Civil Procedure Syllabus FEU Law

FAR EASTERN UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LAW COURSE SYLLABUS Course Title: CIVIL PROCEDURE No. of Units: 4 Semester: 2nd Department/Track: REMEDIAL LAW

Instructor(s): Atty. Axel Rupert M. Cruz

I. COURSE DESCRIPTION AND OBJECTIVES  A study of Rules 1-71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (effective 1 July 1997) . The course starts with a review of the differences between substantive and remedial law, the basic principles of jurisdiction, and the power of the Supreme Court to promulgate the Rules of Court. The course involves the analysis of the relevant rules, jurisprudence, and related laws governing procedure in civil cases, provisional remedies, and special civil actions. Upon completion of the course, students are expected to have a strong fundamental knowledge and understanding of the Rules of Court that will enable them to successfully hurdle the Bar Exams and eventually be capable law practitioners. II.

COURSE OUTLINE and COURSE MATERIALS

 A. Introduction to the Course 1. On April 8, 1997, the SC approved the proposed 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, effective July 1, 1997 2. Court and Judge, distinguished 3. Substantive and Remedial law, distinguished 4. Principle of Judicial Hierarchy 5. Doctrine of non-interference/Doctrine of judicial stability 6. Jurisdiction andVenue, distinguished 7. Kinds of Jurisdiction 8. Requisites for the valid exercise of jurisdiction 9. Jurisdiction of the SC; of the CA; of the RTC; of MeTC, MTC, MCTC, MTCC Required Readings Laws:  Article 8 (§s 1 and 5) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution – re power of the SC to 1. promulgate the Rules of Court Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by Republic Act No. 7691 2. 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure §1(a) 3. Rule of Procedure for Small Claims §s 2 and 4 4. Katarungang Pambarangay Law: P.D. 1508; RA 7160 §399-§422, Book 3, Title 1, 5. Chapter 7 SC Circular No. 09-94, effective 14 June 1994 6. Cases:

1. 2.

Neypes vs. CA, 469 SCRA 633 Pinga vs. Heirs of Santiago, 494 SCRA 393

3. Baritua vs. Mercader, 350 SCRA 86 4. Abrenica vs. Abrenica, G.R. No. 169420, 502 SCRA 614 5. Paloma vs. Mora, 470 SCRA 711 6. Quesada vs. DOJ, 500 SCRA 454 7. Ngo Bun Tiong vs. Judge Sayo, 163 SCRA 237 8. Ella vs. Salonga 35 SCRA 86 9. Villamor vs. Salas, 203 SCRA 540 10. Dela Rosa vs. Roldan, 501 SCRA 34 11. Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy, 23 SCRA 29 12. Calimlim vs. Ramirez, 118 SCRA 399 13. De la Cruz vs. Court of Appeals, 510 SCRA 103 14. Sta. Clara Homeowners vs. Gaston, 374 SCRA 396 15. Sun Insurance Office vs. Asuncion, 170 SCRA 274 16. Ballatan vs. Court of Appeals, App eals, 304 SCRA 34 17. Yuchengco vs. Republic, 333 SCRA 368 18. Vda. De Murga vs. Chan, 25 SCRA 441 (1968) 19. Heirs of Valeriano Concha vs. Spouses Gregorio Lumocso, 540 SCRA 1 20. Agustinvs.Bacalan,135SCRA340 21. Mangaliag vs. Catubig-Pastoral, 474 SCRA 153 22. Sps. Bejer vs. CA, G.R. No. 79404, January 27, 1989 23. Zamora vs. Heirs of Carmen, G.R. No. 146195, November 18, 2004 24. Aquino vs. Abre, February 18, 2008 25. Bañares, et al. vs. Balising, et al, G.R. No. 132624, March 13, 2000 26. Diaz vs. Gestopa, A.M.-MTJ-11-1786, June 22, 2011 B. General Provisions Real Action and Personal Action, distinguished 1. 2.  Action in Personam, Action in Rem, & Action Quasi in Rem, dis tinguished Required Readings Laws: Rule 1 – General Provisions - §1 to §6 Cases:

1. Y u vs. Pacleb, 580 SCRA 197 2. Domagas vs. Jensen, 448 SCRA 663 3. Republic vs. Court of Appeals, 315 SCRA 600 4. Tamano vs. Ortiz, 291 SCRA 584 5. La Tondeña Distillers vs. Ponferrada, 264 SCRA 540 6. Cabutihan vs. Landcenter Construction, 383 SCRA 353 7. Citizen Surety vs. Melencio-Herrera, 38 SCRA 369 8. Go vs. UCPB, G.R. No. 156187, 442 SCRA 264 9. Gochan vs. Gochan 372 SCRA 356 10. Manchester Development Corp. vs. CA, 149 SCRA 562 11. Sun Insurance Office vs. Asuncion, 170 SCRA 274 12. Tacoy vs. RTC of Tagum, 180 SCRA 433 13. AyalaCorp.vs.Madayag, 181 SCRA 687 14. Negros Oriental Planters Association vs. Hon. Presiding Judge of Negros, 575 SCRA575

C. Cause of Action Required Readings Laws: Rule 2– Cause of Action - §1 to §6 Cases:

1. Joseph vs. Bautista, February 23, 1989 2. Monzon vs. Spouses Relova vs. Addio Properties, Inc., 565 SCRA 514 3. Philippine National Construction Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 514 SCRA 569 4. 5. Viewmaster Construction Corporation vs. Roxas, 335 SCRA 540 6. San Lorenzo Village Association, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 288 SCRA 115 7. Zepeda vs. China Banking Corporation, 504 SCRA 126 8. Sea-Land Service, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, 327 SCRA 135 9. Lorbes vs. Court of Appeals, 351 SCRA 716 10. Progressive Development Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 301 SCRA 637 11. Flores vs. Mallare-Philipps, 144 SCRA 377 D. Parties to Civil Actions Required Readings Laws: Rule 3 – Parties to Civil Actions - §1 to §11 1. 2.  Art. 44 of the New Civil Code of the Philippines Cases: 1. Rayo vs. Metrobank, 539 SCRA 571 2. PNB vs. Megaprime Realty, 567 SCRA 633 3. Aguila vs. Court of Appeals, 319 SCRA 345 4. Viason Enterprises vs. CA, 310 SCRA 26 5. Agro-Conglomerates vs. CA, 348 SCRA 450 6. Co vs. Acosta, 134 SCRA 185 7. Samaniego vs. Aguila, 334 SCRA 438 8. Domingo vs. Scheer, 421 SCRA 468 9. Plasabas vs. Court of Appeals, 582 SCRA 686 10. Erna Casals, et al vs. Tayud Golf and Country Club, 593 SCRA 468 11. Senator Pimentel, et al vs. Senate Committee, G.R. No. 187714, March 8, 2011 12. Kilosbayan vs. Guingona, G.R. No. 113375, May 5, 1994 13. Velarde vs. Social Justice Society, G.R. No. 159357, April 8, 2004 E. Parties to Civil Actions Required Readings Laws: Rule 3 – Parties to Civil Actions - §12 to §22 1. Cases: 1. Mathay vs. Consolidated Bank and Trust Co., 58 SCRA 559 2. Ortigas & Co. vs. Ruiz, 148 SCRA 326

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 2008

Newsweek vs. IAC, 142 SCRA 171 Sulo ng Bayan vs. Araneta, 72 SCRA 347 Aguas vs. Llamas, 5 SCRA 959 Board of Liquidators vs. Kalaw, 20 SCRA 987 Spouses Algura vs. City of Naga, 506 SCRA 81 White vs. City of Manila, 576 SCRA 416, January 20, 2009 Province of North Cotabato vs. GRP Peace Panel on Ancestral Domain, October 14,

F. Venue of Actions Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule4 –VenueofActions-§1to§4 Rule 110, §15, Rules on Criminal Procedure 2. §5 R.A. No. 8369 (Family Courts Act) 3. §4, A.M. No. 02-11-10-SC 4. §2(c), A.M. No. 02-11-11-SC 5. Cases: 1. Nocum vs. Tan, 470 SCRA 639 2. Dacoycoy vs. IAC, G.R. No. 74854, April 2, 1991 3. United Overseas Bank Phils. Vs. Rosemoore Mining, 518 SCRA 123 4. Polytrade Corporation vs. Blanco, 30 SCRA 187 5. Anita Mangila vs. Court of Appeals, 387 SCRA 162 6. Spouses Lantin vs. Lantion, 499 SCRA 718 7. Sweetlines vs. Teves, May 19, 1978 8. Unimasters Conglomeration, Inc. vs. CA, 267 SCRA 759 9. Pacific Consultants vs. Schonfeld, 516 SCRA 209 10. Hyatt Elevators vs. Goldstar Elevators, G.R. No. 161026, October 24, 2005 G. Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts and Kinds of Pleadings Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 5 – Uniform Procedure in Trial Courts - §1 and §2 2. Rule 6 – Kinds of Pleadings - §1 to §13 a. §4 to §6, §9, § 19 to §20 of 1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure b. §5 to §7, §11, §13 to §14 of Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases: 1. International Container Terminal Services, Inc. vs. CA, 214 SCRA 456 2. Metals Engineering Resources Corp. vs. CA, 203 SCRA 273 3. Financial Bldg. Corp. vs. Forbes Park, G.R. No. 133119, August 17, 2000 4. Pinga vs. Heirs of Santiago, G.R. No. 170354, 494 SCRA 393 5. Santo Tomas University Hospital vs. Surla, 294 SCRA 382 6. Torres vs. CA, G.R. No. L-25889, January 17, 1973, 49 SCRA 674 7. Anaya vs. Palaroa, 36 SCRA 97 (1970) 8. Balbastro, et al. vs. CA, 48 SCRA 232 (1972) 9. Rubio vs. Mariano, 52 SCRA 338 (1973)

10. Mercader vs. DBP (Cebu Branch), 332 SCRA 82 H. Parts of Pleadings Required Readings Laws: Rule 7 – Parts of Pleadings - §1 to §5 1. Resolution of the Supreme Court En Banc dated June 3, 2008 (Bar Matter 1922) 2. Cases: 1. Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank vs. Court of Appeals, 332 SCRA 241 2. Gochan vs. Gochan, 372 SCRA 256 3. Republic vs. Kenrick Development Corp., 498 SCRA 220, August 8, 2006 4. Argallon-Jocson and Tusing vs. CA, 594 SCRA 343 5. Vicar International Construction vs. FEB leasing and Finance, 456 SCRA 588 6. Robern Development Corp vs. Quitain, 315 SCRA 150 7. Maranaw Hotels and Resort Corp vs. CA, 575 SCRA 463 8. Huibonhoa vs. Concepcion, 497 SCRA 562 9. San Miguel Corporation vs. Aballa, 461 SCRA 392 10. National Steel Corporation vs. CA, 388 SCRA 85 11. Vallacar Transit, Inc. vs. Jocelyn Catubig, G.R. No. 17752 12. Vda. De Hermoso vs. PNB, June 1, 2011 I. Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings Required Readings Laws: Rule 8 – Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings - §1 to §12 1. Cases: 1. Cañete vs. Genuino Ice Co., 542 SCRA 206 2. La Mallorca vs. Court of Appeals, 17 SCRA 729 3. Toribio vs. Bidin, 134 SCRA 162 4. Imperial Textile Mills vs. CA, 183 SCRA 584 5. Hibberd vs. Rhode 32 Phil 476 6. Central Surety and Insurance Co. vs. Hodges, 38 SCRA 159 7. Guevarra vs. Eala, 529 SCRA 1 8. Philippine American General Insurance Co. et al vs. Sweet Lines, 212 SCRA 194  J. Effect of Failure to Plead and When to File Responsive Pleadings Required Readings Laws: Rule 9 – Effect of Failure to Plead - §1 to §3 1. Rule 11 – When to file Responsive Pleadings - §1 to §11 2. Cases: Rule 9 1. Ferrer vs. Ericta, 84 SCRA 705 2. Garcia vs. Mathis, 100 SCRA 250 3. Pinga vs. Heirs of Santiago, 494 SCRA 393

4. Ponciano vs. Parentela, 331 SCRA 605, May 9, 2000 5. Gojo vs. Goyala, 35 SCRA 557 6. Liam Law vs. Olympic Sawmill CO. And Elino Lee Chi, G.R. No. L-30771, May 28, 1984 7. Meliton vs. CA, 216 SCRA 485 8. Korea Technologies Co. Ltd. Vs. Lerma, 542 SCRA 1 9. Cavili vs. Florendo, 154 SCRA 610 10. Gajudo vs. Traders Royal Bank, 485 SCRA 108 11. Pascua vs. Florendo, 136 SCRA 208 12. Laus vs. CA, 219 SCRA 688 13. Philippine British Co. Inc. vs. delos Angeles, 63 SCRA 50 14. De Guia vs. De Guia, 356 SCRA 287 15. Lina vs. Court of Appeals, 35 SCRA 637 16. Torres vs. CA, 49 SCRA 67 17. Lorbes vs. CA, 351 SCRA 716 Rule 11 1. Naga Development Corporation vs. CA, 41 SCRA 105 2. Amante vs. Sunga, 64 SCRA 192 3. Sarmiento vs. Juan, 120 SCRA 403 4. Barraza vs. Campos, 120 SCRA 881 5. Luna vs. Mirafuente, A.M. No. MTJ-05-1610, September 26, 2005

K. Amended and Supplemental Pleadings Required Readings Laws: Rule 10 – Amended and Supplemental Pleadings - §1 to §8 Cases: 1. Paeste vs. Jaurigue, 94 Phil 179 2. Bautista vs. Maya-Maya Cottages, Inc., 476 SCRA 416 3. Alpine Lending Investors vs. Corpuz, 508 SCRA 45 4. Siasoco vs. CA, 303 SCRA 186 5. Philippine Ports Authority vs. WG&A, January 28, 2008 6. Campos Rueda vs. Bautista, 6 SCRA 240 7. Gumabay vs. Baralin, 77 SCRA 258 8. Azola Farms vs. CA, 442 SCRA 133 9. Verzosa vs. CA, 299 SCRA 100 10. Swagman Hotels and Travel, Inc. vs. CA, 455 SCRA 175 11. Magaspi vs. Ramolete, 115 SCRA 193 12. Mercader vs. DBP (Cebu Branch), 332 SCRA 82 13. Youngvs.SpousesSy, 503 SCRA 151 L. Bill of Particulars Required Readings Laws: Rule 12 – Bill of Particulars - §1 to §6

Cases: 1. Go Occo & Co vs. De La Costa, 63 Phil 445 2. Santos vs. Liwag, 101 SCRA 327 3. Filipinas Fabricators & Sales Inc. vs. Magsino, 157 SCRA 467 4. Dumanon vs. Butuan City Rural Bank, 119 SCRA 193 5. Baritua vs. Mercader, 350 SCRA 86 M. Filing and Service of Pleadings, etc. Required Readings Laws: Rule 13 – Filing and Service of Pleadings, etc. - §1 to §14 1. §1 Rule 26 2. Cases: 1. De Los Santos vs. Elizalde, 514 SCRA 14 2. De Leon vs. CA, 383 SCRA 216 3. Duque vs. CA, G.R. No. 125383, July 2, 2002 4. PHHC vs. Tiongco, 12 SCRA 471 5. Marinduque Mining and Industrial Corp. vs. NAPOCOR, 567 SCRA 483 6. United Pulp and Paper co. Inc. vs. United Pulp and Paper Chapter-Federation of Free  Workers, 426 SCRA 329, G.R. No. 141117, March 25, 2004 7. MC Engineering, Inc. vs. NLRC, 360 SCRA 183 8. Aberca, et al vs. Ver, G.R. No. 166216, March 14, 2012 9. Alberto vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119088, June 30, 2000 10. Romero vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 142406, May 16, 2005 N. Summons Required Readings Laws: Rule 14 – Summons - §1 to §10 1. 2.  Administrative Circular No. 59-SC, November 19, 1989 Cases: 1. Umandap vs. Sabio, 339 SCRA 243 2. Biaco vs. Philippine Countryside Rural Bank, 515 SCRA 106 3. Toyota Cubao, Inc. vs. CA, 281 SCRA 198 4. PCIBank vs. Alejandro, 533 SCRA 738 5. Vlasons enterprises vs. CA, 310 SCRA 26 6. Pagalaran vs. Bal-latan, 13 Phil 135 7. Ong Peng vs. Custodio, 1 SCRA 780 or 13 Phil 135 8. Atkins, Kroll, and Co. vs. Domingo, 44 Phil 680 9. Bello vs. Ubo, G.R. No. L-30353, September 30, 1982 10. Filmerco Commercial Co. Inc. vs. IAC, 149 SCRA 194 11. Laus vs. CA, 219 SCRA 688 12. De Leon vs. Hontanosas, 67 SCRA 458 13. Carriaga vs. Malaya, 143 SCRA 441 14. Ablazavs.CIR,126 SCRA 254

O. Summons Required Readings Laws: Rule 14 – Summons - §11-§20 1. Cases: 1. Delta Motor Sales Corp. vs. Mangosing, 70 SCRA 598 2. E.B. Villarosa vs. Benito, 312 SCRA 65 3. Paramount Insurance Corp. vs. AC Ordoñez Corp., 561 SCRA 327 4. Litton Mills, Inc. vs. CA, 256 SCRA 696 5. Wang Laboratories vs. Mendoza, 156 SCRA 44 6. Sahagun vs. CA, 198 SCRA 44 7. Velayo-Fong vs. Spouses Velayo, 510 SCRA 320 8. Jose vs. Boyon, 414 SCRA 216 9. La Naval Drug Corp vs. CA, 236 SCRA 78 10. Boticano vs. Chu, 148 SCRA 541 11. Cezar vs. Ricafort-Bautista, 506 SCRA 322 12. UCPB vs. Ongpin, 368 SCRA 464 13. HSBC vs. Catalan, G.R. No 159590-1, October 18, 2004 14. Santos vs. PNOC Exploration Corporation, G.R. No. 170943, September 23, 2008 15. PCIB vs. Spouses Wilson Dy Hong Pi et al, G.R. No. 171137, June 5, 2009 16. NM Rothschild & Sons vs. Lepanto Consolidated Mining Company, G.R. No. 175799, November 28, 2011 P. Motions Required Readings Laws: Rule 15 – Motions - §1 to §10 §3, Cases: 1. Cledera vs. Sarmiento, 39 SCRA 552 2. Vette Industrial Sales, Co., Inc. vs. Cheng, G.R.No. 170232-170301, December 5, 2006 3. Boiser vs. Aguirre, Jr., 458 SCRA 430 4. Andrada vs. CA, 60 SCRA 379 5. Supreme Investment Corp. vs. Engineering Equipment, Inc, April 11, 1972 6. Davao Light & Power vs. CA, 204 SCRA 343 7. Sarmiento vs. Zaratan, 514 SCRA 246 8. Tuazon & Co. vs. Magdangal, 4 SCRA 84 (1962) 9. Azajar vs. CA, 145 SCRA 333 Q. Motion to Dismiss Required Readings Laws: Rule 16 – Motion to Dismiss - §1 to §6 1. Cases: 1. De Dios vs. Bristol Laboratories, 55 SCRA 349 2. Dalandan vs. Julio, 10 SCRA 400

3. Marcopper Mining vs. Garcia, 143 SCRA 178 4. La Naval Drug Corp. vs. CA, 236 SCRA 78 5. Toyota Cubao vs. CA, 281 SCRA 198 6. Duero vs. CA, 373 SCRA 11 7. Leviton Industries vs. Salvador, 114 SCRA 420 8. Valencia vs. CA, 263 SCRA 275 9. Pacsports Phils., Inc. vs. Niccolo Sports, G.R. No. 141602, November 22, 2001 10. Linzag vs. CA, 291 SCRA 304 11. Hacienda Bigaa, Inc. vs. Chavez, G.R. No. 174160, April 20, 2010 12. Fels Energy Inc. vs. Province of Batangas, G.R. No. 168557, February 19, 2007 13. Sempio vs. CA, 284 SCRA 580 R. Motion to Dismiss Required Readings Laws: Rule 16 – Motion to Dismiss - §1 to §6 Cases: 1. De Los Reyes vs. CA, 285 SCRA 705 2. Aznar vs. Bernad, 161 SCRA 276 3. Landayan vs. Bacani, 117 SCRA 117 4. Dulay vs. CA, 243 SCRA 5. Suyom vs. Collantes, 69 SCRA 514 6. Tan vs. Director of Forestry, 125 SCRA 302 7. Peregrina vs. Panis, 133 SCRA 729 8. Pineda vs. CFI, 111 Phil 643 (1961) 9. Y uvienco vs. Dacuycuy, 104 SCRA 668 10. Bank of America vs. CA, 400 SCRA 156 11. AssociatedBankvs.SpousesMontano, 604 SCRA 134 12. Lu Ym vs. Gertrudes Nabua, 452 SCRA 298 S. Dismissal of Actions Required Readings Laws: Rule 17 – Dismissal of Actions - §1 to §4 Cases: 1. Republic Planters Bank vs. Molina, 166 SCRA 36 2. PCI Leasing Finance, Inc. vs. Milan, 617 SCRA 258 3. Meliton vs. CA, 216 SCRA 485 4. Pinga vs. Heirs of Santiago, 494 SCRA 393  T. Pre-Trial Required Readings Laws: Rule 18 – Pre-Trial - §1 to §7 1. §7 and §8, Rule on Summary Procedure 2. §18 Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases 3.

4. 5.

 Admin. Circular No. 03-1-09-SC (July 13, 2004) OCA Circular 51-2011 CAM/JDR

Cases: 1. Martinez vs. De La Merced, 174 SCRA 182 2. Sarmiento vs. Juan, 120 SCRA 403 3. Paredes vs. Verano, 504 SCRA 264 4. Tria vs. Lirag, G.R. No. L-13994, April 29, 1961 5. Zagala vs. Jimenez, 152 SCRA 147 6. Mercader vs. DBP (Cebu Branch), 332 SCRA 82 U. Intervention Required Readings Laws: Rule 19 – Intervention - §1 to §4 Cases: 1. Mactan Cebu International vs. Heirs of Minoza, February 2, 2011 2. Big Country Ranch Corp vs. CA, 227 SCRA 161 3. Barangay Matictic vs. Elbinias, 148 SCRA 83 4. MBTC vs. Presiding Judge, G.R. No. 89909, September 21, 1990 5. Batama Farmer’s Cooperative Marketing vs. Rosal, 42 SCRA 408 6. Magsaysay-Labrador vs. CA, 180 SCRA 266 7. Looyuko vs. CA, G.R. No. 102696, July 12, 2001 8. Bon-Mar Realty vs. de Guzman, G.R. No. 182136, August 29, 2008 9. Executive Secretary vs. Northeast Freight, 581 SCRA 76  V. Calendar of Cases, Subpoena, and Computation of Time Required Readings Laws: Rule 20 – Calendar of Cases - §1 to §2 1. Rule 21 – Subpoena - §1 to §10 2. Rule 22 – Computation of Time - §1 to §2 3. Cases: 1. People vs. Montejo, 21 SCRA 722 2. Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Primetown Property, 531 SCRA 436  W. Depositions Pending Action and Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 23 – Depositions Pending Action - §1 to §29 2. Rule 24 – Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal - §1 to §7 Cases: 1. Fortune Corporation vs. CA, G.R. No. 108119, January 19, 1994 2. Koh vs, IAC, September 23, 1986 3. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, November 21, 1991

4. 5. 6. 7.

Camus de Lopez vs. Maceren, August 31, 1954, 95 Phil 753 Caguiat vs. Torres, 30 SCRA 106 Dasmarinas Garments Inc. vs. Reyes, 225 SCRA 622 Cariaga vs. CA, 358 SCRA 583

X. Interrogatories to Parties, Admission by Adverse Party, Production or Inspection of Documents or Things, Physical and Mental Examination of Persons, and Refusal to Comply with Modes of Discovery Required Readings Laws: Rule 25 – Interrogatories to Parties - §1 to §5 1. Rule 26 – Admission By Adverse Party - §1 to §5 2. Rule 27 – Production or Inspection of Documents or Things - §1 3. Rule 28 – Physical and Mental Examination of Persons - §1 to §4 4. Rule 29 – Refusal to Comply with Modes of Discovery - §1 to §6 5. Cases: 1. Marcelo vs. Sandiganbayan, 531 SCRA 385 2. Arellano vs. CFI of Sorsogon, G.R. No. L-34897, July 15, 1975, 65 SCRA 46 3. Uy Chao vs. De La Rama Steamship, 6 SCRA 69 4. DBP vs. CA, 470 SCRA 317 5. Nestle Phils., Inc. vs. CA, 375 SCRA 543 6. PNB vs. Gancayco, 15 SCRA 91 7. Air Philippines Corp. vs Pennswell, 540 SCRA 215 8. Zepeda vs. China Banking Corp., 504 SCRA 126  Y . Trial, Consolidation, Trial by Commissioner, and Demurrer to Evidence Required Readings Laws: Rule30–Trial-§1to§9 1. Rule 31 – Consolidation §1 to §2 2. Rule 32 – Trial by Commissioner - §1 to §13 3. Rule 33 – Demurrer to Evidence - §1 4. Cases: 1. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154, November 18, 2003 2. Y u vs. Mapayo, 44 SCRA 163 3. Sarmiento vs. Juan, 120 SCRA 403 4. People vs. Mazo, G.R. No. 136869, October 17, 2001 5. Lopez vs. Liboro, 81 Phil 429 (1948) 6. Salazar vs. CFI of Laguna, 64 Phil 785 7. Superlines Trans. Co. vs. Victor, 124 SCRA 939 8. Aljem’s Corp vs. CA, G.R. No. 122216, March 28, 2001 9. Northwest Airlines, Inc. vs. CA, 284 SCRA 408 10. Radiowealth Finance Corp. vs. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 138739 11. David et al vs. Rivera, G.R. Nos. 139913 & 140159, January 16, 2004 12. Choa vs. Choa, G.R. No. 143376, November 26, 2002

Z. Judgment on the Pleadings and Summary Judgments Required Readings Laws: Rule 34 – Judgment on the Pleadings - §1 1. Rule 35 – Summary Judgments - §1 to §6 2. Cases: 1. Sy Quia et al vs. Marsman, March 1, 1968 2. Meneses vs. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, 505 SCRA 90 3. Hontiveros vs. RTC of Iloilo, 309 SCRA 340 4. Bitanga vs. Pyramid Construction, 565 SCRA 544 5. Asian Development vs. PCI Bank, April 25, 2006 6. Ontimare, Jr. vs. Elep, 479 SCRA 257 7. Diman vs. Alumbres, 299 SCRA 459 8. Pineda vs. Heirs of Guevara, 515 SCRA 627 9. Bungcayao vs. Fort Ilocandia, G.R. No. 170483, April 19, 2010 10. Velasquez vs. CA, 309 SCRA 539 11. Narra Integrated Corp. vs. CA, 344 SCRA 781 12. Calubaquib vs. Republic, G.R. No. 170658, June 22, 2011  AA. Judgment, Final Orders and Entry Thereof Required Readings Laws: Rule 36 – Judment, Final Orders and Entry Thereof - §1 to §6 1. §13 to §14, Art. VIII, 1987 Philippine Constitution 2. Cases: 1. Acosta vs. Comelec, 293 SCRA 578 2. Ting vs. Velez-Ting, G.R. No. 166562, March 31, 2009 3. San Pedro vs. Binaloy, August 25, 2005 4. Ram’s Studio vs. CA, 346 SCRA 691 5. People vs. Escoder, 157 SCRA 541 6. Barrera vs. Militante, 114 SCRA 323 7. Smith Bell & Co. vs. CA, May 20, 1991 8. Lizardo vs. Montana, 332 SCRA 163 9. Equatorial Realty vs. Mayfair Theater, 332 SCRA 139 10. Salvador vs. Ortoll, 343 SCRA 658 11. De Leon vs. CA, 383 SCRA 216 12. Manning International Corp. vs. NLRC, March 13, 1991 13. Briones-Vasquez vs. CA, 450 SCRA 482 14. Lacurom vs. Tienzo, 535 SCRA 253 15. Nazareno vs. CA, 378 SCRA 28 16. People vs. Escalante, 131 SCRA 237 17. Candano vs. Candano, 151 SCRA 147 18. dela Merced vs. GSIS, G.R. No 167140, November 22, 2011 19. Peña vs. GSIS, Sept. 19, 2006 20. Sacdalan vs. CA, G.R. no. 128967, May 20, 2004

BB. New Trial or Reconsideration and Relief from Judgments, Orders, and Other Proceedings Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 37 – New Trial or Reconsideration - §1 to §9 2. Rule 38 – Relief from Judgments, Orders, or Other Proceedings - §1 to §7 Cases: 1. Neypes vs. CA, 469 SCRA 633 2. Dacanay vs. Alvendia, 30 SCRA 31 3. BA Finance Corp. vs. Pineda, December 29, 1982 4. Lucas vs. Fabros, 324 SCRA 1 5. Habaluyas Enterprises vs. Japson, 142 SCRA 208 6. Cansino vs. CA, 409 SCRA 403 7. Magno vs. CA, 107 SCRA 819 8. Conde vs. IAC, 144 SCRA 144 9. Salazar vs. Salazar, 8 Phil 183 10. Ayllon vs. Sevilla, 156 SCRA 257 11. National Shipyards & Steel Corp vs. Asuncion, 103 Phil 630 12. Uy vs. First Metro Integrated Steel, September 27, 2006 13. Amil vs. CA, October 7, 1999 14. Ganaban vs. Boyle, 30 SCRA 365 15. Sayman vs. CA, February 21, 1983 16. Purcon, Jr. vs. MRM Philippines, Inc et al, G.R. No. 182718, September 26, 2008 17.Yusuke Fukuzumi vs. Sanritsu Great International Corp et al, G.R. No. 140630, August 12, 2004 18. Servicewide Specialist vs. Sheriff of Manila, G.R. No. 74586, October 17, 1986 19. PNB vs. Ortiz, May 29, 1987 20. Francisco vs. Puno, 108 SCRA 427 CC. Execution, Satisfaction and Effect of Judgments Required Readings Laws: Rule 39 – Execution, Satisfaction and Effect of Judgements - §1 to §14 1. Cases: 1. Pelejo vs. CA, 116 SCRA 406 2. Napocor vs. Maruhom, 609 SCRA 198 3. Fideldia vs. Songcuan, 465 SCRA 218 4. Fortune Guarantee and Insurance Corp. vs. CA, March 12, 2002 5. Saligumba vs. Palanog, December 4, 2008 6. Y au vs. Silverio, February 4, 2008 7. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 574 SCRA 661 8. Evangelista vs. La Proveedora, 38 SCRA 379 9. Valenzuela vs. de Aguilar, 8 SCRA 212 10. Delta Motors vs. CA, 168 SCRA 206 11. Philippine Surety and Insurance Co. vs. Zabal, 21 SCRA 682 12. De Leon vs. Salvador, 35 SCRA 567

13. Ong vs. Tating, 149 SCRA 265 14. China Banking Corp. vs. Ortega, 49 SCRA 355 15. PNB vs. Pabalan, 83 SCRA 595 16. City of Naga vs. Asuncion, 557 SCRA 528 DD. Execution, Satisfaction and Effect of Judgments Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 39 – Execution, Satisfaction and Effect of Judgments - §15 to §48 2.  Art. 1491 Civil Code of the Philipines Cases: 1. Tan vs. Court of Appeals, 162 SCRA 237 2. Tambunting vs. CA, 167 SCRA 16 3. Sy, et. al vs. Discaya, G.R. No. 86301, January 23, 1990 4. Ching vs. CA, February 23, 2004 5. Traders Royal Bank vs. IAC, 133 SCRA 141 6. De Leon vs. Salvador, 36 SCRA 567 7. Iligan Bay Manufacturing Corp. vs. Dy, 524 SCRA 55 8. Palicte vs. Ramolete, 154 SCRA 132 9. Olego vs. rebuena, 67 SCRA 446 10. Roxas vs. Buan, 167 SCRA 43 11. Bermudez vs. Gonzales, 347 SCRA 611 12. Asiavest Merchant Bankers vs. CA, July 20, 2001 13. Mijares vs. Ranada, April 12, 2005 14. De Sayman vs. CA, 121 SCRA 651 15. Premiere Development Bank vs. Flores, 574 SCRA 66 16. Reburiano vs. CA, 301 SCRA 342 17. Salvante vs. Cruz, 88 Phil 236 18. Cobb-Perez vs. Lantin, 23 SCRA 637 19. Silverio et al vs. Filpino Business Consultants Inc, G.R. No. 143312, August 12, 2005 EE. Appeals Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 40 – Appeal from Municipal Trial Courts to the Regional Trial Courts - §1 to §9 2. Rule 41- Appeal from the Regional Trial Courts - §1 to §13 3. Rule 42 – Petition for Review from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals - §1 to § 9 Rule 43 – Appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals and Quasi-Judicial Agencies to the 4. Court of Appeals - §1 to §13 5. Rule 44 – Ordinary Appealed Cases - §1 to §15 6. Rule 45 – Appeal by Certiorari to the Supreme Court - §1 to §9 Cases: 1. Espina vs. CA, 215 SCRA 489 2. Neplum vs. Orbeso, 384 SCRA 466

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.

Caliwan vs. Ocampo, 579 SCRA 500 Cheesman vs. IAC, 193 SCRA 93 Encarnacion vs. Amigo, 502 SCRA 172 Ortigas & Co. Ltd. Vs. Velasco, 277 SCRA 342 Bugarin vs. Palisoc, December 2, 2005 Carpol vs. Sulu Resource Development Corp., August 8, 2002 St. Martin Funeral Homes vs. NLRC, 295 SCRA 494 CebuWomen’sClubvs.DeLaVictoria,327SCRA533 People vs. Espinosa, August 15, 2003 Salvador vs. MApa, November 28, 2007 Habaluyas Enterprises vs. Japson, 142 SCRA 208 Catholic Bishop of Balanga vs. CA, G.R. No. 112519, November 14, 1996 Capacete vs. Baroro, G.R. No. 154184, July 8, 2003

FF. Original Cases, Annulment of Judgment or Final Orders and Resolutions, Preliminary Conference, Oral Argument, Dismissal of Appeal, Judgment, Motion for Reconsideration, New Trial, Internal Business (CA), Publication of Judgments and Final Resolutions (CA), and Original and Appealed Cases (SC) Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 46 – Original Cases - §1 to §7 2. Rule 47 – Annulment of Judgment or Final Orders and Resolutions - §1 to §10 3. Rule 48 - Preliminary Conference - §1 to §3 4. Rule 49 – Oral Argument - §1 to §3 5. Rule 50 – Dismissal of Appeal - §1 to §3 6. Rule 51 – Judgment - §1 to §11 7. Rule 52 – Motion for Reconsideration - § to §4 8. Rule53–NewTrial-§to§4 9. Rule 54 – Internal Business (CA)- §1 to §2 10. Rule 55 – Publication of Judgments and Final Resolution (CA)- §1 to §3 11. Rule 56 – Original and Appealed Cases (SC) - §1 to §7

 Article VIII, §s 4,13,14, 15, 1987 Philippine Constitution  A.M. 10-4-20-SC (May 4, 2010)  Article 8, Civil Code of the Philippines Cases: 1. Guy vs. CA, 539 SCRA 584 2. Molina vs. CA, January 13, 2003 3. NYK International vs. NLRC, February 17, 2003 4. Shipside, Inc. vs. CA, February 20, 2001 5. Vanguard Assurance Corporation vs. CA, 64 SCRA 148 6. Roman Catholic Archbishop vs. CA, June 19, 1991 7. People vs. Jabinal, 55 SCRA 607 8. Navarro vs. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 180050, April12, 2011 9. League of Cities vs. Comelec, G.R. Nos. 176951, 177499, 178056, April 12, 2011 10. Heirs of Maura So vs. Obliosca, 542 SCRA 406 11. Ramos vs. Pepsi Cola, G.R. No. L-22533, February 9, 1967

GG. Preliminary Attachment Required Readings Laws: Rule 57 – Preliminary Attachment  A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC Section 13, Rule 39  Articles 153 and 157, Family Code of the Philippines Cases: 1. Peregrina vs. Panis G.R. No. 56011, October 31, 1984 2. Carpio vs. Macadaeg 9 SCRA 552 (1963) 3. Adyawan vs. T orres, July 5, 1994 4. Aboitiz & Co. vs. Provincial Sheriff L-35990, June 17, 1981 5. Filinvest Credit Corp. vs. Relova G.R. No. 50378, September 30, 1982 6. Davao Light and Power vs. Court of Appeals, November 29, 1991 7. Oñate vs. Abrogar G.R. No. 107491, February 23, 1995 8. Mangila vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 125027, August 12, 2002 9. Uy vs. Court of Appeals 191 SCRA 275 (1990) 10. Calderon vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, November 11, 1987 11. National Bureau of Investigation vs. Tuliao A.M. P-96-1184, March 24, 1997 12. Escovilla vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 84497, November 6, 1989 13. Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation vs. Yllas Lending Corp. G.R. No. 158997, October 6, 2008 14. Pioneer Insurance & Surety vs. Hontanosas L-35951, August 31, 1977 15. Lucila Magaling et. al., vs. Peter Ong G.R. No. 17333, August 13, 2008 16. Consolidated Bank vs. IAC, G.R. No. 73976, May 29, 1982 17. Carlos vs. Sandoval 471 SCRA 266, November 9, 1977 18. Spouses Yu vs. Ngo Yee Te G.R. No. 155868, February 6, 2007 19. Leelin Marketing Corp. vs. IES Agro Development Co. L-38971, April 28, 1983 HH. Preliminary Injunction Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 58 – Preliminary Injunction 2. §. 9(1) B.P . Blg. 129 3. A.M. 99-10-5-0 4. P .D. 1818 5. P .D. 605 6. Republic Act No. 8975 (November 7, 2000) 7. R.A. No. 7653, §25 Cases: 1. Estares vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 144755, June 8, 2005 2. Mabuyo Farms Inc. vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 140058, August 1, 2002 3. China Banking Corporation vs. Co G.R. No. 174569, September 17, 2008 4. Light Rail Transit Authority vs. Court of Appeals, Novemebr 25, 2004 5. Bacolod City Water District vs. Labayen 446 SCRA 110, December 10, 2004

6. Roman Catholic Archbishop of San Fernando Pampanga vs. Soriano, et al, G.R. No. 153829 and G.R. No. 160909, August 17, 2011 7. Medina vs. Judge Canon, A.M. RTJ-11-298, February 22, 2012 8. Ortigas vs. CA G.R. No. 79128, June 16, 1983 9. Merville Park Homeowners vs. Velez G.R. No. 82985, April 22, 1991 10. Buyco vs. Baraquia, G.R. No. 177486, December 21, 2009 11. Heirs of the late J.B.L. Reyes vs. CA 338 SCRA 282 12. Philippine National Bank vs. Ritratto Group, July 31, 2001 13. Brocka vs. Enrile 192 SCRA 182 14. Medina vs. Greenfield Development G.R. No. 140228, November 19, 2004 15. China Banking Corp vs. CA, December 5, 1996 16. Hutchinson Ports Phils. vs. SBMA, August 31, 2000 17. Nische vs. Equitable-PCI Bank, February 19, 2007 18. Director of the Bureau of Telecommunications vs. Aligaen L-31135, May 29, 1970 19. Aquinovs.SocorroG.R.No.23868,October22,1970 20. Zuño vs. Cabredo, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1779, 402 SCRA 75 21. Filipino Metals, Corp vs. Secretary of DTI, G.R. No. 157498, July 15, 2005 II. Receivership, Replevin, Support Pendente Lite, Interpleader, Declaratory Relief, and Review of Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions of the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 59 – Receivership 2. Rule 60 – Replevin 3. Rule 61 – Support Pendente Lite a. Articles 194, 195, 201, 202, Family Code of the Philippines b.  A.M. No. 02-11-12-SC 4. Rule 62 – Interpleader 5. Rule 63 – Declaratory Relief 6. Rule 64 - Review of Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions of the Commission on Elections and the Commission on Audit Cases: Receivership 1. Normandy vs. Duque 29 SCRA 385 (1969) 2. Commodities Storage vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. 125008, June 19, 1997 3. De Los Reyes vs. Hon Bayona, March 29, 1960 4. National Investment and Development Corp vs. Judge Aquino 163 SCRA 153, June 30, 1988 5. Dolor vs. Sindiam L-27631, April 30, 1971 6. Traders Royal Bank vs. Intermediate Appellate Court 273 SCRA 521, June 17, 1997 Replevin  Yang vs. Valdez 177 SCRA 141, August 31, 1989 Filinvest Credit Corp vs. CA, September 27, 1995  Adoma vs. Gatcheco 448 SCRA 299, January 27, 2005

Paat vs. CA 266 SCRA 167, January 16, 1997 Citibank vs. CA 304 SCRA 679, March 17, 1999 Fernandez et al vs. International Corporate Bank G.R. No. 131283, October 7, 1999 Citibank vs. CA 304 SCRA 679, March 17, 1999 Support Pendente Lite 1. Reyes vs. Ines-Luciano G.R. No. L-48219, February 28, 1979 2. Lam vs. Chua G.R. No. 131286, March 18, 2004 3. Calderon vs. Roxas, G.R. No. 185595, January 9, 2013 Interpleader 1. Ocampo vs. Tirona G.R. No. 147812, April 6, 2005 2. Wack Wack Golf and Country Club vs. Lee E. Won, G.R. No. L-23851, 30 SCRA 165 Declaratory Relief 1. DBM vs. Manila’s Finest Retirees Association, G.R. No. 169446, May 9, 2007 2. Tano vs. Socrates G.R. No. 110249, August 14, 1997 3. Martelino vs. NHMF Corp. G.R. No. 160208, June 30, 2008 4. Singson vs. Republic, January 30, 1968 5. De la Llana vs. COMELEC, December 9, 1977 6. Velasco vs. Villegas G.R. No. L-24153, February 14, 1983

 JJ. Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus Required Readings Laws:

Rule 65 – Certiorari, Prohibition, and Mandamus Cases: Certiorari 1. Balba vs. Peak Development Inc et al G.R. No. 148288, August 12, 2005 2. New frontier Sugar Corp vs. RTC of Iloilo G.R. No. 165001, January 31, 2007 3. Camutin vs. Sps Potente G.R. No. 181642, January 29, 2009 4. Bugarin vs. Palisoc G.R. No. 157985, December 2, 2005 5. Lalican vs. Vergara 276 SCRA 518, July 31, 1997 6. Dillena vs. CA G.R. No. 77660, July 28, 1988 7. Indian Aerospace University vs. CHED G.R. No. 139371, April 4, 2001 8. San Pedro vs. CA, August 4, 1994 9. Equitable PCI Bank vs. Ng Shevrig Ngor G.R. No. 171545, December 19, 2007 10. Republic vs. St. Vincent, August 22, 2012 11. Philippine Commercial Industrial Bank vs. Escolin, March 29, 1974 12. Sps. Nische vs. Equitable-PCI Bank G.R. No. 167434, February 19, 2007 13. Matute vs. CA L-26751, January 31, 1969 14. Yauvs.TheManilaBankingCorporation,July11,2002 15. Barrazona vs. RTC of Baguio City, April 7, 2006 16. San Mihuel Corp. vs. Layos, Jr., G.R. No. 149640, October 19, 2007 17. Makabangkil vs. PHHC, 72 SCRA 326 18. Paa vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No 126560, December 4, 1997

Prohibition 1. David vs. Rivera 420 SCRA 90, January 16, 2004 2. Tan et al vs. COMELEC G.R. No. 73155, July 11, 1986  Mandamus 1. Mayuga vs. CA, August 30, 1996 2. Kant Wong et al vs. PCGG G.R. No. 79484, December 7, 1987 3. Uy Kiao Eng vs. Nixon Lee, G.R. No. 176831, January 15, 2010 4. Matibay vs. Garcia, January 25, 1983 5. Paloma vs. Mora, 470 SCRA 711 6. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of Manila Bay, 574 SCRA 661, December 18, 2008

KK . Quo Warranto, Expropriation, Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage, Partition, Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer and Contempt Required Readings Laws: 1. Rule 66 – Quo W arranto 2. Rule 67 – Expropriation 3. Rule 68 – Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage a. A.M. No. 99-10-05-0 (effective March 10, 2007) b.  Act No. 3135 (Extra-judicial Foreclosure) 4. Rule 69 – Partition 5. Rule 70 – Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer 6. Rule 71 - Contempt Cases:  Quo Warranto 1. Municipality of San Narciso vs. Mendez et al 239 SCRA 11, December 6, 1994 2. Tarrosa vs. Singson 232 SCRA 553, May 25, 1994 3. Lota vs. CA 2 SCRA 715, June 30, 1961  Expropriation 1. Republic vs. Gingoyon G.R. No. 166429, December 19, 2005 2. National Power Corp. vs. Manubay Agro-Industrial G.R. No. 150936, August 18, 2004 3. Republic vs. CA and Heirs of Cris Santos G.R. No. 146587, July 2, 2002 4. Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation vs. City of Pasig G.R. No. 152230, August 9, 2005 5. Robern Development Corp. vs. Quitain, 315 SCRA 150 6. Republic vs. vda. De Castello, 58 SCRA 336 Foreclosure of Real Estate Mortgage 1. Limpin vs. IAC 166 SCRA 88, September 29, 1988 2. BPI Family Savings Bank vs. Sps Veloso 436 SCRA 1, August 9, 2004 Partition 1. Figuracion Gerilla vs. vda. De Figuracion G.R. No. 154322, August 22, 2006 2. Rugian vs. Rugian, 9 Phil 527 (1908)

Forcible Entry and Unlawful Detainer 1. Valdez vs. CA G.R. No. 132426, May 2, 2006 2. Sampoyan vs. CA, January 14, 2005 3. Republic of the Philippines and NAPOCOR vs. Sunvar Realty Development Corporation, G.R. No.194880, June 20, 2012 4. Sarmiento vs. CA, November 16, 1995 5. Co vs. Militar 41 SCRA 455, January 29, 2004 6. Duran vs. CA, May 2, 2006 7. Unida vs. Urban G.R. No. 155432, June 9, 2005 8. Spouses Calendacion vs. Larano G.R. No. 158231, June 19, 2007 9. Bugarin vs. Palisoc, December 2, 2005 10. Montenegro vs. Montenegro G.R. No. 156829, June 8, 2004 Contempt 1. Ang vs. Castro G.R. No. 66371, May 15, 1985 2. People vs. Godoy 243 SCRA 64, March 29, 1995 3. Pimentel, Jr. vs. Majaducon, July 29, 2003 4. Lorenzo Shipping Corp et al vs. Distribution Management Association of the Philippines et al, G.R. No. 155849, August 31, 2011

III. COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND GRADING SYSTEM 40% Recitation 20% Midterm Exam 40% Final Exam IV. CONTACT INFORMATION Only the class beadle is allowed to contact the professor and shall be given his email address/mobile phone no. Request for consultation shall be entertained only during class hours and in the presence of the beadle.