COURSE OUTLINE:
I. POST JUDGMENT REMEDIES
I.1. BEFORE JUDGMENT BECOMES FINAL
A. MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL AND RECONSIDERATION (RULE 37)
B. APPEALS
a) General principles on appeal
1. Stolt Nielsen v. NLRC, 477 SCRA 516
2. Canton v. City of Cebu, 515 SCRA 441
3. Association of Integrated Security Force of Bislig-ALU v. Court of
Appeals, 467 SCRA 483
b) Judgments or orders not appealable (Sec. 1, Rule 41)
b.1. Remedy in case the judgment or final order is not appealable (Sec. 9, Rule
37)
c) Issues that may be raised on appeal
4. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Migrant Pagbilao Corp., 504
SCRA 484
d) When errors not raised on appeal may be considered
5. Dy vs. NLRC, 145 SCRA 211
6. Comilang v. Burcena, 482 SCRA 342
e) Payment of docket fee
7. Regalado v. Go, 514 SCRA 616
8. Buenaflor v. Court of Appeals, 346 SCRA 563
f) Record on appeal; Notice of Appeal (Sec. 2[a], Rule 41)
9. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Manila v. Court of Appeals, 258 SCRA
186
g) Dismissal of Appeal; Court of Appeals (Sec.1, Rule 50); Supreme Court (Sec.5,
Rule 56)
10. The Government of the Kingdom of Belgium v. Court of Appeals, 551
SCRA 223
11. Beatingo v. Gasis, 642 SCRA 539
Ø Appeal from Municipal Trial Court to the Regional Trial Court (Rule 40)
a) Where to appeal (Sec. 1)
b) When to appeal (Sec. 2)
c) How to appeal (Sec. 3)
d) Perfection of appeal (Sec. 4) See Rule 41, Sec. 9
e) Appellate court and other lawful fees (Sec. 5) Same as Rule 41, Sec. 4
f) Procedure in RTC (Sec. 7)
g) Appeal from MTC order dismissing case
i. without trial on the merits (Sec. 8, par. 1)
ii. with trial on the merits (Sec. 8. par. 2)
12. Provost vs. CA, G.R. No. 160406, June 26, 2006
13. Encarnacion vs. Amigo, G.R. No. 169793, September 15, 2006
Ø Appeal from Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals (Rule 41)
a) Subject of appeal (Sec. 1)
b) Non-appealable ordersA.M. No. 07-7-12-SC (dated December 4, 2007 – took
effect on December 27, 2007) – Amendments to Rules 41, 45, 58 and 65
c) Modes of appeal (Sec. 2)
d) Period of ordinary appeal (Sec. 3)
e) Interrupted by timely MNT or MR
f) No motion for extension of time to file MNT or MR
g) MR filed on last day of 15-day period
14. Manila Memorial Park vs. CA, 344 SCRA 769 (2001)
h) New rule on appeal after denial of MR or MNT
15. Neypes vs. CA, 469 SCRA 633 (2005)
i) When appeal allowed even if period to appeal has expired
16. Trans International vs. CA, 285 SCRA 49 (1998)
j) RTC cannot dismiss appeal on ground that only questions of law involved
17. Kho vs. Camacho, 204 SCRA 150 (1991)
k) Appellee who has not appealed may not obtain affirmative relief from appellate
court
18. Custodio vs. CA, 253 SCRA 483 (1996)
l) Exception – when there is solidarity in obligations
19. Citytrust Banking Corp. vs. CA, 196 SCRA 553 (1991)
m) Perfection of appeal (Sec. 9, 1st and 2nd pars.)
n) Loss of jurisdiction (Sec. 9, 3rd and 4th pars.)
o) Residual powers (Sec. 9, 5th par.)
p) Dismissal of appeal (Sec. 13)
a. late filing
b. non-payment of docket and other lawful fees
Ø Ordinary Appealed Cases (Rule 44)
a) Scope and title of cases; Cases appealed to the Court of Appeals under Rule
44.
b) Appellant's brief (Sec. 7, Rule 44)
B.1. When to file;
c) Appellee's brief (Sec. 8, Rule 44)
c.1. When to file;
d) Contents of Appellant's Brief(Sec. 13, Rule 44); Appellee's Brief (Sec. 14,
Rule 44)
e) Questions that may be raised on appeal; Exceptions (Sec. 15, Rule 44)
Ø Petition for Review from Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals (Rule 42)
a) Appeal from RTC decision rendered in the exercise of its appellate
jurisdiction
20. Ross Rica Sales Center, Inc. vs. Ong, G.R. No. 132197, August 16, 2005
b) Pure questions of law may be raised (Sec. 2)
21. Macawiwili Gold Mining and Devt. Co, Inc.vs. CA, 297 SCRA 602
(1998)
c) Effect of failure to comply with requirements (Sec. 3)
d) Action by court (Sec. 4)
a. Require filing of comment or
b. Dismiss petition outright
e) When petition given due course (Sec. 6)
22. Ditching vs. CA, 263 SCRA 343 (1996)
f) Perfection of appeal (Sec. 8, 1st par.)
g) Loss of jurisdiction (Sec. 8, 2nd par.)
h) Residual powers (Sec. 8, 3rd par.)
i) Effect of appeal (Sec. 8, 4th par.)
Ø Appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals and Quasi-Judicial Agencies to the Court
of Appeals (Rule 43)
a) Scope (Sec.1)
23. Fabian vs. Desierto, 295 SCRA 440 (1998)
b) Ombudsman criminal cases – Supreme Court via Rule 65
24. Garcia-Rueda vs. Pascasio, 278 SCRA 269 (1997)
c) Cases not covered (Sec. 2)
25. St. Martin Funeral Home vs. NLRC, 295 SCRA 494 (1998)
d) Decisions of Secretary of Labor and Director of Bureau of Labor Relations –
petition for certiorari to CA under Rule 65
e) Decisions of DOJ Secretary in petitions for review prosecutors’ resolutions –
petition for certiorari to CA under Rule 65
26. Santos vs. Go, 473 SCRA 350 (2005)
f) Not applicable where there is error of jurisdiction
27. Fortich vs. Corona, 289 SCRA 624 (1998)
g) Where to appeal (Sec. 3)
h) Pure questions of law may be raised
i) Period of appeal (Sec. 4)
j) How appeal taken (Sec. 5)
k) Form and contents (Sec. 6)
l) Effect of failure to comply with requirements (Sec. 7) - sufficient ground for
dismissal
m) Action by court (Sec. 8)
a. Require fiing of comment or
b. Dismiss petition outright
n) When petition given due course (Sec. 10)
o) Effect of appeal (Sec.12)
28. Lapid vs. CA, 334 SCRA 738 (2000
Ø Appeal by Certiorari to the Supreme Court (Rule 45)
a) Application of Rule 45
29. Five Star Marketing Co.,Inc. v. Booc, 535 SCRA 28
b) Not a matter of right (Sec. 6, Rule 45)
30. People v. Flores, 481 SCRA 451
c) Questions of law; Questions of fact
31. Co v. Vargas, G.R. No. 195167, Nov. 16, 2011
32. Heirs of Feraren v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 159328, Oct. 5, 2011
33. Republic v. Malabanan, G.R. No. 169067, Oct. 6, 2010
d) Findings of facts; not ordinarily reviewed
34. Tayco v. Heirs of Tayco-Flores, 637 SCRA 742
35. Meneses v. Venturozo, G.R. No. 172196, Oct. 19, 2011
e) When questions of facts may be passed upon in a Rule 45 petition
36. Natividad v. MTRCB, 540 SCRA 124, 135
f) When to appeal (Sec. 2, Rule 45)
g) How to Appeal (Sec. 1, Rule 45)
h) Rule 45 vs. Rule 65; Question of Law v. Question of Fact
37. Republic v. Mercadera, G.R. No. 186027, December 8, 2010
38. Asian Terminals, Inc. v. Simon Enterprises, Inc., G.R. No. 177116,
February 27, 2013
39. Maza v. Turla, G.R. No. 187094, February 15, 2017
40. Philippine Bank of Communications v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
218901, February 15, 2017
e. Mackay v. Angeles, G.R. No. 144230
(Resolution), September 30, 2003
I.2. AFTER JUDGMENT BECOMES FINAL
A. Petition for Relief from Judgments, Orders or Other Proceedings (Rule 38)
B. Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47)
a) When remedy available
b) Where applicable
37. People vs. Bitanga, G.R. No. 159222, June 26, 2007
38. Fraginal vs. Paranal, G.R. No. 150207, February 22, 2007
39. Grande vs. University of the Philippines, G.R. NO. 148456, September
15, 2006
c) Grounds (Sec. 2)
40. Cosmic Lumber Corp. vs. CA, 265 SCRA 166 (1996)
d) Where petition filed (Secs. 1, 10)
e) Period for filing (Sec. 3)
f) Laches
41. Marcelino vs. CA, 210 SCRA 444 (1992)
g) Parties and contents (Sec. 4)
h) May be filed by a non-party to the judgment
i) Available even if judgment has been executed (Sec. 9)
42. Islamic Da’Wah Council of the Phils. vs. CA, 178 SCRA 178(1989)
j) Action by the court (Sec. 5)
k) Procedure (Sec. 6)
l) Effect of judgment (Sec. 7)
m) Suspension of prescriptive period (Sec. 8)
I.3. MISCELLANEOUS MATTERS (Procedures in the Court of Appeals and
Supreme Court)
A. Preliminary Conference (Rule 48)
B. Oral Argument (Rule 49)
C. Dismissal of Appeal (Rule 50)
D. Judgment (Rule 51)
E. Motion for Reconsideration (Rule 52)
F. New Trial (Rule 53)
G. Internal Business (Rule 54)
H. Publication of Judgments and Final Resolution (Rule 55)
I. Original and Appealed Cases in SC (Rule 56)
43. Guy vs. CA, 539 SCRA 584
44. Molina vs. CA, January 13, 2003
45. NYK International vs. NLRC, February 17, 2003
46. Shipside, Inc. vs. CA, February 20, 2001
47. Vanguard Assurance Corporation vs. CA, 64 SCRA 148
48. Roman Catholic Archbishop vs. CA, June 19, 1991
49. People vs. Jabinal, 55 SCRA 607
50. Navarro vs. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 180050, April12, 2011
51. League of Cities vs. Comelec, G.R. Nos. 176951, 177499, 178056,
April 12, 2011
52. Heirs of Maura So vs. Obliosca, 542 SCRA 406
53. Ramos vs. Pepsi Cola, G.R. No. L-22533, February 9, 1967
II. EXECUTION AND SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT (Rule 39)
III. PROVISIONAL REMEDIES
A. Preliminaries
a. Nature and Purpose
b. Jurisdiction over provisional remedies
B. Different Provisional Remedies
Ø Preliminary attachment (Rule 57)
a. Grounds for issuance of writ of attachment
b. Requisites
c. Issuance and contents of order of attachment; affidavit and bond
d. Rule on prior or contemporaneous service of summons
e. Manner of attaching real and personal property; when property attached is
claimed by third person
f. Discharge of attachment and the counter-bond
g. Satisfaction of judgment out of property attached
54. Davao Light & Power Co., Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 93262,
November 29, 1991
55. Torres v. Satsatin. G.R. No. 166759, 25 November 2009
56. Valmonte v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108538, 22 January 1996
57. Traders Royal Bank v. Intermediate Appellate Court, G.R. No. 66321,
October 31, 1984
58. Pacis v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. L-29026 (Resolution),
August 22, 1969
Ø Preliminary injunction
a. Definition and differences between preliminary injunction, temporary
restraining order, and status quo ante order
b. Requisites
c. Kinds of injunctions; kinds of temporary restraining orders
d. When writ may be issued, when writ may not be issued
e. Grounds for issuance of preliminary injunction
f. Grounds for objection to, or for the dissolution of injunction or restraining
order
g. Duration of temporary restraining order
h. Rule on prior or contemporaneous service of summons in relation to
attachment
i. Laws Prohibiting Injunction – PD 605, PD 1818, PD 385
59. Hernandez v. NPC, G.R. No. 145328, 23 March 2006 Australian
Professional Realty v. Municipality of Padre Garcia, Batangas, G.R.
No. 183367, 14 March 2012
60. City of Iloilo v. Honrado, G.R. No. 160399, December 9, 2015
61. Dungog v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 139767, August 5, 2003
62. Antig v. Antipuesto, G.R. No. 192396 (Resolution), January 17, 2018
63. Spouses Laus v. Optimum Security Services, Inc., G.R. No. 208343,
February 3, 2016
64. Verzosa v. Court of Appeals, G.R. Nos. 119511-13, November 24,
1998
65. Tay Chun Suy v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 93640, January 7, 1994
66. Laus v. Optimum Security Services, G.R. No. 208343, 3 February
2016
67. Federation of Land Reform Farmers of the Philippines v. Court of
Appeals, G.R. No. 88384, July 14, 1995
Ø Receivership (Rule 58)
a. Cases when receiver may be appointed
b. Requisites
c. Requirement before issuance of an order
d. General powers of a receiver
e. Two kinds of bonds
f. Termination of receivership
68. Normandy v. Duque, G.R. No. L-25407, August 29, 1969
Ø Replevin (Rule 60)
a. When writ may be issued
b. Requisites
c. Affidavit and bond; redelivery bond
d. Sheriff’s duty in the implementation of the writ; when property is claimed by
third party
69. BA Finance Corp. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 102998, July 5, 1996
70. Rivera v. Vargas, G.R. No. 165895, 5 June 2009
71. Advent Capital and Financ Corp. v. Young, G.R. No. 183018, 3 August
2011
72. Northern Motors, Inc. v. Herrera, G.R. No. L-32674, February 22,
1973
Ø Provisional Remedies under Special Law and Rules
a. Provisional remedies of the Family Courts; Support Pendente Lite (Rule
61)
73. Francisco v. Zandueta, G.R. No. L-43794, 9 August 1935
74. San Juan v. Valenzuela, G.R. No. L-59906, October 23, 1982
b. Human Security Act
c. Anti-Violence against Women and Children Act
d. Anti-Money Laundering Act
e. Financial Rehabilitation and
f. Insolvency Act
g. Precautionary Hold Departure Orders
IV. SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS
A. Preliminaries
a. Nature of Special Civil Actions
b. Ordinary Civil Actions v Special Civil Actions
c. Jurisdiction and Venue in SCA and in general
Ø Interpleader (Rule 62)
a. Requisites
b. When to file
75. Ocampo vs. Tirona G.R. No. 147812, April 6, 2005
76. Wack Wack Golf and Country Club vs. Lee E. Won, G.R. No. L-23851,
30 SCRA 165
Ø Declaratory Relief and Similar Remedies (Rule 63)
a. Who may file
b. Requisites
c. When the court may refuse to make judicial declaration
d. Conversion to Ordinary Action
e. Proceedings considered as similar remedies
77. DBM vs. Manila’s Finest Retirees Association, G.R. No. 169446, May
9, 2007
78. Tano vs. Socrates G.R. No. 110249, August 14, 1997
79. Martelino vs. NHMF Corp. G.R. No. 160208, June 30, 2008
80. Singson vs. Republic, January 30, 1968
81. De la Llana vs. COMELEC, December 9, 1977
82. Velasco vs. Villegas G.R. No. L-24153, February 14, 1983
Ø Review of Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions of the Commission on
Elections and the Commission on Audit (Rule 64)
a. Application of Rule 65 under Rule 64
b. Distinction in the Application of Rule 65 to the judgments of COA and
COMELEC and the Application of Rule 65 to the judgment of other Tribunals,
Officers, Persons
83. Lokin, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 193808, [June 26,
2012], 689 PHIL 200-217)
84. Daraga Press, Inc. v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 201042, [June
16, 2015], 760 PHIL 391-409
85. Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc. v. Commission on Audit, G.R.
No. 213525 (Resolution), [January 27, 2015], 752 PHIL 97-109
86. Law Firm of Laguesma Magsalin Consulta and Gastardo v.
Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 185544, [January 13, 2015], 750
PHIL 258-288
Ø Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus (Rule 65)
a. Definitions and distinctions
b. Requisites
c. When petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus is proper
d. Injunctive relief
e. Certiorari distinguished from Appeal by Certiorari; Prohibition and
Mandamus distinguished from Injunction; when and where to file petition
f. Exceptions to filing of motion for reconsideration before filing petition
g. Reliefs petitioner is entitled to
h. Actions/Omissions of MTC/RTC in election cases
i. Where to file petition
Certiorari
87. Balba vs. Peak Development Inc et al G.R. No. 148288, August 12,
2005
88. New frontier Sugar Corp vs. RTC of Iloilo G.R. No. 165001, January
31, 2007
89. Camutin vs. Sps Potente G.R. No. 181642, January 29, 2009
90. Bugarin vs. Palisoc G.R. No. 157985, December 2, 2005
91. Lalican vs. Vergara 276 SCRA 518, July 31, 1997
92. Dillena vs. CA G.R. No. 77660, July 28, 1988
93. Indian Aerospace University vs. CHED G.R. No. 139371, April 4,
2001
94. San Pedro vs. CA, August 4, 1994
95. Equitable PCI Bank vs. Ng Shevrig Ngor G.R. No. 171545, December
19, 2007
96. Republic vs. St. Vincent, August 22, 2012
97. Philippine Commercial Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, March 29, 1974
98. Sps. Nische vs. Equitable-PCI Bank G.R. No. 167434, February 19,
2007
99. Matute vs. CA L-26751, January 31, 1969
100. Yauvs.TheManilaBankingCorporation,July11,2002
101. Barrazona vs. RTC of Baguio City, April 7, 2006
102. San Mihuel Corp. vs. Layos, Jr., G.R. No. 149640, October 19, 2007
103. Makabangkil vs. PHHC, 72 SCRA 326
104. Paa vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No 126560, December 4, 1997
Prohibition
105. David vs. Rivera 420 SCRA 90, January 16, 2004
106. Tan et al vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 73155, July 11, 1986
Mandamus
107. Mayuga vs. CA, August 30, 1996
108. Kant Wong et al vs. PCGG G.R. No. 79484, December 7, 1987
109. Uy Kiao Eng vs. Nixon Lee, G.R. No. 176831, January 15, 2010
110. Matibay vs. Garcia, January 25, 1983
111. Paloma vs. Mora, 470 SCRA 711
112. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 574 SCRA 661,
December 18, 2008
113. Lokin, Jr. v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 193808, [June 26,
2012], 689 PHIL 200-217)
114. Daraga Press, Inc. v. Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 201042, [June
16, 2015], 760 PHIL 391-409
115. Fortune Life Insurance Company, Inc. v. Commission on Audit,
G.R. No. 213525 (Resolution), [January 27, 2015], 752 PHIL 97-109
116. Law Firm of Laguesma Magsalin Consulta and Gastardo v.
Commission on Audit, G.R. No. 185544, [January 13, 2015], 750
PHIL 258-288
Ø Quo Warranto (Rule 66)
a. Distinguish from Quo Warranto in the Omnibus Election Code
b. When government commence an action against individuals
c. When individual may commence an action Judgment in Quo Warranto
action Rights of a person adjudged entitled to public office
117. Republic v. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, [May 11, 20181
118. Divinagracia v. Consolidated Broadcasting System, Inc., G.R. No.
162272, [April 7, 20091, 602 PHIL
625_670
119. Serafin v. Cruz, G.R. No. 39224, [October 24, 19331, 58 PHIL 611-
617
120. Moro v. Del Castillo, Jr., G.R. No. 184980, [March 30, 2011], 662
PHIL 331-337
121. Lacson v. Romero, G.R. No. L-3081, [October 14, 19491, 84 PHIL
740-756
122. Acosta v. Flor, G.R. No. 2122, [September 13, 19051, 5 PHIL 18-24
123. Garcia v. Perez, G.R. No. L-28184, [September 11, 1980], 188 PHIL
43-50]
124.
Ø Expropriation (Rule 67)
a. Matters to allege in complaint for expropriation
b. Two stages in every action for expropriation
c. When plaintiff can immediately enter into possession of the real property, in
relation to RA 8974
d. New system of immediate payment of initial just compensation
e. Defenses and objections
f. Order of Expropriation
g. Ascertainment of just compensation
h. Appointment of Commissioners;
i. Commissioner's report;
j. Court action upon commissioner's report.
k. Rights of plaintiff upon judgment and payment
l. Effect of recording of judgment
125. Republic vs. Gingoyon G.R. No. 166429, December 19, 2005
126. National Power Corp. vs. Manubay Agro-Industrial G.R. No.
150936, August 18, 2004
127. Republic vs. CA and Heirs of Cris Santos G.R. No. 146587, July 2,
2002
128. Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation vs. City of Pasig G.R.
No. 152230, August 9, 2005
129. Robern Development Corp. vs. Quitain, 315 SCRA 150
130. Republic vs. vda. De Castello, 58 SCRA 336
Ø Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage (Rule 68)
a. Judgment on foreclosure for payment or sale
b. Sale of mortgaged property; effect
c. Disposition of proceeds of sale
d. Deficiency judgment
a) Instances when court cannot render deficiency judgment
e. Judicial foreclosure versus extrajudicial foreclosure
f. Equity of redemption versus right of redemption
131. Limpin vs. IAC 166 SCRA 88, September 29, 1988
132. BPI Family Savings Bank vs. Sps Veloso 436 SCRA 1, August 9,
2004
Ø Partition (Rule 69)
a. Matters to allege in the complaint for partition
b. Two (2) stages in every action for partition
c. Order of partition and partition by agreement
d. Partition by commissioners; Appointment of commissioners, Commissioner's
report; Court action upon commissioner's report
e. Judgment and its effects
f. Partition of personal property
g. Prescription of action
133. Figuracion Gerilla vs. vda. De Figuracion G.R. No. 154322, August
22, 2006
134. Rugian vs. Rugian, 9 Phil 527 (1908)
Ø Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer (Rule 70)
a. Definitions and Distinction
b. Distinguished from accion publiciana and accion reinvindicatoria
c. How to determine jurisdiction in accion publiciana and accion reinvindicatoria
d. Who may institute the action and when; against whom the action may be
maintained
e. Pleadings allowed
f. Action on the complaint
g. When demand is necessary
h. Preliminary injunction and preliminary mandatory injunction
i. Resolving defense of ownership
j. How to stay the immediate execution of judgment
k. Summary procedure, prohibited
135. Valdez vs. CA G.R. No. 132426, May 2, 2006
136. Sampoyan vs. CA, January 14, 2005
137. Republic of the Philippines and NAPOCOR vs. Sunvar Realty
Development Corporation, G.R. No.194880, June 20, 2012
138. Sarmiento vs. CA, November 16, 1995
139. Co vs. Militar 41 SCRA 455, January 29, 2004
140. Duran vs. CA, May 2, 2006
141. Unida vs. Urban G.R. No. 155432, June 9, 2005
142. Spouses Calendacion vs. Larano G.R. No. 158231, June 19, 2007
143. Bugarin vs. Palisoc, December 2, 2005
144. Montenegro vs. Montenegro G.R. No. 156829, June 8, 2004
Ø Contempt (Rule 71)
a. Kinds of contempt
b. Purpose and nature of each
c. Remedy against direct contempt; penalty
d. Remedy against indirect contempt; penalty
e. How contempt proceedings are commenced
f. Acts deemed punishable as indirect contempt
g. When imprisonment shall be imposed
h. Contempt against quasi-judicial bodies
145. Ang vs. Castro G.R. No. 66371, May 15, 1985
146. People vs. Godoy 243 SCRA 64, March 29, 1995
147. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Majaducon, July 29, 2003
148. Lorenzo Shipping Corp et al vs. Distribution Management
Association of the Philippines et al, G.R. No. 155849, August 31, 2011
Comments
Post a Comment