Digest A Case Your Way

There's a marked difference between the law students then and the law students now. Of course, the law students then are probably lawyers now.

What I mean, though, is the way the Internet affects the study of law today. One of the wonders of the Internet is its power to connect people across different time zones and places. For instance, a law student studying in Manila can talk to a law student studying in Davao, thanks to Skype, YM, Facebook, Twitter, etc. A law student can share his digested cases by posting it in his blog or website. And everyone is free to copy it.

When a professor assigns a case or two for the students to read, it's tempting to seek the aid of the Internet. Just type the case title. Then voila! There you have it. Google, or whatever search engine you're using, will provide everything for you----the case digest with a link to the full text of the case.

I've done this many times myself. When I don't have enough time to read the case in its entirety, I read the case digest people in the cyberspace provide. But I find it counterproductive because after reading the case I'm left with more questions than answers. How did the RTC justify its ruling? What was the CA's rationication (I hate this word) in granting or dismissing the appeal? How did the Supreme Court rule on the CA's ruling?

Of course, the exact answers to those questions can only be had if one were to read the entire case. Yes, reading digested cases saves me a lot of time. But it doesn't save me from the grueling question and answer portion law professors like to subject their students.

That is why I think it's better to read the entire case and make your own case digest. Reading a case in its entirety gives you a better grasp of the case. And making your own digest allows you to present the case in a manner that fits your style and frame of mind the most because you made the digest yourself.

Strive for Simplicity, Not Legal Pugnacity

Justices, judges, lawyers, and law students are a brilliant lot. Too often, however, their brilliance is lost when they start writing down their ideas. The case of Leonor vs. CA  drives home this point.

The decision of the Trial Court regarding the merits of the case is as repugnant as the manner by which the decision was written. This is the first paragraph of the judge's decision, quoted in Footnote 13:

This is an action for “Cancellation of Entry in the Civil Registry” particularly on the marriage contract of one Mauricio Leonor, Jr. and Virginia Amor supposedly to have taken place in a long distance past on March 13, 1960 and after a Rip Van Winkle sleep and dormancy liken to a Mt. Pinatubo explosion that rocked the peace and quiet in the lives of the supposedly participants to this drama in Calatrava and San Carlos City, Negros Occidental when out of the blue one party in the person of an aggrieved left-behind spouse revived and revealed an ancient piece of marital bond between her and a reluctant spouse.

What's wrong with the paragraph? Everything, except perhaps for the spelling.

No less than the Supreme Court, through Justice Panganiban, called the language of the decision "convoluted," "painfully a sophomoric and pathetic portrayal" of Virginia, the petitioner in this case.

Further, the Court tersely remarked, "The said decision’s crude attempt at literary sophistication is matched only by its jarring syntax and grammatical incongruencies."

In his essay "On Developing My Decision-Writing Style," former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, this time not writing for the Court, shared the motive behind every decision he wrote.

"Even though my decisions are written primarily to resolve legal issues and are thus emblazoned with a considerable amount of legalese," he said, "I have endeavored to write in simple English, comprehensible as much as possible to a high school graduate.  I want to be understood not only by the legal profession but also by the parties themselves, especially by persons accused of crimes, and by the public at large as regards cases involving interpretation of the Constitution."

"More than lingual elegance and even legal pugnacity," he further said, "I strive for simplicity, clarity and precision in nuances and shades of meanings.  I believe the trend in all professions and occupations -- be they medicine, theology, science or music -- is to be understood not just by the members of that particular discipline but by the public at large."

Thus, lawyers and law students alike should strive for the same simplicity, clarity, and precision. After all, writing aims to reveal rather than conceal.

Sakses!

[caption id="attachment_2366" align="aligncenter" width="510"] The book is published by Central Bookstore.[/caption]

A law student's life is filled with drudgery. But, as Blas Ople said, "Every one of us has his proud moments that seem to recapitulate all past struggles---that lift us from our plain and humdrum lives to an exalted state."

I just recently have one such moment. In August this year, the Philippine Association of Law Schools (PALS) organized a nationwide essay writing contest for law students.

Out of the participants from Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao, ten finalists would be chosen. Of the ten, three would be declared winners.

Why I said I recently have my proud moment? Lest you be misled, I didn't win. Here are the winners:

• 1st Place: Archimedes D. Suganob of St. Mary's College of Law, Tagum City.


• 2nd Place: Julius Caesar Domingo of St. Mary's University, Bayombong Nueva Vizcaya.


• 3rd Place: Euangeli P. Doromal of Cor Jesu College, Digos City.

I'm proud that two of the winners come from Mindanao. I think they all deserve to win, for how can a lowly man like me beat a mathematician/physicist, a Roman Emperor, and an angel?

Seriously, though, I'm proud because PALS has this little book called "In The Eyes of Law Students: The Secret Formula of Teaching Law," which contains, among others, the essays of the winners and ten other finalists.

What of it?

Nothing, except that I'm one of the finalists and my essay is in the book. If you're someone who has a literary pretensions, seeing your work published  is like releasing the feces that have been inside your stomach for quite a while.

No wonder, people say "Sakses!" after defecating.

Creating a Better World, Oppan Onyot Style

I want to be a lawyer because, for me, it’s a good way not only to earn a decent living but to help mankind at the same time.

My family is poor. My father never had a stable job. He used to work as a truck driver, a passenger-jeepney driver, and a taxi driver. My mother is not rich either. Although she inherited a small piece of land from her mother, she sold it to pay for my sisters’ college tuition fees. She also tried her hand selling native delicacies like suman, puto, and biko. She also peddled detergent soaps and viands. Now she runs a small laundry business that she’s struggling to keep alive. Our family is so hard up that I was able to finish college only because I got a scholarship that required me to work in the library in the morning and study in the evening.

If you live this kind of life that I live, you’d think of nothing else but a way out. To become a lawyer is my choice of a way out because, well, lawyers tend to be better off among the professionals, if not among the really rich ones. The idealist in me, however, finds becoming a lawyer merely for profit too small a dream. For sure, we need to aspire for the creature comforts because if the body is weak, we couldn’t possibly perform even the simplest of tasks. Yet I believe that our responsibility is not only to make ourselves better off, but, as Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. said, also to “share the passion and action of his time.”

That makes the profession of law most fascinating. No other profession is so immersed in the passion and action of life than the practice of law. Sadly, however, lawyers get such a bad rap from typical portrayals of them as bad guys in movies and books. Even so, there are a few lawyers who are truly admirable. There are lawyers whose concern is not so much about making a nest-egg from their profession but about leaving a legacy.

To my mind, Antonio Oposa, Jr. of the Philippines is one such lawyer.

Having seen the wanton plunder of the environment in our country, Mr. Oposa decided to use the law—the only available weapon in his arsenal—to defend and protect its forests. He sued Fulgencio Factoran, the then Secretary of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, to demand, among others, the cancellation of all the timber-license agreements that the Philippine government had been wantonly giving. The case, which came to be known as Minors Oposa vs. Factoran, was the first of its kind in the world, for its plaintiffs are thegenerations yet unborn; it used the principle of “intergenerational equity,” a concept developed by Georgetown Law Professor Edith Brown Weiss. The Regional Trial Court dismissed the case on the ground that the unborn generations didn’t have a legal standing. In 1993, however, the Supreme Court reversed the lower court’s decision.

The Supreme Court said in its judgment: “...[E]very generation has a responsibility to the next to preserve that rhythm and harmony for the full enjoyment of a balanced and healthful ecology...the right to a sound environment constitutes, at the same time, the performance of their obligation to ensure the protection of that right for the generations to come.”

Protecting the environment is just one of the many battles that Mr. Oposa has been valiantly carrying out, and his efforts have not gone unnoticed. In 2009, he was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award—the Asian counterpart of Nobel Prize—for “his path-breaking and passionate crusade to engage Filipinos in acts of enlightened citizenship that maximize the power of law to protect and nurture the environment for themselves, their children, and generations still to come.”

Mr. Oposa belies the popular belief that lawyers are crooks and liars. I believe that like Mr. Oposa, there are many more self-abnegating men and women of law out there. They may not drive fancy cars. They may not hold office in high-rise buildings. Instead, what they seek to leave behind is far more lasting: a better, safer, and just world.

I myself aspire to become a crusading lawyer like Mr. Oposa. I have no illusion, though, that the problems of the world will go away instantly simply because I decided to become a lawyer and a good lawyer at that. For indeed, what can one individual like me do? My answer is this: A great edifice is built not by a single person but by many people working side by side. Alone, I may not be able to build the edifice for a better world. But by being a good lawyer, I will help construct that great edifice brick by brick until it becomes a reality.

Surviving Downtown Cebu

While people were coming in droves to Davao City to join the Kadayawan Festival last August, we were heading to the opposite direction. We booked a flight to Cebu, and left Davao while people were insanely figuring out which shopping malls to go just to witness the artistas do something that would pass off as an entertainment.

"What are you going to do?" my friends wondered when I declined their invitation to join the fete.

Some, however, suggested what things we should do, which places to go, what food to eat, and what activities to try while in Cebu.  They say we should visit the miraculous Simala Shrine, or swim with the Butanding in Oslob, or go farther north and experience the beauty of Bantayan Islands which others daresay is  better than Boracay, what with its white sand beaches, crystal blue waters, but minus the crowd. Another also suggested that we try the Death By Chocolate at Casa Verde, which, in fact, I already tried the first time I went there. We should also visit, they suggested, CarCar and try its Lechon.

Since we only stayed in Cebu for three days and two nights, we did none of the above. Instead, we just roamed around downtown Cebu. We experienced the Skywalk and Edge Coaster, which, by the way, can be cheaper if you bring, as we did, a Student ID. We also went to places which make Cebu remarkable: Basilica del Sto. Niño, Magellan's Cross, Fort San Pedro, Cebu Capitol, and Taboan where you can buy danggit.

Staying in Cebu City's downtown is adventure unto itself, and living there is like surviving a day or two in a jungle fraught with danger. Its streets---particularly Colon Street---are teeming with snatchers who blend in so well with the crowd you won't even suspect they have a sinister plot.

The taxi driver who took us from the airport to the hotel where we stayed forewarned us. He told us the story of two graduating Nursing students who were accosted by the hold-uppers. One ran away, prompting the hold-upper to shoot the other who was left lest the latter would run as well.

On the night we had the Skywalk and Edge Coaster, we asked the guard from the Crown Regency which route is going to the Basilica del Sto. Niño. The hotel where we stayed was just near the Basilica. He gave us a worried look, and advised us to take a taxi instead---it's much safer.

Most of the horrifying stories told to us happened in and around Colon Street. Colon is the oldest street in the Philippines. Sadly, though, it's not known today as such, but as a bastion of snatchers and other thugs. What was once an asset of Cebu now became its liability.

Happily, we were able to go home unscathed and spared from the horrors some people we know experienced.

1st Sem of Law School, kumusta?

I passed my Persons. I got 2.8 (82). I'm proud of it. I thought I'm going to get a 75 or below. My only concern now is Consti Law and Crim Law. The grades are not yet in.

Now that the semester is over, and another semester is about to begin, maybe I should share, albeit very briefly, what I've been through for the past five months by answering the most frequently asked questions people asked me about studying law.

1. Is law like any other course?

No, it's not. The study of law is like a jealous mistress. It demands so much from you---time, energy, resources---that you wouldn't even notice that you're giving more than what you have. Of course, that's what our professors told us in the beginning. But I must say, it depends on how you take it. If you take it too seriously and impose unnecessary pressures, then you will most likely be unnecessarily pressured. The opposite is just as fatal. If you take it too lightly and do not discipline yourself, then you will most likely fail.

The most important thing is to strike a balance among your many-faceted life. Study hard. Party harder. Go out if you can. Watch a movie. Hangout with your friends. Talk to people. Read newspapers, not just some antiquated cases dating back to the time when our country is still called the Government of the Philippine Islands.

2. Do you memorize all those laws, articles and Republic Acts?

You can if you want. But so far no professor of mine has yet required us to memorize all the laws we discussed. Why? Because that's plainly impossible. And don't tell me about Mike Ross of Suits----he's a figment of someone else's imagination. But there are times when our professor would let us memorize VIP (Very Important Provisions) of the law.

3. Did you join a fraternity?

No, I didn't, and neither did most of my classmates. And we see no reason to change our decision. And the frat is no guarantee that you would pass all your subjects although they say that the frat's a big help. Your "Ka Brod" would provide the materials your subjects required, saving you a lot of time. Still, nothing beats studying, for what good are the materials your frat provides if you don't bother studying them.

4. Is it true that it's a plus if you have a good penmanship?

I think so. The professors are full-time practicing lawyers themselves. They don't have the luxury of time to decipher every student's handwriting, for it's a double burden----first, the prof needs to decipher your handwriting; and second, the prof needs to understand the meaning of what you've written. Yet make no mistake---it's still substance over form. Many of my classmates have some damn good answers but still scored low. And I submit it's because they have a penmanship that looks like a scribbling of a toddler. The good news is that it can still be remedied. How? There's no easy formula for this. My classmates does so by making notes using cursive.

5. How do you manage it?

Studying law while working full-time is really hard, especially during the first few months. I was so stressed out I thought of quitting. But I figured I was so hard on myself. As the months went by, though, I was able to find my learning style and establish my rhythm. Here's my daily routine.

7:30-4:30 - Work, but I sometimes study in-between my classes.

5:30-8:30 - Attend classes.

10:30 -11:30 - Study for the next day's class. I normally don't stay so late at night. If I go beyond 11 or 11:30, my brain absorbs nothing, and it's just a waste of time for time to be awake. So I sleep, and the next day my brain is again ready to work.

Thus far, that's 1st sem. And I'm pretty sure the 2nd sem will be twice difficult. Oblicon is every day. God bless us all.