Reviewer in Trial Techniques

1. WON new matters not covered during the cross-examination may be asked on re-direct.

Yes. A witness may be cross examined by the adverse party not only as to matters stated in the direct examination but also as to matters connected therewith, and this should be allowed to do with sufficient fullness and freedom to test the witness’ accuracy, truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, and also to elicit from him any important fact bearing upon the issue

American rule – cross-examination must be confined to the matters inquired about in the direct examination In general, witness may be cross-examined not only upon matters relevant to the issue (English Rule)

This jurisdiction – more on English rule

• Unwilling/hostile/adverse party witness – cross examination shall only be on the subject of his examination-in-chief or may only be cross-examined on matters covered by direct examination.

≫ Same as accused testifying on his own behalf

• Question which assumes facts not on the record: If on cross examination – objectionable for bring misleading≫ If on direct examination – objectionable for lack of basis

2. Draft a Verification and Certification against Forum Shopping

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION OF NON FORUM SHOPPING

I Ronilo De Guzman , of legal age, single and a resident of Jaro, Iloilo, Philippines, subscribing under oath, hereby depose and states that:

1. I am the complainant in the instant case;2. I have caused the preparation of the same and I attest to the veracity of all the allegations stated herein;3. I have read and understood all the allegations herein and that I attest to the authenticity and veracity of all the

documents attached herein as based on existing and authentic records;4. I further certify that I have not commenced or filed any claim involving the same issues herein with any other Court.

Tribunal or Quasi-Judicial Agency or I am not aware of any such other case or claim pending before any other court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency; and

5. Should I thereafter learn of the filing or pendency of such similar action or claim, I will inform this Honorable Court of such fact within five (5) days from knowledge thereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto affixed my hands this 7th day of January, 2015 at Iloilo City, Philippines.

Name of Complainant Affiant

SUBSCRIBED and SWORN TO before me this 7th st day of January 2015 at Iloilo City, Philippines, affiant exhibiting to me his CTC # 2014123456 issued on 5th day of January at Iloilo City, Philippines.

ATTY. AAA Notary Public

3. Draft a Demand letter

4. Caption for Petition for Change of Name

5. How to prepare a good pleading- chap 7

6. What questions may be asked during re-direct?

Section 7 - RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION; ITS PURPOSE AND EXTENT

After the cross-examination of the witness has been concluded, he may be re-examined by the party calling him, to explain or supplement his answers given during the cross-examination. On re-direct-examination, questions on matters not dealt with during the cross examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion.

7. Scope of Cross-examination

In English rule, where a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a witness for all purposes and may be fully cross-examined upon all matters material to the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the direct examination.

In American Rule, it restricts cross-examination to the facts with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the witness, applicable to the accused or a hostile witness.

8. Instances when leading questions are allowed

Sec. 10 Rule 132

A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires is a leadingquestion. It is not allowed, except:

a. On cross examination;b. On preliminary matters;c. When there is a difficulty is getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who is ignorant, or a child

of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deaf-mute;d. Of an unwilling or hostile witness; ore. Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a public or private

corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse party.

A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed.

9. What factors should be considered in determining where to file an action?-convenience of party and witnesses, judge, docket load

10. Advantages of availing depositions

Depositions are modes of discovery which serve as a device employed by a party to obtain information about relevant matters on the case from the adverse party in the preparation for trial (Riano, 2007 p. 310). To obtain the fullest possible knowledge of the issues and evidence long before the trial to prevent such trial from being carried on in the dark. Depositions are intended as a means to compel disclosure of facts and resting in the knowledge of a party or other person which are relevant in a suit or proceeding.

What are the principal benefits desirable from the availability and operation of a liberal discovery procedure?

1. it is of great assistance in ascertaining the truth and preventing perjury because the witness isexamined while his memory is still fresh, he is generally not coached, he cannot at a later date contradict his deposition, and his deposition is preserved in case he becomes unavailable.

2. it is an effective means of detecting and exposing fake, fraudulent and sham claims and defenses.

3. it makes available in a simple convenient and often inexpensive way facts which otherwise could not have been proved later.

4. it educates the parties in advance of trial on the real values of their claims and defenses, thereby encouraging settlements out of court.

5. it expedites the disposal of litigations, saves the time of the court and helps clear the dockets.6. it safeguards against surprise at the trial, prevents delays, simplifies the issues, and thereby expedites the trial7. it facilitates both the preparation and trial of cases. (Fortune Corporation v. CA, 19 January1994)

Bautista Notes.

What is the purpose of discovery?

The purpose of discovery is to obtain the fullest knowledge of the issues and fact. Originally, discovery was intended as a device for expediting the case. By being able to obtain more knowledge as to the issues and facts, this would ideally save on time.

As recently as November 1991, the Phil. SC observed what it termed the “unreasoned and unreasonable disinclination” to resort to discovery “which could, as the experience of other jurisdictions convincingly demonstrates effectively shorten the period of litigation and speed up adjudication.” (Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 204 SCRA 212)

However, according to Prof. Bautista, discovery does not always make the case shorter; contrary to expectations that it will expedite the litigation, it has protracted it because this is an additional battleground/ source of skirmish.