LEGAL

TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC

ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

THE PATH OF THE LAW 6. Training of lawyers is a training in logic. Behind the logical form lies
a judgment as to the relative worth and importance of competing
Important points: legislative grounds, often an inarticulate and unconscious
1. Reason why people will pay lawyers to render legal services – in judgment, it is true, and yet the very root and nerve of the whole
societies like ours, the command of the public force is entrusted to proceeding
the judges in certain cases, and the whole power of the sate will be 7. History must be a part of the study, because without it we cannot
put forth, if necessary, to carry out their judgments and decrees know the precise scope of rules which it is our business to know. It
2. From a lawyer’s statement of a case, eliminating as it does all the is a part of the rational study, because it is the first step toward an
dramatic elements, with which his client’s story has clothed it, and enlightened skepticism, that is, towards a deliberate consideration
retaining only the facts of legal import, up to the final analysis and of the worth of those rules. When you get a dragon out of its cave
abstract universals of theoretic jurisprudence on the plain and in the daylight, you cannot count his teeth and
3. Understand limits, point out and dispel a confusion between claws and see just what is his strength. But to get him out is only
morality and law, which sometimes rises to the height of conscious the first step, the next is either to kill him or tame him.
theory, and more often and indeed constantly is making trouble in
detail without reaching the point of consciousness. MECHANICAL JURISPRUDENCE
a. Bad man v. Good man – “a bad man has much reason as a
good one for wishing to avoid an encounter with a public Important points:
force, and you can see the practical importance of the 1. Antithesis: system of enforcing magisterial caprice, however
distinction between morality and law”. honest, and however much distinguished under the name of justice
b. A man who cares nothing for an ethical rule is believed and or equity or natural law
practiced by his neighbors is likely nevertheless to care 2. Marks of a scientific law:
good deal to avoid being made to ay money, and will want a. Conformity to reason (Full Justice) – for solutions that go
to keep out of jail if he can to the root of controversies
4. The fallacy to which I refer is the notion that the only force at work b. Uniformity (Equal Justice) – a like adjustment of like
in the development of the law is logic. The postulate on which we relations under like conditions
think about the universe is that there is a fixed quantitative relation c. Certainty (Exact Justice) – for a justice whose operations,
between every within reasonable limits, may be predicted in advance of
5. Phenomenon and its antecedents and consequents. If there is such action
a thing as a phenomenon without these fixed quantitative 3. End goal of law: to eliminate so far as may be the personal equation
relations, it is a miracle. The condition of our thinking about the in judicial administration, to preclude corruption and to limit the
universe is that it is capable of being thought about rationally, or, dangerous possibilities of magisterial ignorance
in other words, that every part of it is effect and cause in the same 4. 2 dangers against a scientific legal system
sense in which those parts are with which we are most familiar. So a. direction of effect of scientific and artificial character upon
in the broadest sense it is true that the law is a logical development, the public: the law must not become too scientific for the
like everything else. Danger: the notion that a given system, ours, people to appreciate its workings – it must not become so
for instance, can be worked out like mathematics from some completely artificial that the public is led to regard it as
axioms of conduct wholly arbitrary

Page 1 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

b. direction of effect upon courts and the legal profession: LEGAL LOGIC
more subtle and far reaching- the effect of all system is apt
to be petrifaction of the subject systematized. Perfection CHAPTER 1: Introduction
of scientific system and exposition tends to cut off
individual initiative in the future, to stifle independent Logic – the study of the principles and methods of good reasoning. It is a
consideration of new problems and of new phases of old science of reasoning which aims to determine and lay down the criteria of
problems, and to impose ideas of one generation upon good (correct) reasoning and bad (incorrect) reasoning
another
Legal reasoning – expressed through arguments
UNDERSTANDING JUDICIAL DECISION-MAKING: THE IMPORTANCE OF
CONSTRAINTS ON NON-RATIONAL DELIBERATIONS Argument – group of statements in which one statement is claimed to be
true on the basis of other statement/s
Important points: *conclusion – statement claimed to be true
1. The judge is a rational actor who reasons logically from facts, *premise – basis or support of the conclusion
previous decisions, statutes, and constitutions to reach a decision
2. Factors in judicial decision-making EXPLANATION ARGUMENT
DOCTRINAL NON-DOCTRINAL An attempt to show why An attempt to show that
Laws/Statutes School something is the case something is the case
Case Law Beliefs
Methodology Religion STATEMENTS OF BELIEF/OPINION ARGUMENT
Customs Statements about what a speaker Statements that the speaker or
Tradition or writer happens to believe writer claims that they follow from,
Upbringing or support, other claims
Political Views
CONDITIONAL STATEMENT ARGUMENT
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE JUDICIAL ROLE AND ITS EFFECTS ON THE Contains an if-then relationship; A statement where the conclusion
THEORY OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS IN THE PHILIPPINE HYBRID SYSTEM made up of the antecedent and the is claimed to be true because of the
consequent; there is no claim that premise
Important points: one statement is true because of
1. Factos influencing the Philippine theory on judicial precedents the other
a. Adaption of American Court System
b. Constitutional powers vested in the Supreme Court Components of Legal Reasoning:
c. Transplant of Anglo-American principles in the PH legal
system 1. Issue (what is being argued?) – any matter of controversy or
d. Influence of Civil Law uncertainty; a point in dispute, in doubt, in question, or simply up
e. Cultural, Social, and Economic demands of the Philippine for consideration or discussion
Society

Page 2 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

2. Rule (what legal rules govern the issue?) – takes the form of laws, CHAPTER 2: Fundamental Concepts in Legal Reasoning
cases, or principles that have already decided
a. A set of elements, collectively called a test Burden of proof – duty of any party to present evidence to establish his
b. A result that occurs when all the elements are present claim or defense by the amount of evidence required by law, which is
(and the test is thus satisfied) preponderance of evidence in a civil case
c. A causal term that determines whether the result is
mandatory, prohibitory, discretionary, or declaratory 1. In civil cases – the plaintiff has the burden of proving the material
allegations of the complaint which are denied by the answer; and
3. Fact (what are the facts that are relevant to the rule cited?) – the defendant has the burden of proving the material allegations in
satisfies the rule if it covers all its elements his answer
a. Material facts – facts that fit the elements of the rule
2. In administrative proceedings – burden of proof that respondent
4. Analysis (how applicable are the facts to the said rule?) – where the committed the acts complained of rests on the complainant
argumentation and illustration come out. Links rules and facts to
establish what is claimed in the argument Note: A party alleging a fact has the burden of proving it and mere allegation
is not evidence
5. Conclusion (what is the implication of applying the rule to the given
facts?) – ultimate end of a legal argument. What the facts, the Evidence – means sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in a
rules, and the analysis of the case amount to judicial proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact (may be through a
testimony or presentation of an object/document)
Evaluating Legal Reasoning
Admissibility – evidence is deemed admissible if it is relevant to the issue
1. How to distinguish correct from incorrect legal reasoning: and more importantly, fi it is not excluded by provision of law or by the Rules
a. Truth (are the premises provided in the argument true or of Court
acceptable?) – it is necessary for the conclusion of a legal
argument to be grounded on factual basis Testimony – generally confined to the personal knowledge; a witness can
b. Logic (is the reasoning or argument correct or logical?) – testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge which
the premises of the argument must not only be factual but are derived from his own perception, except as otherwise provided under
the connection of the premises to the conclusion must be the Rules of Court; a witness may not testify as to what he merely learned
logically coherent, that is, the movement from the facts, from others either because he was told, or he read or heard the same
to the analysis, and to the main claim must be valid (hearsay rule) XPN: Entries in official records made in the performance of
duty by a public officer
2. Two main processes involved in legal reasoning:
a. Presentation of facts which pertains to the question of Expert Testimony – statements made by individuals who are considered as
truth experts in a particular field
b. Inference which pertains to the question of logic

Page 3 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

Examination: CHAPTER 3: Deductive Reasoning in Law

1. Direct examination by the proponent – refers to the examination- Deduction and Induction:
in-chief of a witness by the party presenting him on the facts
relevant to the issue 1. Deductive reasoning – premises intend to guarantee truth of
conclusion; given the premises, the conclusion could not possibly
2. Cross-examination by the opponent – upon the termination of the be false
direct examination, the witness may be cross-examined by the a. Indicator words – certainly, definitely,
adverse party as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or Example:
connected therewith, with sufficient fullness and freedom to test Payment extinguishes an obligation;
his accuracy and truthfulness and freedom from interest or bias, or Consignation is a form of payment;
reverse, and to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue Definitely, consignation extinguishes an obligation.

3. Re-direct examination by the proponent – after the cross- 2. Inductive reasoning – premises intend to provide good (but not
examination of the witness has been concluded, he may be re- conclusive) evidence of the truth of conclusion; conclusions are
examined by the party calling him, to explain or supplement his likely probable given the premises considered; conclusion might
answers given during the cross-examination. On re-direct turn out to be false even though premises are true
examination, questions on matters not dealt with during the cross- a. Indicator words – probably, likely, chances are
examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion Example:
Block D students are studying hard for their midterms;
4. Re-cross-examination by the opponent – upon the conclusion of Chances are, they will get high grades.
the re-direct examination, the adverse party may re-cross-examine
the witness on matters stated in his re-direct examination, and also Syllogism – a three-line argument that is (2 premises, 1 conclusion)
on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its *Principle: what is true of the universal is true of the particular
discretion Example:
Payment extinguishes an obligation;
Dependence on Precedents Consignation is a form of payment;
Definitely, consignation extinguishes an obligation.
Stare decisis et non quieta movere – when a point has been settled by a
decision, it becomes a precedent which should be followed in subsequent “One of the most beautiful, and one of the most important, made by the
cases before the same court (embodied in Article 8, CC) human mind” – Gottfried Leibniz

Value in legal reasoning (Cesare Beccaria)
PERFECT SYLLOGISM (Criminal Case)
Major Premise General Law
Minor Premise Act which does or does not
conform to the law
Conclusion Acquittal or condemnation

Page 4 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

Valid deductive argument – an argument in which the conclusion really

does follow necessarily from the premises; if the premises are true, then the b. Parts of a categorical syllogism
conclusion must be true or the truth of the premises guarantee the truth of i. 3 kinds of terms:
the conclusion 1. Minor Term (S) – subject of the
Example: conclusion
Quasi-contracts gives rise to obligations; 2. Major Term (P) – predicate of the
Solutio indebiti is a type of quasi-contract conclusion
Therefore, solutio indebiti gives rise to obligations. 3. Middle Term (M) – term found in both
premises; mediates minor and major
Invalid deductive argument – an argument where the conclusion does not terms
follow necessarily from the premises (even if the premise and the conclusion ii. 3 kinds of statements:
is true) 1. Minor Premise – premise which
Example: contains minor term
Henry extinguished his contract to sell to Dannah; 2. Major Premise – premise which contains
Novation is a form of extinguishment of a contract; the major term
Therefore, Henry novated his contract to sell to Dannah. 3. Conclusion – the statement that the
premises support
Validity test – does the conclusion necessarily follow from the premises? If Example:
yes, valid. If no, invalid. M P
Escaped prisoners may be arrested without a
Types of Syllogisms: warrant; (major premise)
S M
1. Categorical Syllogisms – composed of categorical statements alone; Eliel is an escaped prisoner; (minor premise)
directly asserts something or states a fact without any conditions. S P
Subject affirmed or denied by the predicate. Eliel may be arrested without a warrant.
a. Properties of a categorical statement (conclusion)
i. Quality – affirmative (+) or negative (-)
Example: c. Rule for the validity:
Breach of contract is a ground for damages. (+) i. Must not contain two negative premises (Fallacy
Iya is not liable for damages. (-) of Exclusive Premises)
Example:
ii. Quantity – universal (U) or particular (P) Retired AFP officers can’t receive their pension
Example: when they become American citizens;
All obligations may be extinguished. (U) Gen. Vicencio can’t receive his pension;
Some obligations are conditional. (P) Therefore, Gen. Vicencio is an American citizen.

Page 5 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

ii. There must be three pairs of univocal terms 2. Hypothetical Syllogism – includes both categorical and hypothetical
(Fallacy of Equivocation) statements; a compound statement which contains a proposed or
Example: tentative explanation (2 clauses connected by conjunctions,
Carlo was confused when he was asked to jump; adverbs, etc. which express the relationship between the classes as
Confusion can extinguish an obligation; well as the assent to it)
Carlo’s obligation was extinguished when he was Example:
asked to jump. If Dannah did not pay upon demand, she will be guilty of delay.
Dannah did not pay upon demand
iii. The term must be universal at least once (Fallacy Therefore, she will be guilty of delay.
of Particular Middle)
Example: a. Kinds of Hypothetical Syllogisms
Most members of the Congress are pro death i. Conditional Syllogism
penalty; ii. Disjunctive Syllogism
Sen. Perral is a member of the Congress; iii. Conjunctive Syllogism*
Therefore, Sen. Perral is pro death penalty. b. Conjunctive Syllogism – major premise is a conditional
statement
iv. If the term in the conclusion is universal, the *conditional statement – a compound statement which
same term in the premise must also be universal asserts that one member (the then clause/consequent) is
(Fallacy of Illicit Minor) true on condition that the other member (the if
Example: clause/antecedent) is true
All Atenean lawyers are honor students; c. Rules for Conditional Syllogisms
All lawyers are members of the bar; i. Modus Ponens – when minor premise affirms the
Therefore, all honor students are members of the antecedent, the conclusion must affirm the
bar. consequent
Example:
(Fallacy of Illicit Major) If Iya runs for President before reaching 40 years
Example: old, then she will be disqualified.
Grave felonies are punishable under the RPC; Iya ran for president before reaching 40 years old.
Slight physical injuries is not a grave felony Therefore, Iya will be disqualified.
Therefore, slight physical injuries is not
punishable under the RPC. ii. Modus Tolens – when the minor premise denies
the consequent, the conclusion must deny the
antecedent
Example:
If Eliel does not fulfill his obligation to pay, Henry
will sue him for damages.
Henry did not sue him for damages.
Therefore, Eliel fulfilled his obligation to pay.

Page 6 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

iii. Fallacy of denying the antecedent – when the

minor premise denies the antecedent A generic thing is demandable despite a fortuitous event
Example: An iPhone is a generic thing
If Atty. Matsumura loses this case, she will not be Therefore, an iPhone is demandable despite a fortuitous event.
promoted.
Atty. Matsumura won the case. JP lost the iPhone he bought due to a fortuitous event.
Therefore, she will be promoted. An iPhone is demandable despite a fortuitous event.
Therefore, JP is still liable to deliver the iPhone.
iv. Fallacy of affirming the consequent – when the
minor premise affirms the consequent
Example:
If Arielle steals from the bank, she will be
punishable under the RPC.
Arielle stole from the bank.
Therefore, she will be punishable under the RPC.

3. Enthymeme – not written in such a formal structure consisting of
two premises and a conclusion; read between the lines
Example:
(enthymeme form)
The right to due process guaranteed in the Bill of rights already
includes the right of an accused to be represented by his counsel.

(syllogism form)
The right to due process is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.
An accused’s right to counsel is protected by the right to due
process.
Therefore, an accused’s right to counsel is guaranteed by the Bill of
Rights.

4. Polysyllogism – a series of syllogisms in which the conclusion of one
syllogism supplies a premise to the next syllogism; used because
more than one logical step is needed to reach the desired
conclusion
Example:
A generic thing may be replaced by another.
An iPhone may be replaced by another.
An iPhone is a generic thing.

Page 7 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

CHAPTER 4: Inductive Reasoning in Law Evaluating Analogical Arguments (good/bad)

Inductive arguments – give truth or information more than what the 1. Relevance of similarities
premises are saying; what is claimed in the conclusion goes beyond the 2. Relevance of the dissimilarities between the entities being
evidence found in the premises; claims that based on premises, conclusion compared
is likely or probably true

Inductive Generalization – an argument that relies on characteristics of a
sample population to make a claim about the population as a whole; uses
evidence about a limited number of people or things of a certain type
(sample population), to make a general claim about a larger group of people
or things of that type (the population as a whole)
Example:
85% of the entire population of Bataan is in favor of the Death Penalty.

Evaluating Inductive Generalizations (strong/weak)

1. Is the sample large enough? – size of the sample population is an
essential factor in determining whether the conclusion about the
population as a whole is justified or not; large enough, when it is
clear that no hasty generalization was made; the more examples,
the stronger the argument

2. Is the sample representative? – representativeness is the diversity
in the sample (various subgroups of the whole population are
represented in the selected respondents)
a. Random sampling – one which all members of the target
have an equal opportunity to be in the sample

Analogical Arguments – depend upon the similarity or analogy between two
or more things; claim that another similarity exists, given the similarities
already recognized

Three Steps of Analogical Reasoning (Edward Levi)
1. Establish similarities between two cases
2. Announce the rule of law embedded in the first case
3. Apply the rule of law to the second case

Page 8 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

CHAPTER 5: Fallacies in Legal Reasoning Example:

This particular Executive Order punishes people who swindle large
Formal Fallacies – those that may be identified through mere inspection of sums of money.
the form and structure of an argument
Example: 5. Composition – wrongly inferring that what holds true of the
individuals automatically holds true of the group made up of those
Informal Fallacies – those that can be detected only through analysis of the individuals
content of the argument Example:
Example: All ALS students get at least 6 hours of sleep everyday.
Therefore, it is safe to assume that all law students get the same
Fallacies of Ambiguity: number of hours of sleep.

1. Equivocation – consists in leading an opponent to an unwarranted 6. Division – wrongly assuming that what is true in the general is true
conclusion by using a term in its different senses and making it in the particular
appear to have only one meaning Example:
Example: Members of the Congress are able to draft bills and contribute to
Carlo was confused when he was asked to jump; the betterment of the society.
Confusion can extinguish an obligation; Therefore, Manny Pacquiao is a contributor to the betterment of
Carlo’s obligation was extinguished when he was asked to jump. the society.

2. Amphiboly – presenting a claim or argument whose meaning can Fallacies of Irrelevance:
be interpreted in two or more ways due to its grammatical 1. Argumentum ad Hominem (Personal Attack) – ignores the issue by
construction focusing on certain personal characteristics of an opponent
Example: a. Abusive – attacks the argument based on the arguer’s
The public document presented in the trial was reported as falsified reputation, personality, or some personal shortcoming
by Atty. Atty. Hirang. Example:
Plunder is removed in the list of crimes to be punished by
3. Improper accent – misleading people by placing improper the death penalty because all people in the Congress are
emphasis on a word, phrase, or particular aspect of an issue or plunderers themselves, who put our hard-earned money
claim inside their pockets.
Example:
Pres. Duterte wanted to kill a lot of people. He even said in one of b. Circumstantial – defending one’s position by accusing his
his pres cons, “Patayin kita!”. or her critic or other people of doing the same thing
Example:
4. Vicious abstraction – misleading people by using vague or abstract Atty. Timbol cannot mandate his students to wear a
terms necktie in class because he does not wear one himself.
*vague terms are misused when these words are very significant in
the premises used to establish a conclusion

Page 9 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

2. Argumentum ad Misericordiam (Appeal to Pity) – convinces people c. Complex Question – asking a question in which some
by evoking feelings or compassion and sympathy when such presuppositions are buried in that question (aka loaded
feelings, however understandable, are not logically relevant to the question)
arguer’s conclusion Example:
Example: Were you on your way to your meeting when you decided
The defense stands firm in its motion to annul the said Ordinance. I to stop by Mr. Y’s residence and to kill him for his alleged
stand by this court to appeal not as a lawyer, but as a concerned failure to handle the funds of your campaign the manner
citizen who wants this cycle of corruption and killings to end; as a you expected?
father to my children whom I would like to live a life without having
to see bloodshed; and as a brother to Senator. X, who died in the d. Leading Question – directing the respondent to give a
pursuit of showing the rest of the citizens of this country, the evils particular answer to a question at issue by the manner in
brought by the implementation of this Ordinance. which the question is asked
Example:
3. Argumentum ad Baculum (Appeal to Force) – persuading others to You were responsible for the employment of
accept a position by using threat or pressure instead of presenting underqualified rank-and-file employees, are you?
evidence for one’s view
Example: Fallacies of Insufficient Evidence:
If the House of Representatives will not vote in favor of this bill, they 1. Argumentum ad Antiquum (Appeal to the Ages) – attempts to
will be removed from the leadership positions that they hold in the persuade others of a certain belief by appealing to their feelings of
Congress. reverence or respect for some tradition, instead of giving rational
basis for such belief
4. Petitio Principii (Begging the Question) – designed to persuade Example:
people by means of the wording of one of its premises In my class, take down notes. That is how we learned during the
a. Arguing in Circle – assumes as a premise the very thing time we were sitting in your chair as law students back then.
that should be proven in the conclusion
Example: 2. Argumentum ad Verecundiam (Appeal to Inappropriate Authority)
The first requisite of waiver as a ground for warrantless – persuading others by appealing to people who command respect
search and seizure is the presence of the right to waive or authority but do not have legitimate authority in the matter at
one’s right to be inspected without a warrant. hand
Example:
b. Question-Begging Language – discussing an issue by VP Leni is an incompetent public servant, because Mocha Uson says
means of language that assumes a position of the very that the VP has a hidden agenda of being the President of the
question at issue, in such a way as to direct the listener to country.
that same conclusion (aka prejudicial language)
Example: 3. Accident – applying a general rule to a particular case when the
Ms. Laguilles, please tell the jury what time you decided to circumstances suggest that an exception to the rule should apply
rob the bank. Example:

Page 10 of 11

 LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC
ALS BLOCK D 2020 | VILLAMIEL

Dannah was not able to fulfill her obligation to give Eliel. Therefore,
Eliel can file for damages for Dannah’s failure to pay because of a
robber stole her

4. Hasty Generalization (Converse Accident) – drawing a general or
universal conclusion from insufficient particular case
Example:
Block 1-D is against the burial of Former President Marcos in the
Libingan Ng Mga Bayani. Therefore, this shows that the entire ALS
Community is against the decision of the Supreme Court.

5. Argumentum ad Ignorantiam (Arguing from Ignorance) – assuming
that a particular claim is true because its opposite cannot be proven
Example:
In the absence of proof that Arielle did not steal from the bank, she
was accused for stealing the Php 100,000,000.00 deposited by
Henry.

6. False Dilemma – when premise of an argument presents us with a
choice between two alternatives and assumes that they are
exhaustive when in fact they are not
Example:
Because of the removal of plunder in the crimes punishable by death
penalty, plunderers can now swarm freely in the halls of the
Congress knowing that they are able to get away with what they
are continuously doing to our country.

Page 11 of 11