STEP 1: GET YOURSELF A FULL TEXT COPY OF THE CASE.

Why? I'll tell you why. You want to appreciate and understand a story? Read the book and watch the
movie after. As a general rule you DO NOT! I repeat, YOU DO NOT read the digest first before the full
text of the case. That is a mortal sin for professors if they found out you've only read the case digest and
not the full text. It gives you that image of being lazy, and that's a big problem with the capital "P" in it.
But as the saying goes, "if there's a general rule, there's an exception"which is, if you are hopeless
already and you have to finish the case before the end of the world which is the class itself. But this is
not advisable some professors are tricky and try to ask questions that are found in the full text and most
of the time are being overlooked by the students (Such as the date, the justice who penned the case, the
names of the petitioner and respondent, etc.). SO DO YOURSELF A FAVOR, GET A FULL TEXT COPY OF
THE CASE! You can get the full text of the case either through the internet or directly from your law
library.

HERE'S A TIP:

 You can just leave the copy of the list of cases to the librarian or the Xerox Copy Person (XCP
because I do not know how those people are called.) and ask him/her kindly if he/she could go
look for the listed cases there, if they are kind enough to fetch the case for you then you're
lucky, and perhaps a tip would be nice to show your appreciation. Make sure you give them the
case list 2 days or a day before you need the copies of the full text. It's not easy to xerox all
those cases you know. If not? Well, it's one hell of a long journey for you looking at the SCRA
one by one.

 I prefer getting the full text of the case directly from the library than the internet. Why? You can
see the rulings directly at the first page of the SCRA, it's already categorized according to a
particular topic of law related/included in the case. It's much easier to digest.

STEP 2: DON'T JUST LOOK AT IT, READ IT!

You got the case? Good. Now, you read it. Have this relationship with the case, you pay close attention
to the case and while you're at it perhaps you might want to write some notes regarding the case not so
hard of a start isn't it? Reading the case takes some time, but take note of the important things just in
case, these are:

 Full names of the petitioner and the respondent;

 Date of the decision of case;

  Important places in the case (specific address, name of the boat, name of the street, etc.)

 Justice who penned the case;and

 Other information that seem important to the case.

These things are important specially in Criminal Cases specially the time and place where the crime was
committed.

Now, some cases are interesting, criminal cases, cases relating to annulment and the likes. However,
you'll have a problem with cases that will not really spark your interest. For me, cases relating to tax and
corporations are incomprehensible and boring, but you have to read these cases no matter what. It's
worth the effort guys. If you can read fifty shades of grey or the twilight saga then you can also read
those cases. Think that your life and grade depend on it. Put humor in the cases, something that will
remind you of what is that case all about.

STEP 3: NOW WRITE!

Don't just think bout them, ink them. Remember that a case digest should be a page short only as much
as possible, you're not rewriting the full text, you are summarizing it. Now there are formalities which
are to observed in writing down your case digest, I will discuss them step by step.

STEP 3.A: NAME OF THE CASE, GR. No., DATE and JUSTICE WHO PENNED THE CASE.

This is important. If the full text is entitled "Maria Corazon de Jesus Victoria Trinidad vs. Manuel Gabriel"
or if the case have many petitioners and respondents, the you can shortcut it into (for my example)
"Trinidad v. Gabriel" Last name of the petitioner and last name of respondent.
(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)

Then after the case title, under that, you put the G.R Number of the case and the date of the decision of
the case beside it.

(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)

After writing those two, you write the surname of the Justice who penned the decision.

(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)

Your Case Caption should look like this (based on my example earlier):
TRINIDAD v. GABRIEL

G.R. No. XXXXXXX, August 30, 1950

DE GUZMAN, J.:

STEP 3.B: FACTS

Facts are the brief story of the case. You should write what happened in the case, who are the petitioner
and the respondents, what is the decision of the Court of Appeals and Lower Courts. Facts should be
brief as possible. A digest is a summary of the full text and not another copy of the full text.

STEP 3.C: ISSUE

Issue for me, always starts with WHETHER OR NOT followed by the issue that is related to your topic.
For example, the topic is warrant of arrest and the issue in the case is the validity of the warrant, then
your issue should be, WHETHER OR NOT the warrant is valid.

STEP 3.D: RULING/HELD

This is the decision of the SUPREME COURT. I repeat, this is the DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT not
the ruling of any lower court regarding the issue you raised in your issue portion. So, The ISSUE is the
question, the RULING is the answer.

You can use Ruling or Held, whatever is comfortable for you. The point is, you or other people should
see the decision of the court whether it is granted or dismissed and the rationale for such decision.
Decision should answer the issue as i said earlier, if you put a decision that does not answer your issue
then you have a problem discussing the case.

STEP 3.E: HOW IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE

TRINIDAD v. GABRIEL

G.R. No. XXXXXXX, August 30, 1950

DE GUZMAN, J.:

FACTS:

ISSUE:

RULING:

STEP 3.F: SAMPLE DIGEST

BIRAOGO v. THE PHILIPPINE TRUTH COMMISSION OF 2010

G.R No. 192935. December 7, 2010

MENDOZA, J.:

FACT:

E.O No. 1 establishing the Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) of 2010 was signed by President Aquino.
The said PTC is a mere branch formed under the Office of the President tasked to investigate reports of
graft and corruption committed by third-level public officers and employees, their co-principals,
accomplices and accessories during the previous administration and submit their findings
and recommendations to the President, Congress and the Ombudsman. However, PTC is not a quasi-
judicial body, it cannot adjudicate, arbitrate, resolve, settle or render awards in disputes between
parties. Its job is to investigate, collect and asses evidences gathered and make recommendations. It has
subpoena powers but it has no power to cite people in contempt or even arrest. It cannot determine for
such facts if probable cause exist as to warrant the filing of an information in our courts of law.
Petitioners contends the Constitutionality of the E.O. on the grounds that.

 It violates separation of powers as it arrogates the power of Congress to create a public office
and appropriate funds for its operation;

 The provisions of Book III, Chapter 10, Section 31 of the Administrative Code of 1987 cannot
legitimize E.O. No. 1 because the delegated authority of the President to structurally reorganize
the Office of the President to achieve economy, simplicity, and efficiency does not include the
power to create an entirely new office was inexistent like the Truth Commission;

 The E.O illegally amended the Constitution when it made the Truth Commission and vesting it
the power duplicating and even exceeding those of the Office of the Ombudsman and the DOJ.

 It violates the equal protection clause

ISSUE:

WHETHER OR NOT the said E.O is unconstitutional.

RULING:

Yes, E.O No. 1 should be struck down as it is violative of the equal protection clause. The Chief
Executive’s power to create the Ad hoc Investigating Committee cannot be doubted. Having been
constitutionally granted full control of the Executive Department, to which respondents belong, the
President has the obligation to ensure that all executive officials and employees faithfully comply with
the law. With AO 298 as mandate, the legality of the investigation is sustained. Such validity is not
affected by the fact that the investigating team and the PCAGC had the same composition, or that the
former used the offices and facilities of the latter in conducting the inquiry.

4. CONCLUSION

So That's all that you need to know with regards to digesting cases. I hope these helps and please let me
know what you think about digesting cases. We're also open for other suggestions just leave it on the
comments section. THANK YOU AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR DIGESTS!
5. REFERENCE

> LawFacilitate

> Diory's Diction

> Uber Digests