1.
LEGAL RESEARCH, WRITING AND ANALYSIS
A. Finding a case, Parts of a Case and legal
writing.
CASE ANALYSIS AND LEGAL WRITING,
Myrna S. Feliciano
4 PHILJA JUD. J. 185
The requirements of form and content of a
resolution is more or less the same as that of a
decision rendered by a judge or an
administrative officer. Section 14, Article VIII of
the 1987 Constitution provides that: No
decision shall be rendered by any court
without expressing therein clearly and
distinctly the facts and the law on which it is
based.
Purpose:
1) Inform the person reading the decision,
especially the parties,
2) How it was reached by the court after
consideration of the pertinent facts;
3) Examination of the applicable laws.
A similar provision is found in Section 1, Rule 36
of the Rules of Court.
In the form of the decision or resolution,
MATTER should dominate MANNER, i.e., the
reader should be left with the thought that the
arguments are complete and convincing.
Essence of effective legal writing is
communication
1) Brief,
2) Accurate
3) Clear.
Four traditional parts of a decision:
1. Nature of the case if a decision is involved
or the issue to be pr\
2. esented if an order is involved; \
3.
2. Findings of fact;
3. Applicable law; and
4. Dispositive ruling.
Findings of Facts
The former Justice Ricardo Puno identifies the
following forms in narrating the findings of
facts: In regard to facts, we have two basic
types of narration: the “reportorial” type and
the “synthesis.” A cross between the reportorial
type and the synthesis is the “semi-reportorial”
type. The reportorial type is the easiest to
handle. As the term indicates, it is nothing more
than a report of what happened during your
trial. It usually consists of a summation of what
the witnesses testified to. It is a stereotype kind
of narration. You begin in a criminal case, for
instance, with the usual opening: “The accused
stands charged with the crime of bigamy
allegedly committed as follows:” Then you copy
the information. “The prosecution presented
witnesses A, B, C, D and E. A, testified as
follows:” Then you just narrate everything that
he testified to. “B, testified as follows:” Narrate
everything that B said. After the parage of
prosecution witnesses, then yo
u shift to the defense: “On the part of the
accused, he presented three witnesses, namely,
X, Y and Z. “X, testified as follows:” After
summarizing all these testimonies, you make a
brief summation of what you consider as the
correct version. xxx In the synthesis type of
decision-making, the judge summarizes the
factual theory of the plaintiff or prosecution, as
the case may be, and after that the version of
the defense. After summarizing both versions,
the judge will state which version he takes as
true and correct, and then renders the
adjudication.
In the semi-reportorial type, the judge
summarizes the version that he accepts, and
then “reports” on the version that he rejects.
There is a fourth type which is a sub-
classification of the synthesized decision. In this
last type, the court just summarizes the version
that it accepts and adopts, without at all
narrating or explaining what the other version
is. After the summation of that particular
accepted version, then the judge renders his
decision.17
Factors to Consider in Burden of Proof
In deciding cases, there are certain standards
which must be met. In civil cases, the party
having the burden of proof must establish his
case by a preponderance of evidence.18 In a
criminal case, the defendant is entitled to an
acquittal, unless his guilt is shown beyond
reasonable doubt.19 In determining where the
preponderance of evidence lies, the court may
consider the following: 1. All the facts and
circumstances of the case; 2. The witnesses’
manner of testifying; 3. Their intelligence; 4.
Their means and opportunity of knowing the
facts to which they are testifying; 5. The nature
of the facts to which they are testifying; 6. The
probability or improbability of their testimony;
17. Cited by Justice Reynato S. Puno in his
“Lecture on Decision Writing.” 18. Rules of
Court, Rule 133, Sec. 1. 19. Rules of Court, Rule
133, Sec. 2.
7. Their interest or want of interest; 8. Their
personal credibility so far as the same may
legitimately appear upon the trial; and 9. The
number of witnesses, though the
preponderance is not necessarily with the
greatest number.20 In an administrative
determination of contested cases, which are
judicial by their nature, there is no requirement
for strict adherence to technical rules since the
atmosphere is one of expeditiousness and as
restricted by technical or formal rules of
evidence. Nevertheless, it is essential that due
process be observed, for requirements of fair
play are not applicable in judicial proceedings
only.21 In the judicial review of decisions of
administrative agencies, the Supreme Court
uses the substantial evidence rule which means
more than a scintilla or relevant evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion, even if other minds
equally reasonable might opine otherwise.22
Weighing the Evidence
Justice Reynato Puno mentions several
techniques used by judges in the difficult task of
weighing evidence:
1. The uncontroverted facts must be separated.
They come from the pleadings, pre-trial
proceedings, and evidence during the trial in
the forms of admission, uncontradicted
allegations, clear implications, etc. These
uncontroverted facts are helpful to measure the
truth or falsity of other evidence.
2. In interpreting the testimony of a witness, his
whole testimony must be considered, i.e. , his
direct cross examination, redirect and recross.
The truth in testimony cannot be distilled in a
chopped fashion.
3. Self-contradictions by a witness usually
happen. In assessing self- contradictions, the
judge should determine whether they are due
to innocent mistakes or deliberate falsehood.
Innocent mistakes usually cover minor details. If
the self-contradictions are innocent, then these
should be disregarded. If deliberate, then these
should be counted against the witness.
4. Contradictions between witnesses also
commonly occur. Initially, the judge should try
to reconcile them. If they cannot be reconciled,
the judge has to make a choice as to which
testimony to adopt as true and reject as false.
To guide him in his choice, he has to consider
the character of the witness, his ability and
willingness to speak the truth, his means of
knowledge, motives, manner and demeanor,
the consistency or inconsistency as well as the
probability or improbability of his statements.
5. Contradictions between testimony on the
witness stand and prior affidavit are also
common. If they are irreconcilable, affidavits
should normally prevail. Oral testimony is often
unreliable due to passage of time.
6. Testimony that is inherently improbable must
be rejected. To be credible, evidence must
coincide with the common experience of
mankind.
7. Demeanor of witness is an important factor
to be considered in weighing his testimony.23
D D D D D. Statement of . Statement of .
Statement of . Statement of . Statement of the
La the La the La the La the La w w w w w How
do you discuss the applicable law in your
decision? Again, there is no hard and fast rule. If
the applicable law is clear, then its simple
recitation will suffice. Its further explanation
will more often than not be a mere exercise in
redundancy. One legal writer said: It seems that
reverence for citation is the greatest handicap
of lawyers and judges. We delight in cumulative
authority. We think that one citation is not
enough if we can cite twenty, even though the
proposition is obvious enough to require no
citation at all. x x x It will suffice to cite one case
if it is controlling, along with a reference to a
reliable text or encyclopedia. However, if the
applicability of the law is arguable, then you
have to justify your choice of law. Your
discussion may take quite a length. You may
have to go through its history. You may have to
summon analogous rulings even of foreign
courts. You may have to invoke abstract
concepts of justice and equity. In any event, this
is where you have to display your legal
scholarship. Always remember that substance
should not be sacrificed for style.
Disposition
The dispositive ruling must be complete. This is
the test of completeness: 1. The parties know
their rights and obligations. 2. The parties
should know how to execute the decision under
alternative contingencies. 3. There should be no
need for further proceedings. 4. It terminates
the case by according the proper relief. The
proper relief usually depends upon what the
parties asked for. It may be merely declaratory
of rights, or it may command performance of
positive prestations, or order the party to
abstain from specific costs. 5. It must
adjudicate costs. Thus, the judgment of a case is
what is contained in the dispositive portion. The
general rule is where there is a conflict between
the dispositive part and the opinion, the former
must prevail over the latter on the theory that
the dispositive portion is the final order while
the opinion is merely a statement ordering
nothing.24
Basic grammatical skills are important in legal
writing. Grammatical construction is one
method by which courts interpret contracts and
statutes. There are many rules on how to be
concise in writing. Professors Squires and
Rombauer in their book, Legal Writing , mention
only eleven (11) rules in making word choices.
Use of words in their literal sense
Two common sources of imprecision in legal
writing are personification (the givens of
human qualities to abstractions or objects, e.g.,
“coldblooded decision”) and metononym (the
substitution of an attributive oral suggestive
word for the word identifying a person or thing,
e.g., “stage hand” for “stage worker”). In some
writings, this kind of imprecision may be
acceptable. However, in legal writing, it may
introduce ambiguity.
Imprecise:
California has so held.
Precise:
The California Court of Appeals has so held.
Omit archaic legalisms. Omit archaic legalisms.
Omit archaic legalisms. Omit archaic legalisms.
Omit archaic legalisms. Archaic legalisms are
words and phrases such as “hereinafter,”
“heretofore,” “aforesaid,” “forthwith,”
“herein,” “hereby,” “for purposes hereof,”
“notwithstanding anything to the contrary
herein,” “so made,” “by these presents,” and
“said.” Not only are these words obstacles to
the lay reader, but they are also imprecise and,
thus, troublesome to the legal reader. A more
serious fault is the way archaic legalisms create
the appearance of precision, thereby obscuring
ambiguities that might otherwise be recognized.
For example, a question that has been
frequently litigated is whether “herein” refers
to the paragraph in which it is used, to the
section, or to the whole document.
Never attempt to improve style by introducing
synonyms or other word variations that will
create confusion or ambiguity. In the following
sentence, the substitution of the word
“prevailing” for the word “dominant” creates
initial confusion. According to the dominant
view, this article is applied to periodic meetings
as well as to special meetings. The view is that
Article 237 of the Commercial Code provides
the right for minority shareholders to convene
either type of meeting. Is the author discussing
two views? A corollary is to use different words
when you mean different things. If the same
word is used to mean different things, the
reader will be momentarily confused.
Use simple, f Use simple, f Use simple, f Use
simple, f Use simple, familiar words. When you
have a choice between a short and familiar
word, such as “call,” and a longer, more
elaborate word, such as “communicate,”
choose the shorter, simple one. Simple words
are understood more quickly, and they require
less reading and thinking time. Sim ple Wo rd s
Ela b o r a t e C o u n t e r p a r t s after
subsequent to before prior to begin, carry out
implement, effectuate happen eventuate,
transpire inform apprise make render send
transmit think deem think, see regard envisage
Concrete words such as “split decision” are
easier to understand than abstractions such as
“judicial dichotomy.” Legal writers are likely to
use abstract, overblown language in part
because many of the cases that law students
read during their first year reflect an older,
overstuffed style that is all too easy to imitate.
Legal writers must resist the old style. Some
common abstractions are simple words that can
often be eliminated without loss of meaning,
for example, “type,” “kind,” “manner,” “state,”
“area,” “matter,” “factor,” “system,” and
“nature.” Example: The central thrust of
plaintiff’s legal position is dependent on
matters having to do with three decisions of the
Supreme Court. Revised: Plaintiff’s argument
for summary judgment depends on three
Supreme Court decisions.
All words have connotation (overtones of
meaning) as well as denotation (explicit
meaning). Since connotation contributes to
tone, the word choices in a particular piece of
legal writing should have compatible
connotations. Many briefs contain glaring
inconsistencies in tone, as in the following
excerpt from a fact statement:
A third-party park-sitter, unbeknownst to
Plaintiff, contacted said Plaintiff’s head with a
wine bottle. Plaintiff now has two metal plates
and twelve screws holding things together.
As lawyers, we often hesitate to make direct or
dogmatic statements. To protect ourselves or
to reflect uncertainty, use either equivocal or
qualifying words that undermine their meaning.
Typical words and phrases used in this way are:
“It seems to indicate,” “if practicable,” “it
would seem,” “it may well be,” and “it might be
said that.” If you are uncertain, state the
reasons for your uncertainty.
Use unqualified nouns, adjectives and verbs.
Many writers add modifiers to intensify or
buttress poorly chosen nouns, adjectives, and
verbs. Ordinarily, the right word needs no
bolstering. The following modifiers can be
removed without compromising clarity.
absolutely nearly actually obviously basically
particular certain, certainly plainly clearly
practically completely pretty much deepest
quite extremely really frankly so (as in “so
great”) generally sort of given surely greatly
truly in effect various kind of very more or less
virtually A plain style is usually the best style. If
you wish to use figurative language, do so
where it would not interfere with the
communication of substance. Cliches come
readily to mind during writing. Thus, a standard
part of your revision should be to remove or
renovate them. Examples of cliches are “height
of absurdity,” “day of reckoning,” and “cold
light of reason.”
Words go in and out of fashion. Vague
psychoanalytic terms, such as “interaction” and
“supportive,” were frequently used for a time
before they gave way to computer jargon, such
as “interface” and “input.” Avoid word fads
altogether. Words in fashion are quickly
degraded. Their specific meanings disappear,
leaving only a vague general meaning.
As most lawyers know, redundant wording has
a long and respectable past. Our Anglo-Saxon
ancestors gave us word pairings, such as “safe
and sound.” After the Norman invasion, French
synonyms were added to the Middle English
word pairs. Thus, many legal terms have come
to us in triplicate, for example, “give and take
(Old English).” Some word pairings are still
commonly used, such as “acknowledge and
confess,” “act and deed,” “deem and consider,”
“fit and proper,” “goods and chattels,” “keep
and maintain,” “pardon and forgive,” “shun and
avoid,” “aid and abet,” “cease and desist,”
“fraud and deceit,” and “null and void.” Before
automatically adopting an archaic word pairing,
consider whether both words are needed.
Unnecessary word pairing continues to be a
habit in modern English. If you think about each
word you use, then you will be able to avoid
redundancies such as the following: basic
fundamentals telling revelation basic starting
point terrible tragedy false mispresentation true
facts final result unexpected surprise if and
when unless and until sufficient enough save
and except A more pervasive form of
redundancy is a throw-away phrase such as: a
certain amount of as a matter of fact due to the
fact that all intents and purposes in case of the
nature of the case is in regard to the necessity
of the fact of the matter with reference to
Watch out for these phrases and gradually train
yourself to omit them. As an editing technique,
ask the question, “Do I really need this word or
phrase?”
Rule 4. State the Facts Succinctly
Rule 5. Avoid Overchronciling- Most Dates are
Unimportant
Rule 6. Headings are Signposts- They Should
Inform
Rule 7. Write Short Paragraphs
Rule 8. Form is Important- Make it Look Good
Rule 9. Check your Document Carefully
Rule 10. Keep it Short- the Page Limit is your
Friend
Rule 11. Use No Talking Footnotes
Rule 12. Citations go in Footnotes
Rule 13. Use the Ohio form of Citation
Rule 14. Edit, Edit, Edit
Rule 15. Write Short Sentences- the 1818 Rule,
Part 1
Rule 16. Use Mainly Active Voice- the 1818
Rule, Part 2
Rule 17. Use “But” and “And” to Begin
Sentences

A good memorandum, brief or resolution is

readable. Readability is your goal, but do not
lose sight of your objective – the resolution of a
problem. Lawyers must focus on precision and B. Ratio And Obiter Dictum
exactness of the language to avoid latent C. Case Analysis And Case Briefing
ambiguities or disputes about meeting. Being an Read: Lejano v. People, G.R. No. 176389, December 14,
effective legal writer is not easy; legal writing 2010.
requires concentration, patience, judgment,
and skill. Nothing is included without good
reason and nothing of significance is omitted. 1. WHAT IS A PLEADING?
Almost everything you need to know about
Study: Rule 6, Sec 1, Rules of Court
writing can be summarized in one principle:
Write to communicate.
Section 1.Pleadings defined. — Pleadings are
Mark P. Painter, Legal Writing 201 (2002) the written statements of the respective claims
and defenses of the parties submitted to the
Rule 1. Know your Audience court for appropriate judgment. (1a)
Rule 2. Front-Load your Document- Context
Before Detail a. Parts of a Pleading – Rule 7, Rules of Court
PARTS OF A PLEADING
Rule 3. Frame the Issue in Fewer than 75 Words
Section 1. Caption. — The caption sets
forth the name of the court, the title of the
action, and the docket number if assigned.
The title of the action indicates the names
of the parties. They shall all be named in the
original complaint or petition; but in
subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if
the name of the first party on each side be
stated with an appropriate indication when
there are other parties.
Their respective participation in the case
shall be indicated. (1a, 2a)
Section 2. The body. — The body of the
pleading sets fourth its designation, the
allegations of the party's claims or defenses,
the relief prayed for, and the date of the
pleading. (n)
(a) Paragraphs. — The allegations in the
body of a pleading shall be divided into
paragraphs so numbered to be readily
identified, each of which shall contain a
statement of a single set of circumstances
so far as that can be done with
convenience. A paragraph may be referred
to by its number in all succeeding pleadings.
(3a)
(b) Headings. — When two or more causes
of action are joined the statement of the
first shall be prefaced by the words "first
cause of action,'' of the second by "second
cause of action", and so on for the others.
When one or more paragraphs in the
answer are addressed to one of several
causes of action in the complaint, they shall
be prefaced by the words "answer to the
first cause of action" or "answer to the
second cause of action" and so on; and
when one or more paragraphs of the
answer are addressed to several causes of
action, they shall be prefaced by words to
that effect. (4)
(c) Relief. — The pleading shall specify the
relief sought, but it may add a general
prayer for such further or other relief as
may be deemed just or equitable. (3a, R6)
(d) Date. — Every pleading shall be dated.
(n)
Section 3. Signature and address. — Every
pleading must be signed by the party or
counsel representing him, stating in either
case his address which should not be a post
office box.
The signature of counsel constitutes a
certificate by him that he has read the
pleading; that to the best of his knowledge,
information, and belief there is good
ground to support it; and that it is not
interposed for delay.
An unsigned pleading produces no legal
effect. However, the court may, in its
discretion, allow such deficiency to be
remedied if it shall appear that the same
was due to mere inadvertence and not
intended for delay. Counsel who
deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or
signs a pleading in violation of this Rule, or
alleges scandalous or indecent matter
therein, or fails promptly report to the court
a change of his address, shall be subject to
appropriate disciplinary action. (5a)
Section 4. Verification. — Except when
otherwise specifically required by law or
rule, pleadings need not be under oath,
verified or accompanied by affidavit. (5a)
A pleading is verified by an affidavit that the
affiant has read the pleading and that the
allegations therein are true and correct of
his knowledge and belief.
A pleading required to be verified which
contains a verification based on
"information and belief", or upon
"knowledge, information and belief", or
lacks a proper verification, shall be treated
as an unsigned pleading. (6a)
Section 5. Certification against forum
shopping. — The plaintiff or principal party
shall certify under oath in the complaint or
other initiatory pleading asserting a claim
for relief, or in a sworn certification
annexed thereto and simultaneously filed
therewith: (a) that he has not theretofore
commenced any action or filed any claim
involving the same issues in any court,
tribunal or quasi-judicial agency and, to the
best of his knowledge, no such other action
or claim is pending therein; (b) if there is
such other pending action or claim, a
complete statement of the present status
thereof; and (c) if he should thereafter learn
that the same or similar action or claim has
been filed or is pending, he shall report that
fact within five (5) days therefrom to the
court wherein his aforesaid complaint or
initiatory pleading has been filed.
Failure to comply with the foregoing
requirements shall not be curable by mere
amendment of the complaint or other
initiatory pleading but shall be cause for the
dismissal of the case without prejudice,
unless otherwise provided, upon motion
and after hearing. The submission of a false
certification or non-compliance with any of
the undertakings therein shall constitute
indirect contempt of court, without
prejudice to the corresponding
administrative and criminal actions. If the
acts of the party or his counsel clearly
constitute willful and deliberate forum
shopping, the same shall be ground for
summary dismissal with prejudice and shall
constitute direct contempt, as well as a
cause for administrative sanctions. (n)
RULE 8
Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings
Section 1. In general. — Every pleading
shall contain in a methodical and logical
form, a plain, concise and direct statement
of the ultimate facts on which the party
pleading relies for his claim or defense, as
the case may be, omitting the statement of
mere evidentiary facts. (1)
If a defense relied on is based on law, the
pertinent provisions thereof and their
applicability to him shall be clearly and
concisely stated. (n)
Section 2. Alternative causes of action or
defenses. — A party may set forth two or
more statements of a claim or defense
alternatively or hypothetically, either in one
cause of action or defense or in separate
causes of action or defenses. When two or
more statements are made in the
alternative and one of them if made
independently would be sufficient, the
pleading is not made insufficient by the
insufficiency of one or more of the
alternative statements. (2)
Section 3. Conditions precedent. — In any
pleading a general averment of the
performance or occurrence of all conditions
precedent shall be sufficient. (3)
Section 4. Capacity. — Facts showing the
capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the
authority of a party to sue or be sued in a
representative capacity or the legal
existence of an organized association of
person that is made a party, must be
averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as
to the legal existence of any party or the
capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a
representative capacity, shall do so by
specific denial, which shall include such
supporting particulars as are peculiarly
within the pleader's knowledge. (4)
Section 5. Fraud, mistake, condition of the
mind. — In all averments of fraud or
mistake the circumstances constituting
fraud or mistake must be stated with
particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, or
other condition of the mind of a person may
be averred generally.(5a)
Section 6. Judgment. — In pleading a
judgment or decision of a domestic or
foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial
tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is
sufficient to aver the judgment or decision
without setting forth matter showing
jurisdiction to render it. (6)
Section 7. Action or defense based on
document. — Whenever an action or
defense is based upon a written instrument
or document, the substance of such
instrument or document shall be set forth in
the pleading, and the original or a copy
thereof shall be attached to the pleading as
an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a
part of the pleading, or said copy may with
like effect be set forth in the pleading. (7)
Section 8. How to contest such
documents. — When an action or defense is
founded upon a written instrument, copied
in or attached to the corresponding
pleading as provided in the preceding
section, the genuineness and due execution
of the instrument shall be deemed admitted
unless the adverse party, under oath
specifically denies them, and sets forth
what he claims to be the facts, but the
requirement of an oath does not apply
when the adverse party does not appear to
be a party to the instrument or when
compliance with an order for an inspection
of the original instrument is refused. (8a)
Section 9. Official document or act. — In
pleading an official document or official act,
it is sufficient to aver that the document
was issued or the act done in compliance
with law. (9)
Section 10. Specific denial. — A defendant
must specify each material allegation of fact
the truth of which he does not admit and,
whenever practicable, shall set forth the
substance of the matters upon which he
relies to support his denial. Where a
defendant desires to deny only a part of an
averment, he shall specify so much of it as is
true and material and shall deny only the
remainder. Where a defendant is without
knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of a material
averment made to the complaint, he shall
so state, and this shall have the effect of a
denial. (10a)
Section 11. Allegations not specifically
denied deemed admitted. — Material
averment in the complaint, other than
those as to the amount of unliquidated
damages, shall be deemed admitted when
not specifically denied. Allegations of usury
in a complaint to recover usurious interest
are deemed admitted if not denied under
oath. (1a, R9)
Section 12. Striking out of pleading or
matter contained therein. — Upon motion
made by a party before responding to a
pleading or, if no responsive pleading is
permitted by these Rules, upon motion
made by a party within twenty (20) days
after the service of the pleading upon him,
or upon the court's own initiative at any
time, the court may order any pleading to
be stricken out or that any sham or false,
redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or
scandalous matter be stricken out
therefrom. (5, R9)
2. Parts of a decision
Study; PHIL CONST., Art VIII, 14; Rule 36, sec 1,
Rules of Court , Rule 120, sec 2, Rules of Court.
PHIL CONST., Art. VIII, Section 14
Section 14. No decision shall be rendered by
any court without expressing therein clearly and
distinctly the facts and the law on which it is
based.
No petition for review or motion for
reconsideration of a decision of the court shall
be refused due course or denied without stating
the legal basis therefor.
 ROC, Rule 36, Sec. 1

Section 1. Rendition of judgments and

final orders. — A judgment or final order
determining the merits of the case shall be in
writing personally and directly prepared by the
judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and
the law on which it is based, signed by him, and
filed with the clerk of the court. (1a)

ROC, Rule 120, Sec. 2

Section 2. Contents of the judgment. — If

the judgment is of conviction, it shall state (1)
the legal qualification of the offense constituted
by the acts committed by the accused and the
aggravating or mitigating circumstances which
attended its commission; (2) the participation of
the accused in the offense, whether as
principal, accomplice, or accessory after the
fact; (3) the penalty imposed upon the accused;
and (4) the civil liability or damages caused by
his wrongful act or omission to be recovered
from the accused by the offended party, if there
is any, unless the enforcement of the civil
liability by a separate civil action has been
reserved or waived.

Read: Artemio V. Panganiban, Tbe Four “C’s” of

Effective Decision-Writing: An Introduction for
Newly – Appointed judges, 4 PHILJA JUD. J. 29,
42-45 (2002).

3. Case Briefing
Read: Christopher Pyle, How to Brief a case
(1999).