-Patient) Question. Xavier filed a complaint for declaration of nullity of marriage with Ysa on the ground of psychological incapacity. Xavier sought to testify on a confidential psychiatric evaluation report on his wife. Ysa objected to Xavier's testimony on the ground that it vuolates the physician-patient orivilege. Is the objection of Ysa correct? Answer. No. One of the requisites before a physician-patient privilege may be invoked is that the person against whom the privilege is claimed is one duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery, or obstretics. Here, the person against whom the privilege is claimed is not one duly authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstretics. Xavier is simply the husband of Ysa who wishes to testify on a document executed by medical practitioners. This does not fall within the claimed prohibition. Neither can his testimony be considered a circumvention of the prohibition because his testimony cannot have the force and effect of the testimony of the physician who examined the patient and executed the report. (Krohn vs CA, GR 108854, June 14, 1994) Preliminary Injunction Can a suit for injunction be aptly filed with the Supreme Court to stop the President from entering into a peace Agreement with the National Democratic Front? A: No, a suit for injunction cannot aptly be filed in this case as this is a political question. Question: At Joaquin's trial for possession and use of dangerous drug (shabu); his girlfriend Chichay testified that on a particular day, he would see Joaquin being very prim and proper, alert and sharp, but few days later, Joaquin would appear stressed, tired, haggard and overly nervous at the slightest sound he would hear. Joaquin's lawyer objected to the admissibility of Chichay's testimony on the ground that Chichay merely stated her opinion without having been first qualified as an expert witness. If you were the judge, rule on the objection. Answer: The testimony should not be excluded. Chichay, though not an expert witness, nay testify on her impressions of the emotion, behavior, appearance and condition of a person under Rule 130 Sec. 50 last paragraph of the Rules on Evidence.

FACTS: In a collection suit, X a lending company presented in evidence, Statement of Account, and Promissory Note made by a Bookkeeper in his regular course of business. On the date of hearing, the witness presented by Petitioner is the Credit and Collection Manager who testified with respect to the entries in the Statement of Account made by the Bookkeeper. QUESTION : Is the testimony of Credit and Collection Manager an exception to hearsay? ANSWER: No. Sec. 43, Rule 130 of the Rules of Court Entries in the course of business. Entries made at, or near the time of the transactions to which they refer, by a person deceased, or unable to testify, who was in a position to know the facts therein stated, may be received as prima facie evidence, if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or in the performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty. Credit and Collection Manager testified on a statement of account he knew nothing about. He had no personal knowledge of the facts on which the accounts were based. He thus knew nothing of the truth or falsity of the facts stated in the Statement of Account, and in the facts, the bookkeeper is neither dead nor unable to testify. Bar Exam 2012 Question: Apart from the case for the settlement of her parents' estate, Betty filed an action against her sister, Sigma, for reconveyance of title to a piece of land. Betty claimed that Sigma forged the signatures of their late parents to make it appear that they sold the land to her when they did not, thus prejudicing Bettys legitime. Sigma moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the dispute should be resolved in the estate proceedings. Is Sigma correct? Answer: Yes, questions of collation should be resolved in the estate proceedings, not in a separate civil case. Q: Can the courts take judicial notice of facts found in the internet? (e.g., information found on government websites, or other websites) Answer: J11 JUDICIAL NOTICE INTERNET J11:1 In general Use of evidence obtained from the internet can arise for differing reasons. a. Requesting a court to take judicial notice of facts contained in an opposing r y b r ur b hing factual admissions of fact. [seeAmpex Corp. v. Cargle (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1573-1574, 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 863]

b. Requesting a court to take judicial notice of facts and propositions that are of such common knowledge that they cannot reasonably be subject to dispute. [Evidence Code 452(g)(g); Truong v. Nugyen (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 865, 882, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 675] The contents of a business posting its Securities & Exchange Commission filings for use in a defamation suit can be the subject of judicial notice. [Ampex Corp. v. Cargle (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1573, 1574, 27 Cal.Rptr.3d 863] Judicial notice that a server [e.g. Yahoo] offers a financial message board for publically traded companies, contents of messages posted on a message board, may be properly judicially noticed. [Ampex Corp. v. Cargle, supra] Public records may be properly judicially noticed. [U.S. ex rel Dingle v. BioPort Corp. (W.D. Mich. 2003) 270 F.Supp.2d 968, 972] J11:2 Legal basis for requesting judicial notice Facts and propositions that are of such common knowledge that they cannot be reasonably the subject of dispute can be judicially noticed. [Evidence Code 452(g)(h); Truong v. Nugyen (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 865, 882, 67 Cal.Rptr.3d 675 (industry report pertaining to jet skis, magazine article, both not judicially noticed.)] Public records and government documents may be judicially noticed as not being subject to reasonable doubt. [U.S. ex rel Dingle v. BioPort Corp. (W.D. Mich. 2003) 270 F.Supp.2d 968, 672] What are the requirements for an Affidavit of Self Adjudication? A: 1. There is a will 2. No debts; 3. Only one heir. Q: Mr. A's 3 grandchildren namely Anna, Alexa, & Ania were raised, fed, and schooled by him and his wife B during the lifetime of Mr. A. When A died, estate proceedings commenced. Anna, the eldest of the grandchildren, asked for allowance and support for the 3 of them from the estate of Mr. A while it is under settlement. Rule on the matter. A: Under Rule 83 sec. 3., only the widow, minor, or incapacitated children of the deceased, during the settlement proceedings be allowed to receive allowance under the direction of the court. In the case of Estate of hilario ruiz vs. CA, the High Court ruled that grandchildren are grandchildren are not entitled to provisional support from the u T ry r x gr r ,r g r of their minority or incapacity

QUESTION: Is there a Judicial Admission if after admission was made in the pleading, you amended it and removed the admission? ANSWER: It now becomes an Extrajudicial admission- it needs to be offered in evidence. Basis: Ching vs. CA 331 SCRA--- "Admission admitted which is superseded are extrajudicial admissions." Question As counsel of an accused charged with homicide, you are convinced that he can be utilized as a state witness. What procedure will you take? Answer As counsel of an accused charged with homicide, the procedure that can be followed for the accused to be utilized as a state witness is to ask the prosecutor to recommend that the accused be made as state witness. It is the prosecutor who must recommend and move for the acceptance of the accused as a state witness. Question When may the trial court order that the testimony of a child be taken by live link television? Explain. Answer The testimony of a child may be taken by live link television if there is a substantial likelihood that the child would suffer trauma from testifying in the presence of the accused, the counsel, or the prosecutor as the case may be. The trauma must of a kind which would impair the completeness or truthfulness of the testimony of the child. (sec.25, rule on examination of a child witness) Q: IS SPOUSAL IMMUNITY OR MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE APPLICABLE TO ESTRANGED SPOUSES? A: NO. SEC.22 OF RULE 130 DO NOT APPLY WHERE THE MARITAL AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS ARE SO STRAINED THAT THERE IS NO MORE HARMONY TO BE PRESERVED NOR PEACE AND TRANQUILITY WHICH MAY BE DISTURBED. Question: Allan Revilla was killed by Jinggoy Enrile in his house at Makati. Before Allan Revilla died, he was able to write the name Jinggoy Enrile in the wall using his blood. Thereafter, the policemen came to the scene of the crime. Will that writing on the wall be admissible as evidence in court on the part of the prosecution? Answer: It may be admissible in court but will not be given credit/weight unless it is clearly identified (for example, that the writing on the wall really came from the b , r g, u y f the photograph on the scene of the crime, etc.).

Question: What is the Doctrine of Processual Presumption? Answer: Foreign law is the same as the law of the forum. It arises if the foreign law, though properly applicable is either not alleged or if alleged is not duly proved before a competent court. Absent any of the evidence or admission, the foreign law is presumed to be the same at that in the Philippines. (In Re Testate Estate of Suntay, 50 O.G. 5321, Collector of Internal Revenue vs. Fisher, et. al., G.R. No. L-11622, January 28, 1961) Q: Distinguish Preliminary Citation from Peremptory Writ. A: Where the person is detained under governmental authority and the illegality of his detention is not patent from the petition for the writ, the court may issue a citation to the government officer having the person in his custody to show cause why the Writ of Habeas Corpus should not issue. This is known as a Preliminary Citation. Peremptory Writ however is issued when the cause of the detention appears to be patently illegal and the non-compliance wherewith is punishable. (Lee Yick Hon vs. Insular Collector of Customs, 41 Phil 548) 1. what is evidence on motion? A: When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the respective parties, but the court may direct that the matters be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or depositions. 2. what is included when you say one is incompetent? A: Incompetent includes: those suffering from the penalty of civil interdiction; hospitalized lepers; prodigals; deaf and dumb; those of unsound mind although they have lucid intervals; persons not of unsound mind but by reason of age, disease, weak mind, and other similar causes, cannot, without outside aid, take care of themselves or manage their property. Riza sued Darius for injuries that she suffered when Darius' bicycle collided with hers. The issue is whether Darius was riding his bicycle on the correct side of the roadway. Riza wants to introduce a photograph that shows that Bruce was riding his bicycle on the wrong side of the road. Bruce objects to the introduction of the photograph. Is the photograph admissible or not? Answer: Admissible if there is testimony offered showing the photograph to be an accurate representation of the scene of the accident. If a proper foundation is laid, the photograph is admissible into evidence. This requires that there be someone who can testify that the photograph is a true and accurate representation of the accident scene. Since anyone who was present at scene when the photograph was taken can testify to the accuracy of the photograph, the photographer does not have to be present.

What is the remedy when the documents or things offered by the proponent were excluded by the court? Answer: Tender of excluded evidence. If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court, the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record. If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony. Q- Adolf is a member of Religious group, and likewise an active member of one partylist, He was previously convicted of Falsification of Document, Adolf is one of the 5 witnesses to the Will of George, Is Adolf qualified to testify as witness in the probate of the will of George? A- No. Although Sec.20, Rule 130 provides that religious or political belief interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of crime unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be a ground for disqualification. Art. 821 of the Civil Code provides that those who have been convicted of falsification of a document, Perjury or False Testimony are disqualified from being witnesses to a will, as a consequence, these persons may not testify as witnesses in the probate of a Will where the subject of testimony is the very fact of execution of the Will in their presence. A used as an evidence in a land dispute case a certified true copy of real property assessment issued by a city treasurer. is the document admissible? ans. no. sec 7 rule 130 provides that when original document is in the custody of a public officer or is recorded in a public office, its contents may be proved by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. city assessor is the proper custodian of assessment and not the city treasurer. Q: IS SPOUSAL IMMUNITY OR MARITAL DISQUALIFICATION BY REASON OF MARRIAGE APPLICABLE TO ESTRANGED SPOUSES? A: NO. SEC.22 OF RULE 130 DO NOT APPLY WHERE THE MARITAL AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS ARE SO STRAINED THAT THERE IS NO MORE HARMONY TO BE PRESERVED NOR PEACE AND TRANQUILITY WHICH MAY BE DISTURBED. Question Are modes of discovery specifically interrogatories to parties apply only to ordinary civil actions and not special proceedings? Answer: No. Section 2, Rule 72 of ROC provides that: "In the absence of special provisions, the rules provided for in ordinary civil actions shall be, as as practicable applicable in special proceedings". There is no provision to the contrary that would preclude the application of the modes of discovery specifically interrogatories to parties under Rule 25 of the Rules, to probate proceedings.

Q: Within what time can claims against the estate be filed? Can claims arising after the death of the decedent be presented? A1: Within the time fixed in the notice which shall not be more than 12 months or less than 6 months after the date of the first publication. Otherwise, they are barred forever. Exception: Belated Claims or claims not filed within the original period fixed by the court. A2: Gen Rule: No it cannot be presented. Exceptions: 1) Funeral Expenses 2) Expenses of the last sickness of the decedent. What is the Doctrine of Self-serving? It prohibits the admission of declaration of a witness in his favor. It applies only to extrajudicial admission and not those made in open court. The admission made in open court is admissible because the witness maybe cross examined on the matter. It is however up to the court to appreciate the same. when is compromise not allowed? answer: in cases involving 1) civil status of a person 2) validity of a marriage or legal separation 3) any ground for legal separation 4) future sport 5) jurisdiction of courts 6) future legitime 7) habeas corpus and election cases Question: When Jordan loaned as sum of money to Bryant, Jordan typed a single copy of the promissory note, which they both signed. Jordan made two photocopies of the promissory note, giving one copy to Bryant and retaining the other copy. Jordan entrusted the typewritten copy to his counsel for safekeeping. The document with Jordan's counsel was destroyed when fire ravaged his law office. a. In an action to collect on the promissory note, which is deemed to be the original copy for the purpose of obtaining the Best evidence rule? b. Can the photocopies in the hands of the parties be considered duplicate original copies? Answer: a. The original is the one typed and signed by both parties and which was lost when the office of Jordan's counsel got burned. b. The photocopies are not duplicate originals. They cannot be deemed as having been made at the same time with the original because they were not signed by the contracting parties.

Authenticity and due execution of a private document is proved by, inter alia, evidence of genuineness of the handwriting of the maker Q: How is handwriting proved? A: 1. Witness who actually saw the person writing the instrument (Sec 20a) 2. Witness familiar with such handwriting (Sec 22) and who can give his opinion thereon, such opinion being exception to opinion rule (Rule 130, Sec 50b) 3. Comparison by the court of the questioned handwriting and admitted genuine specimens thereof (Sec 22) 4. Expert evidence (Rule 130 Sec 49)