LEGAL DISPUTE

-EXISTS WHEN ONE PARTY COMPLAINS OF A

VIOLATION OF HIS RIGHT BY ANOTHER, WHO ON THE
OTHER HAND, DENIES SUCH A VIOLATION.
-AKIN TO A CAUSE OF ACTION IN CIVIL SUIT IN WHICH
THE DEFENDANT DENIES THE CLAIM AGAINST HIM.
ILLUSTRATION
• A TENANT RENTING AN APARTMENT ALLEGEDLY COULD NOT PAY THE AGREED
RENTS YET REFUSES TO LEAVE HIS UNIT
• IS THERE A LEGAL DISPUTE?
• WHAT?
1) THE APARTMENT OWNER’S CLAIM THAT THE TENANT FAILS TO PAY THE AGREED
MONTHLY RENTS YET REFUSES TO LEAVE HIS UNIT AND;
2) THE TENANT’S DENIAL OF THE CLAIM

• YOU HAVE HERE A RIGHT PROTECTED BY LAW, AN ALLEGED VIOLATION OF SUCH

RIGHT, AND A DENIAL OF THE ALLEGATION.
Q1: WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE RIGHT BEING CLAIMED IN ORDER FOR A LEGAL
DISPUTE TO ARISE?
Q.1.A: A FILIPINO CLAIMS THAT HE DESERVES TO BE ALLOWED TO TRAVEL TO THE US.
CAN HE FILE A LAWSUIT TO COMPEL THE US EMBASSY TO ISSUE HIM THE VISA
REQUIRED FOR ENTRY INTO THAT COUNTRY?
Q.1.B: JUAN DEMANDS THAT FILIPINO RATHER THAN ENGLISH BE MADE THE MEDIUM
OF INSTRUCTION IN ALL LEVELS OF EDUCATION. IS THERE A LEGAL DISPUTE?
Q.1.C: WHAT IS THE LEGAL DISPUTE WHEN A PERSON ALLEGEDLY REFUSES TO PAY HIS
DEBT?
• IN CRIMINAL CASES, THE LEGAL DISPUTE CONSISTS IN THE SENATE’S CLAIM THAT
ACCUSED HAS VIOLATED ITS RIGHT TO COMPEL OBEDIENCE TO ITS LAWS AND IN
THE LATTER’S DENIAL OF THE CLAIM AT HIS ARRAIGNMENT.
Q.1.D: PEDRO DEFRAUDS JUAN BY SELLING A FAKE ROLEX WATCH TO HIM FOR THE
PRICE OF A GENUINE ONE?
A1: IT MUST BE A LEGAL RIGHT SINCE COURTS WILL UPHOLD AND VINDICATE
ONLY THOSE RIGHTS THAT ARE ESTABLISHED OR RECOGNIZED BY LAW.
A.1.A: NO, AS PHILIPPINE LAWS DO NOT GRANT HIM THAT RIGHT.
A.1.B: THERE IS NO LEGAL DISPUTE SINCE IT DOES NOT INVOLVE AN ACTUAL
VIOLATION OF SOME RIGHT. THE CONTROVERSY, ALTHOUGH OF PUBLIC
INTEREST, WILL NOT BE RESOLVED BY LITIGATION BUT BY LEGISLATIVE
ACTION.
A.1.C: THE CREDITOR’S CLAIM THAT THE DEBTOR UNJUSTLY REFUSES TO PAY
HIS DEBT UNDER A PROMISSORY NOTE THAT HE ISSUED IN FAVOR OF THE
CREDITOR, AND THE DEBTOR’S DENIAL OF SUCH CLAIM.
A.1.D: THE STATE’S CHARGE THAT THE ACCUSED DEFRAUDED THE
COMPLAINANT BY SELLING A FAKE ROLEX WATCH TO HIM FOR THE PRICE
OF A GENUINE ONE; AND THE ACCUSED’ DENIAL OF THE CHARGE.
SIGNIFICANCE OF LEGAL DISPUTE IN
LEGAL WRITING

- IT IS THE HEART OF EVERY CASE SUBJECT OF LEGAL WRITING AS THE

RESOLUTION OF THE LEGAL DISPUTE PUTS AN END TO LITIGATION.
-FAILURE TO IDENTIFY THE CORRECT LEGAL DISPUTE WILL LEAD TO HAVING
DIFFICULTY FINDING A WAY TO SOLVE OR ADDRESS IT. YOU WILL BE ARGUING
ON SOMETHING THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RESOLVING THE CASE. A
FUTILE ATTEMPT TO END THE LITIGATION.
LEGAL DISPUTE VIS-À-VIS PRINCIPAL
ISSUE
• A LEGAL DISPUTE RECAST IN THE FORMAT OF AN ISSUE, BECOMES THE
PRINCIPAL ISSUE IN EVERY CASE. HOW IS THIS ACCOMPLISHED?
• YOU JUST HAVE TO ADD THE PHRASE “WHETHER OR NOT”
1.“WHETHER OR NOT THE TENANT FAILS TO PAY THE MONTHLY RENTS
YET REFUSES TO LEAVE HIS UNIT”
2.“WHETHER OR NOT THE DEBTOR UNJUSTLY REFUSES TO PAY HIS DEBT
UNDER A PROMISSORY NOTE THAT HE ISSUED IN FAVOR OF THE
CREDITOR”
3.“WHETHER OR NOT THE ACCUSED DEFRAUDED THE COMPLAINANT BY
SELLING A FAKE ROLEX WATCH TO HIM FOR THE PRICE OF A GENUINE
ONE”
WHAT IS THE LEGAL DISPUTE AND THE
PRINCIPAL ISSUE?

• X, A BUILDING OFFICIAL ISSUES TO THE OWNER AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT FOR A

BUILDING WITH INADEQUATE FIRE EXITS.
• LD: (1) THE COMPLAINANT’S CLAIM THAT RESPONDENT BUILDING OFFICIAL ISSUED
TO THE OWNER AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT FOR A BUILDING WITH INADEQUATE FIRE
EXITS IN VIOLATION OF SECTION 3(E) OF REPUBLIC ACT 3019 AND; (2) THE
RESPONDENT’S DENIAL OF THAT CLAIM.

• PI: “WHETHER OR NOT RESPONDENT BUILDING OFFICIAL ISSUED TO THE OWNER

AN OCCUPANCY PERMIT COVERING A BUILDING WITH INADEQUATE FIRE EXITS IN
VIOLATION OF SECTION 3(E) OF REPUBLIC ACT 3019”
IMPORTANCE OF PRINCIPAL ISSUE
• THE CASE WILL BE DECIDED FOR OR AGAINST YOU BASED ON THE
PRINCIPAL ISSUE RAISED.
• THE ARGUMENT OF THE PARTIES WILL BE FOUNDED ON AND USUALLY
REVOLVES AROUND THE PRINCIPAL ISSUE.
• EASE IN CRAFTING YOUR ARGUMENTS IN ORDER TO PERSUADE YOUR
READER TO ACCEPT YOUR POINT OF VIEW.
• YOUGET TO SAVE TIME AS YOU WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THE
CORRECT ISSUE, CONSIDERING THAT SOMETIMES A PARTICULAR
PROBLEM POSES SEVERAL ISSUES. THE STRENGTH OF YOUR
ARGUMENTS WILL LARGELY DEPEND ON ITS RELEVANCE TO THE
CORRECT PRINCIPAL ISSUE. OTHERWISE, YOUR WORK WILL BE
USELESS.
STAGES OF WRITING

• PRE-WORK
• LOOK AT THE FACTS AND EVIDENCE OF THE CASE (INTERVIEWS OF THE PERSONS
INVOLVED IN THE PROBLEM OR FROM RELATED DOCUMENTS THAT REQUIRE SORTING)
• DATES ARE OFTEN MIXED UP, IF IT IS A NEW CASE
• IF IT IS ONE WHICH HAS ALREADY UNDERGONE TRIAL, YOUR SOURCES WILL BE THE
TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONIES OF WITNESSES AND THE DOCUMENTARY EXHIBITS
PRESENTED IN THE CASE [AFFIDAVIT-COMPLAINT; AFFIDAVIT OF WITNESSES, ETC.]
THINGS TO CONSIDER WHEN DOING YOUR
PRE-WORK:

• ESTABLISH WHERE THE LEGAL DISPUTE LIES IN THE CASE;

• DISCOVER ITS RELEVANT FACTS;
• KNOW THE LAWS OR RULES THAT APPLY TO IT;
• IDENTIFY THE ISSUE/S THAT YOU WOULD WANT TO ADDRESS;
• ROUGH OUT THE ARGUMENTS THAT YOU WOULD USE
STAGES OF WRITING

• WRITE-UP
• PUTTING UP FLESH, COLOR AND SHAPE IN YOUR LEGAL WRITING
• TRANSFORM YOUR SKETCHES AND OUTLINES INTO A FULL DRAFT OF THE PAPER
REQUIRED OF YOU --- A PLEADING, A LEGAL OPINION, A PETITION, A COMMENT, A
MEMORANDUM, A POSITION PAPER, OR EVEN A DECISION
• COMPLETED BY EDITING AND REWRITING
GETTING AT THE FACTS OF THE CASE
• THIS IS THE INITIAL PHASE OF PRE-WORK: GETTING THE FACTS RIGHT
• WHEN STUDYING THE FACTS OF A CASE, DO NOT LEAVE THEN UNTIL YOU HAVE
COME TO A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE CASE IS ABOUT FROM
EVERY ANGLE

• DO NOT STOP UNLESS AND UNTIL YOU CAN SHOW YOUR CLIENT THAT YOU KNOW
MORE ABOUT HIS CASE THAN HE DOES

• ALMOST ALWAYS, A LAWYER WHO CASUALLY READ THE FACTS FROM THE SOURCE
MATERIALS WITHOUT TRULY UNDERSTANDING AND ABSORBING THEIR CONTENTS
SHORT-CHANGES HIS CLIENT

• YOU WILL END UP EVEN MORE CONFUSED THAN YOUR CLIENT AND YOU DEFINITELY
DO NOT WANT THIS.
RANDOM NOTES VS. SUMMARY
• MAKE SHORT RANDOM NOTES OF THE FACTS OF THE CASE THAT YOU
CONSIDER IMPORTANT AS YOU GO OVER THEM. BUT BEAR IN MIND THAT
PURELY RANDOM NOTES DO NOT GIVE YOU THE COMPLETE PICTURE.
• CHANCES ARE, THEY ARE UNCORRELATED; HENCE, USEFUL ONLY FOR
WORK DONE IN ONE SITTING. THE NEXT YOU READ YOUR RANDOM
NOTES, YOU WILL HAVE A HARD TIME STITCHING THE EVENTS THAT YOU
WILL HAVE TO GO OVER THE FACTS AGAIN IN ORDER TO GET THE
CORRECT MEANING OF THE WORDS/ TERMS YOU USED. IN A WAY, YOU
WASTED MORE TIME THAN YOU CAN EVEN AFFORD TO WASTE.
• WHAT YOU NEED IS SYSTEMATICALLY PREPARED NOTES THAT
ADEQUATELY CAPTURE THE ENTIRE FACTUAL TERRAIN OF THE CASE,
WITH THE IMPORTANT POINTS PROPERLY MARKED OUT.
• THE REMEDY FOR THIS DILEMMA IS: SUMMARIZING
• YOU CAN BEST UNDERSTAND AND ABSORB WRITTEN
MATERIALS WHEN YOU SUMMARIZE THEIR CONTENTS.
YOUR SUMMARY SERVES AS A DETAILED MAP IN YOUR
HAND, ABLE TO GUIDE YOU IN NEGOTIATING YOUR WAY
THROUGH THE DISPUTE INVOLVED.
• IN SUMMARIZING, YOU HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER YOU
NEED THAT FACT OR NOT. BETTER STILL, YOU ASK THIS
QUESTION, “WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS FACT TO
THIS CASE?”
•YOUR FACTS MUST BE SEEN THROUGH THE ISSUE: GO
OVER THE MATERIALS VERY QUICKLY AND
DETERMINE THE PRINCIPAL ISSUE/S INVLOVED
•ONLY WHEN YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT THE
PRINCIPAL ISSUE IS, COULD YOU MAKE A GOOD JOB
OF EXTRACTING THE RELEVANT FACTS FROM YOUR
MATERIALS.
•TAKE THIS CASE FOR EXAMPLE: THE BEERS WAR
•AFTER READING THE PROBLEM, STUDENTS MUST BE
ABLE TO TELL WHAT THE CASE IS ALL ABOUT IN ONE
SENTENCE --- THE CASE IS ABOUT…
ANSWER

• THE CASE IS ABOUT THE LAWSUIT THAT THE RESTAURANT OWNER FILED AGAINST
SAN MANUEL BREWERY FOR THE INJURY HE SUFFERED IN THE HANDS OF AN
OUTRAGED CUSTOMER WHOM HE SERVED WITH A PEST-LADEN BOTTLE OF BEER.
HOW DO YOU MAKE A COMPLETE
SUMMARY FROM RAW DATA?

• TAKE OUT THE NON-ESSENTIAL FACTS FROM YOUR WRITTEN MATERIALS LIKE
CONTRACTS, DEEDS, LETTERS, RECORDS, BOOKS, TESTIMONIES, OR SWORN
STATEMENTS.

• CROSS OUT THOSE NON-ESSENTIAL FACTS, LEAVING ONLY THE ESSENTIAL ONES ON
THE PAGE OF EACH DOCUMENT OR PAPER.

• ACTIVITY 1
• THE PARTICULAR NUMBER OF THE ORDINANCE INVOLVED
• THE PARTICULAR NUMBER OF THE SECTION OF THE ORDINANCE
• PARTICULAR PLACE WHERE IT WAS ENACTED
• ALL THESE ARE NOT RELEVANT TO THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE ORDINANCE
SUPERFLUOUS DETAILS:
- IF THE LOTS TAKEN WERE TO BE “FOR CHARITY BURIAL”, IT WOULD BE SUPERFLUOUS
TO SAY THAT IT WOULD BENEFIT “PAUPER RESIDENTS”
- THE PHRASE “NO PERMIT TO ESTABLISH, OPERATE, AND MAINTAIN” ARE SUPERFLUOUS
“TO OPERATE” ASSUMES THESE TWO TERMS
CLUTTERED FACTS
• TRANSCRIPT OF STENOGRAPHIC NOTES
-RAPE CASE

• EXTRACTING RELEVANT FACTS

1)IDENTIFY THE LEGAL DISPUTE INVOLVED IN THE ABOVE CASE
A) THE GOVERNMENT’S CHARGE THAT RONALD RAPED JULIA AND;
B) RONALD’S DENIAL OF THE CHARGE
2) REWRITE THE LEGAL DISPUTE IN THE FORMAT OF AN ISSUE TO PRODUCE YOUR
PRINCIPAL ISSUE THEN PUT DOWN THIS ISSUE IN BOLD PRINT, AND PLACE IT
RIGHT BEFORE YOU AS YOU DO YOUR SUMMARIZING
FACTS SET IN SEQUENCE

• IT IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU PUT THE EVENTS IN THE ORDER OF THEIR
OCCURRENCE

• WHEN THE SEQUENCE OF THE EVENTS IS IN DISARRAY, WITH THE SUBSEQUENT

EVENTS TOLD AHEAD OF PRECEDING ONES OR WITH FREQUENT FLASHBACKS TO
THE PAST AS THE STORY UNFOLDS, YOU ARE LIKELY TO GET CONFUSED.

• YOU WILL BE LOOKING AT ITEMS OF FACTS THAT ARE OUT OF THE CONTEXT OR
DETACHED FROM THEIR SURROUNDING CIRCUMSTANCES.
• IN THE RAPE CASE, JUST SPOT THE POINT WHERE JULIA’S STORY LOGICALLY
BEGINS THEN ARRANGE IT ACCORDING TO THEIR OCCURRENCE UNTIL YOU REACH
THE END OF HER STORY.
BENEFITS DERIVED FROM ARRANGING THE
FACTS IN PROPER ORDER OR SEQUENCE:

1) THE FACTS ARE EASIER TO UNDERSTAND WHEN PUT IN THE ORDER OF TIME
BECAUSE THEY FOLLOW A NATURAL ORDER OF FLOW.
ACTUAL HUMAN EXPERIENCE OCCURS IN THE ORDER OF TIME WHERE ONE
EVENT FOLLOWS ANOTHER WITH THE TICKING OF THE HOUR.
A STORY THAT JUMPS AHEAD, GOES BACK TO A PREVIOUS EVENT, AND THEN
RETURNS TO RESUME ITS ADVANCE WHERE IT TEMPORARILY DROPPED OFF IS
UNNATURAL. IT CAN BE QUITE CONFUSING. THE HUMAN MIND IS NOT AT EASE
WITH SUCH A MANNER OF STORY TELLING.
2) WHEN FACTS ARE ARRANGED IN THE PROPER ORDER, YOU WOULD CLEARLY SEE
HOW EACH FACT RELATES TO OR CONNECTS WITH OTHERS.
EACH FACT ACQUIRES DEEPER SIGNIFICANCE WHEN VIEWED ALONG WITH
RELATED FACTS.
3) WHEN THE FACTUAL VERSIONS OF EITHER SIDE ARE PUT IN ORDER AND MATCHED,
YOU WOULD ALSO BE ABLE TO SEE CLEARLY THE AREAS WHERE THE RESPECTIVE
VERSIONS AGREE AND DISAGREE.
THIS WILL FURNISH YOU WITH A BALANCED APPRECIATION OF EACH OPPOSING
CLAIM.
4) FACTS, PROPERLY ARRANGED, PREPARE YOU FOR THE WORK OF WRITING UP THE
FACTS OF THE CASE IN YOUR PLEADING OR MEMORANDUM.
5) YOU CAN CREATE A COMPACT INDEX TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, INCLUDING THE
TESTIMONIES AND THE DOCUMENTS YOU WORK ON.

WITH YOUR COMPACT SUMMARY, YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RE-READ YOUR

VOLUMINOUS MATERIALS EACH TIME YOU WANT TO BE REMINDED OF THE
IMPORTANT DETAILS OF THE CASE.
YOUR SUMMARY WILL BE YOUR MAP IN GUIDING YOU THROUGH OUT THE COURSE
OF TRIAL OF THE CASE AND DURING APPEAL.
 WRITING EXERCISE

SORT OUT THE REST OF THE TESTIMONIES IN

THE RAPE CASE, MAKE A SUMMARY OF THE
RELEVANT FACTS, AND ARRANGE THEM IN
ORDER.
KNOWING THE APPLICABLE LAW OR RULE

• SOURCES OF LAW OR RULE

1) STATUTE LAW: LAWS AND RULES ENACTED BY DULY CONSTITUTED RULE-MAKING
AUTHORITIES LIKE CONGRESS (RAS AND BPS), THE PRESIDENT (PDS AND EOS), THE
SUPREME COURT (RULES OF COURT), LOCAL GOVERNMENT COUNCILS (CITY OR
MUNICIPAL ORDINANCES), AND ADMINISTRATIVE REGULATORY AGENCIES (IRRS).
2) CASE LAW: DECISIONS OF COURTS AND PERSONS OR AGENCIES PERFORMING
JUDICIAL FUNCTIONS. THESE DECISIONS INTERPRET AND APPLY STATUTE LAW TO
SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. THE RULINGS BECOME LEGAL PRECEDENTS THAT, WHEN
INVARIABLY AFFIRMED AND USED, BECOME PART OF THE LAW ITSELF.
HOW TO LOCATE THE RIGHT LAW AND
LEGAL PRECEDENTS?

1)IDENTIFY THE GENERAL NATURE OF THE LEGAL

DISPUTE INVOLVED.
-OUR RAPE CASE IS A CRIME INVOLVING CHASTITY (RAPE PROVISION OF THE RPC AND
ITS AMENDMENTS)
2) SEARCH FOR LEGAL PRECEDENTS THAT HAVE MORE OR LESS PARALLEL FACTS.
3) AT TIMES, IT IS ALSO USEFUL THAT YOU USE SOME RULES THAT DERIVE FROM THE
WISDOM OF COMMON EXPERIENCE. THIS IS ESPECIALLY USEFUL IN RESOLVING
FACTUAL ISSUES.
MATCH THE APPLICABLE LAWS OR RULES WITH THE RELEVANT FACTS OF YOUR
CASE AND YOU ARE READY TO WORK ON YOUR ARGUMENTS.
FACTS REEXAMINED

HAVING DISCOVERED THE LAWS OR RULES THAT APPLY TO YOUR CASE, YOU
SHOULD NOW BE IN A BETTER POSITION TO REVIEW YOUR SUMMARY OF FACTS
AND ADD TO IT OTHER RELEVANT FACTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE OMITTED. YOU
COULD ALSO SUBTRACT FROM YOUR SUMMARY THOSE FACTS THAT NOW APPEAR
IRRELEVANT TO THE APPLICABLE LAWS OR RULES AND PRECEDENTS THAT YOU
HAVE DISCOVERED.
WRITING EXERCISES

1) GO BACK TO THE CASE ON THE DOG’S ATTACK OF A LITTLE GIRL. CHECK OUT
AND COPY THE LAWS OR THE RULES THAT SHOULD PROPERLY GOVERN THEM.

2) CHECK OUT TOO THOSE PARALLEL CASES THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS
PREVIOUSLY DECIDED. SEE IF THE RULINGS AND DOCTRINES ESTABLISHED IN
THESE CASES COULD BE CITED AGAINST YOU OR TO YOUR WORK ADVANTAGE.
PUT THEM ALL ON PAPER AS PART OF YOUR PRE-WORK.
GETTING INTO THE ISSUES

HERE, YOU HAVE TO PINPOINT THE SPECIFIC ISSUES THAT THE CONFLICTING
CLAIMS OF THE PARTIES PRESENT AND TO PUT THOSE ISSUES DOWN IN WRITING.
EVERYTHING YOU WRITE --- THE FACTS, THE LAW, THE ARGUMENT, AND THE RELIEF
--- MUST TAKE BEARING ON THOSE ISSUES.
YOU WRITE AIMLESSLY WHEN YOU ARE UNABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES IN
YOUR CASE OR ARE UNABLE TO HOLD ON TO IT.
ISSUES IN MULTIPLE LEGAL DISPUTES

• COMMON IN CIVIL SUITS/ CASES WHERE THERE COULD BE AS MANY LEGAL

DISPUTES AS THERE ARE CLAIMS FOR VIOLATIONS OF SEPARATE RIGHTS OF THE
PARTIES.

• YOU SHOULD ADDRESS EACH OF THE PRINCIPAL ISSUES THAT THE SEVERAL LEGAL
DISPUTES PRESENT.
EXAMPLE:
IN A LAWSUIT, X, A MUSIC COMPOSER, CLAIMS THAT HIS FRIEND Y
APPROPRIATED AS HIS OWN AND SOLD TO A RECORD COMPANY A SONG THAT HE
(X) HAD CREATED.
Y CLAIMED THAT X MALIGNED HIM AS A THIEF OF IP. HE ALLEGED THAT IT WAS X
WHO STOLE HIS WORK.
Q:WHAT ARE THE LEGAL DISPUTE/S?
Q: WHAT IS THE CONTROLLING ISSUE?
ANSWER:
1)Y’S DENIAL OF THE CLAIM BY X;
2)Y’S CLAIM THAT X MALIGNED HIM AS A THIEF OF IP AND THE DENIAL BY X OF SUCH
ALLEGATION;
3)CLAIM BY Y THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY X WHO TRIED TO STEAL THE SONG FROM HIM
AND X’S DENIAL OF SUCH ALLEGATION
4)Y’S CLAIM THAT THE LAWSUIT WAS MALICIOUS AND X’S DENIAL OF THIS CLAIM
CI: “WHETHER OR NOT X, OR Y, CREATED THE SONG
SUBORDINATE CONTROLLING ISSUE/S
• THE RESOLUTION OF THE PS IN THE CASE DEPENDS ON HOW A SUBORDINATE
ISSUE RAISED IN CONNECTION WITH ITS IS RESOLVED.
E.G. THE RESOLUTION OF WON THE TENANT HAS VIOLATED THE LEASE BY NOT
PAYING THE RENT MIGHT DEPEND ON THE SUBORDINATE ISSUE OF WON THE RENT
MAY BE DEEMED PAID BY THE SET OFF OF THE LESSOR’S SEPARATE DEBT TO THE
TENANT.
A TENANT WHO DID NOT PAY THE RENTS, BECAUSE HE HAS IN THE
MEANTIME ACQUIRED OWNERSHIP OF THE APARTMENT FROM THE BANK THAT
FORECLOSED THE MORTGAGE ON IT. THE SUBORDINATE ISSUE WOULD BE
“WHETHER OR NOT THE TENANT SUBSEQUENTLY ACQUIRED OWNERSHIP OF THE
LEASED PROPERTY.
NOTE THAT IN THESE INSTANCES, THE SUBORDINATE ISSUES HAVE BECOME THE
CONTROLLING ISSUES THAT WOULD DECIDE THE OUTCOME OF THE CASE.
EXAMPLE:
O RELYING ON ADVERTISEMENTS ABOUT THE BENEFITS TO WOMEN OF FACIAL
CREAM CALLED MAXIM BOUGHT THE CREAM FROM A SUPERMARKET AND USED IT.
SHE DEVELOPED RASHES THAT LEFT SCARS ON HER FACE. SHE SUED MAXIM & CO.,
THE MANUFACTURER OF THE CREAM, FOR DAMAGES.
THE COMPANY INVOKED THE SMALL PRINTS ON THE LABEL OF THE CREAM
CONTAINER THAT WARNED POSSIBLE ALLERGY IN THE USE OF THE CREAM. SINCE
EVERY CONSUMER HAS THE RIGHT TO BUY ONLY SAFE PRODUCTS FROM
COSMETIC MANUFACTURERS, O CLAIMS THAT THE COMPANY VIOLATED THIS
RIGHT WHEN IT SOLD TO HER A FACIAL CREAM THAT HARMED HER FACE. MAXIM
DENIES THIS CLAIM, HOWEVER, IT STATED THAT O HAS BEEN FOREWARNED OF
POSSIBLE ALLERGY AND THAT SHE ACCEPTED THE RISK WHEN SHE BOUGHT AND
USED THE CREAM.
PI: “WHETHER OR NOT MAXIM VIOLATED O’S RIGHT TO BE SOLD ONLY SAFE
PRODUCTS.
SI: “WHETHER OR NOT MAXIM HAS THE RIGHT TO MARKET COSMETIC PRODUCTS
THAT COULD CAUSE HARMFUL ALLERGY TO SOME, PROVIDED THAT THE PRODUCT
LABEL DISCLOSES THIS RISK.
RELEVANT VS. IRRELEVANT ISSUES

Q: MUST YOU DISCUSS ALL THE FACTUAL ISSUES RAISED BY THE CONFLICTING
CLAIMS OF THE PARTIES?
A: NO, SINCE NOT ALL ISSUES RAISED IN A CASE MERIT DISCUSSION AND
RESOLUTION; ONLY RELEVANT ISSUES MATTER.
THUS, RELEVANT ISSUES ARE THOSE THAT WHEN RESOLVED DETERMINE THE
OUTCOME OF THE LEGAL DISPUTE IN A PARTICULAR CASE.
IRRELEVANT ISSUES ARE THOSE THAT HAVE NO VALUE IN A CASE EVEN IF THEY ARE
DEBATED AND RESOLVED SINCE THEY ARE OF NO CONSEQUENCE TO THE OUTCOME
OF THE LEGAL DISPUTE.
WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO KNOW IF THE
ISSUE IS RELEVANT OR NOT?

1) YOUR DISCUSSION OF IRRELEVANT ISSUES WOULD PRODUCE NO ADVANTAGE

AND MIGHT WEAKEN YOUR POSITION IN THE CASE.

2) IF YOU MAKE A MISTAKE AND DROP A RELEVANT ISSUE, YOU MIGHT BE FORFEITING
THAT ISSUE TO YOUR CLIENT’S LOSS.
WHEN IS THERE AN ISSUE?

• WHEN THE CONTENDING PARTIES DO NOT AGREE ON A GIVEN POINT.

• TO SPOT THE ISSUE, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS TO COMPARE THE FACTS AND THE
LAWS THAT THE TWO SIDES CLAIM AND IDENTIFY THE AREAS OF THEIR
DISAGREEMENT. ALTHOUGH IT IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT TO TAKE NOTE OF
WHAT THE PARTIES AGREE ON.
RAPE CASE
• AREAS OF DISAGREEMENT:
1)WON RONALD WAS JULIA’S SUITOR; (SI)
2)WON JULIA IGNORED HIM AT THE PARTY BECAUSE SHE DISLIKED HIM; (II)
3)WON SHE WALKED HOME ALONE FROM THE PARTY;
4)WON RONALD CAUGHT UP WITH HER ON THE RICE FIELD AND GRABBED HER;
5)WON RONALD RAPED JULIA, EMPLOYING FORCE AND INTIMIDATION AND;
(DOMINANT ISSUE)
6)WON JULIA WAS PROMPTED BY A GENUINE DESIRE FOR JUSTICE IN FILING THE
CHARGE OF RAPE AGAINST RONALD
FACTUAL AND LEGAL ISSUES

• AN ISSUE IS FACTUAL WHEN THE CONTENDING PARTIES CANNOT AGREE THAT A

THING EXISTS OR HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED.

• AN ISSUE IS LEGAL WHEN THE CONTENDING PARTIES ASSUME A THING EXISTS OR

HAS ACTUALLY HAPPENED BUT DISAGREE ON ITS LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE OR EFFECT
ON THEIR RIGHTS.
CORRECT STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

1) USE THE INTRODUCTORY WORDS, “WHETHER OR NOT”, AS YOU ARE

AUTOMATICALLY INCORPORATING THE OPPOSING VIEWS, THE POSITIVE AND
NEGATIVE, INTO ONE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE.
IT MAKES FOR A FAIR STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE.
2) THE ISSUES TO BE TRIED AND DECIDED ARE BEST DEFINED IN TERMS OF THOSE
AFFIRMATIVE CLAIMS. THIS IS BECAUSE THE PLAINTIFF OR THE ACCUSER IN A
CASE ALWAYS BEARS THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE AFFIRMATIVE OF HIS OR
HER CLAIMS.
EXCEPT:
WHEN THE DEFENDANT, RESPONDENT, OR THE ACCUSED IN THE CASE
ADMITS THE FACTS CONSTITUTING THE CLAIM AGAINST HIM BUT RAISES A
DEFENSE THAT EXEMPTS HIM FROM LIABILITY UNDER IT.
3)THE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE MUST BE FAIR, NOT SLANTED IN FAVOR OF A
PARTY.
4)THE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE SHOULD ALSO BE COMPREHENSIVE, LEAVING NO
RELEVANT POINT OUTSIDE ITS EMBRACE.
5) THE STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE MUST BE SPECIFIC AND CLEAR.
6) TRY AT ALL TIMES TO CAPTURE IN YOUR STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE, THE GIST
OR ESSENCE OF THE SPECIFIC VIOLATION OF RIGHT THAT THE DEFENDANT
COMMITTED.
THRESHOLD ISSUES

• THESEARE ISSUES THAT COULD SLAM THE DOOR TO ANY JUDICIAL

CONSIDERATION OF THE CASE ON THE MERITS.

• THESE ARE ISSUES THAT CONCERNS MATTERS OF PROCEDURE

• LACK OF JURISDICTION
• WRONG VENUE
• NOT REAL-PARTY-IN-INTEREST
• ACTION PRESCRIBED
• THE RESOLUTION OF THESE ISSUES AND SIMILAR OTHERS TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER
THE MAIN LEGAL DISPUTES.
ROUGHING OUT THE ARGUMENT

• YOU PERSUADE SOMEONE TO ACCEPT YOUR OPINION OR POINT OF VIEW

• YOUR PRESENTATION MUST CONSIDER THE STRUCTURE OF A BALANCED THESIS
PRESENTATION:
1) A CLEAR STATEMENT OF YOUR THESIS OR WHERE YOU STAND ON THE ISSUE TO BE
RESOLVED;
2) THE ARGUMENTS THAT CAN BE MADE AGAINST YOUR POSITION BUT WITH AN
EXPLANATION THAT THOSE ARGUMENTS DO NOT DOOM SUCH POSITION;
3) THE ARGUMENTS IN FAVOR OF YOUR POSITION;
4) AN APPEAL TO THE GOOD SENSE OF THE PERSON/S WHO WILL RESOLVE THE ISSUE.
USE OF THE BALANCE SHEET FORMAT
(Where You Stand on the Issue)
Ronald did not rape Julia
Arguments against You Arguments in Your Favor
Vaginal lacerations usually found in rape As a virgin, Julia could have lacerations
victims were found in Julia during consented sex

Appeal to Your Reader’s Good Sense

WHAT IS AN ARGUMENT?
• AN ARGUMENT IS A REASON YOU OFFER TO PROVE YOUR THESIS OR
PROPOSITION.
• THISIS WHERE YOUR KNOWLEDGE OF CATEGORICAL SYLLOGISM IS
IMPORTANT.
• E.G. MAJOR PREMISE: ALL MEN ARE MORTAL.
MINOR PREMISE: JOSE IS A MAN.
CONCLUSION: JOSE IS MORTAL.
THE MAJOR PREMISE IS A STATEMENT OF A GENERALLY ACCEPTED
RULE OR TRUTH. THE MINOR PREMISE IS A STATEMENT THAT BRINGS
A PARTICULAR THING OR INDIVIDUAL WITHIN THE CLASS COVERED BY
THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED RULE OR TRUTH. THE CONCLUSION IS A
STATEMENT THAT FOLLOWS AFTER THE MAJOR AND MINOR PREMISES,
DEDUCING THAT THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED RULE OR TRUTH APPLIES
TO THE PARTICULAR THING OR INDIVIDUAL.
• E.G. PEOPLE WHO LIE CANNOT BE BELIEVED.
ARMANDO LIED IN HIS TESTIMONY.
THEREFORE, HE CANNOT BE BELIEVED.
HERE IS AN EXAMPLE BASED ON COMMON EXPERIENCE WHERE THE WITNESS CAN BE
DISCREDITED IN THIS MANNER.

THUS, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT EVERY SOUND LEGAL ARGUMENT IS A

COMBINATION OF THE RIGHT RULE AND THE RIGHT FACT.
 E.G. CROSSING THE RED LIGHT IS PUNISHABLE BY LAW. - RULE
JOSE CROSSED THE RED LIGHT. - FACT
THEREFORE, JOSE SHOULD BE PUNISHED BY LAW -
CONCLUSION

THE ABOVE ARGUMENT CONSISTS OF THREE STATEMENTS: THE RULE STATEMENT,

THE CASE FACT STATEMENT, AND CONCLUSION STATEMENT.
• NOTE THAT THE RULE STATEMENT HAS A FACT COMPONENT. THIS IS LOGICAL
SINCE ALL RULES IDENTIFY THE FACTS ON WHICH THEY WILL OPERATE OR APPLY.
THE FACT COMPONENT IN A RULE STATEMENT IS CALLED “KEY FACT.” IT IS A KEY
FACT BECAUSE ITS PRESENCE IN THE CASE OPENS UP SUCH CASE TO THE
APPLICATION OF THE RULE.
 CROSSING THE RED LIGHT IS PUNISHABLE BY LAW. BUT CROSSING THE YELLOW
LIGHT DOES NOT AMOUNT TO CROSSING THE RED LIGHT. DAVID ACTUALLY
CROSSED A YELLOW LIGHT. THEREFORE, DAVID CANNOT BE PUNISHED BY LAW.

• THE KEY FACT ON WHICH THE GENERAL RULE OPERATES IS “CROSSING THE RED
LIGHT”. BUT THIS IS NOT FOUND IN THE PARTICULAR CASE OF DAVID FOR HE
ACTUALLY CROSSED A YELLOW LIGHT. CONSEQUENTLY, THE PUNISHMENT DUE TO
PERSONS WHO CROSS THE RED LIGHTS DOES NOT APPLY TO DAVID. HIS
CROSSING A YELLOW LIGHT REPELS THE OPERATION OF THE LAW, PRODUCING A
NEGATIVE CONCLUSION.
SUMMARY-APPLICABLE TO BOTH
POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ARGUMENTS

• RULE STATEMENT – A STATEMENT OF A RULE THAT APPLIES TO A GIVEN FACT OR

SET OF FACTS;

• CASE FACT STATEMENT – THE STATEMENT OF THE FACT OF A PARTICULAR CASE

THAT OPENS UP SUCH CASE OR CLOSES IT TO THE APPLICATION OF THE RULE; AND

• CONCLUSION STATEMENT – THE CONCLUSION THAT THE RULE APPLIES OR NOT TO

THE PARTICULAR CASE
CASE FACT

• Q: IS IT THE RULE THAT DICTATES WHAT THE FACT OF A PARTICULAR CASE OUGHT
TO BE OR IS IT THE FACT OF THE CASE THAT DICTATES WHAT THE RULE OUGHT TO
BE?

• A:
THINGS TO DO WHEN PREPARING AN ARGUMENT:
1)BEGIN BY ASCERTAINING THE FACT/S OF YOUR CASE;
2)CHECK OUT THE FACT/S AGAINST WHATEVER RULE IS PROPOSED TO GOVERN
THEM.
NOTE HOWEVER THAT FACTS ARE FACTS AND YOU CANNOT ALTER THEM.
• HOWEVER, PUTTING ON TOGETHER THE CORRECT FACTS OF A CASE CAN BE
DIFFICULT BECAUSE THE EVIDENCE OF THOSE FACTS OF A CASE CAN BE DIFFICULT
SINCE THOSE FACTS CAN BE MARRED:
1)BY THE WITNESS’ BIAS;
2)BY HUMAN ERROR IN OBSERVING THEM;
3)BY LACK OF ABILITY TO COMMUNICATE WHAT ONE OBSERVED AND;
4)BY A MOTIVE TO LIE.
RULE

• INCLUDES:
1) CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS;
2) STATUTORY PROVISIONS;
3) RULES OF COURT PROVISIONS;
4) CASE LAWS OR JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS;
5) WIDELY ACCEPTED TRUTHS THAT DERIVE FROM LOGIC, COMMON SENSE, OR
EVEN COMMON EXPERIENCE.
USE OF THE BALANCE SHEET FORMAT
(Where You Stand on the Issue)
Ronald did not rape Julia
Arguments against You Arguments in Your Favor
Because women will rarely admit to But not when the woman’s testimony, like
having been raped unless true, a rape that of Julia, is inherently incredible
victim’s testimony can stand alone
Absence of bruises on her body despite
rough grounds negates rape by the use of
force
Being a barrio woman, it is likely that
someone like Ronald walked her home at
that late hour.
Appeal to Your Reader’s Good Sense
It is but fair that testimony inconsistent with common
experience is not believed.
CREATIVE THINKING AS LAST LOGICAL
RESORT

• BE SURE THAT YOUR MIND GETS ALL THE DATA AND INPUTS ABOUT THE CASE
THAT YOUR SOURCE MATERIALS WOULD YIELD.

• POSE THE PROBLEM TO YOU MIND. E.G. “HOW CAN I PROVE THAT RONALD DID NOT
RAPE JULIA?”

• FORGET ABOUT THE CASE.

• TAKE TIME OUT AND LET YOUR SUBCONSCIOUS MIND DO THE WORK. GO TO SLEEP.
YOU WILL BE SURPRISED THAT THE ANSWER WILL POP OUT OF YOUR HEAD IN THE
MIDDLE OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING. BE PREPARED TO JOT IT DOWN IMMEDIATELY.
ARGUMENTS THAT BUILD UP

• THE FAVORABLE TESTIMONY COMES FROM A CREDIBLE WITNESS.

• THE TESTIMONIES OF THOSE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE CASE OR THEIR RELATIVES
AND FRIENDS ARE OFTEN REGARDED AS PARTISAN. THOSE WITH NO BIAS, ONE WAY OR
THE OTHER, ARE EXCELLENT WITNESSES.

•THE PARTY’S VERSION IS INHERENTLY CREDIBLE

AND CONSISTENT WITH COMMON EXPERIENCE.
• THE TRUTH OF NARRATIVE STORIES IS OFTEN JUDGED
BY ITS COMPATIBILITY WITH COMMON EXPERIENCE.
• ALL THE ELEMENTS OR REQUISITES OF A VALID CLAIM OR DEFENSE HAVE BEEN
PROVED. SOME LAWS PRESCRIBE FACTUAL ELEMENTS OR REQUISITES IN ORDER
FOR CLAIMS OR DEFENSES TO BE OPERATIVE. YOU MAKE A GOOD ARGUMENT
WHEN YOU PROVE THAT YOU HAVE ESTABLISHED THEM ALL.
ARGUMENTS THAT DESTROY
• THE ARGUMENT RAISED IS IRRELEVANT.
• WHEN IT DOES NOT HELP RESOLVE THE ISSUE/S ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
• E.G. RONALD IS IMMORAL AND IRRESPONSIBLE BECAUSE HE REFUSES TO MARRY JULIA
EVEN WHEN HE ADMITS THAT HE TOOK HER INNOCENCE FROM HER.
• IS THIS ARGUMENT IRRELAVANT? WHY?
• THE ARGUMENT HAS LITTLE WEIGHT GIVEN THE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS IN THE
CASE.
• HERE, YOU ASSUME THAT YOUR OPPONENT HAS MADE A VALID ARGUMENT BUT YOU
HASTEN TO STATE THAT OTHER CONSIDERATIONS OUTWEIGH THAT ARGUMENT.
• RONALD’S FAILURE TO SEE JULIA’S PARENTS TO EXPLAIN HIS SIDE SHOWS HIS GUILT.
• YOU CAN COUNTER AND SAY, “THAT FAILURE CAN BE EXPLAINED. THEIR SONS WOULD
HAVE KILLED RONALD IF HE IMMEDIATELY WENT TO SEE THEM AFTER THEIR DAUGHTER
CRIED RAPE.
• THE ARGUMENT IS BASELESS.
• A CLAIM MADE WITH NO FACT TO SUPPORT IT IS BASELESS.
• E.G. JULIA IS A GOOD, INNOCENT GIRL WHO WOULD NOT CRY RAPE IF IT WERE UNTRUE.
YOU WOULD SAY, IT IS BASELESS AND SINCE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW THAT
SHE IS GOOD AND INNOCENT.

• THE ARGUMENT IS CONTRARY TO COMMON EXPERIENCE.

• AS A RULE, CLAIMS THAT GO AGAINST ORDINARY HUMAN EXPERIENCE ARE BIZARRE
AND CANNOT BE BELIEVED.
• E.G. JULIA WAS NOT AFRAID TO WALK HOME ALONE THROUGH EMPTY RICE FIELDS
NEAR MIDNIGHT.
• YOU CAN SAY, THAT IS UNBELIEVABLE, NO WOMAN IN HER RIGHT MIND WILL DO THAT.
• THE ARGUMENT IS INCONSISTENT WITH UNDENIABLE FACTS.
• NO ASSERTION CAN DEFEAT FACTS THAT CANNOT LIE.
• E.G. JULIA WASTED NO TIME TO FILE HER COMPLAINT AGAINST RONALD.
• YOU SAY, “THE RECORD SHOWS THAT SHE SHOWED UP AT THE POLICE STATION TWO DAYS AFTER THE
ALLEGED RAPE.

• THE ARGUMENT IS INCONSISTENT WITH A PRIOR CLAIM.

- PERSONS WHO SAY ONE THING NOW AND ANOTHER
THING LATER CANNOT BE RELIED ON TO TELL THE TRUTH.
- E.G. JULIA TESTIFIED THAT RONALD WAS HER SUITOR,
YOU
SAY, SHE ONCE ADMITTED TO A FRIEND THAT SHE WAS
HIS SWEETHEART.
PRE-WORK REVIEWED

• SUMMARY OF THE STEPS:

1)ASCERTAIN THE LEGAL DISPUTE
2)MAKE AN OUTLINE OF THE RELEVANT FACTS.
3)IDENTIFY THE ISSUES.
4)ROUGH OUT THE ARGUMENT.