How to Digest a Case

A case digest or a case brief is a written summary of the case. A case sometimes involves several
issues. Digesting the same would help the student in separating one issue from another and
understanding how the Court resolved the issues in the case. The student does not need to discuss
all the issues decided in the case in his case digest. He only needs to focus on the relevant issue or
the issue related to the subject that he is taking. A case digest may also serve as a useful study aid
for class discussions and exams. A student who has a case digest does not need to go back to the
case in order to remember what he has read.
Format of the Case Digest
I. Caption. This includes the title of the case, the date it was decided, and citation. Include also the
petitioner, respondent, and the ponente.
II. Facts. There is no need to include all the facts. Just include those that are relevant to the subject.
III. Issues. Include only those that are relevant. Issues are usually framed in the form of questions
that are answerable by "yes" or "no," for example, "Is the contract void?" Sometimes, students frame
the question by starting it with the word "whether," for example, "Whether the contract is void" or
"Whether or not the contract is void." The answer to the question has to be answered in the ruling.
IV. Ruling. This usually starts with a "yes" or a "no." This is the answer to the question/s involving
the issue. After the categorical yes/no answer, the reason for the decision will be explained.
V. Concurring and Dissenting Opinions. This part is optional, but it would help to include them
because there are professors who ask for separate opinions in recitations.
Sample Case Digest
DOMINGO VS. COURT OF APPEALS
226 SCRA 572
Petitioner: Roberto Domingo
Respondents: Court of Appeals and Delia Soledad Avera
Ponente: J. Romero
FACTS:
On May 29, 1991, private respondent Delia Soledad A. Domingo filed the petition entitled
"Declaration of Nullity of Marriage and Separation of Property" against Roberto Domingo. The
petition, which was filed before Pasig RTC, alleged the following:
(a) they were married on November 29, 1976;
(b) unknown to her (Delia), he had a previous marriage with Emerina dela Paz on April 25, 1969
which marriage is valid and still existing;
(c) she came to know of the prior marriage only sometime in 1983 when Emerina sued them for
bigamy;
(d) since 1979, she has been working in Saudi Arabia and is only able to stay in the Philippines
when she would avail of the one-month annual vacation leave granted by her employer;

(e) Roberto has been unemployed and completely dependent upon her for support and subsistence;
(f) Her personal properties amounting to P350,000.00 are under the possession of Roberto, who
disposed some of the said properties without her knowledge and consent;
(g) while on her vacation, she discovered that he was cohabiting with another woman.
Petitioner filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground that the declaration of their marriage, which is void
ab initio, is superfluous and unnecessary. He further suggested that private respondent should have
filed an ordinary civil action for the recovery of the properties alleged to have been acquired by their
union.
RTC and CA dismissed the petitioner's motion for lack of merit.
ISSUES:
1) Whether or not a petition for judicial delaration of a void marriage is necessary. (If in the
affirmative, whether the same should be filed only for purpose of remarriage.)
2) Whether or not the petition entitled "Declaration of Nullity of Marriage and Separation of Property"
is the proper remedy of private respondent to recover certain real and personal properties allegedly
belonging to her exclusively.
HELD:
1) Yes. The nullification of a marriage for the purpose of contracting another cannot be accomplished
merely on the basis of the perception of both parties or of one that their union is defective. Were this
so, this inviolable social institution would be reduced to a mockery and would rest on a very shaky
foundation.
On the other hand, the clause "on the basis solely of a final judgment delaring such marriage void" in
Article 40 of the Code denotes that such final judgment declaring the previous marriage void is not
only for purpose of remarriage.
2) Yes. The prayer for declaration of absolute nullity of marriage may be raised together with the
other incident of their marriage such as the separation of their properties. The Family Code has
clearly provided the effects of the declaration of nullity of marriage, one of which is the separation of
property according to the regime of property relations governing them.
Hence, SC denied the instant petition. CA's decision is affirmed.

SAMPLE CASE

The following is a sample case that is commonly used in Contracts Cases to

illustrate the idea of a "legal duty." Each element is identified.
STEPHEN GRAY, RESPONDENT, v. THERESA D.
MARTINO, APPELLANT
Supreme Court of New Jersey
91 N.J.L. 462; 103 A. 24
February 2, 1918, Decided

Parties: These are the primary parties.

Generally the case will be referred to
only by the last names of the parties.
E.g. Gray v. Martino.

MINTURN, J. The plaintiff occupied the position of a

Facts of the case: What happened that
special police officer, in Atlantic City, and incidentally
brought these parties to court?
was identified with the work of the prosecutor of the pleas
of the county. He possessed knowledge concerning the
theft of certain diamonds and jewelry from the possession
of the defendant, who had advertised a reward for the
recovery of the property. In this situation he claims to
have entered into a verbal contract with defendant,
whereby she agreed to pay him $500 if he could procure
for her the names and addresses of the thieves. As a result
of his meditation with the police authorities the diamonds
and jewelry were recovered, and plaintiff brought this suit
to recover the promised reward.
The District Court, sitting without a jury, awarded
plaintiff a judgment for the amount of the reward, and
hence this appeal.

Procedural History: Who won in the

court below?

Various points are discussed in the briefs, but to us the

dominant and conspicuous inquiry in the case is, was the
plaintiff, during the period of this transaction, a public
officer, charged with the enforcement of the law?

Legal Issue: What fact or

circumstance is at issue that will be
the deciding factor in how the court
rules on this case?

The testimony makes it manifest that he was a special

police officer to some extent identified with the work of
the prosecutor's office, and that position, upon wellsettled grounds of public policy, required him to assist, at
least, in the prosecution of offenders against the law.

Reasoning/Analysis: The court

applies the facts to see whether they
satisfy the elements of the rule.

The services he rendered, in this instance, must be

presumed to have been rendered in pursuance of that
public duty, and for its performance he was not entitled to
receive a special quid pro quo.

The cases on the subject are collected in a footnote

to Somerset Bank v. Edmund, 10 Am. & Eng. Ann. Cas.
726; 76 Ohio St. Rep. 396, the head-note to which reads:
"Public policy and sound morals alike forbid that a public
officer should demand or receive for services performed
by him in the discharge of official duty any other or
further remuneration or reward than that prescribed or
allowed by law."

Rule of Law: Under what rule of law

does this issue fall?

This rule of public policy has been relaxed only in those

instances where the legislature for sufficient public reason
has seen fit by statute to extend the stimulus of a reward
to the public without distinction, as in the case of United
States v. Matthews, 173 U.S. 381, where the attorneygeneral, under an act for "the detection and prosecution of
crimes against the United States," made a public offer of
reward sufficiently liberal and generic to comprehend the
services of a federal deputy marshal. Exceptions of that
character upon familiar principles serve to emphasize the
correctness of the rule, as one based upon sound public
policy.
The judgment below for that reason must be reversed.

Holding: What is the conclusion of

the court?

SAMPLE BRIEF

Gray (cop) v. Martino (crime victim)

Procedural History

Cop sues for reward money.

District court awards money to the cop.

Defendant appeals.

Issue

At the time the contract was formed, was the plaintiff acting as a police officer
charged with a legal duty to catch criminals without further reward?
Facts

Plaintiff makes a verbal contract with defendant. In return for

$500, plaintiff will find defendant's stolen jewels.

Plaintiff had knowledge of whereabouts of jewels at contract

formation.

Plaintiff is a special police officer and has dealings with

prosecutor's office.

Defendant published advertisement for reward.

Plaintiff finds stolen goods and arranges return.

Rule of Law
1. A public officer cannot demand or receive remuneration or a
reward for carrying out the duty of his job as a matter of public
policy and morality
2. However, it is not against public policy for a police officer to
receive a reward in performance of his legal duty if the legislature
passes a statute giving the reward to the public at large in
furtherance of some public policy - such as preventing treason
against the US.
Reasoning

Court finds sufficient evidence to characterize this fellow as a

public official.

His interaction with the prosecutor's office weighed in as a factor

in suggesting he had a legal duty.

Since he is characterized within the rule as a public official, he

cannot, as a matter of law, receive a reward for the performance
of his duties.

Holding

Court reverses decision of lower court in favor of the plaintiff since he was
characterized as a public official.

THE IRAC METHOD

At some point in your law school career, you will be introduced to the I.R.A.C
method. This acronym stands for: Issue, Rule, Application, and Conclusion. Although
the definitions are useful as a foundation for legal writing, don't get stuck thinking (as
many people do) that you have to keep these components in this specific order or that
you can't style their arrangement to your needs; I kept my writing style open, and had
great success in my writing assignments doing so. But, be warned, some professors will
tell you exactly how you should order your paper, and you should follow their
suggestions since they will be grading your writing. Here are the definitions of the
components:

ISSUE:
In legal writing, issues are the core of your paper or essay. If you can't spot
a single issue, you will earn no points. To find issues, look for anything in the
facts of a case that could raise a question, sometimes called a "question of law":
Could the defendant be charged with x crime? Could he be convicted of that
crime? Does he have any defenses for his actions? Is the case eligible to be
heard by a jury? If a jury hears the case, would they convict even if the laws
make the defendant look guilty?
Issue spotting is easiest when you know the laws and court holdings of
your state, so be sure to research and study thoroughly, but if you run across a
question that is not addressed by the rules of your state, don't fret, this is a good

opportunity to bring up rules from other jurisdictions that might persuade the
court to make new precedence on that issue.

RULE:
In legal writing, rules are the same as they are in the rest of life; they are
statements that cannot be ignored without punishment, lower grades in our
case. Rules can be found in laws, regulations, and precedents (court holdings
from similar cases), but while all rules are mentionable, all do not carry the
same strength. If one rule pertains to identical issues as your paper, and
another has only similar issues, the most persuasive rule (which must be
mentioned) is the one that is on point; it is up to you to decide whether the less
persuasive rule is worth mentioning. The same differences in persuasiveness
exist for rules that come from your states laws & courts versus those from other
states. And of course, any ruling from the Supreme Court overrides local
precedence on that issue.

APPLICATION:
The application should be the simplest part of your writing. If you know
the facts, can see the issues, and know the rules pertaining to those issues, the
application will write itself. Simply state the issue, state the facts & rules that
give rise to the issue, and tell your professor how those facts do or do not meet
the requirements laid down by the rules. Then tell your professor whether you
think a court would find the D guilty or not guilty based on the strength of the
facts and the rules. Even though this seems simple, you must be vigilant to not
leave any loose threads; address all elements of the rule and all the relevant
facts. Don't try to strengthen your argument by "forgetting" to include elements
or facts that hurt your argument.

CONCLUSION:
The conclusion, as with all writing, is a statement that tells your reader
what the result of your arguments is, or what it should be. But, as with all good
writing, the conclusion should be redundant. All of your application sections
should have already clearly stated the conclusion for each individual issue. I
suggest using this final conclusion section only to remind the reader of those
previous conclusions, and to resolve any differences between those conclusions,

such as when a defendant can be found guilty of a crime, but also may have a
defense. Example: "The Defendant met all of the elements of crime X, and can
thus be found guilty, but it is likely the court will find that his justifiable defense
of Y will prevent that conviction if they follow the precedent set by X v. Y.

The I.R.A.C. method is a great start, but there is much more to think about when writing
an essay answer and when implementing the I.R.A.C. method, as found in Intro to Essay
Writing.