Remedial Law 2011

8/12/2019 Remedial Law 2011

1/25

Bar Examination Questionnaire for Remedial LawSet A

(1) Anna filed a petition for appointment as regular administratrix of her fathers' estate. Her sister Sophiamoved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the parties, as members of the same family, have notexerted 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 summarypro 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 ofhomi ide. /n appeal, she applied for bail. 0ay the ourt of Appeals deny her appli ation for bail onground of habitual delin&uen y!

(A) "es, the felonies are both punishable under the evised +enal ode.

($) "es, her twin onvi tions indi ated her riminal in linations.

( ) %o, the felonies fall under different titles in the evised +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 andrender #udgment against him.

($) 4he ourt shall refer the ase to the $oard of ommissioners to determine theamount of #ust ompensation.

( ) 4he plaintiff shall ma7e the re&uired deposit and forthwith ta7e immediate possessionof the property sought to be expropriated.


2/25

( ) 4he plaintiff may appropriate the property for publi use after #udgment and paymentof 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 riminalpro eeding!

(A) An amendment that downgrades the offense re&uires leave of ourt even before thea used pleads.

($) Substantial amendments are allowed with leave of ourt before the a used pleads.

( ) /nly formal amendments are permissible before the a used pleads.

( ) After the plea, a formal amendment may be made without leave of ourt.

(*) :ary who lived in 4aguig borrowed +1 million from ey who lived in 0a7ati under a ontra t of loanthat fixed 0a7ati as the venue of any a tion arising from the ontra t. :ary had already paid the loan but

ey 7ept on sending him letters of demand for some balan e. 3here is the venue of the a tion forharassment that :ary wants to file against ey!

(A) 5n 0a7ati sin e the intent of the party is to ma7e it the venue of any a tion betweenthem 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 ey 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 thesame.

( ) 5nvest the funds in his hands without ourt approval.

(


3/25


4/25

($) "es, sin e publi interest in #usti e re&uires his testimony.

( ) %o, sin e amon 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 + 6 C 6 the plaintifffrom refiling his a tion!

(A) es #udi ata.

($) Ca 7 of #urisdi tion over the sub#e t matter.

( ) nenfor 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 hersister, 3ella, before the 4 of 0anila for selling to ?i tor a land that she previously sold to Soledad. Atthe same time Soledad filed a ivil a tion to annul the se ond sale before the 4 of DueEon ity. 0aythe 0anila 4 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 ofthe 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.


5/25

( ) "es, if it is onvin ed that due pro ess and fair trial will be better served if the riminalase is suspended.

(1) :erry sued F"G $us o. and i o, its bus driver, for in#uries :erry suffered when their bus ran offthe road and hit him. /f the two defendants, only F"G $us o. filed an answer, alleging that its bus ranoff the road be ause one of its wheels got aught in an open manhole, ausing the bus to swerve withoutthe driver8s fault. Someone had stolen the manhole over and the road gave no warning of the danger itposed. /n :erry8s motion and over the ob#e tion of F"G $us o., the ourt de lared i 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 busompany8s answer.

($) %o, the ourt should have dropped i o as defendant sin e the moneyed defendantis the bus ompany.

( ) "es, the ourt an, under the rules, render #udgment against the defendant de laredin default.

( ) "es, sin e, in failing to answer, i o may be deemed to have admitted the allegationsin 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 underustodia 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 6 /%6/ SC"applied!

(A) in 3rit of Amparo ases, substantial eviden e.

($) to satisfy the burden of proof in ivil ases, preponderan e of eviden e.


6/25

( ) 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 theproperty 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 inase 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 6:A 6 as a suffi ient proof of personal servi e of pleadings!

(A) /ffi ial return of the server.

($) egistered 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 partydefendant was made. pon 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 ane#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, shouldnot pre#udi e A.


7/25

( ) %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.

( ) aise the ward to be ome a responsible member of so iety.

( ) 3hi h of the following laims survive the death of the defendant and need not be presented as alaim against the estate!

(A) ontingent money laims arising from ontra t.

($) nenfor 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, Assuming that the assailant wasbehind the de eased before he atta 7ed him, would you say that trea hery attended the 7illing! 5s thishypotheti al &uestion permissible!


8/25

(A) %o, sin e it as7s for his legal opinion.

($) "es, but onditionally, sub#e t to subse&uent proof that the assailant was indeedbehind 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 triedand onvi ted as harged. A few days later, 4eren e died due to severe infe tion of his stab wounds. anthe 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 againsthim.

($) %o, double #eopardy is present sin e $en had already been onvi ted of the firstoffense.

( ) %o, there is double #eopardy sin e serious physi al in#uries is ne essarily in luded inthe 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 atedthe drugs and the money and brought them to the poli e station where they prepared the inventory dulysigned by poli e offi er /s ar 0oreno. 4hey were, however, unable to ta7e pi tures of the items. 3ill thisdefi 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, willnot negate onvi tion.

($) %o, a brea h of the hain of ustody rule may be offset by presentation in ourt of thedrugs.

( ) "es, hain of ustody in drug ases must be stri tly observed at all times to preservethe integrity of the onfis ated items.

( ) "es, omplian e with the hain of ustody rule in drug ases is the only way to provethe a used8s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

(--) A sued $ in the 4 of DueEon ity, #oining two auses of a tionI for partition of real property andbrea 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 onea tion.

($) %o, sin e auses of a tion pertaining to different venues may be #oined in the 4 ifone 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.


9/25

( ) %o, sin e plaintiff may un&ualifiedly #oin in one omplaint as many auses of a tion ashe 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 ourtof oordinate #urisdi tion.

( ) A higher ourt will not entertain dire t resort to it unless the redress sought annot beobtained 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 ialadmission!

(A) Admissions made in a pleading signed by the party and his ounsel intended to befiled.

($) 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 omityamong 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. indypresented i and +at, neighbors of :eorge and 4eresa in ebu ity, to prove, first, that :eorge and4eresa ohabited there and, se ond, that they established a reputation as husband and wife. an indyprove 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 tosupport a onvi tion for bigamy.

( ) %o, the ir umstantial eviden e is not enough to support a onvi tion for bigamy.


10/25

( ) %o, the ir umstantial eviden e annot over ome the la 7 of dire t eviden e in anyriminal ase.

(-) onsidering the &ualifi ations re&uired of a would@be witness, who among the following is5% /0+646%4 to testify!

(A) A person under the influen e of drugs when the event he is as7ed to testify on too7pla 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, Arthurrepla ed its original sound system with an inferior one. $ren dis overed the hange, re#e ted the ar, anddemanded the return of his money. Arthur did not omply. 0eantime, his ompany reassigned Arthur toSingapore. $ren filed a ivil a tion against Arthur for ontra tual fraud and damages. pon hisappli 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 ofpreliminary 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 omponentsbefore 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 relatedmotion 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.


11/25

( ) Appeal the orders of denial.

(2 ) uring trial, plaintiff offered eviden e that appeared irrelevant at that time but he said he waseventually 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 thesame 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 presentoffense.

( ) %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 arisingfrom 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 beonsolidated with the first.

(29) Alex filed a petition for writ of amparo against 0elba relative to his daughter 4oni's involuntarydisappearan 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 dowith 4oni's disappearan e and that she too7 steps to as ertain 4oni's whereabouts. 3hat is the &uantumof 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.


12/25

(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 1. +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 sheborrowed. 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) 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 used fails to pay his annual premium on the bail bond.

( ) 3hen the a 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 beseiEed.


13/25

($) +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 hiswitnesses.

(91) anger 0otors filed a replevin suit against $art to re over possession of a ar that he mortgaged toit. $art disputed the laim. 0eantime, the ourt allowed, with no opposition from the parties, 0idway

epair Shop to intervene with its laim against $art for unpaid repair bills. /n subse&uent motion ofanger 0otors and $art, the ourt dismissed the omplaint as well as 0idway epair 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 separatea tion.

($) "es, intervention is merely ollateral to the prin ipal a tion and not an independentpro eeding.

( ) "es, the right of the intervenor is merely in aid of the right of the original party, whi hin this ase had eased to exist.

( ) %o, sin e having been allowed to intervene, the intervenor be ame a party to thea 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 twooffended 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 riminalintent.

( ) "es, sin e the se ond offended party is entitled to the vindi ation of the wrong donehim as well.

( ) %o, sin e the se ond offended party is in estoppel, not having #oined the first riminala tion.

(9-) Henry testified that a month after the robbery Asiong, one of the a used, told him that arlos wasone of those who ommitted the rime with him. 5s Henry8s testimony regarding what Asiong told himadmissible 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.


14/25

(92) orothy filed a petition for writ of habeas orpus against her husband, oy, to get from him ustodyof their 9 year old son, =eff. 4he ourt granted the petition and re&uired oy to turn over =eff to hismother. oy sought re onsideration but the ourt denied it. He filed a noti e of appeal five days fromre 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 forre onsideration.

( ) "es, sin e he filed it within 19 days from re eipt of the denial of his motion forre onsideration.

( ) "es, sin e he filed it within ; days from re eipt of the denial of his motion forre onsideration.

(99) Angel Bubeta filed a petition to hange his first name Angel. After the re&uired publi ation butbefore any opposition ould be re eived, he filed a noti e of dismissal. 4he ourt onfirmed the dismissalwithout pre#udi e. ive days later, he filed another petition, this time to hange his surname Bubeta.

Again, Angel filed a noti e of dismissal after the publi ation. 4his time, however, the ourt issued anorder, 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 tospe ial pro eedings.

( ) %o, sin e hange of name does not involve publi interest and the rules should beliberally onstrued.

( ) "es, sin e the rule on dismissal of a tion upon the plaintiff8s noti e applies and thetwo ases involve a hange in name.

(9*) A omplaint without the re&uired verifi ation

(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 ule 29.

($) petition for review on ertiorari filed with the ourt of Appeals under ule 2 .

( ) appeal to the Supreme ourt under ule 92.


15/25

( ) spe ial ivil a tion of ertiorari under ule *9 filed with the Supreme ourt.

(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 theirlate parents to ma7e it appear that they sold the land to her when they did not, thus pre#udi ing $etty8slegitime. Sigma moved to dismiss the a tion on the ground that the dispute should be resolved in theestate pro eedings. 5s Sigma orre t!

(A) "es, &uestions of ollation should be resolved in the estate pro eedings, not in aseparate ivil ase.

($) %o, sin e &uestions of ownership of property annot be resolved in the estatepro 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 besuspended 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 preliminaryinvestigation 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.


16/25

(* ) 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 thathe 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 laimin 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 ofimproper venue. After hearing, the ourt denied the motion. 5n his answer, the defendant laimedpres ription of a tion as affirmative defense, iting the date alleged in the omplaint when the ause ofa 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 beforethe 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 hargestwo offenses!

(A) He may be onvi ted only of the more serious offense.


17/25

($) 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 notallowed.

($) 4he ourt in whi h several ases are pending involving ommon &uestions of law andfa 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 notpermissible.

( ) 4he onsolidation of ases is done only for trial purposes and not for appeal.

(*) raud as a ground for new trial must be extrinsi as distinguished from intrinsi . 3hi h of thefollowing onstitutes extrinsi fraud!

(A) ollusive suppression by plaintiff8s ounsel of a material eviden e vital to his ause ofa tion.

($) se of per#ured testimony at the trial.

( ) 4he defendant8s fraudulent representation that aused damage to the plaintiff.

( ) se of falsified do uments during the trial.

(; ) pon review, the Se retary of =usti e ordered the publi prose utor to file a motion to withdraw theinformation for estafa against Sagun for la 7 of probable ause. 4he publi prose utor omplied. 5s thetrial 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.


18/25

( ) %o, sin e the ourt has the power after the ase is filed to itself determine probableause.

( ) "es, sin e the de ision of the Se retary of =usti e in riminal matters is binding onourts.

(;1) nexplained or un#ustified non@#oinder in the omplaint of a ne essary party despite ourt orderresults 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 thatnature.

($) 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, isonsidered dead for purposes of su ession.

(;-)


19/25

(A) in riminal ases, the a used may prove his good moral hara ter if pertinent to themoral trait involved in the offense harged.

($) in riminal ases, the prose ution may prove the bad moral hara ter of the a usedto 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 therule providing for shortened pro edure in ad#udi ating laims that do not ex eed +1 , . . F filed hisa 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.

(;) 4he information harges +%+ hief Cuis Santos, (Salary :rade


20/25

($) Sandiganbayan or egional 4rial ourt

( ) Sandiganbayan or ourt 0artial

( ) egional 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 byprior #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 #udgmentpre 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.

(


21/25

($) 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 inuse.

( ) 4he ourt shall va ate the #udgment as well as the entire pro eedings had in the

ase.

(


22/25

( ) 4he disallowan e of an appeal.

(


23/25

(> ) 5n pro eedings for the settlement of the estate of de eased persons, the ourt in whi h the a tion ispending may properly

(A) pass upon &uestion of ownership of a real property in the name of the de eased butlaimed 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 thede eased.

( ) res ind a ontra t of lease entered into by the de eased before death on the groundof 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 ofivil pro edure fix!

(A) 5n ase of litigation arising from this ontra t of sale, the preferred venue shall be inthe proper ourts of 0a7ati.

($) Should the real owner su eed in re overing his stolen ar from buyer F, the lattershall 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 theproper 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 towithdraw 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 tto ourt attendan e.


24/25

( ) "es, sin e the a used has brea hed its agreement with the surety ompany.

(>*) 4o prove that Susan stabbed her husband 6lmer, i o testified that he heard Ceon running down thestreet, shouting ex itedly, Sinasa7sa7 daw ni Susan ang asawa niyaK (5 heard that Susan is stabbing herhusbandK) 5s Ceon's statement as narrated by i 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 4 6 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 andmatters of serious impli ations.

( ) A higher ourt will not entertain dire t re ourse to it if redress an be obtained in theappropriate ourts.

( ) 4he reason for it is the need for higher ourts to devote more time to matters withintheir ex lusive #urisdi tion.

(>>) 3hen may an information be filed in ourt without the preliminary investigation re&uired in theparti 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 ersthat he is waiving his right to preliminary investigation.


25/25

( ) 3hen the a used fails to hallenge the validity of the warrantless arrest at hisarraignment.

( ) 3hen the arresting offi ers ta7e the suspe t before the #udge who issues a detentionorder against him.

(1 ) 5n a ivil a tion involving three separate auses of a tion, the ourt rendered summary #udgment onthe first two auses of a tion and tried the third. After the period to appeal from the summary #udgmentexpired, 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 stillhas 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 isionin the ase.

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

Remedial Law 2011

Documents