Possible Questions

1. 7 Kinds of orders where an appeal may not be taken therefrom.

1. An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion
seeking relief from judgement;
2. Interlocutory order;
3. An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;
4. An order of execution;
5. An order denying a motion to set aside a judgement by
consent, confession, or compromise on the grounds of fraud,
mistake or duress, or any other ground vitiating consent;
6. A judgement or final order for or against one or several
parties in a separate claims, counter-claims, cross-claims, or third-
party complaints while the main case is pending, unless the court
allows an appeal therefrom; and
7. An order denying an action without prejudice.

2. Grounds for the annulment of judgements

- Rule 47, Section 2: Judgements may only be annulled based
on the grounds of extrinsic fraud and lack of jurisdiction

3. What are the exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

- Rule 45, Section 1

a person questioning a resolution, order, or decision of an

administrative body must first avail himself of the remedies
afforded by that said body before seeking judicial intervention.

4. The Heirarchy of Courts

The doctrine of hierarchy of courts recognizes the various levels of
courts in the country as they are established under the Constitution
and by law, their ranking and effect of their rulings in relation with
one another, and how these different levels of court interact with
one another. It determines the venues of appeals and the
appropriate forum for the issuance of extraordinary writs.
- MTC>RTC>CA>SC
5. Explain the Residual Power Doctrine
Residual jurisdiction refers to the authority of the trial court
to :
(1) issue orders for the protection and preservation of the
rights of the parties which do not involve any matter litigated by
the appeal;
(2) to approve compromises;
(3) to permit appeals by indigent litigants;
(4) to order execution pending appeal in accordance with
Section 2, Rule 39; and
(5) to allow the withdrawal of the appeal, provided these are
done prior to the transmittal of the original record or the record on
appeal, even if the appeal has already been perfected or despite the
approval of the record on appea or in case of a petition for review
under Rule 42, before the CA gives due course to the petition.

6. Modes of Appeal
- Ordinary Appeal- cases decided by the RTC
- Petition for Review
- Appeal by Certiorari

7. Writ of Error
- This is an ordinary appeal which is an appeal to the Court of
Appeals on cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction where questions of fact, or
mixed questions of fact and law are raised.

8. Contents of a Notice of Appeal

- Indicate the parties to the appeal;
- Specify the judgement or final order or part thereof
appealed from
- Specify the court to which the appeal is being taken; and
- State the material dates showing the timeliness of the
appeal.

9. Section 1, Rule 56
- Original Cases that maybe filed with the supreme court
1. Petition for Certiorari
2. Prohibition
3. Mandamus
4. Quo Warranto
5. Writ of Habeas Corpus
6. Disciplinary Proceedings against members of the judiciary
and attorneys and;
7. cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and
consuls...

10. Question of Law vs. Question of Fact

- Question of Law - arises when there is doubt as to the
applicability of a law on a given set of facts
- Question of Fact - arises when there is doubt as to the
truth/falsity of a given set of facts

11. When will an appeal be filed from MTC to RTC

An appeal may be taken from a judgment or final order of the MTC
wih the RTC that exercises territorial jurisdiction which the former
pertains.
12. Factual Issue Bar Rule
- The jurisdiction of the SC in cases brought before it from
the CA is limited to reviewing and revising the errors of law
imputed to it. findings of facts of the CA when supported by
substantial evidence, are conclusive and binding on the parties and
are not reviewable by the SC. The SC is not a trier of facts.

Exceptions (Medina v. Mayor Asistio)

1. When the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on
speculation, surmises or conjectures;
2. When the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or
impossible;
3. there is a grave abuse of discretion;
4. judgment is based on misapprehension of facts;
5. finding of fact are conflicting;
6. CA, in making its findings, went beyond the issue of the
case and such is contrary to the admissions of the appellant and
appellee;
7. findings of CA are contrary to those of the trial courts;
8. findings of fact are conclusions without citation of specific
evidence on which they are based;
9. facts set forth in the petition are not disputed by the
respondents;
10. finding of fact of the CA is premised on the supposed
absence of evidence and is contradicted bby the evidence on
record.

13. Rule 41, Section 9, Paragraph 4

14. Rule 40, Section 2 Commencement

- The appeal
15. Doorstep Dismissal
- a. patently without merit
b. prosecution for delay
c. questions raised are too unsubstantial to require
consideration

16. Rule 56

17. Record or appeal when us

18. When can you file an action for interpleader?

- An action for interpleader must be filed within a reasonable
time after the dispute has arisen, otherwise it may be barred
by laches.
19. What are the 3 orders in foreclosure of mortgage which is
appealable?
- 1. Judgment of Foreclosure (Sec. 2, Rule 68, ROC)
2. Order confirming the foreclosure sale with respect to the
validity of the sale (Sec. 3, Rule 68, ROC)
3. Deficiency judgment as to the correctness of the award (Sec. 6,
Rule 68, ROC)
20. When is record of appeal perfected
- Filed within 30 days after the notice of final judgment is given
21. What is the Remedy of Terceria
- a remedy by third party claimant. It is done by executing an affidavit of his title or right of
possession over the property seized and serving the same upon the officer making the levy
and the judgement creditor.

22. What are the grounds for a motion to dismiss an interpleader?

- 1. Impropriety of Interpleader (Sec. 4, Rule 62, ROC, as amended)
2. Grounds for a motion to dismiss
a. Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
b. Litis pendentia
c. Res judicata
d. Prescription (Sec. 12(a), Rule 15, ROC, as amended)
23. Who may file a declatory relief?
- 1. Interested under a deed, will, contract or other written
instrument (Sec. 1, Rule 63, ROC, as amended);
2. Whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or
regulation, ordinance or any other governmental regulation (Sec. 1,
Rule 63, ROC, as amended); and
3. The other parties are all persons who have or claim any interest
which would be affected by the declaration. (Sec. 2, Rule 63, ROC,
as amended)
24. Requisites for valid prohibition, certiorari, and mandamus?
Requisites of a valid Certiorari
1. The petition is directed against a tribunal, board or officer
exercising judicial or quasijudicial functions;
2. Such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion; and
3. There is neither appeal nor any plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law for the purpose of annulling
or modifying the proceeding. There must be capricious, arbitrary
and whimsical exercise of power for it to prosper. (Sec. 1 Rule 65,
ROC, as amended; Aggabao v. Comelec, G.R. No. 163756, 26 Jan.
2005; Riano, 2019)
Requisites of a valid Prohibition
1. The impugned act must be that of a tribunal, corporation, board
or person;
2. The respondent must be exercising judicial, quasi-judicial
functions or ministerial functions;
3. Respondents acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction or with
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction; and
4. There must be no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy. (Sec. 2, Rule 65, ROC, as amended)
Requisites of a valid Mandamus
1. There must be a clear legal right to the act demanded;
2. It must be the duty of the defendant to perform the act because
it is mandated by law;
3. The defendant: a. unlawfully neglects the performance of the
duty enjoined by law; or b. unlawfully excludes another from the
use and enjoyment of a right or office which such other is entitled;
4. The act to be performed is ministerial, not discretionary;
5. There is no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
in the ordinary course of law. (Sec. 3, Rule 65, ROC, as amended;
Riano, 2019)

25. Grounds for certiorari

That a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial
functions acted:
1. Without or in excess of jurisdiction; or
2. In grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction

26. Sunset Clause

-The Temporary Restraining Order is not extendible upon expiration of the 20-day period for

27. Contents in Replevin

the same ground without need of a judicial declaration to that effect.

- a. That the applicant is the owner of the property claimed,

particular description of such entitlement to possession particularly
describing it, or is entitled to the possession thereof;
b. That the property is wrongfully detained by the adverse party,
alleging the cause of detention according to applicant’s knowledge,
information and belief;
c. That the property has not been distrained or taken for tax
assessment or fine, or seized by writ of execution, preliminary
attachment, or placed in custodia legis, or if so seized, that is
exempt or should be released from custody;
d. Actual market value of the property (Sec. 2, Rule 60, ROC, as
amended)

28. Incidental Fraud v Causal Fraud

- Accidental Fraud and Causal Fraud refer to different types of
deceit or misrepresentation in legal contexts, particularly in
contracts. Accidental fraud, also known as incidental fraud,
involves deceit that does not directly cause a party to enter into a
contract but may have influenced certain terms or conditions. It is
not the decisive factor for the agreement, meaning the contract
remains valid, though the party committing the fraud may be liable
for damages. On the other hand, causal fraud refers to deceit that
is directly responsible for inducing one party to enter into the
contract. It is the proximate cause of the agreement, making the
contract voidable at the instance of the aggrieved party.