TITLE: Lea Mer Industries, Inc. vs. Malayan Insurance Co., Inc.

CITATION: 471 SCRA 698, G.R. No. 161745 September 30, 2005
TOPIC: Testimonial Knowledge

FACTS:
X entered into a contract of carriage with Y for the shipment of silica sand. The vessel sank during the
voyage. Z, as insurer, paid the value of the lost cargo and instituted a complaint against Y. During trial,
the survey report of the cargo surveyor S was presented but S did not testify. The said report was made
as basis for the final Adjustment Report prepared by R to which was also presented and testified to by R.
Is the survey report admissible in evidence?

ANSWER:
Yes.

As a general rule, unless the affiant is presented as a witness, an affidavit is considered hearsay. An
exception to the foregoing rule is that on “independently relevant statements.” A report made by a
person is admissible if it is intended to prove the tenor, not the truth, of the statements. Independent of
the truth or the falsity of the statement given in the report, the fact that it has been made is relevant.

In the case at bar, the referral to S’s Report was in relation to R’s final Adjustment Report. It was ​the
existence​ of the Survey Report that was testified to.

Thus, the Survey Report prepared by S is admissible but only as part of the testimony of R.
TITLE: Estrada vs. Desierto
CITATION: 356 SCRA 108, G.R. Nos. 146710-15, G.R. No. 146738 April 3, 2001
TOPIC: Testimonial Knowledge

FACTS:
Joseph Ejercito Estrada alleges that he is the President on leave while Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo claims
she is the President. During trial, the Angara diary was presented. The diary contains statements of
Estrada which reflect his state of mind. It also contains statements of Secretary Angara from which
Estrada’s intent to resign can be deduced. Is the diary admissible in evidence?

ANSWER:
No.

The ban on hearsay evidence does not cover independently relevant statements. These are statements
which are relevant independently of whether they are true or not, like statements of a person to show,
among others, his state of mind, mental condition, knowledge, belief, intention, ill will, and other emotions.

In this case, the incidents described in the Angara diary tell a story of desperation, duress and
helplessness surrounding Estrada, arguing eloquently against the idea of intent and voluntariness on his
part to leave the Presidency.

Thus, it is admissible and not covered by the rule on hearsay.

TITLE: People vs. Comiling
CITATION: 424 SCRA 698, G.R. No. 140405 March 4, 2004
TOPIC: Dying declaration

FACTS:
An information for robbery with homicide was filed against X. It was alleged that in the emergency room,
the victim identified X as the robber who shot him. His statement was taken down and the victim affixed
his thumbmark with his own blood. Is the victim’s statement admissible in evidence?

ANSWER:
Yes.

Under Rule 130, Section 37 of the Rules of Court, the declaration of a dying person with the
consciousness of impending death may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of
inquiry, as evidence of the cause and the surrounding circumstances of such death. There are four
requisites which must concur in order that a dying declaration may be admissible: (1) it must concern the
crime and surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s death; (2) at the time it was made, the declarant
was under the consciousness of an impending death; (3) the declarant was competent as a witness; and
(4) the declaration is offered in any criminal case for homicide, murder or parricide in which the declarant
was the victim.

In this case, the victim’s dying declaration is complete in the sense that it was a full expression of all that
he wanted to say with regard to the circumstances of his death. An ante-mortem statement is evidence of
the highest order. It is doctrinal that, when a person is at the point of death, every motive of falsehood is
silenced.