05 OT00087 0

BASIC TECHNIQUES
IN LEGAL REASONING

JOHN DAVE VERGARA

t"d:!'\ Published & Distributed by

~ REX Book Store
856 Nicanor Reyes, Sr. St.
Tel. Nos. 736-05-67 • 735-13-64
1977 C.M. Recto Avenue
Tel. Nos. 735-55-27 • 735-55-34
Manila, Phlllpplnes
www.rexpubllshlng:-com.ph
 JD is a deep thinker. His legal training and experience,
and his passion for rational argument, definitely deepened his
legal and logical mind. This is demonstrated in this book that
you now hold. It is a great honor for me to give the foreword
To:
for his first publication (may you suffer from a 'diarrhea of
the ink' and publish more!). Read it. Study it. Learn from
it. Practice it. And indeed, that "certain kind of mind - the Sarah, Gio, and Tea
legal mind... a mind that is formed by legal reasoning and
argumentation ... (strengthened by) some basic rules of logic"
(p. vii)-a requirement for becoming a genuine lawyer by
heart (not just by profession)-will grow in you as naturally
as a seed grows, drawing nutrients from soil, sun, and water.

Edgar Rene M. Nartatez

PhD Student
Ateneo de Manila University
Adjunct Faculty, Philosophy Department
Ateneo de Davao University

V
- iv
 PREFACE

Every school year, thousands of students flock the

portals of law schools to get a shot at the legal profession.
Sadly, of those who got a law degree, only a few pass the bar
exams conducted yearly by the Supreme Court. It has been
wildly claimed that next to Japan, the Philippines enjoys the
notoriety of having the 2nd most difficult bar exams in the
world. Whether this is true or not, we have no way of knowing
it. Personally though, it is no exaggeration to say that our
bar exams feel like the "Excalibur." Only the "worthy few" ar e
able to draw such a sword every year.
So the crucial question is, how does one become a lawyer?
How does one draw the Excalibur? The technical answer
of course is found in Sections 1, 2, and 5 of Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court. This rule tells us who may practice law in
the Philippines, the requirement of a four-year study of
law, and the requirements before taking the Philippine bar
examination.
But this is not what we are really asking about. Apart
from the legal requirement before taking the bar exams, how
does one really become a lawyer? We know that there are
many who earned law degrees but fall short of passing the bar
exams. Satisfying the legal requirement seems not enough.
Are there any other things needed to become a lawyer?
This humble book tries to answer this question. There
is an important personal skill to become a lawyer. This book
proposes that becoming a lawyer requires a certain kind of
mind - the legal mind. The legal mind is not a litigious mind but
a mind that is formed by legal reasoning and argumentation.
Some basic rules of logic play a vital role in this area. This
book teaches law students, or any person interested in the

-vi vu
subject, on how to use logical reasoning in working out legal
concepts with an aim to obtain a legal mind, a mind that is
necessary in passing the bar exams.
In other words, this book provides methodology in the CONTENTS
legal profession. All kinds of academic pursuits have their
own methodologies. In legal profession, legal reasoning is the I. Introduction ............................................ .................. . 1
basic methodology. When I entered law school, there was no Historical Background of Logic ............ ........... . 2
subject about legal reasoning. Statutory Construction is the Deductive and Inductive Reasonings .............. . 4
subject nearest to this, but it strictly deals with interpreting
a law and does not directly teach how to think logically to Legal Reasoning ............................................... . 5
interpret the laws correctly. Students are somehow expected II. Basic Patterns of Reasoning ..................................... 6
to learn legal reasoning as a by-product of working out legal
Identifying Arguments ..................................... . 7
concepts.
Argument Indicators ........................................ . 8
However, this book sets out only the most basic rules of
legal reasoning. This is not designed as a workbook with lots Nature of Arguments ....................................... . 10
of exercises. The contents simply provide a skeletal frame- Deductive and Inductive Pattern in Court
work of legal reasoning which are needed in analyzing a law, Cases ............. ............................................. 13
court cases, law school and the bar examination questions.
The student or the reader is encouraged to take further steps III. Other Patterns of Legal Reasoning ......................... . 23
in applying what is being discussed in the book to develop Reasoning from Definition .............................. .. 23
confidence in legal reasoning. The contents are primarily
If and Then Reasoning ..................................... . 33
beneficial to law students particularly during their first year .
Almost all of them enter law school with no knowledge of Argument from General Principles of Law ..... . 34
what is involved in the whole enterprise. In this light, this 40
IV. Effective Reading Skills ... ....... .... ............................. .
book also serves as a "manual" for first year law students to
provide them with some kind of an entry level skills to deal Codals and Jurisprudence ............................... . 41
with various legal concepts they will encounter in law school. Read the Materials Repeatedly ................... .... . 42
The examples used in the book are taken from certain Look for Important Words, Phrases,
provisions of the Civil Code, the Revised Penal Code, and and Sentences .... ....................... .............. .. . 43
selected cases. Some examples in Chapters V and VI are taken Read Contextually ... ................ ......................... . 45
from this website: https: I ! upangphinmalaw.files.wordpress.
com. - Accessed date: April 19, 2017. Suggested cases readings Context in Chapters ...................................... ... . 48
are also provided as references for further application of the The Case About the Facts, Issues,
techniques discussed in this book. and Rulings ...................................... .......... 49
J .D. Vergara
October 28, 2016 Read the Decision of the Trial Court
Davao City, Philippines or the Labor Arbiter a nd the NLRC .. ....... 50

-viii lX
 "FIR" Method in Case Digests ... .... .... ........ ....... 52
Historical Discussions.. ..................................... 57
V. Examination Questions Analysis ............................ . 61
Objective and Problem Type Questions .......... . 61
The "FIR" Pattern in Problem Type I
Questions .................................................. . 65
Seeing the Syllogism in the Problem ............. .. 65 INTRODUCTION
Facts to Elements (oflaw) Correspondence .... . 68
at is logic? Here's an answer from Comedy Central:
VI. Argumentative Writing ............................................ . 70
"Two rednecks, Bubba and Cooter, decided that they
Argumentative Writing Defined ...................... . 70 weren't going anywhere in life and thought they should
The Syllogistic Pattern in Argumentative go to college to get ahead.
Writing ....................................................... 73 Bubba goes in first, and the professor advises him to take
math, history and logic.
''What's logic?" asked Bubba.
The professor answered, "Let me give you an example. Do
you own a weed-whacker?"
"I sure do," answered the redneck.
''Then I can assume, using logic, that you have a yard,"
replied the professor.
"That's real good," the redneck responded in awe.
The professor continued, "Logic will also tell me that since
you have a yard, you also have a house."
Impressed, the redneck shouted, "AMAZING!"
"And since you own a house, logic dictates that you have
a wife."
"Betty Mae! This is incr edible!"
"Finally, since you have a wife, logically I can assume
that you are h eterosexual," said the professor.
''You're absolutely right! Why, that's th e most fascinating
thing I ever heard of! I can't wait to take this logic class."
Bubba, proud of the new world opening up to him, walked
back into the hallway where Cooter was waiting.
"So, what classes are ya takin?" he asks.
''Math, history and logic," replies Bubba.

-x
2 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Coot er asks, "What's logic?"
"Let me give you an example. Do ya own a weed-eater ?"
"No."
''You're gay, ain't ya?" 1
On a serious note, logic comes from the Greek word "logos,"
which literally means "word" or "speech ." It also means "a plea,"
"reason" or "discourse."2 The early Greek philosophers began
using this term to mean "principle of order and knowledge."3
As a principle, it is used as a tool to evaluate the val ue of a n
assertion or truth claims.
Today, logic is popularly defined as "t he science and
art of_correct t}Jinking."4 Science is a systematized body of
k nowledge. Logic as science simply means that it employs t he
same appr oac~.11nd attit1J..de in stud ing its obj e.ct .5 It relies on
~reful observation, critical analysis, and COI).clusive rational
proofs .
Argumen ts are th e object of study in logic. Here, they
are carefully consider ed a nd critically analyzed. Most impor-
ta ntly, t heir conclusions a r e evaluated as to how necessary or
probable their assertions are.
Historical Background of Logic
Historically, the development of logic as a study can
be traced back to the Greek P re-Socratic philosophers,6
starting wit h Thales of Miletus around 585 B.C. These pre-
1
b ttp://jokes.cc.com/funny-blue-collar/edx2nzlhighly-illogica1. - Accessed
date: October 28, 2016.
2
b ttps://en .wikipedia .org/wiki/Logos. - Accessed date: April 19, 2017.
3Richard D. McKirahan , A Presocratic Reader, Hackett Publishing Com.,
Inc., 1995.
4
Andrew H. Bachhuber, S.J., Introduction To Logic, Appleton-Century-
Croft, Inc., New York, 1957, p. 1.
6
Bachhuber observes t he tendency today to restrict the meanin g of th e
word "science" to only empirical or natural sciences su ch as Physics. He main-
tains that logic is a science in th at sense that "it is certain a nd systematized
knowledge", p. 4.
6Richard D. McKirah a n, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., Jndja napo-
lis, 1996.
I - INTRODUCTION 3
Socratic philosophers ask ed questions about the nature of
the physical world. They proposed various answers a nd t heo-
ries to these questions. With these varied a nswers, th e need
- ---
to find out which on e of them are tru~e beca me imperative.
---- ------ -
Pla to (428-347 B.C.), a t lea st bega n asking t he veracity
a nd validity of ideas and theories. He asked, "What is it that
can properly be ca lled true or fa lse?", "Wha t is the nature of
the connection between the asS;11J:E..tio!!§ of_a uali<i,. aJ;glj,men t_
and its conctusion?': ''What is the na tur~ of d,efin,ition?"1 This
un crubteafy star ted a way
ofseeing logic as an obj ect of study.
Later, logic became itself a branch of Philosophy. 8
It was Aristot le (384 B.C.) who began to actually lay
down t he ground for logic as a n object of study in itself. In his
work "Topics," he laid down t he nature of reasoning to quote,
"... reasoning is an argum ent in w hich certai n things bein_g laid
d OWJb,..§..O!Jl,e{IJ:ing oth.er:..than necessaTJ!. comes a boul, thrQl!:Ch
them . " 9 This descr ibes wha t we now know as "si:llgg!,sm.:'' Syllo-
gism is a form of argument where the conclusion is drawn
from a set of premises. The typical exam ples of syllogism are:
"All men are mortal.
Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal."
And:
"Socrates is mortal.
P la to is mortal.
Aristotle is mortal.
Socrat es, P lato, and Aristotle are a ll m e n .
Therefore, all men are mortal."
As we can see, the for m above con tain s statemen ts which
are called pre mises followed by a conclusion . The latter comes
as the necessar y outcome of t h e premises. The first example
7https://en.wikipedia.or g/wiki/History_of_logic. - Accessed date: April 19,
2017.
8Andr ew Bachhuber explains that logic "...introduces us to philosophy
by inviting (or even compelling) us to philosophize. It introduces us to the
abstract thinking in philosophy a nd familiarizes us with some of its technical
terminology'', p. 9.
9Aristotle, Topics, as translated by W.A. Pickard, Cambridge.
4 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
is what is known as "deductive reasoning" and the second is
known as "inductive reasoning."
Deductive and Inductive Reasonings
Deductive reasoning is an argument where the conclusion
is the necessary outcome of the premises while inductive
reasoning is one where the conclusion is a probable outcome
of the premises.
In the first example, we start with a general statement
about man - that he is mortal. If we grant that this statement
is true, then the conclusion that Socrates is mortal necessarily
"follows" as a matter of course. Socrates being "man" is
effectively included in the set of "mortals" based on the first
premise. This ~nd premise "necessitates" the conclusion,
"Socrates is mortal." This is deductive reaso~ng. In logic this
"necessity'' is known as inference.
In the second example, we started with a series of par-
ticular statements, namely: Socrates is mortal, Plato is mortal,
and Aristotle is mortal. If we grant these statements to be
true, must we conclude from these that all men are mortals?
Does this conclusion "follows" from these statements?
For us to truly conclude that all men are mortals, we have
to account for all men in the world not just Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle. This conclusion therefore does not "follow" and
hence, inconclusive.
However, is it probable that based on our account of these
three persons we can conclude that all men are mortal? Yes,
but such conclusion is only "probable," meaning, it is may be
true or not. In other words, the conclusion is falsifiable. This
is inductive reasoning-l~p.~ t is a proba ilistic reasonmg.
To identify an argument as deductive or inductive, is not
a walk in the park. 10 How the premises relate to the conclusion
10Patrick J . Hurley explains, "the distinction between inductive and
deductive arguments lies in the strength of an ar gume nt's inferential claim.
In most arguments, however, the strength of t his clai m is not explicitly stated,
I - INTRODUCTION 5
is key. If the premises are such that the conclusion is necessary,
then it is a deductive reasoning. On the other hand, if the
premises are such that the conclusion is only probable, then it
is an inductive reasoning. But let us move quickly to our main
subject- the legal reasoning.
Legal Reasoning
In the legal profession, logical reasoning is a vital tool.
_!,egal knowlec!,~e is formed by the rules on !2wc. What we have
toaay as legal knowledge isthe product of logical reasoning.
Vern R. Walker writes that legal reasoning is the "...tool we
~_i!.:.!!!.rP!~!i TJ:K$.,Onsti!'!:.~£oM, _gaJl.f:!e~ !J:!l: !..eff..ulationll.,J..n
~ cing fundament_a_l pri71cJE!!~....E!!:.(Polic,ie~, ~ JP._ting
and modilYi..!:B.!egal rulrs, inJ:EPlY..i'!:.Q. those rules to cases, in
evaluating evid! nce, 2-ng in .!!!::.q_k,.ing,ul(imate decisions. " 11
This means that a law student, in pursuing a law degree,
and a lawyer, writing his pleadings, must use logical reasoning
for such respective tasks. It is the student's tool for law studies
and the lawyer's tool for law practice. This is true with the job
of judges and justices. Court decisions are formed using legal
reasoning. Logical reasoning therefore is the bedrock of all
legal knowledge. --
In the following chapters, we will see how the patterns
of reasoning that are taken from logic are applied to legal
reasoning. We will see how these can apply when analyzing
the law, court cases, including law school and bar examination
questions.
so we must use our interpretive skills to evaluate it." Patrick J . Huerley, A
Concise Introduction to Logic, Wadsworth Publishing Company, California,
1991, p . 29.
11
• Vern Walker, Discovering the Logic of Legal Reasoning, Hofstra Law
Review,(h ttp://sch olarlycom mons. Iaw .h ofstra .edu/cgi/viewcon tent.cgi? article
· 2283& context=hlr) - Accessed date: March 28, 2017.

II
BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONING
E ·v erything in the universe has form - squares, rec-
tangles, circles, triangles, etc. These forms make up all things
around us. The early Greek philosophers observed these
forms when they studied geometry. They saw these shapes
as repeating patterns found in leaves, trees, mountains, sky,
and everything else in nature. What is more profound is that
these philosophers observed that these shapes or patterns
can be understood mathematically. This became the way they
viewed mathematics. 1
Aristotle applied this notion of shapes and patterns in
logical reasoning. Like mathematics, reasoning has a pattern,
~ shap~. Through these pattern;,' assertions can e evalua-
ted. The truth and validity of any assertion can be known
by evaluating reasoning patterns. These patterns in turn,
make up the rules oflogic. We have introduced its most basic
form in Chapter 1, namely, the syllogism and the patterns
of r easoning such as deductive and inductive reasoning. All
these, along with other kinds of arguments such as arguing
from authority, arguing from definition, and arguing from
analogy are the very methods used by lawyers and judges in
formulating legal concepts, interpreting statutes and resolving
legal problems. 2
However, legal reasoning adds its own unique pattern.
Lawyers and judges use the "FIR" method. FIR stands for
1Keith Devlin, The Math Gene, Phoenix, 2001, p. 10.
ZVern Walker, Discovering the Logic of Legal Reasoning, Hofstra Law
Review,(http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=
2283&context =hlr) - Accessed date: March 28, 2017.
6 201 1, Vol. 36, No. 4, pp. 3-4.
II - BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONING 7
'.'.fu.~ts,': "issu~ " and "rulin,j." Facts refer to the factual content
of a legal problem, the issues are the points of contentions
therein, and the ruling is the conclusions or more specifically,
the decisions of the courts in the resolution of such legal
problem. This is also the underlying pattern used by lawyers
in writing pleadings and other papers such as motions or
petitions submitted to the court. Law students are also trained
to use this pattern in digesting published decisions of th e
Supreme Court. We will discuss this further in Chapter 4.
Identifying Arguments
Understanding legal reasoning starts with identifying
~r,$·
arguments. Arzyments .ar~ ~he sgecimen in learning legaJ
To an untrained mind, an argument is lost in the
sea o words:
Example 1:
''They placed social harmony above individual rights,
welfare of the community over individual satisfaction,
compassion above apathy, sacrifice over self-fulfillment,
spirituality above materialism, and they taught that t he
social life of a person must always be in harmony with
the universe. Thus, under such ideology, the indigenes'
customary law developed such notions as communal own-
ership of land, the right to ancestral domain, acquisition
of virgin land through family cultivation, concepts of eco-
logical (as distinguished from environmental) justice, a nd
development of methods of r esolving disputes by using a
'go-between', or by the use of metaphors instead of logical
reasoning."3
This long winded paragraph, which is actually composed
of only two sentences, appears to be highly confusing at first
glance. But by carefully looking at certain "key'' words in this
paragraph, its main idea is shown and its argument is seen.
Here we see the word "thus" which by itself, indicates some
3 Pacifico A. Agabin, The Influence of Philippine Indigenous Law in the
Development of New Concept of Social Justice, IBP Journal, October - December
8 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
kind of a concluding thought. This indicates that from the
word "thus" everything that follows is a conclusion or a part
thereof. With this in mind, we can simply mentally add the
word ''because" at the beginning of the first sentence, and we
can now see its argument:
"(Because) They placed social harmony above indi-
vidual rights, welfare of the community over individual
satisfaction , compassion above apathy, sacrifice over
self-fulfillment, spirituality above materialism, a nd they
taught that the social life of a person must always be in
ha rmony with the universe.
Thus, under such ideology, the indigenes' customary
law developed such notions as communal ownership of
land, the right to ancestral domain, acquisition of virgin
land through family cultivation, concepts of ecological
(as distinguished from environmental) justice, and deve-
lopment of methods of resolving disputes by using a 'go-
between', or by the use of metaphors instead of logical
reasoning."
Now we know that the argument is simply this: Because
they (the indigenous referred to in this paragraph) put
importance in social harmony and community welfare
over individual needs and desires, indigenous custom-
ary law develop the following concepts, namely, com-
munal ownership, right to ancestral domain, etc. The
argument is that indigenous customary law is such because
of the indigenous peoples' values.
Argument Indicators
What we did here is simply identify an "argument indi-
cator" which is the word "thus" in the example no. 1. Argument
indicators h elp us unlock the intended argument in statements
like the example above.
The following are the typical examples of concluding
words which serves as argument indicators:4
4
See Pa trick J . Hurley, p. 3.
II - BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONI NG 9
/ therefore, ,, hence
,,, whence accordingly
, wherefore thus
~ consequently ,, it follows that
, we may conclude ,, entails that
.,, We may infer .,, implies that
/ It must be that 1 as a result
Whenever we see these words or any words that con-
cludes, we know that an argument exists. Another argument
indicator in the example above is the word "because" which
we added to example no. 1. When statements begin with
''because" it indicates an argument. The word is indicative of
some kind of a cause and effect: ''because A killed B, A is liable
for homicide."
Below is another example:
Example 2:
"Because prelil!!inary investigation began as ~judi-
cial process conducted by a judge to determine r eason able
ground and probable cause whether or not to issu e a
warrant of arrest,!!!i-e present preliminary investigation
effectively disallow the cooperation of the police and pro-
secutors in case build-up a nd investigation crucial to t he
successful prosecution and conviction of criminals."5
Here, we see the word ''because" from the start of this
sentence. It is indicative of the cause of some effect. What is
the cause here? The cause is that preliminary investigation
was conducted as a judicial process. What is the effect? The
effect is this: preliminary investigation disallows police and
prosecutors to "cooperate" or work together to build up the
criminal investigation crucial to the conviction of criminals.
This observation is made because in preliminary investiga-
tions, prosecutors are expected to a ssume an impartial role
like that of judges in determining probable cause. In such
Gl,eila M. De Lima, Geronimo L. Sy, A Short History of Preliminary
Jnuestination, IBP J ournal, Octob r-Occember 2011, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 84.
10 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
system, they distance themselves from police investigators
and this is counterproductive in the development of a criminal
case according to this argument because these prosecutors are
the ones who will eventually prosecute the case in court.
Another argument indicator which is often used is the
term, "admittedly." The idea is quite obvious: something is
admitted as true or obviously agreeable. It may be an evidence,
a testimony, or a theory and the same is admitted as true or
considered as obviously agreeable.
Example 3:
"Admittedly, petitioners had been granted a right of
way through the other adjacent lot owned by the Spouses
Arce. In fact, other lot owners use the said outlet in going
to and coming from the public highway. Clearly, there is
an existing outlet to and from the public road."6
Here, what is said to be admitted is the existence of a right
of way. The use of lot owners of such passage way as an outlet
to the public road shows an obvious conclusion that a right of
way exists. The conclusion of this argument is indicated by
the word "Clearly."
Nature of Arguments
Arguments are ~ me11t§ wJ.u.£h try to prove som.ethiQ.g
as true tor
Ti!~e). 7 In other words, these statementsl!!!Y.e
"evidentiary'' nature in them that qualify them as arguments.
In the published court decisions of the Philippine Supreme
Court known as the Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA),
we can identify the arguments of the following participating
courts in a case, namely, the trial court, the Court of Appeals,
and of course, the Supreme Court itself. The same is true in
labor cases where there are levels such as the Labor Arbiter, the
NLRC, and of course, the Court of Appeals, and the Supreme
6 Quoted from Survey of 2010 Supreme Court Decisions in Property and
Land Registration, IBP Journal, October .December 2011, Vol. 36, No. 4, p. 113.
7
Patrick Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic, Wadsworth Publishing
Company, Belmont California, 1991, p. 13.
II - BASIC PA'ITERNS OF REASONING 11
Court. It is important that in reading the SCRA, we must be
able to identify and evaluate all th~ ~ fil!ments made..by the
lower courts therein and not just look at the arguments made
y the Sup.;me Court. However, the arguments of th e lower
courts in the SCRA are normally written in the third person
as they are simply referred to by the Supreme Court. But we
can deduce these arguments by carefully understanding what
the statements say about them.
Let us look at some examples.
Example 4:
''The RTC also ruled that treachery attended the
killing of the victim for the prosecution's evidence shows
that accused·appellant suddenly and unexpectedly
appeared and shot the victim who did not sense any
danger upon him."8
Is there an argument in this statement? Yes. The Regional
Trial Court (RTC) is arguing that the crime committed by
the accused is murder because the killing is by means of
treachery. Treachery in the Revised Penal Code refers to the
manner of committing the crime. Killing a person can either
be homicide or murder depen drng on the presence of ~alifying
cir.s.!J.mstances such as, in this example, treachery. ...
With treachery, the killing is committed in such a way
that its execution is ensured without danger to the perpe-
trator. Here, the RTC argues that the accused "suddenly and
unexpectedly appeared and shot the victim who did not sense
any danger upon him" which connotes treachery. The trial
court is trying to prove that the crime committed is murder
because of the treacherous nature of the attack. All these are
shown to us by the example given.
Example 5:
"He testified that h e was able to positively identify
accused appellant at the time of the shooting becau se th e
8People v. Llobera, G.R. No. 203066, August 5, 2015.
12 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
place wher e the shooting occurred was illuminated by the
moon, the lights from the neighbor s' houses, and the lamp
gaser a at his uncle's h ouse."9
Here, a per son t estified that he could identify the accused
at the time of the shooting because of the following factors:
th e place was illuminated by the moon, the lights from the
neighbor's houses, and the lamp from an uncle's house. By his
testimony of identifying the accused, he is asserting that the
latter was the one who shot the victim. It is relatively easy to
deduce the arguments even from these statements .
Example 6:
''The case at bar takes u s to a most difficult area of
constitutional law wher e man s tands accountable to an
authority higher than t he state. To be held on balance are
the states inter est and the r espondents' religious freedom.
In this highly sensitive area of law, the task of balancing
between authority and liberty is most delicate because to
the person invok ing religious freedom, the consequences
of the case are not only tempor al." 10
From this example, we see a first person statement by
the Supreme Cour t . Do you find an argument in these state-
ments? Not ;really. These statements do not appear to be
provin g something as true. They are stl;!_tements that inform
the difficult task of balancing public interest and religious
freedom. They are d~clffltivesentences"'b y the cou.rt a out
1 gregation that sh e and her ma te are a r espect able and
certain things. They7an be W ormatio~al but are not in them-
selves arguments. The words we see h ere are preliminar y
st atements which ar e normally found in Supreme Court cases.
Let us have another example from the same case:
Example 7:
"Estrada argued, t hrough counsel, that t he Declara-
tion of Pledging Faithfulness recognizes t h e supremacy of
the proper public authorities such t hat s he bound h erself
9 People v. Llobera, supra.
10
Estrada v. Escri tor , A.M. No. P-02-1651, August 4, 2003.
II - BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONI NG 13
to seek means to ...legalize their unionJ riit"~f.ilven assum-
ing arguendo that the declaration is valid a nd binding in
her congregation, it is binding only to her co-members in
the congregation a nd serves only th e internal purpose of
displaying to the r est of the congregation th at sh e and
her mate ar e a respectable and morally upright couple.
Their religiou s belief a nd practice, however, cannot over-
ride the norms of conduct r equired by law for government
employees. To rule otherwise would cr eate a dangerous
precedent a s t hose who cannot legalize their live-in rela -
tionship can simply join the J ehovah's Witnesses congre-
gation and use their r eligion as a defense a gainst legal
lia bility." 11
Here, we are informed right away that "Estrada argued."
By careful reading of this paragraph, we find that Es.tra.2a
arg®d to dispxgve the validity of the so-s_~l}_ed_::pe~lar:_~ ion
of Pledging Faithfulness." e argued that the document itself
recognizesthe supremacy, i.e., the priority of public authorities
(existing laws on marriage), and that such document, being a
private document, is binding only to priva te persons, part icu-
larly in this example, the members of the J ehovah's Witnesses.
Cited here is Estra da's reasoning: 'f""
~Thu~ even assuming arguendo that the declaration
is valid a nd binding in h er con gregation, it is binding only
to her co-members in t he congrega tion a nd serves only
the internal purpose of displaying to th e rest of t he con-
morally upright couple."
In learning legal rea soning, one must develop th e ability
to identify the argument in a statement. This is a vital skill
that must be acquired by a student of law if he is determined
to succeed in his pursuit of legal profession.
Deductive and Inductive Pattern in Court Cases
At this point, we shall discuss the most important and
most basic patterns of argument in legal r easoning, n amely,
11 Estrada v. Escri tor, supra.
14 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
the deductive and the inductive patterns. Again, deductive
reasoning is one where the conclusion is the necessary out-
come of the premises, while inductive reasoning is one where
the conclusion is the "probable" outcome of the premises.
The crucial thing to do is this: to be. ab{e to if.te1'J.tilxJ!,e
"syllogist~cal :'.P.s,.ttgr.n .of. f:ll&.gJ:a-umep._tirJ, c:ou.rt .C:a$£S. We must
be able to construct its syllogism and identify what kind of
argument (deductive or inductive) is put forward.
From thereon, we will apply this technique in the ex-
amples in this book. Let us now construct the syllogism of
Estrada's argument in the example no. 7:
1. Private instruments are binding only to private
persons who are parties therein;
2. The Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness is drawn
by the members of the Jehovah's Witnesses who are
private persons;
3. Hence, it is binding only to its members.
By identifying and constructing the syllogistical pattern
of an argument, we can easily evaluate its reasoning. With
this technique, we can say that the argument above is a
deductive argument where the conclusion "follows" from the
premises. If premise no. 1 is true: private instruments are
binding only to private persons who are parties therein, and
if factual premise no. 2 is also true: the document was drawn
and signed by private persons, then the conclusion no. 3: the
document binds only the parties to it "follows" or "necessitates"
from these given premises. That is the nature of a deductive
argument.
Let us have other example:
Example 8:
"Firstly, the court is of the opinion that granting the
petition would be more in consonance with the principles
of justice and equity. With his sexua l re-assignment,
petitioner, who has always felt, thought, and acted like
a woman, now possesses the physique of a female. Peti-
II - BASIC PA'ITERNS OF REASONING 15
tioner's misfortune to be trapped in a man's body is not
his own doing and should not be in any way taken against
him."12
Example no. 8 is a petition filed seeking to "correct" the
entries of the name and gender in a birth certificate. The
petitioner wanted to change his name "Rommel" to ''Mely''
and his gender being a ''Male" to "Female." He presented the
following allegations: that he was already a female physically
due to his sex re-assignment surgery, and that this now
created a factual discrepancy in his birth certificate needing
the latter to be corrected. The trial court granted his petition
and its argument is the one quoted above.
Let us construct the syllogism for this example.
1. Petitioner always feels, acts, and thinks like a
woman;
,,, 2. He is a woman trapped in a man's body;
3. This is a misfortune and the petitioner is a victim
thereof;
I 4. Hence, granting his petition is just and equitable.
The lower court is using the inductive reasoning. Its pre-
mises contains particular facts such as: feeling, acting, and
thinking as a woman by the petitioner, which are then used
as the basis in concluding: that the petitioner is "a woman
trapped in a man's body," that his situation is "a misfortune"
and that to grant his petition would be "just and equitable."
Noticeably, statements nos. 2,3,4 are the concluding state-
ments for this inductive argument.
We already learned that the conclusions gf.a iqg ctiv,,e
reasoning are "probabilistic," which means they are more or
l ess true. The conclusions drawn by the trial court are highly
"improbable" or "unlikely." That petitioner is "a woman
trapped in a man's body," and that the same is a "misfortune,"
and finally that this is an issue of "justice" do not "follow"
12Silverio v. Republic, G.R. No. l 74680, October 22, 2007.
16 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
from the particular premise given here. This is a fallacious
reasoning known as argument "nonk.8$9,.UJJ.:u.r;'' which means
that th,e cgnclusion/s does/do notfol OW from the P!-'emise or
pre~ises.
Further, the statement concluding that the petitioner
is a "woman trapped in a man's body'' is at best a metaphor
drawn from subjective personal feelings of the petitioner.
They are "personal opinions" that do not factor in primarily
the resolutions of court cases. 13 Courts of law deal only with
fa~ts and.Jal'Lfill.Jl.uoLwith m!lta ors or an kind oOiterary
--
devices.
Let us proceed to another example in the same case.
Example 9:
"Before a person can legally change his given name,
he must present proper or reasonable cause or any com-
pelling reason justifying such change. In addition, he
must show that he will be prejudiced by the use of his true
and official name. In this case, he failed to show, or even
allege, any prejudice that he might suffer as a result of
using is true and official name." 14
This argument is clearly a deductive argument. It starts
with a general rule about changing one's given name, i.e., that
a person must show "reasonable cause" or "compelling reason"
for him to change his given name. Additionally, such person
must show that he suffers prejudice as a result of using his
current given name. In this case, the petitioner failed to show
any prejudice that he might suffer as a result of using his true
name.
Although the conclusion is not spelled out here, we
know what it is because, again, in a deductive argument the
conclusion follows from the premises. The change of name
here cannot be granted.
!SUnder Rule 130, Section 50, last par., of the Rules of Court, a witness
may testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance
of a person.
14 Silverio v. Republic, G.R. No. 174680, October 22, 2007.
II - BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONING 17
The syllogisms for this argument are as follows:
,, 1. A person may change his given name if he can show
reasonable or compelling reason for such change or
that the use of his given name causes him prejudice.
2. In this case, (he) failed to show any reasonable or
compelling reason for the change of his given name,
and neither did he show any prejudice in u sing such
given name.
/ 3.
Therefore, (he) cannot be allowed to change his given
name.
In law, there is what is known as ','circumstantial evi-
dence." Circumstantial evidence is an indirect evid,_ence; it,)
__......
tends ·-
to prove indirectly the existence or non-existence of a -
fact or event. In criminal cases, circumstantial evidence is
16
sufficient to convict a person when: 6J> there are more than
one circumstance, ~ the facts from which the inferences are
derived are proven,e the combination of all the circumstances
is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt. 16
Looking at this criterion, we see circumstantial evidence
as akin to an inductive argument because the conclusion
(conviction in a criminal case) is derived from particular cir-
cumstances. Let's take a look at the case of Viray v. People
of the Philippines. 17 /
Viray was employed as ~ dog keeper and was charged
with the crime of qualified theft. His employer alleged that
she locked the doors of her h ouse and left Viray to attend t he
dogs in her compound. When the employer came home, she
noticed several of her things missing - jewelry, game boy,
cell phones, CD players; and that the front door of her house
was destroyed. She also found a plastic bag near h er bedroom
which contained a t-shirt and a pair of sh orts belonging to
Viray.
1 5www.freedictionary.com. - Accessed date: March 28, 2017.
16 Section 4, Rule 134, Revised Rules on Evidence, Rex Book Store, Inc.,
2005, p. 472.
17
G.R. No. 205180, November ll , 2013.
18 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Here, we have several circumstances: Viray was left with
the dogs, several personal properties of the employer were
missing, the front door was destroyed, and a plastic bag owned
by Viray found near the employer's bedroom and containing
Viray's t-shirt and shorts.
Let us now identify the inductive argument in this case.
Take note that in this case, different conclusions were drawn
by the trial court, Court of Appeals, and the Supreme Court.
Example 10:
1. Viray was left with the dogs in the house of his
employer;
2. Items belonging to the employer were missing, the
front door destroyed, and a plastic bar was found
near the employer's bedroom containing Viray's
t-shirt and shorts;
3. A neighbor, a laundry woman who saw Viray at the
time of the crime with a male companion carrying a
big sack, leaving the house of the complainant;
4. Another laundry woman who said she saw Viray at
the time of the crime inside the house of the com-
plainant;
These are the particular premises in this case. The con-
clusions drawn from these however are varied. The trial court
' -
cg_,,n victed Viray with:toboery,because the dooc.wa.$..de.stroye.d
to get th e property. It argued that there is "force u on things"
and hence the crime is robbery. The Cou t .9f...~@eals says
no. According to it, Viray enjoyed the trust and confidence o f
th; employer because the latter entrusted her dogs with him.
Viray breached th at trust and confidence when he destroyed
the door. Hence, Viray is guilty of u alifi.ed theft. The Supreme
Court however said both the trial court and the Court of
Appeals are wrong:
"The allegation in the information that the offender
is a la borer of the offended party does not by itself,
without more, create the relation of confidence a nd
II - BASIC PATI'ERNS OF REASONING 19
intimacy required by law for th e imposition of t he penalty
prescribed for qualified t heft. Hence, the conclusion
reach ed by the appellate court t hat petitioner committed
qualified theft because he 'enjoyed the confidence of the
priva te complainant, being the caretaker of the latter's
pets' is without legal basis. The offended party's ver y own
a dmission that the accused was never allowed to enter
the house where t he stolen properties were kept r efutes
the existence of the high degree of confidence that the
offender could have allegedly abused by 'forcing open the
doors of t he same house.'"
The Supreme Court convicted Vir~y of Si~pl~ Thef-~nly
because h e was not all.owe O enter t e
house belying the
presence of trust and confidence. It seems that the kind of
confidence n eeded to qualify the crime of theft is a ''high degree
g_ug,nfiden"ce" which the ·courtaiclnot seehere. Furth er, wiiat
were stolen were those things not entrusted to Viray. Had
the dogs been the things stolen, the crime would perhaps be
qualified theft. All in all, cases with..circumsta tjal evidence
~e goo~.: xa~r>les of in~u ctive reasoning.
In sum, we h ave learned that legal reasoning follows
the basic patterns of logic such as deductive and inductive
syllogism. To better understand court cases, we need to identify
and construct the syllogistical forms of the arguments found
in them. We also learned that arguments indicator s help us
unlock the logical reasoning of certain statements. In the next
chapter we will explore oth er patterns of legal reasoning.
Exercises:
Identify if the item is an argument or not. If the item is
an argument, identify its argument indicator if there is any
and construct its syllogism. If the item is not a n argument,
give reasons for your an swer.
1. The trial court declared th at Aguete did not sign the
loan documents, did not appear before the Notary
Public to acknowledge the execution of the loan
documents, did not receive the loan proceeds from
20 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
PNB, and was not aware of the loan until PNB
notified her in August 1978 that she and her family
should vacate the mortgaged property because of the
expiration of the redemption period. Under the Civil
Code, the effective law at the time of the transaction,
Ros could not encumber any real property of the con-
jugal partnership without Aguetes consent. Aguete
may, during their marriage and within 10 years
from the transaction questioned, ask the courts for
the annulment of the contract her husband entered
into without her consent, especially in the present
case where her consent is required. 18
2. The appellate court stated that the trial court
concluded forgery without adequate proof; thus
was improper for the trial court to rely soiely on
Aguetes testimony that her signatures on the loan
documents were forged. The appellate court dec-
lared that Aguete affixed her signatures on the
documents knowingly and with her full consent.
Assuming arguendo that Aguete did not give her
consent to Ros loan, the appellate court ruled that
the conjugal partnership is still liable because the
loan proceeds redounded to the benefit of the family.
The records of the case reveal that the loan was used
for the expansion of the family's business. Therefore,
the debt obtained is chargeable against the conjugal
partnership. 19
3. I also believe that as an Associate Justice of the
Court (who can no longer take part if and when the
present case comes up to the Court for review), I have
the duty to express my views on any interpretation
of the applicable provisions of the 1987 Constitution
- particularly on a point that I believe had been
erroneously applied - for to condone an error and
the practices that spring from it, is to violate my
18Aguete v. Philippine Na tional Bank, G.R. No. 170166, April 6, 2011.
19Jbid.
II- BASIC PATTERNS OF REASONING 21
oath of office by permitting a continuing violation of
the Constitution. 20
4. The respondent cannot also be considered a natural-
born Philippine citizen:
a. since her citizenship cannot be established, re-
cognized, or presumed, she had no citizenship
to reacquire under Republic Act No. 9225;
b. even if she had been a natural-born Philippine
citizen, her naturalization in the U.S. rendered
her ineligible to be considered natural-born. As
a foreigner who had undergone an expedited
form of naturalization under Republic Act No.
9225, she had to perform acts to acquire Phil-
tt ippine citizenship and did not, therefore fall
under the Constitution's definition of a natural
born citizen.
I, therefore, vote to disqualify the respondent
Grace Poe for the position of Senator of the Republic
of the Philippines. 21
5. The Cleveland standard, however, does not throw
light to the issue in the case at bar. The pronounce-
ments of the U.S. Supreme Court that polygamy is
mtrinsically odious or barbaric do not apply in the
Phili pines where Muslims, by"mw," are 'a1lowed to
practice polygamy. Unlike in Cleveland, there is no
jurisprudence in Philippine jurisdiction holdi;;g th; t
the defense of religious freedom of a member of the
Jehovah's Witnesses under the same circumstances
as respondent will not prevail over the laws on
adultery:, coji~u....binage or some othe,r law. We cannot
summarily conclude therefore that her conduct is
likewise so odious and barbaric as to be immoral
and punishable by law. 22
20
Dissenting opinion of Justice Brion in the SET Case No. 001-15 -
Rizalito Y. David v. Mary Grace Poe Llamanzares.
21[bid.
22
Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02- 165 1, August 4, 2003.
22 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING

Su ggest ed Case Read ing:

1. People v. Ofiza, G.R. No. 203066, August 5, 2015.
2. Estrada v. Escritor, AM. No. P -02-1651, August 4, III
2003.
OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING
3. Silverio v. Republic, G.R. No. 174680, October 22,
2007.
In the previous ch apter, we learned about deductive and
4. Viray v. People, G.R. No. 205180, November 11,
inductive reasoning, and argument indicators. In this chap-
2013.
ter, we will be dealing with other patterns oflogical reasoni:gg
that are u sed in legal reasoning. These patterns are the
following: "reasoning from definition," "if and then reasoning,"
and "reasoning from the principles of law."

Reasoning from Definition

Sometimes the key to resolving a legal problem lies in
defining a term. In such a situation, the arguments we find
center around the very definition of such a term. In logic, the
arguments are referred to as "arguments from definition." (D
An argument from definition "is an argument in which th e
conclusion is claimed to depen d merely upon the definition
of som ord or hrase used in the r · e or conclusion."•
There are a number of cases ec1 ed by the Supreme ourt
which can be categorized as arguments from definition . Let us
take a look at some of them.
Example 11:
"Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court,
which requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience. 'To engage in the
practice of law is to p erform t hose acts which are charac-
teristics of the profession . Generally, to practice law is
to give n otice or r ender any kind of service, which device
or service r equires the use in any degree of legal know-

1Patrick J . Hurley. A Concise Introduction to Logic, Wadswort h Publishing

Compa ny, Belmont California, 1991, p. 31.

23
24 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
ledge or skill' .. .lnterpreted in the light of the various
definitions of the term 'Practice of law' particularly the
modern concept of law practice, and taking into consid-
eration the liberal construction intended by the framers
of the Constitution, Atty. Monsod's past work experiences
as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-
entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts,
and a lawyer-legislator of both the rich and the poor -
verily more than satisfy the constitutional requirement
- that he has been engaged in the practice of law for at
least ten years."
This example is taken from the case of Cayetano v.
Monsod. 2 In this case, Atty. Monsod was appointed by former
President Corazon Aquino as Chairman of the Commission on
Election. Atty. Cayetano challenged the validity of Monsod's
appointment saying that the latter was not in the practice of
law for at least 10 years.
The issue here is obvious: What is the "practice of law''?
The Supreme Court took great pains in discussing the diverse
conceptions of the term historically, and it took note of what it
refers to as "modern concept of law practice." It then defined
the practice of law as:
1. any activity, in or out of court, which requires the
application oflaw, legal procedure, knowledge, train-
ing and experience;
2. to give notice or render any kind of service, which
device or service requires the use in any degree of
legal knowledge or skill;
This definition was then applied favorably to Atty.
Monsod, to wit: 'Litty. Monsod's past work experiences... more
than satisfy the constitutional requirement - that he has been
engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years." Let us
now put example no. 8 in a syllogism:
2
G.R. No. 100113, September 3, 1991.
III - OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 25
1. The Comelec Chairman must have engaged in the
practice of law for at least 10 years prior to his
appointment as such ;
2. The practice of law means, any activity, in or out of
court, which requires the application of law, legal
procedure, knowledge, training and experience; to
give notice or render any kind of service, which device
or service requires the use in any degree of legal
knowledge or skill;
3. Atty. Monsod's past work experiences as a lawyer-
economist, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-entrepreneur
of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts, and a
lawyer-legislator of both the rich a nd the poor for
more than 10 years con stitute the practice of law;
4. Therefore, Atty. Monsod is qualified to be appointed
as Comelec Chairman.
Another example of argument from definition is the
case of Orceo v. Comelec. 3 Her e, the Comelec promulgated
Resolution No. 8714 banning the carrying or transporting of
firearms and deadly weapons during the election period. In
this resolution, airsoft guns or their replicas were included
as prohibited firearms. Orceo filed a petition challenging the
validity of Resolution No. 8714.
Orceo's r easonings are read as follows :
Example 12:
1. The Omnibus Election Code does not include airsoft
guns and their replicas in its definition of firearms;
2. The law intends that the word "firearm" is taken to
mean in its common and ordinary u sage;
3. Including airsoft guns and their replicas in th e Reso-
lution No. 8714 would have the effect of "cri min al-
izing" the sport.
8G.R. No. 190779, Ma rch 26, 2010.
26 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
The deductive syllogism for the above-cited arguments,
to wit:
1. The Omnibus Election Code prohibits the carrying
of firearms during the election period;
2. -
Airsoft guns and other gun replicas are not firearms
within the meaning of firearm in the Omnibus
Election Code;
3. Therefore, the carrying of airsoft guns and other gun
replicas must not be prohibited during the election
period.
From Orceo's point of view, this case depended on the
meaning of the word "firearm" under the Omnibus Election
Code. This was the point of contention according to him.
But the Supreme Court did not share his view. The
Court resolved the controversy by looking at purpose of the
prohibition. The purpose, according to the Supreme Court is
to avoid the "... sowing of fear. intimidation, or terror during
the election period. " This condition said the Court, frustrates
the will of the voters during the election period. The Court
reasoned that airsoft guns are indistinguishable from a real
gun to an ordinary citizen. The fear it could cause to voters is
the same fear caused by real guns.
We can put this reasoning in the following syllogism:
1. The Omnibus Election Code prohibits the carrying
and transporting of firearms during the election
period as these could cause fear and chaos frustrating
the will of the voters;
2. Airsoft guns are so indistinguishable from real fire-
arms and they can also cause fear and chaos on the
voters;
3. Therefore, airsoft guns must be prohibited alongside
firearms on election period. 4
41n the judicial world, no matter how seemingly "weak" the argument of
the Supreme Court is, such argument governs as it is t he final a rbiter of all
legal issues in our jurisdiction.
III - OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 27
Logically speaking, the conclusion here "follows" from
the premises. The major premise deals with the prevention of
fear and chaos and it is indeed true that, in all appearances,
"airsoft guns" and th eir replicas look ver y similar to real
guns. The argument is indeed valid. However , it can still be
maintained that the Election Code prohibits only "firearms"
and "airsoft guns," t echnically speaking, are not "firearms."
It can still be insisted that the issue is the very definition of
"firearm." Nevertheless, the Court's argument stands as it is
the final arbiter of all legal controver sy in the land. Clearly, the
Court upheld not the letter but the "spirit" of the prohibition
in the law. 6
Let us have another example.
Example 13:
''To us, prema rital sex between two consenting adults
~ thout legal impediment to marry each other who later
on married each other does not fall within the contem-
plation of "disgraceful or immoral conduct" and "serious
misconduct" of th e Manual of Regulations for Private
Schools and the Labor Code of the Philippines."6
These are the words of "Ch eryll" who got fired from a
Catholic school for engagin g in premarital sex and became
pregnant. The school fired h er on the ground of "disgraceful,
immoral conduct." Cheryll alleged that when two unmarried
adults had sex and later married, they are not doing a "dis-
graceful or immoral conduct."
The .Pivotal issue h ere is th e fuean.mg of "disgraceful
and immoral conduct" found in the Manual of Regulations
for Private Schools which is a ground for termination of
employment therein. However, the ma nual did not define what
5Th.is principle in interpreting the law is applied when there ar e ambigui-
ties in the language of the law. Ruben Agpalo explains that "th e statu te shall
be so construed as to effectuate its intent and purpose, advance the remedy and
suppress the mischief contemplated by the framers." Ruben E. Agpalo, Statu-
tory Construction , Rex Book Store, Inc., 1990, p. 97.
6Leus v. St. Scholastica's College, G.R. No. 187226, J a nuary 28, 2016.
28 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
"disgraceful or immoral conduct" is. It did not give instances
constituting "disgraceful or immoral conduct."
The National Labor Relations Commission affirmed the
termination of Cheryll arguing that sex outside marriage is
indeed immoral. The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC's
decision. The CA has the same reasoning with the NLRC
which was stated as follows:
Example 14:
"Petitioner's pregnancy prior to marriage is scandal-
ous in itself given the work environment and social milieu
sh e was in. Respondent school for young ladies precisely
seeks to prevent its students from situations like this,
inculcating in them strict moral values and standards.
Being part of the institution, petitioner's private and pub-
lic life could not be separated. Her admitted premarital
sexual relations was a violation of private respondent's
prescribed standards of conduct that views pre-marital
sex as immoral because sex between a man and a woman
must only take place within the bounds of marriage."
Here, "immoral conduct" i§_ defined in light of the nature
and the work environment of the institution. The CA argued
that the msfatuhon , being a Catholic school for young ladies,
stood for what it considered as "strict moral values and
standards." The institution maintained that sex between a
man and a woman must only be within marriage. Employees
therein must also abide by its moral values in their public and
private lives. For having engaged in premarital sex and got
pregnant, Cheryll violated that moral standard expected of
her being an employee of the institution. She can therefore be
validly terminated.
Putting the arguments in syllogism, to wit:
1. This is a Catholic institution which believes that
sex must only be between a man and a woman in
marriage and that premarital sex is a "disgraceful
and immoral'' conduct.
ill - OTHER PA'ITERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 29
2. Cheryll, being an employee of this institution abides
by this belief and standard of moral value.
3. Cheryll engaged in premarital sex.
4. Therefore, Cheryll committed a disgraceful and
immoral act and had violated the belief and moral
standard of the institution. 7
The argument is clearly deductive and it defines "dis-
graceful and immoral conduct" according to the moral standard
held by the institution. The standard also set the boundary
for sex, i.e., marriage. Being deductive, the argument is tight
proof. The conclusion truly follows from the premises.
Let us see how the Supreme Court resolved this case.
Examples 15:
"That the petitioner was employed by a Catholic edu-
cational institution per se does not absolutely determine
whether her pregnancy out of wedlock is disgraceful or
immoral. There is still a n ecessity to determine whether
the petitioner's pregnancy out of wedlock is considered
disgraceful or immoral in accordance with the prevailing
norms of conduct."8
The Court's argument here is this: It is not the Cath olic
educational institution which would defin e the meanin of
dis aceful or immoral conduc b h e "prevailing norms !)f
conduct." By these words, the Supreme Court seemed to have
taken the ruler and the judge out of the Catholic institution
and flung it out to what it categorized as the "prevailing
norms of cond uct." Let us put the Court's reasoning in a
syllogism.
1. The Catholic institution says that pregnancy out of
wedlock is a disgraceful and immoral conduct.
2. But it does not have the authority to define what is
disgraceful and immoral conduct.
7The premises contain complex sentences. Putting them in a simplistic
syllogism may not be possible. The aim is to constru ct premises without losing
vital information in the argument.
8Lcus v. St. Scholastica's College, G.R. No. 187226, January 28, 2015.
30 BASIC TECHNIQU ES IN LEGAL REASONING
3. Therefore, its judgment that pregnancy out of wed-
lock is disgraceful and immoral conduct cannot
prevail.
Or,
1. The Catholic institution says that pregnancy out of
wedlock is a disgraceful and immoral conduct;
2. But the "prevailing norms of conduct" does not view
the same as disgraceful and immoral;
3. Therefore, the Catholic institution's categorization
of this conduct cannot prevail.
Here, the Sup.reme Court effectively demolished the
arguments of the NLRC and the CA. It seemed that the
Supreme Court did not want the school to be the ruler, defi-
ning what the standard of morality is and a judge as well,
determining what will violate such standard. Morality has to
come from outside the parties to this case. It must come from
the "prevailing norms of conduct."
Let us now go to its definitive argument.
Example 16:
"In stark contrast to Santos, the Court does not find
any circumstance in this case which would lead the Court
to conclude that the petitioner committed a disgraceful
or immoral conduct. It bear s stressing that the petitioner
and her boyfriend, at th e time they conceived a child,
had no legal impediment to marry. Indeed, even prior to
her dismissal, the petitioner married her boyfriend, the
father of her child. As the Court held in Radam, ~ s beliefs, it would tacitly approve or endorse tbat belief
no law which penalizes an unmarried mother by rea son
of her sexual conduct or proscribes the consensual sexual
activity between two unmarried pers ons; tha t neither
does such situation contravene any funda mental state
policy enshrined in the Cons titution.
Admittedly, the petitioner is employed in an educa-
tional institution wher e the teachings and doctrines of
the Catholic Church , including that on premarital sexual
relations, is strictly upheld and taught to the students.
III - OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 31
That her indiscr etion, which r esulted in h er pregnancy out
of wedlock, is a na thema to the doctrines of the Catholic
Church .
However, viewed a ga inst the prevailing norms of
conduct, the petitioner's conduct ca nnot be considered as
dis graceful or immoral; su ch conduct is not denounced
by! public;} a nd lsecularl morali~y. It may be a n unusual
arrangement, but it certainly is not disgraceful or immoral
within the contemplation of the law. To stress, premarital
sexual relations between two consen ting adults who h ave
no impediment to marry each other, and, consequently,
conceiving a child out of wedlock, gauged from a purely
public and secular view of morality, does not amount to a
disgraceful or immoral conduct under Section 94(e) of the
1992 MRPS."9
Here, the term "prevailing norm of con d 11.ct" means
''secular morality." Here is how the court defined this concept:
"The morality referred to in the law is ublic and
necessarily secu ar, not re igious x x x. "Religiou s teach-
ings a s expressed in public deba te may influence th e
civil public order but public moral disputes may be
resolved only on grounds articulable in secular t erms."
Otherwise, if government r elies upon religious beliefs
in formula ting public policies and morals, the resulting
...policies and morals would reguire conformity to what
some might r egard as r eligious programs or a gend~. Tile
nonbeliever s would ther efore be compelled to conform to
a sta nda rd of conduct buttressed by a r eligious belief, i.e:-
to a "compelled religion ," anathema to r eligious freedom .
Likewise, if government based its actions upon religious
and thereby also tacitly disapprove contrary r eligious
or nom eligiou s views tha t would n ot support the policy.
As a result, government will not provide full r eligiou s
freedom for all its citizens, or even make it appear tha t
those whose beliefs are disapproved are second class citi-
zen s. Expansive religious freedom therefore requires t hat
government be neutral in matter s of r eligion; govern-
9 Leus v. St. Scholastica's College, C.R. No. 187226, J a nuary 28, 2016.
 32 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
mental reliance upon religious justification is inconsistent
with this policy of neutrality."10
Thus secular norm and not religious norm of conduct
v"_ m_u_s_,t_g_o_v_e-rn} It said that when-a public law,. such as the 1992
Manual of Regulations for Private School, provides for some
moral norm or standard, such standard must always bear a
secular and not religious conception. Religious teachings may
influence public debate, the Court argued, but in the end,
moral delineations are determinable only in secular terms.
This is to ensure that the constitutional rights of people to
religious freedom will not be violated.
Let us make syllogism out of this reasoning.
1. Secular morality does not regard premarital sex
between two adult, unmarried male and female as
disgraceful and immoral.
2. Cheryll, being adult and married, consented to have
premarital sex with her boyfriend.
3. Therefore, Cheryll does not commit any disgraceful
and immoral conduct.
This deductive reasoning is valid however revolting
its implication maybe to other people. The argument and
reasoning make sense formally even if it is distasteful to the
sensibilities and reasoning of those who see morality from
religious point of view. Agreeably, the idea of morality as a
product of social convention is dangerous. Social conventions
stand on shaky ground. They come and go as fads come and
go. Under this condition, morality is utterly dependent on
what societal norms are prevailing.
Nevertheless, we are simply dealing with argument
from definition in legal reasoning. Substantial treatment on
morality is beyond the scope of this book. The succeeding
discussion is about the other kinds of arguments.
10 Estrada v. Escritor, A.M. No. P-02- 1651, August 4, 2003.
III - OTHER PA'ITERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 33
If and Then Reasoning
If and then reasoning is also known as "hypothetical
..§yllogism." It is a syllogism with conditional statement for one
or both of its premises. Below is an example of this kin d of
reasoning taken from Patrick J . Hurley's book ''.A Concise
Introduction To Logic": 11
/ "If electricity flows through a conductor, th en a mag-
netic field is pr oduced.
/ If a magnetic field is produced, then a nearby com pass
will be deflected.
/ Therefore, if electricity flows throu gh a conductor,
then a nearby compass will be deflected ."
We have several examples of this type of reasoning in the
case of Estrada v. Escritor: 12
Example 17:
'1f the r elationship is such that it can h ave God's
approval, then, a second principle to consider is that one
should do all one can to establish th e honorableness of
ones marital union in the eyes of all."
'1f divorce is possible, then such step s hould now be
taken so that, having obtained t he divorce (on whatever
legal grounds may be available), th e present union can
receive civil valida tion as a recognized marriage."
"Finally, if the marital rela tion ship is not one out of
h armony with the principles of God's Word, a nd if one h as
don e all tha t can r easonably be done to h ave it r ecognized
by civil authorit ies and h as been blocked in doing so, then,
a Declaration of Pledging Faithfulness can be signed."
If an~ en argument is easy to identify. It starts with
the word c::g:)and concludes with~ We do not need to
belabor so much in this subject. Let us proceed to the next
pattern of argument.
11
H urley, p. 31.
12
A.M. No. P-02- 1651, August 4, 2003.
34 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Argument from General Principles of Law
Principles such as '}lnjust enrichment," "justice
and equity," "force majeure," etc., are also u sed as major
premises in deductive reasoning or used as the concluding
principle on which inductive premises are based. But we are
going to u se the principle "unjust enrichment" because we
are simply seeking to learn how an argument can be made by
invoking a general principle oflaw. It must also be pointed out
that justice and equity underlie all other general principles
oflaw.
What is "unjust enrichment"? In the case of Philippine
Realty and Holdings Corp. v. Levy Construction and
Development Corp., 13 the Supreme Court defined the phrase
"unjust enrichment," to wit:
"Unjust enrichment exists when a person unjustly
retains a benefit to the loss of another, or when a person
retains money or propert of another a ainst the funda-
men a · · ice e uity and ood conscience.
Under Art. 22 of the Civil Code, there is unjust enric -
ment when(GY.a person is unju stl y beoe6ted, and@ such
benefit is derived at the expense of or with damages to
another." - 4. It was imposed on him;
Simply put, there is unjust enrichment when a person
obtains a benefit (money or property) at the expense of an-
other. As stated by the Supreme Court, this principle is
founded on the fundamental principle of justice, equity, and
good conscience. Again, principles like these are used as major
premises in deductive reasoning. Let us see how this is played
out in the case of Locsin II v. Mekeni Food Corporation.14
Locsin was hired as a regional sales manager of Mekeni -()
Food Corporation (Mekeni). To enable Locsin to cover his
sales work, Mekeni furnished him a second hand car valued
at P280,000.00. This car was formerly furnished to a former
employee. P5,000.00 was deducted from Locsin's salary as
13G.R. No. 165547, June 13, 2011.
14
G.R. No. 192105, December 9, 2013.
III - OTHER PAITERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 35
monthly payment for the car. Locsin resigned from Mekeni
and at the time of his resignation, a total of Pl 12,500.00
was deducted from his salary. Locsin was now seeking reim-
bursement of Pl 12,500.00 from Mekeni invoking the principle
of unjust enrichment.
Let us analyze Locsin's argument.
Example 18:
" ... petitioner ... (argues that the car) ... was part of his
compensation package, and the vehicle was an important
component of his work which required constant and
uninterrupted mobility. Petitioner claims that the car
plan was in fact more beneficial to Mekeni than to him·
besides, he did not choose to avail of it, as it was simpl;
imposed on him. He concludes that it is only just that his
payments should be refunded and returned to him."
Locsin's argument is inductive, to wit:
1. The car was part of his compensation;
2. It is required of his work;
3. He did not choose to avail of it;
5. The car was more beneficial to Mekeni and if the
latter retains the P112,500.00 it would be unjustly
benefit at Locsin's loss.
6. Therefore, it would be unjust if his payments are not
refunded to him.
As inductive reasoning is probabilistic, the conclusion
that the car payments must be refunded is more probable.
Fortunately for Locsin, the Supreme Court agreed with him:
Example 19:
"Any benefit or privilege enjoyed by petitioner from
using the service vehicle was merely incidental and insig-
nificant, because for the most part the vehicle was under
Mekeni's control and supervision. Free and complete dis-
posal is given to the petitioner only after the vehicle's cost
is covered or paid in full. Until then, the vehicle remains
36 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
at the back and call of Mekeni. Given the vast territory
petitioner had to cover to be able to perform his work
effectively and generate business for his employer, the
service vehicle was an absolute necessity, or else Mekeni's
business would suffer adversely. Thus, it was clear that
while petitioner was paying for half of the vehicle's value,
Mekeni was rea ping the full benefits from the use thereof."
Observe carefully that the Supreme Court's reasoning
here is also inductive which can be constructed this way:
1. Any benefit enjoyed by Locsin of the the car was
merely incidental;
2. The car was under Mekeni's control and supervision;
3. Free and complete disposal of it will be given to
Locsin after payment in full of the price;
4. The car was an absolute necessity of Mekeni's busi-
ness without which the latter would suffer;
5. Therefore, retaining the car would be an unjust en-
richment for Mekeni at the expense of Locsin.
These examples show that general principles of law
such as the principle of "unjust enrichment" can be made the
major premise or the concluding statement of an argument.
It must be pointed out heretofore that we are constructing
the syllogistic structure of either a deductive or inductive
argument.
In the next chapter, we will explore ways of building
effective reading skills that are vital to the development of
critical thinking and logical reasoning.
Exercises:
Identify the kind of arguments in each item below and
construct their syllogism.
1. If entry into the party-list system would depend
only on the ability of an organization to represent its
constituencies, then all representative organizations
would have found themselves into the party-list
III - OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 37
race. But that is not the intention of the framers
of the law. The party-list system is not a tool to
advocate tolerance and acceptance of misunderstood
persons or groups of persons. Rather, the party-list
system is a tool for the realization of aspirations of
marginalized individuals whose interests are also
the nation only that their interests have not been
brought to the attention of the nation because of their
under representation. Until the time comes when
Ladlad is able to justify that having mixed sexual
orientations and transgender identities is beneficial
to the nation, its application for accreditation under
the party-list system will remain just that. 15
2. The COMELEC posits that the majority of the Phil-
ippine population considers homosexual conduct
as immoral and unacceptable, and this constitutes
sufficient reason to disqualify the petitioner. Un-
fortunately for the respondent, the Philippine elec-
torate has expressed no such belief. No law exists
to criminalize homosexual behavior or expressions
or parties about homosexual behavior. Indeed, even
if we were to assume that public opinion is as the
COMELEC describes it, the asserted state interest
here that is, moral disapproval of an unpopular
minority is not a legitimate state interest that is
sufficient to satisfy rational basis review under the
equal protection clause. The COMELEC's differ-
entiation, and its unsubstantiated claim that Ang
Ladlad cannot contribute to the formulation of
legislation that would benefit the nation, furthers no
legitimate state interest other than disapproval of
or dislike for a disfavored group. 16
3. Petitioner contends that the term "television pro-
gram" should not include religious programs like its
16
ANG LADLAD LGBT PARTY v. Comelec, G.R. No. 190582, April 8, 2010.
16[bid.
38 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING III - OTHER PATTERNS OF LEGAL REASONING 39

program "Ang Iglesia ni Cristo." A contrary inter- as well as unjust enrichment on the part of petitioner
pretation, it is urged, will contravene Section 5, if the rental fees paid by respondent during the time
Article III of the Constitution which guarantees that that it was denied access to and prevented from
"no law shall be made respecting an establishment using the leased premises be not returned to it. 19
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
The free exercise and enjoyment of r eligious pro- Suggested Case Reading:
fession and worship, without discrimination or 1. Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, September 3,
preference, shall forever be allowed." 17 1991;
4. The evidence shows that the respondent Board 2. Orceo v. Comelec, G.R. No. 190779, March 26, 2010;
x-rated petitioners TV series for "attacking" either 3. Leus v. St. Scholastica's, G.R. No. 187776, January
religions, especially the Catholic Church. An exam- 28, 2015;
ination of the evidence, especially Exhibits "A,"
"A-1," "B," "C," and "D" will show that the so- 4. Phil. Realty and Holdings Corp. v. Levy Construction
called "attacks" are mere criticisms of some of the and Dev. Corp., G.R. No. 165547, June 13, 2011;
deeply held dogmas and tenets of other religions. 5. Locsin v. Mekeni Food Corp., G.R. No. 192105,
The videotapes were not viewed by the respondent December 9, 2013.
court as they were not presented as evidence. Yet
they were considered by the respondent court as
indecent, contrary to law and good customs, hence,
can be prohibited from public viewing under Section
3(c) of PD 1986. This ruling clearly suppresses
petitioner's freedom of speech and interferes with its
right to free exercise of religion. It misappreciates
the essence of freedom to differ as delineated in the
benchmark case of Cantwell v. Connecticut...18
5. In the instant case, it is clear that petitioner failed to
maintain respondent in the peaceful and adequate
enjoyment of the leased premises by unjustifiably
preventing the latter access thereto. Consequently,
in accordance with Article 1658 of the Civil Code,
respondent had no duty to make rent payments.
Despite that, respondent still continued to pay the
rental fees agreed upon in the original contract.
Thus, it would be the height of inequity and injustice

17 Iglesia Ni Cristo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119673, J uly 26, 1996. 19MIAA v. Avia FiJipinas In ternational, Inc., G.R. No. 180168, February
18
Jglesia Ni Cristo v. Cou rt of Appeals, supra. 27, 201 2.

IV
EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS
[I ) evelopmental Psychologist and author Maryanne Wolf
says, "we are not only wh at we read, we are how we read ."1
Our reading ability and habits transform our way of think-
ing and our way of thinking becomes us. Reading is not an
"instinctive skills" for human beings unlike speaking, says
Wolf. ''We have to teach our minds how to translate the sym-
bolic characters we see into the language we understand,"2
she adds.
This is also true in legal reasoning. How we read the law
and court cases transform our minds. As we read legal argu-
ments and reasoning, we create mental habits that eventually
develop a legal mind.
Laws do not come out of thin air. They are the product of
the collective mind of Congress. Before a bill becomes a law, it
passes through a long and tedious process where its provisions
are deliberated and argued upon. These deliberations make
up wh at is known as the legislative intent. The latter serves
as the guiding principle or even the context in interpreting th e
laws. When we read a law, we read its intent and context. As
we do, we get into the mental framework of Congress.
The same is true in reading jurisprudence or court cases.
We enter into the minds of judges and justices, and uncover
h ow they use the language, how they utilize style and voice in
th eir writin g, and above all, how they reason. The dissenting
1 As quoted by Nicholas Carr, (IS GOOGLE MAKING US STUPID?), The
Atlantic, July/August 2008 issue.
2Ibid.
40-
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 41
opinions in the Supreme Court cases also tell us that, at least,
there are many sides of viewing a legal problem. Sometimes,
the dissenting opinions come as more sensible and logical than
the majority opinion. But such is the hallmark of democracy -
the majority rules.
All these are available to the reader when reading law
materials. Again, Maryanne Wolf says, "we are not only what
we read, we are how we read." For those who aspire to become
lawyer s, reading is an indispensable habit and a skill that
must be constantly improved.
Codals and Jurisprudence
In law school, there are three basic reading materials:
the cod e (the bare law without commentaries), which is
popularly called the "coda ls," the c ommentaries (text books
by professor s of law), and jurisprude nce (cases decided by
the Supreme Court and can be read in the Supreme Court
R ep orts Ann otated [SCRA]). These are the main sources of
reading materials for law students.
Of the three, the codals and jurisprudence must be the
main diet. Law students must live under the foundation of
these materials. The drawback of commentaries is this:
students tend to make them their main reading material.
This is under standable con sidering that with commentaries
the author lays out his expla nation of the law, his perspective
of the law, and his digests of th e cases he has read. The
author has done all the work and "spoon feed" this to the
students. However, it must be maintained that this is counter-
productive.
In reality, the students are deprived of the chance to
intellectually digest the codals and jurisprudence if they
rely primarily on th e commentaries. If challenged with a
legal question, the student who is addicted to commentaries
would immediately and instinctively want to look for the com-
mentaries for answers. As a result, self-confidence in dealing
with this situation is low. Hence, sole r eliance on commentaries
42 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
can be counterproductive in developing legal reasoning.
Codals and jurisprudence therefore must be emphasized as
the main reading materials and.the commentaries should be
treated as secondary sources. In this chapter, we will examine
the techniques on how to read codals and jurisprudence or
published court cases.
Read the Materials Repeatedly
We live in an age where everything is instantly available
for our use. Technology has pampered us so much that it
deprived us of patience and perseverance - values which are
needed in highly disciplined areas of studies such as law. This
is more particularly true with first year law students. They do
not have the habit of repetition. Yet law studies demand that
the materials be read repeatedly.
Law materials contain technical words , phrases, and con-
cepts. These come from a field which has its own "language"
so to speak. It would not be surprising to find lengthy, almost
"run on" type of sentences in court cases such as this one:
"In effect, judicial decisions assume the same authority
as the statute itself and, until authoritatively abandoned,
necessarily become, to the extent that they are applicable,
the criteria which must control the actuations not only
of those called upon to abide thereby but also of those in
duty bound to enforce obedience thereto."3
Anyone reading these materials will immediately find
that diligence and perseverance are the necessary attributes.
Harvard Law professor Felix Frankfurter has this advice in
reading the law: "read the statute, read the statute, read the
statute/" 4 So again, reading law materials repeatedly cannot
be overemphasized.
G.R. No. L-19650, September 29, 1966.
3Caltex Philippines, Inc. v. Palomar,
4Katharine Clark and Matthew Connolly, A Guide to Reading, Interpret-
ing and Applying Statutes, April 2006, https://www.law.georgetown.edu/aca-
demics/academic-progra ms/legal-writing-scholarship/writing-center/upload/
statutory interpretation.pd£. - Accessed Date: March 28, 2017.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 43
Look for Important Words, Phrases, and Sentences
Since legal materials contain technical terms and con-
cepts, one must therefore carefully consider seemingly impor-
tant words, phrases, and sentences. These must not be car e-
lessly read. Let us take a look at this example :
Example 20:
"By the very nature of cases involving the application
of Article 36, it is logical and understandable to give
weight to the expert opinions furnished by psychologists
regarding the psychological temperament of parties in
order to determine the root cause, juridical antecedence,
gravity and incurability of the psychological incapacity."5
The sentence above is a complex sentence because it
contains independent clauses. It has technical terms that
needed further consideration, namely: "expert opinion" and
" psychological incapacity." Both terms are legally defined
under existing law and rules. The phrase "expert opinion"6
is defined in the Revised Rules on Evidence while "psy-
chological incapacitym is defined carefully in the Family
Code. The reader must not only take note of these kinds of
phrases but must carefully trace their sources and determine
what is the extent of their meaning. Black's Law Dictionary!
can be of tremendous help h ere.
Going back to the case of Silverio v. Republic,9 the
Supreme Court illuminates several words and phrases which
are all vital in the resolution of that case, to quote:
5Ting v. Ting, G.R. No. 166562, March 31, 2009.
6Section 49. Opinion of expert witness. - The opinion of a witness on
a matter requiring special knowledge, skill, experience or training which he
shown to posses, may be received in evidence.
7 Article 36 of the Family Code of the Philippines, "A marriage contracted by
any party who, at the time of the celebration, was psychologically incapacitated
to comply with his obligations of marriage, shall likewise be void even if such
incapacity becomes manifest only after its solemnization."
8 See: www.nationallibertyalliance.org. - Accessed date: April 19, 2017.
9Silverio v. Republic, G.R. No. 174680, October 22, 2007.
44 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Example 21:
" 'To correct' simply means 'to ma ke or set aright; to
remove the faults or error /rom' while to change means 'to
replace something wit h something else of the same kind
or with something that serves as a subs titute."
also:
"'Status' refers t o the circums ta nces affecting the
legal sit uation (that is, the su m tota l of capacities and
incapacities) of a person in view of his age, nationality
and his family member ship."
And we have important words and phrases too in the case
of Suntay v. Suntay:
"Indeed, the ter ms 'annul' and 'null a nd void' h ave
different legal connota tions a nd implications. Annul
means to r educe to nothing; annihilate; obliterate; to
make void or of n o effect ; to nullify; to a bolish ; to do away
with whereas null and void is something that does not
exist from the beginning. A marriage t hat is annulled
presupposes th at it subsists but later ceases to h ave
legal effect wh en it is termin ated t hrou gh a court action .
But in nullifyi ng a marriage, th e court simply declares
a st atus or condition which already exists from th e very
beginning." 10
The words "status," "annul, " and the phrase "to correct"
and "null and void" are some of the many words and phrases
bein g dealt with carefully in court cases. When words and
phrases like these are defined and explained, their definitions
must be memorized and th eir meanin gs must be familiarized.
Memorizing words and phrases like these builds up one's
legal vocabulary skills which would come h andy during
examinations. In the subject Statutory Construction , th e
interpretation of words such as "shall," "must" or "may" will be
th oroughly discussed. But h ere, it is enou gh to point out tha t
words and phrases like these must not be ignored or skimmed
throu gh.
10Suntay
v. S untay, G.R. No. 132524, December 29, 1998.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 45
Read Contextually
What is context? The best answer is not to know its
definition but to see how it actually functions. 11 How does
context function? We h ear people complaining that they were
taken out of context. It means that they did not mean whatever
is said as their statements.
Context, practically speaking, is about the over all mean-
ing of something. It's the entire structure of statements - its
form and intent. It's the picture or image that comes out when
all words and sentences are considered.
How do we find context ? How do we identify it? Context
can be found in a sentence, in a paragraph, in the entire
material being read. In law, most often , context can be found
in its very intent. To know its intent is to know the context of
the law. To know the context of the law is to know the law.
To show u s how this works, let us go through the entire
process of finding the context of Article 19 of the Civil Cod e
starting from the article itself and working our way ultimately
to the very context of the title "Human Relations":12
Example 22:
"Article 19. Every per son must , in the exer cise of
his rights and in the performan ce of his duties, act with
justice, give everyon e his due, and observe hon esty a nd
good faith."
As usual, we find here a complex sentence. Again, a com-
plex sentence is one which has an independent clause and
dependent clauses and phrases. We have to extract the context
of this sentence. To do this, let us first map out this complex
sentence of its main parts.
The simple sentence, i.e., the simple subject and predicate
of this sentence is, "Everyon e must ... act." The dependent
11Merriam Webster defines context as, "the words that are used with a certain
word or phrase a nd that help to explain its meaning," or "the situation in which
something ha ppens; the group of conditions t hat exist where an d when something
ha ppens." On its face, the definition docs not help much . This is, I believe, because
the word is hard to define than to describe.
12Soe Article 19, Civi l Code-
 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
46
clauses are, "in the exercise of his rights," and "in the per-
formance of his duties." The phrases are "with justice,"
"give everyone his due," and "and observe honesty and
good faith." We can line up the whole thing this way:
1. "Ever y person must ... act";
2. "in the exercise of his right"; "and in the performance
of his duties";
3. "with justice," "give everyone his due," "observe honesty
and good faith"
From this view, we h ave a better chance of seein g the
context of Article 19. The ideas of "acting with justice,"
"giving every person his due," can be summed up with
the word "justice." The notions of "observing honesty and
good faith" can be summed up with the word "good faith."
The whole thing can be paraphrased: ''Whenever a person
exercises his right or performs his duties, he must act
justly and in good faith."
Here, we see the context - human engagement must
be done justly and with good faith. That is the "picture," the
"image" that shows up in Article 19. That is also its purpose
and intent. Let us put together Article 19 and our paraphrased
of it:
"Article 19. Every person must, in the exer cise of
his rights and in the performance of his duties, act with
justice, give everyone his due, a nd observe honesty and
good faith."
''Whenever a person exercises his right or performs
his duties, he must act justly and in good faith ."
Here, we have our very own commentary of Article 19.
But h ere's a word of caution. In answering exam questions,
it is still very important that the actual law be quoted rather
than stating the paraphrased of it. The examiner still prefers
to see the actual law in the examination paper.
We are not yet through. We have to get to the ultimate
context. Why must we engage justly and honestly with ever y-
one? Why must we insist on this requirement? These questions
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 47
lead us to the very picture and image of the Civil Code itself.
The word "civil" means one who is cultured or polite. It refers
to people treating each oth er h onestly and fairly.
We have now a "picture" or "image" of what the Civil Code
is all about. The Civil Code is a body of law which deals with
how people must treat each other in society. This means that
the law requires that we need to act justly and in good faith
in dealing with one anoth er in order to build a civil society. A
civil society is t he indispensable ingredient of a civilization.
The Civil Code then is designed to create and maintain a
civilized Philippine society.
At this point, we got not only the context of Article 19
but the very context of it, i.e., the picture or image of the Civil
Code itself. This context must be used as the over all context
in reading the different provisions of this law. This context
will be th e guide, the parameters in reading the Civil Code
correctly.
The process of finding the context is as follows:
1. Identify the different parts of a sentence;
2. Put them in order;
3. Draw out its main though t or context;
4. Paraphrase it;
5. Relate th e main thought to the rest of the body of
law from which the sentence is derived;
6. Get the over all context (picture, image) of the law;
7. Use the over all context as guide in reading every
provisions in th e law.
This must be done in reading all kinds of law. Through
this means, one gets a personal "experience" with the material
being read. The reader goes through this entire process of
analysis and thereby acquires a mental route for what is read.
Through this "experience," self-confidence is formed. Things
learned by experience tend to last than those learned by
other means. Aristotle wrote, ''for the things we have to learn
48 BASIC TECHNI QUES IN LEGAL REASONING
before we can do them, we learn by doing them. "13 Remember ,
read the codals an d jurispr udence, a nd not just rely and get
addicted with commentaries.
Context in Chapters
Context is also seen by looking at a chapter of the law.
Read the example below:
Example 23:
BOOK I
PERSONS
Title I. - CIVIL PERSONALITY
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL PROVISIONS
Art. 37. Juridical capacit y, which is the fitness to be t he
subject of legal r elations, is inher ent in every natu ral
person and is lost only through death. Capa~ity to _a ct,
which is the power to do acts with legal effect , 1s acqm.red
a nd may be lost. (n)
Art. 38. Minor ity, insanity or imbecility, th e state of being
a deaf-mute, prodigality and civil interdiction are mere
restrictions on capacity to act , and do not exempt t he
incapacita ted person from certain obligations, as when
the latter arise from his acts or from property r elations,
such as easemen ts. (32a)
Art. 39. The following circumstances, a mong other s,
modify or limit capacity to act : age, insanity, imbecility,
the state of being a deaf-mute, pen alty, prodigality, family
r ela tions, alienage, absence, insolvency and trusteeship .
The consequences of th ese circumstances are governed in
this Code, oth er codes, the Rules of Court, and in s pecial
laws. Capacity to act is not limited on account of r eligious
belief or political opinion.
A married woman, t wenty-one years of age or over , is
qualified for all acts of civil life, except in cases specified
by law.
1sw .D. Ross, Necomachean Ethics by Aristotle, Digireads.com Publishing,
2005.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 49
First, we need to look for importa nt words and phrases
a nd use these to give us the context for this chapter . Her e, the
important words and phrases are: persons, civil personality,
juridical capacity, capacity to act, restrictions on capacity to
act, and limitations on capacity to act.
In th e example, the caption is infor mative - the terms
"persons" and "civil personality'' tell us that this ch apter talks
about personality or "per sonhood." These terms give us the
context of Articles, 37, 38, and 39. In law, a per son is one who
h as juridical capacity. Juridical capacity means two things:
fitness to engage into legal relations with other persons, and
capacity to act, which means the capacity to do legal acts.
Article 37 tells us that juridical capacity is "inheren t" in every
natural person,1" that is, it is an inborn trait. Articles 38 and
39 tell us instances when this capacity to act is modified,
limited, or restricted.
We have shown that by reading the entire ch apter along
with its captions and title a nd of course, the important words
and phra se, gives us the context of the ch apter. Throu gh this
process, the reader acquires a picture or image of wh at the
Cha pter is all about. All the articles in the chapter must now
be read in the light of the con text.
Let us now proceed to reading court cases.
The Case About the Facts, Issues, and Rulings
In law school, it is strongly emphasized th at students
must learn how to get the facts, issues, and rulings (FIR
pattern) of a case. However , there is some kind of dangerous
by-product of directly looking for the "FIR" - the students
develop a kind of reckless attitude in reading a case. They
skim through words, phrases and paragraphs with a resolute
intent of finding the facts, issues, and rulings and fail to spend
enough time reading the arguments raised by the trial court
and the Court of Appeals.
14
Chapter 2 of t he Civil Code provides for Natural Persons and Chapter 3
provides for Ju ridicaJ or "artificia l" persons.
50 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Perhaps the enormous amount of cases assigned by
law professors for reading contributes to this tendency. But
this is counter-productive in developing legal thinking and
reasoning. Students must read carefully all the contents of
the case, and if possible, include the footnotes. The footnotes
show the previous related cases and these are good sources to ar gument, hence:
find out how cases are decided. Courts follow what is known as
"stare decisis" which literally means, ''let the decision stand."
Ji
Stare decisis is a judicial policy of adhering to the principles
established in past cases. This subject is discussed in detail
in Statutory Construction and parts of the Civil Code. So, in
reading case, nothing must be wasted. ~t
I
Read the Decision of the Trial Court or the Labor Arbiter
and the NLRC
A decided case, whether it is a civil, criminal, admin - Appeals, to wit:
istrative, or a labor case, contains decisions and reasoning
of lower courts and the adjudicating bodies. The decision of Example 25:
the Supreme Court will be either an affirmation, r ejection, or
modification of these decisions. In other words, the decisions
of the Supreme Court do not come out of a vacuum. Hence,
to truly appreciate such decisions one mus t read and engage
the decisions upon which this final decision is based. It is
very important to identify the "syllogistical" patterns found
in th ese court decisions as we have learned in the previous
chapters.
which can be written as follows:
Let us illustrate this important point by going back to
the case of Silverio v. Rep u b lic. In this case, we will identify
the decisions of the trial court, the Court of Appeals, and the
Supreme Court and try to draw the syllogistic forms of these
decisions.
The decision of the RTC, to wit:
Example 24:
"Firstly, the court is of the opinion that granting the
petition would be more in consonance with the principles
of justice and equity. With his sexual re-assignment,
petitioner, who h as always felt, thought, and acted like
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 51
a woman, now possesses the physique of a female. Peti-
ti~mer's rni_sfortune to be trapped in a man's body is not
his own domg and should not be in a ny way taken against
him."
In Chapter 1, we already drew the syllogism for this
1. Petitioner always feels, acts, and thinks like a
woman;
2. He is a woman trapped in a man's body;
3. This is a misfortune and the petitioner is a victim
thereof;
4. Hence, granting his petitioner is just and equitable.
Next, we need to identify the argument of the Court of
"It (the Court of Appeals) ruled that the trial court's
decisions lacked legal basis. There is no law allowing the
change of either name or sex in the certificate of birth on
the ground of sex reassignment through surgery. Thus,
the Court of Appeals granted the Republic's petition, set
aside the decision of the trial court a nd ordered the dis-
missal of SP Case No. 02-105207."
Then let us construct the syllogism of this argument
1. In order that changes of name and sex in the cer-
tificate of birth be allowed on the ground of sex
r eassignment through surgery, there must be a law
allowing it.
2. The trial court allowed such changes in Silverio's
certificate of live birth;
3. But there is no law allowing such changes on the
ground of sex reassignment;
4. Hence, the trial court's decision must be annulled as
it Jacks legal basis.
52 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
We have drawn here the deductive syllogism of the Court
of Appeals' argument. Just by comparing the syllogisms
of both arguments, we can identify which has a more solid
and correct reasoning. The RTC's argument is inductive and
hence, its conclusion is probabilistic. The CA's argument is
deductive in that the conclusion "follows" its premises. The
CA's premises are all actually true. There is indeed no law
allowing such changes in the certificate of birth on the ground
of sex reassignment but the RTC allowed such change. The
conclusion therefore is necessary and hence, the argument is
correct.
The Supreme Court's decision in this case is an affirma-
tion of the CA's argument, to quote:
Example 26:
"... while petitioner may have s ucceeded in altering his
body and appearance through the intervention of modern
surgery, no law authorizes the change of entry a s to sex
in the civil regis try for that rea son. Thus, there is no legal
basis for his petition for the correction or change of the
entries in his birth certificate."
We need not state the syllogism for the Court's argument
because it is the same with the CA's. We simply want to
point out that in reading court cases, we need to identify
the arguments raised therein and mentally construct their
syllogisms.
" FIR" Method in Case Digests
After reading the case, a digest must be made for an
easy reference of the same. Again, the standard format for
digesting a case is of course, the "FIR." 16 This format requires
that the facts, the issues, and the ruling of the case must be
"digested" that is, put in a summarized, condensed form. This
summarized form is what is known as the "case digest."
15fo Western countries like the U.S. and Canada, they call it ''IRAC"
which stands for "issues," "rule," "application" a nd "conclusion." The "IRAC" is
also used as the methodology or case analysis.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 53
Here is an example of a case digest using "FIR":
Example 27:
People v. SyJuco 16
64 Phil. 667
Facts: Certain government officer s, armed with a search
warrant duly issued, seized among other things, a filing
cabinet, belonging to Atty. R. In seeking the return of the
cabinet, Atty. R claimed the cabinet contained documents
and articles belonging to his clients. Because of the r efu-
sal of the government men to return the cabinet, Atty. R
petitioned the CFI praying that the agents be prohibited
from opening the cabinet.
Held:11 Since, it has been proven that the cabinet belongs
to a lawyer and that he keeps the records of his clients
therein, the lower court cannot order the opening of said
cabinet. To do so is in violation of his rights as an attorney.
It would be tantamount to compelling him to disclose his
client's secrets.
At the outset, we know that a lot of information is lost
in this digested form. By reading the ruling, we understand
that the lower court ordered the opening of the cabinet. Why?
What was its legal reasoning to have allowed the same? We
also do not know how the Court of Appeals decides on this
case. A digest serves only one thing: a useful reminder of what
was read thoroughly.
This means that to simply rely on digested cases as a
primary source of reading material is downright wrong. There
is no way one learns legal reasoning by simply living in a
constant diet of digested cases. With this kind of case digest,
the student must read again the original case.
Cited on the succeeding page is a much better case digest:
16
Ernesto L. Pineda, Legal And J udicia l Ethics, Ce ntral, 1995, pp. 255-
256.
17
This word is also used instead of "ruling."

54 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Example 28:
Pallada v. People
G.R. No. 131270, March 17, 2000 18
Facts: DENR officers assisted by member s of the Phil-
ippine National Police (PNP) r aided Valencia Golden
Harvest Corporation in Bukidnon wit h a warrant issued
after r eports alleged that illegally cu t lumber were
being delivered to the said warehouse. They came upon
a stockpile of lumber cut by ch a in saw and discredited
r eceipts from a lumberyard whose permit had long been
suspended.
The first batch of 162 pieces were confiscated and
impounded. The petitioner, general manager of the ware-
house refused to acknowledge the seizure order. The com-
pa ny president asked for the su spension of confiscation of
the 2nd batch of lumber to seek the lifting of the warrant.
The motion was denied.
Petitioner, together with the operations manager ,
company president a nd counsel were charged with viola-
tion of Section 68 of Presidentia l Decree (P.D.) 705. All
pleaded not guilty.
The lower court found the petitioner and the com-
pany president guilty beyond reasonable doubt of pos-
sessing P488,334.45 worth of timber products without the
required legal documents and sentenced them to ten (10)
years of prision mayor to twenty (20) years of reclusion
perpetua, while both the operations manager a nd counsel
were acquitted for lack of evidence.
The petitioner and company president appealed to
the Court of Appeals (CA) . The CA affirmed the decision
of the lower court, but acquitted the company president
for lack of proof.
Thus, the petitioner filed for review the CA's decision
to this court .
18 GreenJ ustice: A Handbook on Selected Philippine Enuironmental Laws,
RegtLlations and Cases. 2006, pp. 39-40.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 55
Issues: The issues are 1) wh ether or not the r uling of
the trial court proved beyond reasonable doubt th e guilt
of the petitioner, 2) whether or not the Certificate of
Timber Origin (CTO) the proper document to jus tify the
possession of the timber products, an d 3) whether or not
the irregularities in the CTO relevant to the decision.
Ruling: This court affamed t he decision of the CA based
on the following premises:
The warehouse's CTO and other related documents
presented by the petitioner failed to establish that the
possession of the seized lumber was legal. Even if the
petitioner con tended th at "timber'' includes "lumber"
(in reference to Mustang v. CA), in this case, different
certificates of origin were required for timber, lumber and
non-timber products expressly stated in BFD Circular
No. 10-83 for establishing accounta bility and uniformity
in documentation.
Even if CTO serves as a substitute for Certificate of
Lumber Origin, conviction of the petitioner was justified
due to the irregularities and defects contained in t he
documents ensued from the lumber dealer s. H owever, the
petitioner should have made efforts to correct them and
th erefore cannot feign ignorance.
This court modified the penalty imposed as stated
in Article 309 of the Revised Penal Code a nd applied the
Indeterminate Sentence Law. The petitioner was sen-
tenced to six (6) years of prision correctional, as minimum,
to twenty (20) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
This is a much better case digest because it contains more
information than the previous one. It also h as the distinctive
"FIR." However, while this digest contains information of
what the trial court and the CA ruled, it does not say why they
ruled that way. We have no idea why the trial court found the
guilt of the petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. Issue no. 1 is
not resolved in the ruling. We do not know what h appen ed to
this issue. It is clear here that we have facts but not much of
ar guments and reasoning. We h ave no adequate information
in these areas. This digest too is of little h elp in learning legal
reasoning.
56 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Let us now create a good case digest. For simple illustra-
tion, we will use the case of Silverio v . Republic19 because
the "FIR" in this case is uncomplicated and easy to follow.
Example 29:
Facts: Rommel J acinto Dantes Silverio ha d undergone a
sex reassignment surgery. He filed a petition seeking to
have his first name changed from Rommel to Mely, and
his sex from male to female in his certificate of birth. In
his petition he alleged that, "he is a male transsexual,
that is, 'anatomically male but feels, thinks and acts as a
female,' that he always identified himself with girls since
childhood." He felt "trapped in a man's body." By this
sex reassignment surgery he "tra nsformed himself to a
'woman."' After his s urgery, Silverio went on to live as a
female and was to be married to a man.
The trial court granted the petition. The court says
that granting the petition is more consistent with "justice
and equity" as petitioner's condition of being "trapped in a
man's body" is a misfortune which the courts of justice can
remedy. Further the court ''believes that no harm, injury
or prejudice will be caused to anybody or the community
in granting this petition."
The Court of Appeals denied the petition arguing
that there is no law allowing name or sex on the ground
of sex reassignment through surgery.
Issues: Can changes in name and sex in the certificate of
live birth be allowed on the ground of sex reassignment?
Ruling: The Supreme Court said no. RA 9048 governs as to
change in first na mes. In it, changes in first name may be
allowed when: the first na me is "ridiculous, tainted with
dishonor, or extremely difficult to write or pronounce,"
the change will avoid confusion. In this case, petitioner
failed to "show or alleged, any prejudice that he might
suffer as a result of using his true and official name."
He hasn't shown his true name to be "ridiculous, tainted
with dishonor, or extremely difficult to pronounce." And
19
G.R. No. 174680, October 22, 2007.
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 57
I
"rather than avoiding confusion, changing petitioner's
first name ...may only create grave complications in the
civil registry and the public interest."
As to change of sex, Art. 412 of the Civil Code governs
and correction th ereof may be allowed when there is error
in the ent ries. To correct means "to make straight or
set right; to remove the faults or error from." The birth
certificate of the petitioner "contained no error. All entries
therein, including those corresponding to his first name
and sex, were all correct. No correction is necessary."
As to the issue of justice and equity, the changes
sought by th e petitioner will result to "serious and wide-
ranging legal and public policy consequences ... to grant
the changes ... will substan tially reconfigure and greatly
alter the laws on marriage an family relations. It will
allow the union of man with a nother man ... (alter) the
various laws which particularly apply to women such
as the provisions of the Labor Code on employment of
women, certain felonies under the Revised Penal Code
and the presumption of survivorship ... under Rule 131
of the Rules of Court ... these la ws underscore the public
policy in relation to women which could be substantially
affected if petitioner's petition were to be granted."
In this example, we h ave most of the important informa-
tion of the case. We also have the different arguments and
reasoning raised therein. Of course some other information
like those referring to rules and procedures are eliminated
because we have first year law students in mind. Rules and
procedures are taken up in th e second year. But all in all, we
have the vital information of th e case as well as the compo-
nents for the various syllogisms which can be constructed
therefrom. Remember, a good case digest must not have just
the bare "FIR" but also the arguments of the parties, the
judges and justices including the over all legal thought of the
entire case.
Historical Discussions
Sometimes a court case contains reference and discus-
sions about his tory or philosoph y. The latter are quite relevant
58 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
and instructive to th e issu es in such case. Here is a lengthy
paragraph as a good example to illustrate this point taken
from the case of Estrada v . Escritor, to quote:
Example 30:
"At base, morality refers to, in Socrates words, h ow we
ought to live and why. Any definition of morality beyond
Socrates simple formulation is bound to offend one or
a nother of the many rival theories regarding what it
means to live morally. The answer to t he question of how
we ought to live necessarily consider s that man does not
live in isolation, but in society ... a society is h eld together
by a community of ideas, made up not only of political
ideas but also of ideas about the manner its members
should behave a nd govern their lives. The latter are
their morals; they constitute the public morality. Each
member of society has ideas about what is good a nd what
is evil. If people try to create a society wherein there is no
fundamental agreement about good a nd evil, they will fail;
if h aving established the society on common agreement,
the agreement collapses, the society will disintegrate.
Society is kept together by the invisible bonds of common
thought so that if the bonds are too loose, the members
would drift apart. A common morality is part of the
bondage and the bondage is part of the price of society;
and mankind, which needs society, must pay its price.
This design is parallel with t he social contract in the
realm of politics: people give up a portion of th eir liberties
to the state to allow the state to protect their liberties.
In a constitutional order, people make a fundamental
agreement about the powers of government and their
liberties and embody this agreement in a constitution,
h ence referred to as the fundamental law of the land. A
complete break of this fundamental agreement s uch as
by r evolution destroys the old order a nd creates a new
one. Similarly, in the r ealm of morality, the breakdown
of the fundamental agreement about the manner a
society's members should behave and govern their lives
would disintegrate society. Thus, society is justified in
taking steps to preserve its moral code by law as it does to
preserve its government and other essential institu tions."
IV - EFFECTIVE READING SKILLS 59
These extended discussions by th e Supreme Court
give us the over-arching context of the court's decision. The
example above deals with the history and the philosophical
development of morality. It instructs us on the definition and
historical background of "public morality."
It says that morality is about "how w e live and why"
and any conceptions on this topic must be drawn within the
context of the society becau se, essentially, " ...man does not
live in isolation but in society." The conceptions of society
about how its members ought to live and why, constitute its
morals. This is elaborated in this case to show us what is
"public morality."
The Court here tells us wh at makes society intact -
"Society is kept together by the invisible bonds of
common thought so that if the bonds are too loose,
the members would drift apart." Being vital to the bonds
that hold society together, the state, through positive laws,
has the right to preserve these - "thus, society is justified
in taking steps to preserve its moral code by law as it
does to preserve its government and other essential
institutions."
Court discussions like these are precious windows that
allow us to see how justices think, reason, and decide a case
and where they get their ideas. They let us in the world of the
judicial mind. So, no matter how lengthy and tedious these
parts are in a court case, they must be th oroughly read and ·
f
not neglected. Remember, what we read and how we read 1
becomes us. ~
As a summary, this chapt er taught us that reading
effectively entails us to: read the codals a nd jurisprudence J
as primary source materials, read aw materials repeatedly, ~
look for important words, terms, and phrases, read the law t-J
contextually, read the historical discussions in a case, and
finally, digest a case using "FIR" format with an inclusion .)
of the different arguments made by the trial court, Court of ~
Appeals, NLRC, Labor Arbiter , and of course, the Supreme
Court.
60 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING

Suggested Case Reading:

1. Ting v. Ting, G.R. No. 166565, March 31, 2009;
2. Suntay v. Suntay, G.R. No. 132524, December 29, V
1998;
EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ANALYSIS
3. People v. Syjuco, 64 Phil. 667;
4. Pallada v. People, G.R. No. 131270, March 17, 2000. S tudy of Law is like a fraternity hazing: students are
h arassed by the "Socratic method" through which they are
"crossed-examined" on the cases and laws assigned for reading.
They are whipped and paddled by the legalese and dry logic of
the legal knowledge. Most importantly, they are forced to "tap
out" in the written examinations, where the questions are
seemingly designed to "confuse" and "mislead." This picture
may be a caricature of legal education but the feeling stands.
There must be a way to prepare law students for this
kind of agony. There must be a way to help them handle the
written examinations effectively. After all, to be a lawyer is
to pass in law school and the bar exams. What is the best
way to analyze law school examination questions? How does a
student attack and conquer it?
This chapter will show the reader on how to analyze bar
exam questions by using and applying the logical reasoning
that have been discussed in this book. Analysis of examination
questions can be correctly done by applying the pattern of
logical thinking. The word examinee will be used in reference
to the law student and the bar candidate in this chapter.

Objective and Problem Type Questions

The questions in the law school exams and the bar
exams are of two types: the objective and the problem type.
The objective questions are quite straightforward. They are
simply designed to test what the examinee knows. They are
largely memorization.

61
 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
62
Example 31:
Is there a ny difference in their legal effect between
1
·
ignorance of the law an d ignorance · t a k e of fact?"
or mis . Along t he same line, a man who commits a crime with an
Here, the question simply tests what the examirn~e knows
about basic concepts of ignorance of the law and mistake of
fact. Questions like that are bonus questions because they are
basic legal concepts which are drilled into the first year of law
school and students are expected to know them by heart.
But sometimes, objective questions take a weird turn.
When this happens the question will no longer _b e a~ ~he
usual objective type questions but one which require cntlcal
thinking and logical reasoning. Read the example below:
Example 32:
''Motive is essential in the determination of the com-
mission of a crime and the liabilities of the perpetrators.
What are the instances where proof of motive is not
essential or r equired to justify conviction of an accu sed?
Give at least 3 instances"2
Motive is never essential in determining criminal
liability. The law (Revised Penal Code in this case) simply
seeks to find if the elements of the crime are present. If they
are then criminal liability exists. Intent on the other hand,
is ~ crucial element of criminal responsibility. In the case of
People v. Ballesteros, et al., the Supre_me Cour~ explains
the important distinctions between motive and mtent, to
quote:
"A distinction is h er ein timely made between motive
and intent . Motive is the moving power which impels one
to action for a definite result. Intent, on the other hand,
is the purpose to use a particular mean s to effect such
r esult. Motive alone is not proof of a crime. In order to
tip the scales in its favor, intent and not motive must be
established by t he prosecution . Motive is hardly ever an
'Civil Law Bar Examination, 1996.
22006 Bar Examinations, Criminal Law.
V - EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ANALYSIS 63
essential element of a crime. A man driven by extreme
moral perversion may be led to commit a crime, without
a real motive but a just for the sake of committing it.
a pparent motive may produce different results, for which
h e is punished. As held in a line of cases, the rule is well-
settled that the prosecution need n ot prove motive on the
part of the accused when the latter has been positively
identified as the author of the crime. Lack or absence
of motive for committing the crime does not preclude
conviction thereof where there were reliable witnesses
who fully and satisfactorily identified the accused as the
perpetrator of the felony." 3
The Supreme Court described motive as the ''moving
power" that compels a person to act, while intent is the
"purpose to use a particular means" to perform such act.
Motive lies in the realm of the mind while intent is seen by the
very means used in committing a crime. Use of deadly weapon
for example, shows the intent to kill. The circumstances
behind a crime, like the circumstance of nighttime in murder,
are truly indicative of a felonious intent. Motive, according to
the Supreme Court in this case, is "hardly ever an essential
element of a crime."
But in the 2006 bar question, motive is presented as an
essential element of a crime - "Motive is essential in the
determination of the commission of a crime and the
liabilities of the perpetrators." This question is obviously
skewed and if not careful, the examinee will surely fall for this
trap. How do we answer this kind of question?
First of all, it is very important not to make any ridicu-
lous answer to this seemingly crazy question. Do not fight fire
by fire. Although objective questions usually require memo-
rization, this one requires logical thinking. Second, read th e
rest of the question (2nd paragraph) and answer accordingly.
In fact, one can disregard the first paragraph and simply focus
3 Peopl v. Balleslcros, et al., G.R. No. 120921, January 29, 1998 (italics
nddcd.).
64 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
on th e second which is more sensible: ''Wha t are t h e in s-
t ances w h ere pr oof of motive is n ot essen tial or required
t o justify conviction of an accu sed ? Give at lea st t hree
instances."
Stated differently, the question asks for instances when
motive is vital to convict a person of a crime. This is a valid
question but requires a comprehensive knowledge on the rules
on evidence, Revised Penal Code, and jurisprudence. Below
is the suggested answer given by Laggui-Icao and Icao of
Siliman College o f Law,4 to wit:
1. When there is an eyewitness or positive identifica-
tion of the accused.
2. When the accused admitted or confessed to the com-
mission of the crime.
3. In crimes mala prohibita.
4. In direct assault, when the victim, who is a person
in authority or agent of a person in authority was
attacked in the actual performance of his duty
(Article 148, Revised Penal Code).
5. In crimes committed through reckless imprudence.
To recap, objective type questions simply require memo-
rization and knowledge of basic legal concepts, except when
they are designed to draw critical thinking and logical reason-
ing from the examinee.
Let us now proceed to problem type questions. Problem
type questions are d~ d to test the examinee's legal
reasoning skills. They are formulated to test one's grasp of th e
iaw. They demand argumentative answers and hence, require
a showing of reasoning ability.
Example 33:
"In 1977, Mario and Clara, both Filipino citizens, were
married in the Philippines. Three years later, they went
4
https://upangphin malaw.wordpress.com/2011/03104/suggested-answers-to-
bar-examinations-in-civil-la w-1994-2006-arranged-by-topics/. - Accessed da te: March
28, 2017.
V - EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ANALYSIS 65
\
to the United States of America and established their
resi~ence in San Francisco, California. In 1987, the couple
applied for, and were [sic] granted, U.S. citizenship. In
1989, Mario, claiming to have been abandoned by Clara,
was able to secure a decree of divorce in Reno Nevada
U.S.~. In 1990, Mario returned to the Philip;ines a nd
married Juana who knew well Mario's past life. (a) Is the
marriage between Mario and Juana valid?"5
This question asks for arguments on the validity of Mario
and Juana's marriage. The examinee has to answer what the
Philippine laws provide for divorces contracted by Filipinos in
countr~e_s ~here divorce is allowed. What is the legal effect in
the Ph1lippmes of such divorces?
N~cessarily, the answer requires the following: careful
analysis of the facts given, determination of existing Philippine
laws on marriage, and the application of these laws, if th ey do
apply, to the facts given in an argumentative manner. This is
the nature of the problem type questions in law school and in
the bar exams.
The "FIR" Pattern in Problem Type Questions
~s we see in the example given above, problem type
quest10ns give you the "facts" of a legal problem and you are
asked to determine what the law is applicable in those set of
facts. Remember the "FIR" format? The problem gives out the
facts ~f the case and the questions requires you to "rule," i.e.,
~o decide. on the problem. The "FIR" format is used not just
m analyzmg cases or in digesting them, but also in analyzing
problem type questions. Some examples are presented in the
succeeding discussion.
Seeing the Syllogism in the Problem
Another important point we need to emphasize in deal-
ing with problem type questions is analyzing the problem
in its syllogistical sense. We must identify what arguments
the question tries to elicit. We need to consider the question
0
1997 Bnr Rxnminu tions, Civil Lnw.
 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
66
in these facts and determine the applicable laws. The argu-
mentative answer must be formulated and articulated from
these considerations. Writing argumentative answers will be
discussed further in Cha pter VI.
Let us now have some examples.
Going back to example no. 33, we can construct syllogism
as follows:
1. Article 26 of the Family Code provides that Filipino
citizens who became citizens abroad and validly
obtained divorce there, such divorce is also valid in
the Philippines.
2. In this case, Mario and Clara, both Filipinos who
became American citizens, validly obtained divorce
in America;
3. Such divorce is also valid h ere in the Philippines.
4. Therefore , Mario and Juana's marriage in the Phil-
ippines is valid and binding.
True to the rule on syllogism, paragraph 1 serves as the
major premise, paragraphs 2 and 3 as minor premises, and
paragraph 4 as the conclusion. However, in law school and bar
exams, the conclusion must be written first and serves as the
major premise. We will discuss this in detail in Chapter VI.
Let us move to another example.
Example 34:
Zirxthoussous_ delos Santos filed a petition for
change of name with the Office of the Civil Registrar of
Mandaluyong City under the administrative proceeding
provided in Republic Act No. 9048. He alleged that his first
name sounds ridiculous and is extremely difficult to spell
and pronounce. After complying with the requirements
of the law, th e Civil Registrar granted his petition and
changed his first name Zirxthoussous to "Jesus." His full
na me now reads "J esu s delos Santos. Jesu s delos Santos
moved to General Santos City to work in a multi-n ational
company. There, h e fell in love and married Mary Grace
V - EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ANALYSIS 67
delos Santos. She requested him to have his first name
changed because his new name "J esus delos Santos" is
the same name as that of her father who abandoned her
family and became a notorious drug lord. She wanted to
forget him. Hence, Jesus filed another petition with the
Office of t he Local Civil Registrar to ch a nge his firs t name
to "Roberto." He claimed that the cha n ge is warranted
because it will eradicate all vestiges of the infamy of
Mary Grace's father. Will the petition for change of name
of J esus delos Santos to Roberto delos Santos under
Republic Act No. 9048 prosper? Explain.6
It is truly important to understand the facts carefully.
There are two situations in the case: the change of name from
"Zirxthousouss" to "Jesus" and the !1ttempt to change the
name "Jesus" to "Roberto." From the facts shown the legal
basis for changing names are given namely, ''first name
sounds ridiculous and is extremely difficult to spell and
pronounce" for the change of "Zirxthousouss" to "Jesus"
and " ...the same name as that of her father who aban-
doned her family and became a notorious drug lord." for
changing "Jesus" to "Roberto." Now let u s draw the syllo-
gisms in this problem.
As to the change of name from "Zirxthoussous" to
"Jesus" the syllogism can be as follows:
1. Change of first name is allowed if such name is
ridiculous and is difficult to spell or pronounce;
2. The name "Zirxthousous" is ridiculous, and is difficult
to spell or pronounce, while the name "Jesus" is not;
3. Therefore, change of name "Zirxthousous" to "Jesus"
is allowed.
Her e, we see a deductive reasoning where the conclusion
"follows" from the premises. The name "Zirxthousous" is
indeed ridiculous and is difficult to spell or pronounce. No
wonder that th e petition to change the same name is allowed.
62006 Bor ExnminnlioM, Civil Law.
(
68 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
What about the change of name from "Jesus" to ''Roberto"? Its
syllogism can be drawn as follows:
1. Change of first name is allowed if such name is
tainted with dishonor;
2. Now the name "J esus" is the same name of a notor-
ious drug lord;
3. Such name is tainted with dishonor;
4. Therefore, the name "Jesus" must be changed to
''Roberto."
Immediately, one feels the fallacy of this argument. First
of all, there is nothing dishonorable with the name "Jesus"
per se. On the contrary, such name is honorable as it is the
name of Jesus Christ. Secondly, the facts shows that whatever
dishonor which can be attributed to the name "J esus" is
simply personal to Mary Grace making the conclusion highly
subjective.
This argument is still formally a deductive argument
but the conclusion does not follow from the premises. Its
conclusion is false. With such analysis it is easy to know the
right answer.
Facts to Elements (of law) Correspondence
Another good way of analyzing a problem type question
is to see what the applicable law is and applies the elements
of such law to the given facts . Let us illustrate this point.
Example 35:
"At about 9:30 in the evening, while Dino a nd Raffy
were walking along Padre Faura Street , Manila. Johnny
hit them with a rock injuring Dino at the back. Raffy
approached Dino, but suddenly, Bobby, Steve, Danny and
Nonoy surrounded the duo. Then Bobby stabbed Dino.
Steve, Danny, Nonoy and Johnny kept on hitting Dino
and Raffy with rocks. As a result, Dino died, Bobby, Steve,
Danny, Nonoy and Johnny wer e ch arged with homicide.
Is there conspiracy in this case?"
V - EXAMINATION QUESTIONS ANALYSIS 69
This question is straightforward. The facts lead only to
one question: Is there conspiracy in this case? When is there
conspiracy in committing a crime? Article 8 of the Revised
Penal Code provides:
"Art.. 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony .
- Conspiracy and proposa,l to commit felony are punish-
I
able only in the cases in which the law specially provides
a penalty therefor. A conspiracy exists when two or more
p~rsons come to an agreement concerning the commis-
s10n of a felony and decide to commit it. There is proposal
when the person who has decided to commit a felony pro-
poses its execution to some other person or persons." J
Additionally, the Supreme Court says "unity of p urp ose
and u nity in the execution of the unlawful objective are
essential to establish the existence of consp iracy.''7
Article 8 tells us that when: a) two or more persons b)
agree~ to commit a felony c) they actually commit the felony,
there 1s conspiracy. Also, the Supreme Court tells us that two
elements must exist for conspiracy to exist, namely: a) unity
of purpose, and b) unity of execution of such purpose. The
latter is somewhat a summary of Article 8.
What we need to do in Example No. 31 is apply a sort
of "correspondence" between elements of conspiracy and the
facts of the case. We need to ask the following questions: What
is the purpose of Bobby? What is the purpose of Steve, Danny,
Nonoy and Johnny? Do they have the same purpose? Were
they united in this purpose?
From the facts given we can say that Bobby's purpose
was to kill Dino because he was using a deadly weapon. For
the rest, we can conclude that the purpose was the same
because stones can be a "deadly weapon." Purpose is intent.
And intent is shown by the means used to execute the act.
Here, the means of execution appears to be the same. There is
conspiracy here.8
7
People v. Ramirez, G.R. No. 99379, April 22, 1994.
8
h ttps://upa ngph in ma la w. wo rd prcss.com/20 l l/03/04/s uggested-a ns wers-to-
bar-cx11 mi n11 tions-i n-ci vi 1-lnw-199<1 -2006-nrrangcd-by-lopics/ - Accessed date: March
28, 20 17.

VI
ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING
W riting is an act of summarizing, synthesizing, and
articulating one's thoughts. All the ideas in the materials we
read - law, jurisprudence, and the commentaries will now have
to be hemmed in, tucked, and lined up sensibly, correctly, and
of course, neatly, in particular words, sentences, and para-
graphs. It is a tedious task, one may say. Yes it is. In law
school and the legal profession, it is the necessary evil.
-
No person is born a writer. We all have to learn it and earn
it. In school - elementary, high school, and college, we had
to write essays and reaction papers as a requirement. W}le~
something is forced, nothing is learnec!z much less retained.
So we tossed writing away as soon as we had the chance, but
we have to pick it up again, albeit reluctantly, in law school.
Virginia Woolf says, "Every secret of a writer's soul, every
experience of his life, every quality of his mind, is written large
in his works. "1 Writing reveals one's intellectual life. This is
the medium that reveals the legal mind, if it exists at all. In
law school and in the bar exams, writing is the reckoning
point, the Judgment Day if you will say. The student or the
bar candidate stands and fall by what and how he writes his
answers. In the Philippine bar exams, argumentative writing
is the main tool to use.
Argumentative Writing Defined
What is argumentative writing?
It is a type of writing that requires a writer to set out
a definitive premise or premises and then seeks to establish
'Quoted by Zachary Petit, Writer's Digest, June 22, 2012.
70
VI - ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 71
the validity and merit of such premise or premises. 2 In this
definition, we see that argumentative writing h as a form. By
now, this form is already familiar to us. Syllogism is used not
just in logical thinking but also in argumentative writing.
Let us read the examples.
Example 35:
"Elated that her sister who h ad been married for
five year was pregnant for the first time, Alma dona-
ted Pl00,000.00 to the unborn child. Unfortu nately, the
baby died one hour after delivery. May Alma recover the
Pl00.000.00 that sh e had donated to said baby before it
was born considering that the baby died? Stated other-
wise, is the donation valid and binding? Explain."S
As what we have learned from Chapter V, the first thing
to do in answering problems is to carefully analyze the facts
and the question being asked. We need to see how the facts
relate to an applicable law. Most importantly, we need to
find the main issue in the problem. Further, do not write the
answer immediately. See the outline of syllogism in your mind
first and then write a draft on the test paper if allowed. Do
this thoroughly and efficiently within the time allotted. Only
then will you finally write the answer.
Based on the facts given, the issues could be either
juridical capacity or the validity of donations. The latter
seems to be implied in the question, ': .. is the donation valid
and binding?" But if we analyze further, we can see th at the
roblem is really about juridical capacity of the unborn child.
We must t ere ore ta e e a er course. The next thing to do
is to recall the law on juridical capacity.
What is juridical capacity?
Article 37 of the Civil Code says,
2
h ttp :/Is tu dy .co mlaca de my/lesso n/argu men ta ti ve-essay-definition.
formnt-cxamples.html. Accessed date: March 28, 2017.
1
· 1999 Bnr Rxnminnlion11, C'ivi l Law.

72 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
"Juridical capacity, which is the fitness to be the sub-
ject of legal relations, is inherent in every natural person
and is lost only through death . Capacity to act, which is
the power to do acts with legal effect, is acquired and may
be lost ."
Juridical capacity is the ''fitness to be the s ubject of legal
relations. " This capacity, the law says, is inh er ent in n atural
persons Donation is a legal relation, s~ we need to as~ n relation is favorable to it, and it is alive after its delivery from
the unborn child, the fetus, be a donee? Can it be a subject of
a legal relation? In other words, does a fetus have a juridical
capacity? This depends on whether a fetus is a "person" in law
because juridical capacity is inherent in natural persons.
This leads us to Article 40 of the Civil Code:
Art. 40. Birth determines personality; but the con-
ceived child shall be considered born for all purposes
that are favorable to it, provided it be born later with the
conditions specified in the following article.
Here, birth determines whether a person exists or not. A
person is one who is ''born" according to Article 40. But what
is meant by ''born" here? A fetus is physically not born yet. So,
technically, it is not a person yet, not until it is born.
But Article 41 tells us otherwise:
"Art. 41. For civil purposes, th e fetus is consider ed
born if it is alive at the time it is completely deliver ed from
the mother 's womb. However, if the fetus ha d an intra-
uterine life of less than seven months, it is not deemed
born if it dies within twenty-four hours after its complete
delivery from the materna l womb."
So one is ''born" when one is "alive" after being delivered
from the womb. It is being born alive that determines
personal!iY. Without it, there is no personality, there is no
person to talk about. Without personality, there is no subject
to engage in any kind of legal relations.
But let's go back to the question , is the fetus a person? It
is, to a very narrow margin according to Article 41. How? This
is how:
I l
VI - ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 73
1. The fetus must be alive after its delivery from the
womb;
2. For fetuses with an intra-uterine life of less than
seven months, it is not considered alive if it dies
within 24 hours after its delivery from the womb.
So a fetus can be a subject of legal relations if such ,
the womb. In case it has an intra-uterine life of less than
seven months, it must not die within 24 hours. These are the
conditions that make an unborn child a person in the law.
Now let us go back to the problem. The donation of
Pl00,000.00 is obviously favorable to the unborn child. So here,
the child, although unborn, is considered by law as ''born,"
meaning it is a person in a limited sen se. The requirement
of Article 41 however, must be complied. In the problem, the
child died after an hour. But all the essential conditions for
it to be considered a person are present. This means that
the unborn child had the personality to be the donee of the
Pl00,000.00 a nd therefore, Alma cannot recover it.
The Syllogistic Pattern in Argumentative Writing
Now, we have analyzed the problem carefully in light of
Articles 37, 40, and 41 of the Civil Code. We are now ready to
write our answer. Let us take a look at the problem again:
"Elated that h er sister who had been married for
five year was pregnant for the first time, Alma dona-
ted Pl00,000.00 to the unborn child. Unfortunately, the
baby died one hour after delivery. May Alma recover the
Pl00.000.00 that she had donated to said baby before it
was born con sidering that the baby died? Stated other-
wise, is the donation valid and binding? Explain."
It is now clear that Articles 40 and 41 are applicable in
this problem. These are our legal basis, which in logic, serve
as our major premise. At this point, we must emph asize that
deductive r easoning must be the syllogism we should use in
our a nswer . Remember , in deductive reasoning, the conclusion
..

74 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
necessarily "follows" from the premises. Deductive reasoning
is a tight and crisp reasoning format to be used. This is the
standard reasoning form that must be used in law school and
bar examinations.
One more thing, in syllogism, the conclusion is stated at
the very end of the argument. But in answering law school
and bar exams, the conclusion must be stated first. We have
to give our definite answer right away. We should not beat
around the bush. We deliver our best punch straight to the
face.
So, in the given problem, this can be our answer:
._ "No, Alma cannot recover the donated Pl00,000.00,
because the donation is valid and binding.
The Civil Code provides that an unborn child is con-
sidered born, that is, a person who can be a donee in a
contract of donation provided it is alive at the time of its
delivery from the womb and in case it has an intra-uterine
life of less than seven months, it must not die within
twenty-four hours after its delivery.
In this case, the child is alive upon its complete
delivery from the womb and there is no indication that it
has an intra-uterine life of less than seven months. The
child is therefore considered born, making the donation
to it valid."
In this answer, we have the conclusion in the first
paragraph, the major premise in the second paragraph, and
the minor premise in the third paragraph. We have therefore
crafted a syllogistic pattern in our answer.
This is how argumentative writing is done. We must
apply this in all questions in law school and the bar exams.
This is our tool, our weapon. The tradesman and his tools,
the warrior and his weapon must become one. This is possible
only by constant and relentless practice.
'
VI - ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 75
Let's take another question:
Example 36:
''Roland, a basketball star, was under contract for
one year to play-for-play exclusively for Lady Love, Inc.
However, even before the basketball season could open,
he was offered a more attractive pay plus fringes benefits
by Sweet Taste, Inc. Roland accepted the offer and trans-
ferred to Sweet Taste. Lady Love sues Roland and Sweet
Tas te for breach of contract. Defendants claim that the
restriction to play for Lady Love alone is void, h ence, un-
enforceable, as it constitutes an undue interference with
the right of Roland to play and enjoy basketball."4
Here, we are simply asked to rule on the merit of the
Defendants' argument. The problem tells us that Roland
was under an exclusive one-year contract with Lady Love.
We know that this contract was valid and subsisting. Then
came Sweet Taste, a third party, a stranger to this contractual
relationship, and worse, a rival team of Lady Love, offered
R_oland a better deal with better compensation package. Imme-
diately, one feels the 'wrongness' in the offer. But what is
worse, Roland accepted the offer.
One of the most important aspects of contractual
obligations and relations is good faith. Good faith, which in
latin, "bona fide" is the essential element in the harmonious
operations of civil relations. It is an age old social trait that
serves to maintain fair and transparent human interactions.
W~thout "bona fide" no civil contracts would be possible.
Without contracts there is no civil society to speak of. In
the given problem, good faith is clearly violated. We see this
instinctively.
But aside from this general concept of good faith, what
exactly are the liabilities of Roland and Sweet Taste? Their
liabilities are the following: for Roland, he violated his con-
tract with Lady Love hence, he is liable for damages for breach
of contract. For Sweet Taste, it may be guilty of "tortious
interference."
'1991 Bar Examin1ttion1J, Civi l Law.
76 BASIC TECHNIQUES IN LEGAL REASONING
Tortious interference exists when a third person induces
~ arty to a contract to violate the terms and condition"sth erir-
of. Such third party is liable for damages. In Gov. C"ordero,
G.R. No. 164747, May 4, 2010, Tortious Interference applies
when the interferer is simply being malicious. The concept
does not apply when the interferer is impelled by a "proper
business interest." In this problem however , we see that both
Roland and Sweet Taste have the same defense which sug-
gests collusion between the two. Both may have been impelled
by malice, hence, they are liable for damages to Lady Love.
Roland is guilty of breach of contract under Article 11705 of
the Civil Code, while Sweet Taste may be guilty of ''tortious
interference" under Article 13146 of the same Code. See the
case for further instruction on this subject.
Now we are done analyzing the problem and managed to
see the core points of it, to wit: a) the status of the one year
exclusive contract of Roland and Lady Love, b) the violation
of contractual relations and obligations, and c) the respective
liabilities of Roland and Sweet Taste. All these must be dealt
with neatly and correctly in our answer.
Again, we must remember to use the deductive reasoning
and that the conclusion be its major premise. The answer
would be:
Yes, Roland is bound by his contract with La dy Love;
he cannot disregard it, a nd both he a nd Sweet Taste are
liable for damages.
The Civil Code provides that "those who in the per-
forma nce of their obligations are guilty, in any manner, /
of contravening th e tenor thereof, are liable for damages"
and "Any third person who induces a nother to violate
his contract shall be liable for da mages to the other con -
tracting party."
6'Ufhose who in the performance of their obligations are guil ty of fraud,
negligence or delay, and those who in any manner contravene t he tenor thereof,
are liable for damages."
&uAny third person who induces anothe r to viola te his contract shall be
lia ble for damages to the other contracting party."
dnto: March 28, 201 7.
VI - ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING 77
In this case, Roland's contract with La dy Love is
valid a nd subsisting and he must comply it in good faith.
When he accepted the offer of Sweet Love, he violated
such obligation and thereby liable for damage for breach
of contract. Sweet Tas te is also liable to Lady Love for
da mages, being a third person, induced Roland to violate
his contract with Lady Love. Both Rola nd and Sweet
: as«: have colluded against Lady Love indicated by their
identical defense. Hence, both are lia ble for da mages.
Here, we have achieved our goal. We have accounted the
core points of the problem, a nd have written a decent deductive
"syllogistical" presentation of our answer. But again, the most
important thing to r emember is that all steps must be done
as quickly as possible. Examinations are timed. The factual
ana_lysis of the problem, the recollection of the accurate legal
basis, the formulation of the answer in a deductive reasoning
must all be done efficiently and neatly.
Time is alwa s of the essence in the examinations. It is a
rare resource we cannot waste. This is t e c enge we must
overcome to pass the bar exams. This can be possible when
~he argumentative writing skill is already in place. Without
1t, we can expect the outcome to be less desirable.
Practice therefore means everything. One writer gave
this advice:
"Write.
Write more.
Write even more.
Write even more th an that.
Write when you don't want to.
Write when you do.
Write when you have something to say.
Write when you don't.
Write every day.
Keep writing."1
1
Brian Cla rk, quot('d from Good Quotes, www.goodreads.com. - Accessed
78 BASIC TECHNI QUES IN LEGAL REASONI NG

By now, one must realize that there are no short cuts in

the process. There is no other way to do this. Ther e is no other
way to learn the ropes oflegal reasoning, there is no other way
to acquire the legal mind, and h ence, there is no other way to
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
be a lawyer.
Now, answer the following exercises effectively.
Exercises: ATTY. JOHN DAVE G. VERGARA,
"Atty. JD" for short, teaches Legal Technique
1. Jaime, who is 65, and his son, Willy, who is 25, died
and Logic at the University of Mindanao
in a plane crash. There is no proof as to who died
College of Legal Education in Davao City.
first. J aime's only surviving heir is his wife, Julia,
He had a brief stint as a defense attorney in
who is also Willy's mother. Willy's surviving h eirs
2008 and immediately entered government
are his mother, Julia and his wife, Wilma.
service at the National Commission on
a) In the settlement of J aime's estate, can Wilma Indigenous Peoples (NCIP) from 2009 up to
successfully claim that her late husband, Willy 2014. Currently, he is serving as in-house
h ad a h ereditary share since he was much counsel for Philippine Business Bank (PBB)
younger th an his fath er and, therefore, should in Davao City branch.
be presumed to have survived longer?
b) Suppose J aime had a life insurance policy with
his wife, Julia, and his son , Willy, as th e bene-
ficiaries. Can >Wilma successfully claim th at
one-h alf of th e proceeds should belong to Willy's
estate?8
2. On January 5, 1992, Nonoy obtained a loan of
Pl,000,000.00 from his friend Raffy. The promissory
note did not stipulate any payment for interest. The
note was due on J anuary 5, 1993 but before this
date the two became political enemies. Nonoy, out of
spite, deliberately defaulted in paying the note, thus
forcing Raffy to sue him. 1) What actual damages can
Raffy recover? 2) Can Raffy ask for moral damages
from Nonoy? 3) Can Raffy ask for nominal damages?
4) Can Raffy a sk for temperate damages? 5) Can
Raffy ask for attorney's fees? 9

8 1998 Bar Examination s, Civil Law.

9 1994 Bar Examinations, Civil Law.