LEGAL RESEARCH ASSIGNMENT 1

MEMORANDUMTO : JUDGE MA. THERESA ENRIQUEZ-GASPARFROM : MONA LUISA C. DE GUZMANDATE: July 30, 2011RE : EJECTMENT SUIT DECISION – Effect on a person not a party

to the case

Issue(s)Is a decision of the court in an ejectment suit binding even on a person who is not a party to the case? Why or why not? Explain.

ConclusionNo, court decisions in an ejectment suit are not binding on a person who is not a party to the case. Decisions of the court are only applicable to those who are considered as parties to the case filed.

Statement of FactsIssue above has not presented any detail facts for the ejectment suit but it is definite that when such a case is filed to the court, parties to the case only involved the petitioner and the respondent. It can also be said that the case has already been heard and that a decision has been passed for implementation. Here is where the issue of a third party, not involved in the original ejectment suit, is brought to the attention of this office since such third party is affected in the implementation of a court decision of an ejectment suit.

DiscussionCourt’s decisions potentially affect many people and in fact have considerable effects. The extent to which the Court does have impact indicates its importance in the Country’s political system. In the issue presented in this memorandum, court decisions in an ejectment suit is binding only to the parties involved and in as much as there are other parties who have similar facts presented in their individual cases as the country follows the stare decisis doctrine.

In order for court’s decisions in an ejectment suit to become binding to a person that person must be a party to the case. As in Lorenzana vs. Cayetano (G.R. No. L-37501, August 31, 1977) it was noted that Cayetano was not a party to any of the 12 ejectment cases wherein the writs of demolition had been issued; she did not make her appearance in and during the pendency of these ejectment cases. Cayetano, in the said case, only went to court to protect her property from demolition after the judgment in the ejectment cases had become final and executor. Hence, with respect to the judgment in said ejectment cases, Cayetano remains a third person to such judgment, which does not bind her; not can its writ of execution be enforced against her since she was not afforded her day in court in said ejectment cases.

Furthermore Rule 39 of the 1996 Rules of Court (Execution, Satisfaction and Effect of Judgements) has specified that only parties to a case shall be bound to the executed ruling of the court.

P a g e | 1 de Guzman, Mona Luisa C.

LEGAL RESEARCH ASSIGNMENT 1

JOURNAL: RESEARCH PROCESS

This is a step by step journal of how I did my research for the question posted and how I came about the Memorandum presented.

Upon reading the question posted, I outlined the things that I need to look into as follows:

1. Procedure on making a legal memorandum2. Definition of an ejectment suit3. Procedures for filing a case, particularly who are the parties to an

ejectment case 4. Determine what are the effects of court decisions, in particular to court

decisions in ejectment suitSince we are using the book of Atty. Peter P. Ng on Legal Research as

our reference book for this class, I turned to the chapter of the book referring to the Case Brief and Memoranda (Chapter 14), to check the contents and how to go about writing a legal memorandum.

Upon understanding the procedure on how to make a legal memorandum, I then proceeded to check any statutory laws that could help me in the discussion of the issue at hand hence I used the copy of the Rules of Court which is available to me through the collection of books I have found in the library. Since I needed to check the procedures for filing ejectment cases, I read through Rule 13 of the Rules of Court (pp. 31-35) but I only found here rules on how to file a pleading. As this is general rules of the court, I assumed that these are also true to cases of ejectment. In any other case I also checked Rule 38 of the Rules of Court (pp. 94-123) to determine the effects of judgments.

In order to find the necessary support for the memorandum I made, I went to the library to check the SCRA Quick Index Digest available. As I searched through the library I found out that the latest SCRA Quick Index Digest available is for 2006 only. Hence, I decided to check SCRA Quick Index Digest for years 2007-2008 which are actually available to me through the book collection of a friend of mine. I then checked the table of contents of both books (all part 1 of the Index Digests) and turned to the EJECTMENT annotations (please find attached copies of the pages from the Quick Index Digest year 2007 and 2008).

As I read through the annotations in the Quick Index I could not determine which particular annotation is related to the issue at hand, hence I checked the internet through google search for any related cases pertaining ejectment cases and found a digitized copy of The Law Times p.49 and p. 50 which highlighted court rulings on ejectment cases abroad (please find attached printed copies of the pages of the Law Times mentioned). As I was uncertain on whether the rulings are applicable to Philippine territories I went to websites of www.lawphil.net and www.chanrobles.com for court decisions on ejectment suits pertaining to third party involvement in the Philippines. As such I found 2 cases (G.R. No. L-20920 and G.R. No. L-37051) that helped me in my creation of the memorandum (please find attached copies of the retrieved case files from lawphil and chanrobles websites).

P a g e | 2 de Guzman, Mona Luisa C.