Please copy and paste as you add landmark cases;

1. Crespo vs mogul (CrimPro)

When a case is already within the Jurisdiction of the Judge, it Can not be
dismissed by a motion of the SOJ

2. Manchester case (CivPro)

Non payment of docket fees is fatal

3. Tijam vs Sibonghanoy (CivPro)

Jurisdiction may be acquired through estoppel by laches

4. In re: Dona Paz (CivPro)

There is no Class suit when there is no commonality of interest

5. Oposa vs Factoran (CivPro)

There is ALWAYS Class suit in environmental cases under the doctrine of
transgenerational responsibility

6. Juana Complex case (CivPro)

The subject matter., the closure and excavation of the La Paz Road, is initially
shown to be of common or general interest to many persons. the individuals
sought to be represented by private respondents in the suit are so numerous
that it is impracticable to join them all as parties and be named individually as
plaintiffs in the complaint

7. Vivares v. STC (SpecPro)

Habeas Data: Facebook; no violation of right to privacy

8. Neypes
Fresh period of 15 days to file appeal from denial of MR/MNT. applies to Civil
and Criminal cases as well as cases from Quasi judicial bodies. BUT DOES NOT
APPLY TO ADMIN CASES

9. Quintos v. Nicolas (CivPro)

Dismissal with prejudice under R17 S3 cannot defeat the right of a co-owner to
ask for partition at any time, provided that there is no actual adjudication of
ownership of shares yet.
10. Marcos-Araneta v. CA (CivPro)
When there is more than one plaintiff in a personal action case, the residence of
the PRINCIPAL parties should be the basis for determining proper venue

11. People vs aminudin

12. Gsis v. Heirs of Caballero (CivPro)

Sc has sole authority to promulgate rules concerning pleading practice and
procedure in all courts

13. Caseant Realty v. Philbanking (CivPro)

If defense in Answer is based on actionable document, a REPLY, under oath
specifically denying it must be made

14. Mallon v. Alcantara (CivPro)

There is res judicata barring the subsequent action to declare the nullity of
marriage based on lack of marriage license if there is already a previous final
judgment denying such petition on the ground of psychological incapacity

15. Penta Pacific Realty v. Ley Construction (CivPro)

If the assessed value is not found in the complaint, the action should be
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
EXCEPTION: BSP VS. LEGASPI Non-inclusion of the assessed value on the face of
the complaint is NOT FATAL if ATTACHED to the complaint is a TAX DECLARATION
showing the assessed value of the property. Annexes to the complaint are part
of and should be considered together with the complaint in determining
jurisdiction of the court.

16. Girlie Quisay v. People (CrimPro)

The Certification attached to the Information did not sufficiently complied with
Section 4, Rule 112 of the Rules of Court which requires the prior written authority
or approval by, among others, the City Prosecutor, in the filing of Informations.

17. George Palileo v Planters Devt Bank (Del Castillo) (CivPro)

service and filing of pleadings by COURIER SERVICE is a mode NOT provided in
the rules.
18. Mendoza v Ca (2015) (CivPro)
service of judgment to SECURITY GUARD of a building of counsel's office is valid
and binding.

19. Robinson v Miralles (CivPro)

Service of Summons to security guard was valid. SC frowns upon an overly strict
application pf the rules.

20. Sps. Marimla v. People (CrimPro)

Guidelines in the issuance of the search warrants in special criminal cases by the
RTCs of Manila and QC shall be an XPN to Sec. 2 Rule 126 of the RoC (In case of
search warrants involving heinous crimes, illegal gambling, illegal possession of
firearms and ammunitions as well as violation of comprehensive dangerous
drugs act, IP code, AMLA, and TCC)

21. Ongpin v. Custodio (CivPro)

Mandamus will lie to compel court to accept amended complaint if as a matter
of right because it is an exercise of a right therefore ministerial on the part of the
court to accept

22. People v. Delfin (2014) (CrimPro)

Variance of date in rape is so grave, example 2013 vs. 2017 is FATAL to the case
(regarding rule on dates sa information)

23. Villamor v. People (CrimPro)

Waiver regarding the illegality of the arrest is only confined to the defects of the
arrest and not on the inadmissibility of the evidence seized during an illegal
arrest.

24. In the Matter of the Adoption of Stephanie Garcia (SpecPro)

An illegitimate child, upon adoption by her natural father may use the surname
of her natural mother as her middle name

25. People v. Constantino (Evid)

Yung 4 links sa Chain of Custody rule. Since di natanong sa crim, baka sa rem.
Kasi mula poli may drugs cases eh.

26. People v. Mercury dela cruz (Evid)

Failure to strictly comply with Section 21, Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 will
not automatically impair the integrity of chain of custody because what is of
utmost importance is the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value
of the seized items, as these would be utilized in the determination of the guilt or
innocence of the accused.

27. Alvarez v. Ramirez (Testimony by the estranged spouse) (Evid)

sinunog ni hubby yung house ni sister in law; The marital and domestic relations
between the spouses have become so strained that there is no more harmony,
peace, or tranquility. There is no longer any reason to apply marital
disqualification rule.

28. People V. Bayotas (CrimPro)

Effects of death of accused pending appeal on his liabilities: -death pending
appeal of conviction extinguished his crim/civil liability ex delicto -claim for civil
liability based on a source of obli other than delict survives

29. Swagman hotels v. Ca (CivPro)

A complaint whose cause of action has not yet accrued cannot be cured or
remedied by an amended pleading alleging the existence or accrual of a
cause of action while the case is pending

30. San Miguel Prop v Perez (CivPro)

An administrative action for specific performance filed in the HLURB is a
prejudicial question to the criminal action filed under PD957

31. Sunlife vs Asuncion (relaxation of the rules on docket fees--- no bad faith)
(CivPro)
Where the filing of the initiatory pleading is not accompanied by payment of
the docket fee, the court may allow payment of the fee within a reasonable
time but in no case beyond the applicable prescriptive or reglamentary period.
Same rule goes for permissive counterclaims, third party claims and similar
pleadings. A more liberal interpretation of the rules is called for considering that,
unlike in Manchester, the private respondent demonstrated his willingness to
abide by the rules by paying the additional docket fees as required.

32. Fernan v. People (CrimPro)

Persons present in the vicinity where search is made may also be searched if
committing a crime. Example: pot session

33. Pacoy v. Cajigal (CrimPro)

No DJ. Homi is necessarily included in the crime of murder; thus, the judge
merely ordered the amendment of the info and not the dismissal of the original
info

34. Sabitsana v. Muertegui (J. DEL CASTILLO CASE mentioned in tranquil lecture)
(CivPro)
When you talk of quieting of title as purely quieting of title in accordance with
Rule 63, which is other similar remedies, jurisdiction is with the RTC regardless of
the value of the property.

Sps. Reterta v. Sps. Mores (CivPro) – An action for quieting of title is a real action thus jurisdiction is
determined by the assessed value of the real property

35. Good Shepherd Foundation Case (indigent litigant) (CivPro)

Only a natural party litigant may be regarded as an indigent litigant. Good
Shepherd Foundation Inc., being a juridical person cannot be accorded the
exemption from legal and filing fees granted to indigent litigants

36. Resident Marine Mammals v. Sec. Reyes (CivPro)

The capacity to sue in environmental cases remains vested in natural persons.
Such legal capacity is not possessed by the marine mammals that are alleged
to be adversely affected by the possible violations of environmental laws

37. Philippine Bank of Commerce v. Lim (CivPro)

Complementary contracts construed together doctrine: an accessory contract
must be read in its entirety and together with the principal agreement. The
venue stipulated in the promissory note also applies to the ancillary contract of
the promissory note.

38. BPI Family v. Sps. Yujuico (CivPro)

An action to recover the deficiency after an extrajudicial foreclosure of a real
property mortgage is a personal action because it does not affect title to or
possession of real property, or any interest therein.
39. Sante v. Claravall (CivPro)
Amendment to confer jurisdiction to the court may be allowed if amendment is
a matter of right

40. Ching v. Cheng (CivPro)

In order for two dismissal rule to apply, both dismissals must be at the instance of
the Plaintiff.

41. Sps. Afulugencia v. Metrobank (del Castillo) (CivPro)

Written interrogatories must be served first upon a party so he may be called as
adverse party to teh witness stand; FAILURE TO SERVE, a party not served may
not be compelled by the adverse party to give testimony in open court, or to
give a deposition pending appeal.

42. Air Philippines v. Pennswell (CivPro)

The notes, memoranda, and writings made by counsel in pursuance of his
professional duty form part of his private and confidential files in the cases
handled by him. These are privileged, thus may not be subject of production or
inspection of documents or things under Rule 27.

43. Estipona Case (CrimPro)

Pwede na plea bargaining sa drug cases

44. Enrile case (CrimPro)

Bill of Particulars discussion
Bill of Particulars presupposes a valid Information, one that presents all the
elements of the crime charged, albeit under vague terms. If the information
does not charge an offense, then a motion to quash is in order. But if the
information charges an offense and the averments are so vague that the
accused cannot prepare to plead or prepare for trial, then a motion for a bill of
particulars is the proper remedy

45. RCBC vs. BDO (CivPro)

Injunctive reliefs are preservative remedies for the protection of substantive
rights. Injunction is not an action itself, but is an adjunct to the main suit. When
the acts to be enjoined become fait accompli, the prayer for provisional
remedies should be denied. When provisional action is dismissed, the provisional
remedies would likewise be dismissed.
46. Ivler v. San Pedro (CrimPro)
Prior conviction or acquittal of reckless imprudence bars subsequent
prosecution for the same quasi-offense regardless of its various resulting acts

47. People v. Cerilla (Evid)

Paraffin Test: a negative finding on paraffin test is not a conclusive proof that
one has not fired a gun becuase it is possible for a person to fire a gun and yet
bear no traces of nitrates or gunpowder

48. Republic v. Olaybar (SpecPro)

Respondent indeed sought, not the nullification of marriage as there was no
marriage to speak of, but the correction of the record of such marriage to
reflect the truth as set forth by the evidence. Otherwise stated, in allowing the
correction of the subject certificate of marriage by cancelling the wife portion
thereof, the trial court did not, in any way, declare the marriage void as there
was no marriage to speak of.

49. Navia v. Pardico (SpecPro)

Writ of Amparo may issue against public persons and private persons in concert
with public perons

50. Go v. Dimagiba (SpecPro)

Habeas Corpus as a post conviction remedy may be allowed
a. there has been a deprivation of constitutional right resulting in the restraint of
a person
b. court had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence; or
c. the imposed penalty has been excessive, voiding the sentence as to such
excess

51. Navia v. Pardico (SpecPro)

Writ of Amparo may issue against public persons and private persons in concert
with public perons

52. Go v. Dimagiba (SpecPro)

Habeas Corpus as a post conviction remedy may be allowed a. there has been
a deprivation of constitutional right resulting in the restraint of a person b. court
had no jurisdiction to impose the sentence; or c. the imposed penalty has been
excessive, voiding the sentence as to such excess

53. Terry v. Ohio (CrimPro)

When a police officer has a reasonable suspicion that an individual is armed,
engaged, or about to be engaged, in criminal conduct, the officer may briefly
stop and detain an individual for a pat-down search of outer clothing.

54. People v. Vallejo (Evid)

In assessing the probative value of DNA Evidence courts should consider:
a. How samples were collected
b. How they were handled
c. Possibility of contamination of samples
d. Procedure in analyzing the samples
e. Proper standards and procedures were followed in conducting the tests
f. Qualification of the analyst conducting the test