case sythesizing 1

7/26/2019 Case Sythesizing 1

1/6

CASE SYTHESIZING

Introduction

In law, the idea of synthesis comes into play as lawyers analyze groups of legal authority to determine

reasonable interpretations of law.

It is therefore understood that case synthesis is the process of binding together the various rules (Constitution,

Statutes, Jurisprudence, etc.) into whole description that states a rule of law or epression of legal policy.

!he Supreme Court had instructed magistrates to eert effort to ensure that their decisions would present a

comprehensive analysis or account of the factual and legal findings that would substantially address the issuesraised by the parties. ("adrid vs. Court of #ppeals, $$% SC ', $* "ay %)

Basis for the fundamental requirements of a Decision

Art. III! Sec. "# of the Constitution $ro%ides 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. No petition for review or motion for reconsideration of a decision of the court shall be refuseddue course or denied without stating the basis therefor."

'ules on Ci%il (rocedure! 'ule )*! Sec. "Sec. ". Rendition of judgments and final orders. + # udgment or final order determining the merits of the case shallbe in writing personally and directly prepared by the udge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which itis based, signed by him and filed with the cler- of court.

'ules of Court on Criminal (rocedure! 'ule "+,! Sec. +Sec. +. Form and contents of judgments. + !he udgment must be written in the official language, personally anddirectly prepared by the udge and signed by him and shall contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts proved

or admitted by the accused and the law upon which the udgment is based.

Administrati%e Circular No. " issued on % January */ by the Supreme Court, prompts all udges "to makecomplete findings of facts in their decisions, and scrutinize closely the legal aspects of the case in the light of theevidence presented. They should avoid the tendency to generalize and form conclusions without detailing the facts fromwhich such conclusions are deduced."

'ationale for the requirements&

*. !o inform the parties of the reason or reasons for the decision0%. If any of the parties appeals, he can point out to the appellate court the finding of facts or the rulings on points of

law with which he disagrees0$. #n assurance to the parties that, in reaching udgment, the udge did so through the processes of legal

reasoning.


2/6

(arts of a Decision

1ample2

&epublic of the 3hilippines

S-('EE C/-'T

"anila

SEC/ND DIISI/N

G.'. No. "0,1," Decem2er +#! +,,0

(E/(3E /4 THE (HI3I((INES!plaintiff4appellee,

vs.'/GE' END/ZA 5 DE3A C'-Z!accused4appellant.

D E C I S I / N

E3ASC/! 6'.! J.&

!his is an appeal from the 5ecision dated June %/, % of the Court of #ppeals (C#) in C#46.&. C&47.C. 8o. 9'*,modifying the 5ecision dated :ctober %, %; of the &egional !rial Court (&!C),


3/6

('ESBITE'/ 6. E3ASC/! 6'.#ssociate Justice

=1 C:8C>&23E/NA'D/ A. :-IS-BING

#ssociate JusticeChairperson

C/NCHITA CA'(I/ /'A3ES#ssociate Justice

DANTE /. TINGA#ssociate Justice


4/6

A'T-'/ D. B'I/N#ssociate Justice

ATTESTATI/NI attest that the conclusions in the above 5ecision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinionof the Court?s 5ivision.

3E/NA'D/ A. :-IS-BING#ssociate Justice

Chairperson

CE'TI4ICATI/N

3ursuant to Section *$, #rticle @III of the Constitution, and the 5ivision Chairperson?s #ttestation, it is hereby certified that the conclusions inthe above 5ecision were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court?s 5ivision.

'EYNAT/ S. (-N/Chief Justice

4ootnotes

I. CaptionA!itle

!he caption sets forth the name of the court, the doc-et number if assigned, and the title of the action.

!he title of the action indicates the names of the parties. !hey shall all be named in the original complaint or

petition0 but in subseBuent 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.

!heir respective participation in the case shall be indicated.

II. ecti%e or re$ortorial method+ !he udge summarizes 44 without comment 44 the testimony of each

witness and the contents of each ehibit.o S5nthesis method+ !he factual theory of the plaintiff or prosecution and then that of the defendant or

defense is summarized according to the udge?s best light.

o Su2>ecti%e method+ !he version of the facts accepted by the udge is simply narrated without eplainingwhat the parties? versions are.

o Com2ination of o2>ecti%e and su2>ecti%e4 !he testimony of each witness is reported and the udge then

formulates his or her own version of the facts.


5/6

In criminal cases, it is better to present both the version of the prosecution and that of the defense, in the

interest of fairness and due process. #lso, the reasoning of the lower court or body whose decision is under review should be laid out, in order that

the parties may clearly understand why the lower court ruled in a certain way, and why the reviewing courteither finds no reason to reverse it or concludes otherwise.

;c< Issues or assi8nment of errors=


6/6

case sythesizing 1

Documents