1.

What is the most convenient way of serving summons to a

resident temporarily out of the Philippines?
a.
b.
c.
d.

Extraterritorial Service
Substituted Service
Personal Service
Service by Publication

Reason: A person who leaves his/her country temporarily normally

leaves her business to some person of suitable age and discretion.
2. Can the court acquire jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant
who is not in the Philippines without serving extraterritorial
service of summons?
a. No, service of summons may only be effected to a nonresident
defendant
not
in
the
Philippine
through
extraterritorial service of summons under Sec. 14 of Rule 16.
b. Yes, service of summons may be effected personally to a nonresident defendant who is not in the Philippines because it is
one of the ways where extraterritorial service of summons
may be made as enumerated in Sec. 14.
c. Yes, in cases where the non-resident defendant files a
motion to dismiss without necessarily stating that it is
merely for a special appearance.
3. A pleading served or filed by a party through modes other than
personal service of pleadings shall be considered as having been
duly served or filed if:
a. A receiving copy thereof is signed by a person of suitable age
or discretion.
b. It is accompanied by a written explanation stating the
facts and circumstances why filing is done through the
other modes.
c. It is proved by its existence in the record of the case.
d. It is proved by a written admission of the party served or the
official concerned.
4. A has a pending action against B for recovery of ownership of a
piece of land. What is the remedy that may be availed of by A in
order to protect his interest against a subsequent purchaser or
encumbrancer of the property involved in the case?
a. Preliminary Attachment
b. Action for Injunction

c. Receivership
d. Notice of Lis Pendens (Rule 13, Section 14)
5. A filed a complaint against ABC Corporation. The service of
summons was served to both the corporate Vice President and
the corporate Secretary. Is there a valid service of summons?
a. Yes, summons was served with the corporate
secretary. Hence, it is sufficient to confer jurisdiction
over the person of the defendant.
b. No, the summons was served with the Vice-president making
the service of summons invalid.
c. No, it is necessary that the service of summons to
corporations must only be served with the persons authorized
under Sec. 11, Rule 14.
d. Yes, there is a valid service of summons because it was made
with the Vice-President.
6. In an action for accounting with partition against B, an American
citizen who is a resident of Paris, what can A, the petitioner, do in
order to confer the court jurisdiction over the complaint?
a. Apply for Preliminary Attachment in order to acquire
jurisdiction over the res.
b. Resort to Extra-territorial Service of Summons in order to
acquire jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
c. Resort to Substituted service of summons in order to acquire
jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
d. Apply for preliminary injunction to enjoin the defendant from
alienating his properties.
7. A filed a complaint for sum of money against B. B filed a motion
to dismiss on the ground of improper venue. The motion to
dismiss was denied by the court. B, then filed his answer raising
the affirmative defense of lack of jurisdiction over the subject
matter. Can the court dismiss the case?
a. Yes, the court may dismiss the case considering that a
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction is not deemed
waive despite that fact that it is not raised as ground
in a motion to dismiss.
b. No, under the Omnibus Motion Rule, grounds not included in a
motion to dismiss are deemed waived.
c. No, when a motion to dismiss is filed the grounds not raised
therein cannot anymore be raised as an affirmative defense in
an answer.

8. B filed a complaint for a sum of money against A. A filed motion

to dismiss on the ground of lack of cause of action. The court
then granted the motion to dismiss. B filed a motion to declare
the defendant in default. B reasoned that the motion to dismiss
is with no notice and was not set for hearing. Is the motion for
declaration in default proper?
a. No, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss. Hence, it tolls the
running of the period to file an answer.
b. No, the complaint is already dismissed by the court. Hence,
the proceedings are already terminated.
c. Yes, the motion to declare the defendant in default is
proper. The motion to dismiss is a worthless piece of
paper.
d. Yes, declaration in default may not be ordered by the court
unless there is a motion for that purpose.
9. In the same situation in No. 8, if the motion to dismiss is denied,
what is the proper remedy that A can resort to?
a.
b.
c.
d.

File an answer.
File a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 65.
File motion for reconsideration.
File an answer and raise the ground of lack of cause of action
as an affirmative defense.

10.
A filed an action for specific performance against B based
on the oral agreement of a sale of a parcel of land between A
(vendee) and B (vendor). B filed a motion to dismiss. The court
granted the motion. A re-filed the case. B, again filed a motion to
dismiss on the ground of res judicata. Is the motion to dismiss on
the ground of res judicata proper?
a. No, the dismissal of the original case filed by A is a dismissal
without prejudice. Hence, it may be re-filed.
b. No, the dismissal of the original case is not adjudication upon
the merits. Res judicata is not proper.
c. Yes, the dismissal is with prejudice. Hence, it cannot
anymore be re-filed as it is considered an adjudication
upon the merits. Hence, barred by res judicata.
d. Yes, the dismissal is proper. A case, once dismissed, cannot
anymore be re-filed.
11.
A served a written interrogatory against B. B, however, did
not file an answer thereto within 15 days from service of the

written interrogatories. What is the remedy that A may avail of

for Bs failure to file an answer?
a.
b.
c.
d.

Cite B for contempt.

Motion to strike out any pleading filed by B.
Motion to declare B in default.
Motion for summary judgment.

12.
After issues have been joined, B (petitioner) served C
(defendant) request for admission to admit that on March 20,
2016, they entered into an oral contract of a donation of a box of
chocolates. Upon the lapse of the 15-day period, C failed to file
an answer. B filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Is the
motion proper?
a. No, judgment on the pleadings is not one of the
remedies available when there is a failure to file an
answer to the request for admission.
b. Yes, failure to file an answer in a request for admission results
in the admission of the material allegations in the complaint.
c. No, the proper remedy is to strike out any pleading filed by C.
d. Yes, judgment on the pleadings may be availed of only by the
petitioner.
13.
In problem no. 12, is it proper if B filed a motion for
summary judgment?
a. No, a motion for summary judgment may only be availed of
when there is no genuine issue, or when the issue sham or
fictitious.
b. Yes, summary judgment may be availed of because
failure to file an answer to a request for admission is
an implied admission of the matters requested to be
admitted.
c. No, the proper remedy is to cite the C in contempt.
d. No, the proper remedy is to strike out any pleadings of C.
14.
A filed a complaint for specific performance against B.
Within 15 days from the service of the complaint, B filed an
answer. B, in his answer, admitted all the material allegations in
the pleading but interposed the defense of prescription. A then
served B with a request for admission asking B to admit that they
entered into a contract sometime in March 21, 2016. B did not
answer the request. Will the failure of B in answering have an
adverse effect on his defense?

a. Yes, failure to file a sworn statement in a request for admission

shall be deemed as an implied admission of the matter
requested to be admitted.
b. No, the request for admission is already a mere
redundancy as B already admitted all material allegations
in the complaint.
c. Yes, the failure to file shall allow A to move for a summary
judgment.
d. Yes, the failure to file shall allow A to move for a judgment on the
pleadings.
15.
Because of the technicalities and intricacies of the matters
in dispute, the case by written consent of the parties was
ordered to be referred to a commissioner. The commissioner then
issued an order requesting B, the defendant, to present evidence
before him. B did not obey the order of the said commissioner. B
then was cited for contempt. May B be cited for contempt?
a. No, contempt only applies when there is a refusal to obey the
orders of the court.
b. No, the commissioner does not have the power to cite the
defendant in contempt.
c. No, the order to present evidence did not come from the court
but from the commissioner.
d. Yes, the partys refusal to obey the orders of the
commissioner constitutes contempt of court.
16.
After A, the plaintiff, rested its case, the defendant B filed
a motion to dismiss on the ground that upon the facts and the
law A has shown no right to relief. The motion to dismiss was
denied. B then appealed the order of denial. Is appeal a proper
remedy?
a. Yes, a denial of a motion to dismiss under Rule 33 is
appealable and not an interlocutory order.
b. No, denial of a demurrer to evidence is an interlocutory
order.
c. No, all denials of any motion to dismiss based on any ground
is an interlocutory.
d. Yes, the same shall be considered as an adjudication upon the
merits.
17.
In no. 16, what if the court granted the motion to dismiss?
Is appeal a proper remedy?

a. Yes, appeal is the proper remedy because an order

granting a motion to dismiss is appealable.
b. No, grant or denial of a demurer to evidence is an
interlocutory order.
c. No, the proper remedy is certiorari.
d. Yes, the grant of a motion to dismiss based on failure to state
cause of action is appealable.
18.
The Court of Appeals reversed the order of the trial court
granting the demurer to evidence. It then remanded to case to
the trial court. Is the Court of Appeals correct?
a. No, the Court of Appeals is not correct. The proceedings shall
must now be considered terminated.
b. No, the Court of Appeals is not correct. Upon the
reversal of the grant of the demurer, the court should
now render judgment.
c. Yes, the Court of Appeals is correct. Presentation of evidence
is still necessary.
d. Yes, the Court of Appeals is correct. The defendant does not
lose his right to present evidence.
19.
a.
b.
c.
d.

When is a record of appeal necessary?

An
An
An
An

action
action
action
action

for
for
for
for

partition.
injunction.
unlawful detainer.
forcible entry.

20.
A petition for certiorari cannot lie in the following cases,
except:
a. Writ of Amparo
b. Forcible Entry
c. Writ of Habeas Corpus
d. Expropriation