Law Student's Coffee Table

Let's talk anything and everything about the Law.

Linggo, Abril 19, 2015

LET'S DIGEST (A GUIDE ON HOW TO DIGEST A CASE)

LET'S DIGEST 
(A GUIDE ON HOW TO DIGEST A CASE)

Hi guys! I'm here to tell you some tips on how to properly digest a case. As a law student, we are
often asked by our professors as a requirement to digest cases which are normally assigned by your
professors for the whole semester. These cases contain the real-life application of the principles and
theories that are discussed in the law. Some cases are long, and some are short, some can reach up
to 30 pages and some reach only 2 to 5 pages, it depends on how critical the case is. 

Now, some students have difficulty in digesting these cases whether they are long or short. Probably
because of lack of experience in digesting cases or probably this is a new concept for you. Digesting
a case is more like a book summary, you read a novel or a story then you summarize the story. Same
thing with case digest, you read the case and summarize the whole case into
something comprehensive for a layman and of course for yourself. 

Here are some tips I'd like to share with you today. Some of these tips are supported by different
sources from other blogs on How to Write a Case Digest. I'll be posting the links of these sources in
the end of this blog.

WHY SHOULD YOU DIGEST CASES?

The cases that will be assigned to you will be a huge part of the discussions and recitations. It's really
hard to answer a question which you do not know the answer, sometimes, you've read the cases by
heart and understand the doctrines inside it but because there are tons of cases to read you might
find yourself mixing facts and ruling up and that's bad too. You digest cases in order for you to have
guidelines and overview regarding the case you've read. Digest contains brief facts of the case, issue
which needs to be resolve in the case and the decision and solution given by the court. You cannot
possibly memorize everything except if you're a boy genius or someone who have a photographic
memory.

Some professors do not allow open books but allow open written notes, without a copy of a full text
you're a goner and you'd probably mix up the facts of the cases assigned. When you have a written
digest, you can follow the discussion and probably even prepare for the questions that might be
asked by the professors with the little life save you call, "Case Digest".

Some professors, also require that you submit your case digests either week, or by the end of the
semester. Don't do the digests, and it's your loss. Some professors give considerations for the effort
given in the digest. Some professors put an incomplete (INC) mark to those who did not pass their
cases or those who have incomplete case digest. It may not be possible for your professors to read
all your digests but it's worth the effort to impress your professor with a complete and magnificent
case digest.

STEP 1: GET YOURSELF A FULL TEXT COPY OF THE CASE.

Why? I'll tell you why. You want to appreciate and understand a story? Read the book and watch the
movie after. As a general rule you DO NOT! I repeat, YOU DO NOT read the digest first before the
full text of the case. That is a mortal sin for professors if they found out you've only read the case
digest and not the full text. It gives you that image of being lazy, and that's a big problem with the
capital "P" in it. But as the saying goes, "if there's a general rule, there's an exception" which is, if you
are hopeless already and you have to finish the case before the end of the world which is the class
itself. But this is not advisable some professors are tricky and try to ask questions that are found in
the full text and most of the time are being overlooked by the students (Such as the date, the justice
who penned the case, the names of the petitioner and respondent, etc.). SO, DO YOURSELF A
FAVOR, GET A FULL TEXT COPY OF THE CASE! You can get the full text of the case either
through the internet or directly from your law library.

HERE'S A TIP:
  You can just leave the copy of the list of cases to the librarian or the Xerox Copy Person (XCP
because I do not know how those people are called.) and ask him/her kindly if he/she could go look
for the listed cases there, if they are kind enough to fetch the case for you then you're lucky, and
perhaps a tip would be nice to show your appreciation. Make sure you give them the case list 2
days or a day before you need the copies of the full text. It's not easy to xerox all those cases you
know. If not? Well, it's one hell of a long journey for you looking at the SCRA one by one. 

 I prefer getting the full text of the case directly from the library than the internet. Why? You can
see the rulings directly at the first page of the SCRA, it's already categorized according to a
particular topic of law related/included in the case. It's much easier to digest.

STEP 2: DON'T JUST LOOK AT IT, READ IT!

You got the case? Good. Now, you read it. Have this relationship with the case, you pay close
attention to the case and while you're at it perhaps you might want to write some notes regarding
the case not so hard of a start isn't it? Reading the case takes some time, but take note of the
important things just in case, these are:

 Full names of the petitioner and the respondent.

 Date of the decision of case.

 Important places in the case (specific address, name of the boat, name of the street, etc.)

 Justice who penned the case; and. `

 Other information that seem important to the case.

These things are important specially in Criminal Cases specially the time and place where the crime
was committed.

Now, some cases are interesting, criminal cases, cases relating to annulment and the likes. However,
you'll have a problem with cases that will not really spark your interest. For me, cases relating to tax
and corporations are incomprehensible and boring, but you have to read these cases no matter what.
It's worth the effort guys. If you can read fifty shades of grey or the twilight saga then you can also
read those cases. Think that your life and grade depend on it. Put humor in the cases, something that
will remind you of what is that case all about.
STEP 3: NOW WRITE!

Don't just think about them, ink them. Remember that a case digest should be a page short only as
much as possible, you're not rewriting the full text, you are summarizing it. Now there are formalities
which are to observe in writing down your case digest, I will discuss them step by step.

STEP 3.A: NAME OF THE CASE, GR. No., DATE and JUSTICE WHO PENNED THE CASE.

This is important. If the full text is entitled "Maria Corazon de Jesus Victoria Trinidad vs. Manuel
Gabriel" or if the case have many petitioners and respondents, the you can shortcut it into (for my
example) "Trinidad v. Gabriel" Last name of the petitioner and last name of respondent.

(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)

Then after the case title, under that, you put the G.R Number of the case and the date of the decision
of the case beside it.

(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)
After writing those two, you write the surname of the Justice who penned the decision.

(based on an actual case. Note: I removed the name of petitioner and respondent)

Your Case Caption should look like this (based on my example earlier):

TRINIDAD v. GABRIEL
G.R. No. XXXXXXX, August 30, 1950
DE GUZMAN, J.:

STEP 3.B: FACTS

Facts are the brief story of the case. You should write what happened in the case, who are the
petitioner and the respondents, what is the decision of the Court of Appeals and Lower Courts. Facts
should be brief as possible. A digest is a summary of the full text and not another copy of the full text.

STEP 3.C: ISSUE

Issue for me, always starts with WHETHER OR NOT followed by the issue that is related to your
topic. For example, the topic is warrant of arrest and the issue in the case is the validity of the
warrant, then your issue should be, WHETHER OR NOT the warrant is valid.

STEP 3.D: RULING/HELD

This is the decision of the SUPREME COURT. I repeat, this is the DECISION OF THE SUPREME
COURT not the ruling of any lower court regarding the issue you raised in your issue portion. So,
The ISSUE is the question, the RULING is the answer. 
You can use Ruling or Held, whatever is comfortable for you. The point is, you or other people should
see the decision of the court whether it is granted or dismissed and the rationale for such decision.
Decision should answer the issue as I said earlier, if you put a decision that does not answer your
issue then you have a problem discussing the case.

STEP 3.E: HOW IT SHOULD LOOK LIKE

TRINIDAD v. GABRIEL
G.R. No. XXXXXXX, August 30, 1950
DE GUZMAN, J.:

FACTS:

ISSUE: 

RULING:

STEP 3.F: SAMPLE DIGEST

BIRAOGO v. THE PHILIPPINE TRUTH COMMISSION OF 2010

G.R No. 192935. December 7, 2010
MENDOZA, J.:

FACT:
E.O No. 1 establishing the Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) of 2010 was signed by President
Aquino. The said PTC is a mere branch formed under the Office of the President tasked to investigate
reports of graft and corruption committed by third-level public officers and employees, their co-
principals, accomplices and accessories during the previous administration and submit their findings
and recommendations to the President, Congress and the Ombudsman. However, PTC is not a
quasi-judicial body, it cannot adjudicate, arbitrate, resolve, settle or render awards in disputes
between parties. Its job is to investigate, collect and asses evidences gathered and
make recommendations. It has subpoena powers, but it has no power to cite people in contempt or
even arrest. It cannot determine for such facts if probable cause exist as to warrant the filing of an
information in our courts of law.
Petitioners contends the Constitutionality of the E.O. on the grounds that. 

 It violates separation of powers as it arrogates the power of Congress to create a public office

and appropriate funds for its operation.

 The provisions of Book III, Chapter 10, Section 31 of the Administrative Code of 1987 cannot
legitimize E.O. No. 1 because the delegated authority of the President to structurally reorganize the
Office of the President to achieve economy, simplicity, and efficiency does not include the power to
create an entirely new office was inexistent like the Truth Commission;

 The E.O illegally amended the Constitution when it made the Truth Commission and vesting it
the power duplicating and even exceeding those of the Office of the Ombudsman and the DOJ.

 It violates the equal protection clause 

ISSUE:
WHETHER OR NOT the said E.O is unconstitutional.

RULING:
Yes, E.O No. 1 should be struck down as it is violative of the equal protection clause. The Chief
Executive’s power to create the Ad hoc Investigating Committee cannot be doubted. Having been
constitutionally granted full control of the Executive Department, to which respondents belong, the
President has the obligation to ensure that all executive officials and employees faithfully comply with
the law. With AO 298 as mandate, the legality of the investigation is sustained. Such validity is not
affected by the fact that the investigating team and the PCAGC had the same composition, or that the
former used the offices and facilities of the latter in conducting the inquiry.

4. CONCLUSION
So That's all that you need to know with regards to digesting cases. I hope these helps and please let
me know what you think about digesting cases. We're also open for other suggestions just leave it on
the comments section. THANK YOU AND GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR DIGESTS!

5. REFERENCE 
> LawFacilitate

> Diory's Diction

Archive sa Blog

 ▼  2015 (12)

o ▼  Abril (12)

 ASSOCIATION OF SMALL LANDOWNERS V. SECRETARY OF DA...

 LET'S DIGEST (A GUIDE ON HOW TO DIGEST A CASE)
 SARMIENTO V. MISON, G. R. No. 79974 December 17, 1...
 DE CASTRO V. JBC, G.R. No. 191342 April 2, 2010 (C...
 BIRAOGO V. PHILIPPINE TRUTH COMMISSION 2010, G. R....
 IRENEO ROQUE V. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, G.R No. L-25373...
 LEAGUE OF CITIES v. COMELEC G.R. No. 176951 August...
 JMM PROMOTION AND MANAGEMENT, INC. v. CA 260 SCRA ...
 LUTZ v. ARANETA 98 PHIL. 145 December 22, 1955 (CA...
 LOZANO v. MARTINEZ G.R No. L-63419. December 18, 1...
 YNOT v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT G.R. No. 7445...
 WHITE LIGHT CORPORATION v. CITY OF MANILA January...