Page 1 of 6

I. that the levy was a cloud over the title. Jack and Jill filed an action against Elsa
for quieting of title. Since the trial ruled in favor of Jack and Jill, Elsa filed an
A. How may a court acquire jurisdiction over a person? (4%) appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, Elsa discovered that there was no RTC
order that authorized the deed of sale. She then filed a motion for new trial.
B. How may summons be served in actions in personam? Why? (6%)
A. Rule on the motion for new trial. (5%)
B. What is the effect of the failure of Gil to join the action? (5%)
A. The manner by which the court acquires jurisdiction over the parties depends
A. The motion for new trial must be granted. As held in the case of Ybiernas
on whether the party is the plaintiff or the defendant.
v. Tanco, the rules allows the courts to grant a new trial when there exists
a newly discovered evidence.
Jurisdiction over the plaintiff is acquired when the action is commenced by the
filing of the complaint, and the payment of the correct docket fees In the case at hand, the discovery of Elsa that there was indeed No RTC
order that authorized the deed of sale is a newly-discovered evidence
Jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is obtained either by a valid because it conforms with the following aspects of a newly-discovered
service of summons upon him or by his voluntary submission to the court’s evidence:
authority.
1. Temporal– the evidence was discovered only after trial
B. In an action in personam, jurisdiction over the person of the defendant is 2. Predictive – the existence of the evidence could not have been predicted
necessary for the court to validly try and decide the case. Jurisdiction over the even with the exercise of reasonable diligence to locate it before or
person of a resident defendant who does not voluntarily appear in court can be during the trial.
acquired by personal service of summons as provided under Section 7, Rule
Since the evidence is a newly-discovered evidence, it is but proper to
14 of the Rules of Court. If he cannot be personally served with summons within
warrant a Motion for New Trial.
a reasonable time, substituted service may be made in accordance with Section
8 of the said Rule.
II. B. The failure of Gil to join the action will not affect the action or the judgment
of the action. This is because the action for quieting of title filed by his co-
Elsa obtained a favorable judgment in a collection suit which she filed against
owners Jack and Jill shall serve for the benefit of all of them since they share
Norma, Mother of Jack, Jil and Gil. During the execution of the judgment, the
a common interest on the property.
sheriff levied upon a property which was still registered in the name of Norma. At
that time, there is an RTC order and a deed of absolute sale that was annotated in
the Title. The RTC order was apparently issued by as cadastral court approving
the deed of sale that was annotated with it. Claiming to be the true owners of the
property despite the fact that the title was still in the name of their mother and

III.
Give the purposes of the following special civil actions. (2% each). Give one
concept in an ordinary civil action that does not apply to them: (1% each)
A. Interpleader
B. Declaratory relief
C. Certiorari
D. Mandamus
E. Quo warranto
A. Interpleader is a special civil action filed by a person against whom two
conflicting claims are made upon the same subject matter and over which he
claims no interest, to compel the claimants to interplead and to litigate their
conflicting claims among themselves (Sec. 1 Rule 62)
B. An action for declaratory relief is brought to secure an authoritative statement
of the rights and obligations of the parties under a contract or a statute for their
guidance in the enforcement or compliance with the same (Meralco vs.
Philippine Consumers Foundation, 374 SCRA 262). Thus, the purpose is to
seek for a judicial interpretation of an instrument or for a judicial declaration of
a person’s rights under a statute and not to ask for affirmative reliefs like
injunction, damages or any other relief beyond the purpose of the petition as
declared under the Rules.
Ordinary civil action – plaintiff alleges that his right has been violated by the
defendant; judgment rendered is coercive in character; a writ of execution may
be executed against the defeated party.
Special civil action of declaratory relief – an impending violation is sufficient
to file a declaratory relief; no execution may be issued; the court merely makes
a declaration.
Page 2 of 6
C. Certiorari is an extraordinary writ annulling or modifying the proceedings of a
tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions when
such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of its or his
jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction, there being no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law (Sec. 1, Rule 65).
D. Mandamus is an extraordinary writ commanding a tribunal, corporation, board
or person, to do an act required to be done: (a) When he unlawfully neglects the
performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty, and there is
no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law; or
(b) When one unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a
right or office to which the other is entitled (Sec.3, Rule 65)
Mandamus is not an appropriate remedy to enforce a contractual obligation.
Mandamus is directed only to ministerial acts, directing or commanding a
person to do a legal.
E. Quo Warranto- It is a special civil action commenced by a verified petition
against (a) a person who usurps a public office, position or franchise; (b) a
public officer who performs an act constituting forfeiture of a public office; or
(c) an association which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without
being legally incorporated or without lawful authority to do so (Sec. 1, Rule 66)
IV.
After obtaining a favorable judgment in a collection suit. Edna caused the
levy of a lot registered under the name of the defendant, Graham. Percy
claims to be the real owner of the lot which was apparently only being held
by Graham in trust for him.
A. What is the remedy of Percy? (5%)
B. What is his next remedy if he fails in the first remedy he chooses? (5%)
 Page 3 of 6

B. As a rule, a judgment becomes final only upon the expiration of the period for the filing
of an appeal, without an appeal or motion for reconsideration being filed. Give five
A. Precy may file a third-party claim. exceptions to this rule. (5%)
C. How do you stay an execution pending appeal? (5%)
Remedies available to a third person not party to the action but whose
A. A judgment on appeal, although not yet final may be executed if it pertains
property is the subject of execution:
to the following actions:
(a) Terceria - By making an affidavit of his title thereto or his right to
a. Injunction
possession thereof, stating the grounds of such right or title. The affidavit
must be served upon the sheriff and the attaching party (Sec. 14, Rule 57). b. Receivership
Upon service of the affidavit upon him, the sheriff shall not be bound to keep c. Forcible Entry
the property under attachment except if the attaching party files a bond d. Unlawful Detainer
approved by the court. the sheriff shall not be liable for damages for the taking e. Support Pendente Lite
or keeping of the property, if such bond shall be filed.
B. Judgments on the following actions are immediately final and are exceptions
(b) Exclusion or release of property – Upon application of the third person
through a motion to set aside the levy on attachment, the court shall order a to the general rule that a judgment becomes final only upon the expiration of
summary hearing for the purpose of determining whether the sheriff has acted the period for the filing of an appeal without an appeal or a motion for
rightly or wrongly in the performance of his duties in the execution of the writ reconsideration being filed:
of attachment. The court may order the sheriff to release the property from the a. Injunction
erroneous levy and to return the same to the third person. In resolving the b. Receivership
application, the court cannot pass upon the question of title to the property c. Forcible Entry
with any character of finality but only insofar as may be necessary to decide if
d. Unlawful Detainer
the sheriff has acted correctly or not (Ching vs. CA, 423 SCRA 356).
e. Support Pendente Lite
(c) Accion Reinvindicatoria - The third party claimant is not precluded by
Sec. 14, Rule 57 from vindicating his claim to the property in the same or in a C. An execution pending appeal may be stayed upon approval by the proper
separate action. He may file a separate action to nullify the levy with damages court of a sufficient supersedeas bond filed by the party against whom it is
resulting from the unlawful levy and seizure. This action may be a totally directed.
distinct action from the former case.
VI.

V. On February 12, 2010, Dante received his copy of the judgment in the specific
performance case which he filed against Rose. While he was able to get a writ of
A. As a rule, only a judgment that has become final may be executed. Give five exceptions execution in his favor on February 25, 2014, he requested the sheriff not to
to this rule. (5%) implement it yet because he has become smitten with the son of Rose. On March

2015 when Rose son finally rejected Dante's amorous induendos, the latter told
the sheriiffto implement the writ.
A. May the writ be implemented? (5%)
B. What is the remedy of Dante in case the sheriff refuses to implement the writ?
(5%)
A. Yes, the writ may still be implemented however it must be done by filing an
Action to Revive Judgment because more than 5 years has already lapsed
since the date of entry of judgment.
B. Dante may commence a proceeding for indirect contempt against the sheriff
by filing a verified petition for that matter.
VII.
Give the most important difference between (2% each)
1 Personal action and an acbpn in personam.
2 Venue and jurisdiction
3 Conclusiveness of judgment and bar by prior judgment
4 Verification and certificate against forum-shopping
5 preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order
A. Personal action and Action in Personam
All other actions or, when the issue is not one of those- meaning, it is founded
on privity of contract, or on quasi-delict, such as actions for a sum of money,
or damages arising from breach of a contract, or for the enforcement or
resolution of a contract, or for recovery of personal property, these are the
PERSONAL ACTIONS .(Casilan vs. Tomassi, 90 Phil. 765; Cachero vs.
Manila Yellow Taxicab, 101 Phil. 523; Bautista vs. Piguing, L-10006, Oct. 31,
1957)
Page 4 of 6
“If the technical object of the suit is to establish a claim generally against
some particular persons, with a judgment which, in theory, at least, binds
his body or to bar some individual claim or objection, so that only certain
persons aree ntitled to be heard, the action is IN PERSONAM.” (Grey
Albavs. Dela Cruz, 17 Phil. 49; Sandejas vs. Robles, 81 Phil. 421
B. JURISDICTION from VENUE.
1) JURISDICTION refers to the authority of the court to hear the case,
Whereas VENUE refers only to the place where the action is to be heard or
tried;
2) JURISDICTION over the subject matter cannot he waived; Whereas
VENUE is waivable and can be subject of agreement;
3) JURISDICTION is governed by substantive law –Judiciary Law, BP
129; whereas VENUE is governed by procedural law Rule 4 of the Rules
of Court;
4) JURISDICTION establishes a relation between the court and the
subject matter; whereas VENUE creates a relation between the plaintiff
and defendant, or petitioner and respondent; and
5) JURISDICTION or lack of it over the subject matter is a ground for a
moto proprio dismissal; whereas VENUE is not except in cases subject to
summary procedure.
C. Res judicata has two concepts. The first is bar by prior judgment under
Rule 39, Section 47(b), and the second is conclusiveness of judgment
under Rule 39, Section 47(c).
The first concept bars the prosecution of a second action upon the same
claim, demand or cause of action. The second concept states that a fact or
question which was in issue in a former suit and was there judicially passed
upon and determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, is conclusively
settled by the judgment therein as far as the parties to that action and persons
in privity with them are concerned and cannot be again litigated in any

future action between such parties or their privies, in the same court or any
other court of concurrent jurisdiction on either the same or different cause
of action, while the judgment remains unreversed by proper authority.
D. A writ of preliminary injunction remains until it is dissolved; a temporary
restraining order (TRO) has a lifetime only of 20 days (RTC and MTC) or
60 days (Court of Appeals). A TRO issued by the Supreme Court shall be
effective until further orders. A TRO is issued to preserve the status quo
until the hearing of the application for preliminary injunction. The judge
may issue a TRO with a limited life of 20 days from date of issue. If before
the expiration of the 20 day period, the application for preliminary
injunction is denied, the TRO would be deemed automatically vacated. If
no action is taken by the judge within the 20 day period, the TRO would
automatically expire on the 20th day by the sheer force of law, no judicial
declaration to that effect being necessary (Bacolod City Water District vs.
Labayen, 446 SCRA 110).
VIII.
Sammy, the plainttff in a forcible entry case and a columnist in a newspaper being
circulated in Baguio City, published an article describing the MTC judge before
whom the case was pending to be a smooth-brained discombobulating
nincompoop. He stated that he was so appalled by the gross ignorance of the judge
that he filed with the Regional Trial Court a case for recovery of possession
against the same defendant and over the same property,
A If you were the lawyer for the defendant what action will you take
regarding the two pending cases? (5%)
B. What action will you take against Sammy? (5%)
A. File a motion to dismiss with the RTC on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction. Forcible entry cases falls within the exclusive and original
jurisdiction of the MTC, irrespective of the amount of damages or rental
sought to be recovered. Sammy filed a case with the RTC without
judgment rendered by the MTC, evidently not a valid action, since it is a
Page 5 of 6
forcible entry case. Thus, filing a motion to dismiss the case before the
RTC is proper.
B. Motu proprio or through verified petition citing actions of Sammy as
indirect contempt, on the ground of improper conduct tending to degrade
the administration of justice.
IX.
After serious misunderstanding with her husband Gary, Alice went to have a brief
vacation in Japan. When she came home last October 24, 2018, She was surprised
to discover Emma in their family home in Baguio City, with an assessed value of
P368,700. Upon inquiry, she learned that Gary sold the house and all its contents
to Emma. She goes to you, a maverick but promising lawyer from UC, with the
intention of filing a forcible entry case against Emma for having disposed her
through strategy and stealth. Will you file a forcible entry case?
No, in a forcible entry case the issue is as to who is entitled to the physical or
material or actual possession of the premises- that is possession de facto and
not possession de jure. Since the family home was sold by Gary to Emma there
is no possession de facto on the part of Emma in this case.
X.
What will you do if. (Limit your answer to one word, phrase, or sentence
only) (5%)
1. Your client does not have money to pay the filing fee
-Motion to litigate an indigent litigant
2. Your client does not have money to pay you
-
 Page 6 of 6

3. The sheriff refuses to implement the writ of execution issued in favor of

your client
-Petition for mandamus
4. The proceeds of the foreclosure sale is not sufficient to cover the judgment
amount
-File a motion and ask the court to render deficiency judgment against the
defendant
5. The defendant in your collection case is about to leave the Philippines
with the intention of escaping from his creditors
-Issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment ex parte