FINAL EXAMINATION

LEGAL LOGIC AND TECHNIQUE

Associate Solicitor Mark Anthony C. Cabasag

21 May 2022

INSTRUCTIONS

1. This Questionnaire contains twelve (12) pages including this Instructions page.
Check the number of pages and make sure it has the correct number of pages
and their proper numbers.

There are FIFTY-THREE (53) QUESTIONS in this questionnaire, divided into

objective, and essay type of questions. For essay type which requires analysis,
some of the questions will have sub-questions.

Read each question very carefully and write your answers in your Examination
Booklet or electronic document in the same order the questions are posed. Note well
the allocated percentage points for each number, question, or sub-question. In
your answers, use the numbering system in the questionnaire.

2. Answer the Essay questions legibly, clearly, and concisely. Start each number on
a separate page. An answer to a sub-question under the same number may be
written continuously on the same page and the immediately succeeding pages
until completed.

Your answer should demonstrate your ability to analyze the facts, apply the
pertinent laws and jurisprudence, and arrive at a sound or logical conclusion.
Always support your answer with the pertinent laws, rules, jurisprudence, and
the facts.

Unless otherwise instructed, a mere “Yes” or “No” answer without any

corresponding explanation or discussion will not be given full credit. Thus,
always briefly but fully explain your answers although the question does not
expressly ask for an explanation. You do not need to re-write or repeat the
question in your Notebook.

DO NOT DISSEMINATE THIS QUESTIONNAIRE.

 I.

Choose the best answer by writing the letter of your choice. (50%)

1. No litigation lawyer is a corporate lawyer. Juan dela Cruz is not a litigation

lawyer. Therefore:

a. Juan dela Cruz is a corporate lawyer

b. Juan dela Cruz is not a lawyer
c. Juan dela Cruz is not a corporate lawyer
d. No conclusion can be drawn

2. Most politicians are male. Most politicians are corrupt. Therefore:

a. Most politicians are corrupt

b. Some male politicians are corrupt
c. Some politicians are corrupt
d. No conclusion can be drawn

3. Conditional syllogism is a syllogism in which __________ is a conditional

statement.

a. Major premise
b. Minor premise
c. Middle term
d. None of the above

4. What fallacy is committed in the following reasoning?

Less grave felonies are not punishable by reclusion perpetua to death.

Homicide is not punishable by reclusion perpetua to death.
Therefore, homicide is a less grave felony.

a. Particular middle
b. Illicit major
c. Exclusive premise
d. Illicit minor

5. All candidates for presidency must be at least 35 years of age on the day of
the election. Pedro Santos is a candidate for presidency. Therefore:

a. Pedro Santos is at least 35 years old on the day of the election

b. Pedro Santos is not 35 years old on the day of the election
c. Pedro Santos is 40 years old on the day of the election
d. No conclusion can be drawn

6. What fallacy is committed in the following reasoning?

Some laws are unjust.

The Anti-Terrorism Act is a law.
Therefore, the Anti-Terrorism Act is an unjust law.
 a. Particular middle
b. Equivocation
c. Exclusive premise
d. Illicit minor

7. In a conditional syllogism, when the minor premise denies the consequent,

and the conclusion deny the antecedent, the form is called:

a. Modus tollens
b. Modus ponens
c. Denying the antecedent
d. None of the above

8. If a person kills somebody, then he commits a crime. Fallon committed a

crime. Therefore:

a. Fallon killed somebody

b. Fallon did not commit a crime
c. Fallon killed and committed a crime
d. No conclusion can be drawn

9. What fallacy is committed in the following reasoning?

If a person unlawfully takes the property of another through intimidation,

then the crime is robbery.
Tokyo unlawfully took the property of Berlin through intimidation.
Therefore, Tokyo committed robbery.

a. Affirming the consequent

b. Denying the antecedent
c. Illicit minor
d. None

10. What fallacy is committed in the following reasoning?

If a married man cohabits with another woman not his wife, then the crime
of concubinage is committed.
Kim Yoon-Ki did not cohabit with another woman.
Therefore, Kim Yoon-Ki did not commit a crime.

a. Illicit major
b. Denying the antecedent
c. Affirming the consequent
d. None

11. If it is sunny, then it is a nice day. Today is a nice day. Therefore:

a. No conclusion can be drawn

b. It is sunny
c. It is not sunny
d. Today is Saturday
12. If a person drinks coffee, then he will be energized. Juan has no energy.
Therefore:

a. Juan drunk coffee

b. Juan only drunk hot chocolate
c. Juan did not drink coffee
d. No conclusion can be drawn

13. Physical injuries are crimes against persons. Mutilation is not physical injury.
Therefore:

a. Mutilation is not a crime against person

b. Crimes against persons are not mutilation
c. No conclusion can be drawn
d. Mutilation is a physical injury

14. What fallacy is committed in the following reasoning?

All forms of killing are crimes against person.

All forms of killing are grave offenses.
Therefore, all crimes against persons are grave offenses.

a. Illicit major
b. Illicit minor
c. Particular middle
d. None

15. Identify the logical fallacy in the following statement:

John is really good at making friends because he is so friendly, and he’s so

friendly because he has so many friends.

a. Strawman
b. Circular reasoning
c. Ad hominem
d. Ad antiquum

16. Identify the logical fallacy in the following statement:

Law student A: I’m so sad that I was not able to answer my professor’s
question

Law student B: Girl, think of the farmers in the countryside where fertilizer
prices are going up. Your problem will seem pretty insignificant to them.

a. Strawman
b. Circular reasoning
c. Ad hominem
d. Red herring

17. You should support the President. It’s the patriotic thing to do.
 a. False dilemma
b. Begging the question
c. Ad populum
d. False analogy

18. Identify the logical fallacy in the following statement:

The corporation law class that I am taking in law school is more difficult than
the corporation law class that I took in pre-law. All of the classes in law school
must be more difficult than the classes in pre-law.

a. Ad baculum
b. Strawman
c. Hasty Generalization
d. Slippery slope

19. Identify the logical fallacy in the following statement:

If the Anti-Terrorism Act will be implemented, then our freedom of

expression will be limited. When that happens, we can no longer
demonstrate in the streets, and when that happens, we will be under a
tyrannical and authoritarian government. Clearly, the implementation of the
Anti-Terrorism Act will cause us to lose our prized freedoms which we
restored in 1986 during the People Power Revolution.

a. Slippery slope
b. Red herring
c. Strawman
d. Hasty generalization

20. Guns are like hammers – they’re both tools with metal parts that could be
used to kill someone. And yet it would be ridiculous to restrict the purchase
of hammers – so restrictions on purchasing guns are equally ridiculous.

a. Ad hominem
b. False analogy
c. Begging the question
d. Slippery slope

21. What logical fallacy is committed in the following statement?

Same sex marriage is wrong because marriage has always been between a
man and a woman.

a. Slippery slope
b. Hasty generalization
c. Ad antiquum
d. Accident

22. If a person qualified in a particular field by training, ability, and position, yet
they are so vitally interested in or affected by the issue at stake, and makes
an argument, is guilty of what kind of fallacy?
 a. None
b. Converse accident
c. Ad Ignoratiam
d. Ad Verecundiam

23. What logical fallacy is committed in the following statement?

Since various organizations cannot prove that the virus which causes
COVID-19 did not originate from animal to human transmission, then it is
likely true that the virus was result of a laboratory leak in Wuhan, China.

a. Slippery slope
b. Hasty generalization
c. Ad ignoratiam
d. Accident

24. What logical fallacy is committed in the following statement?

Publishing a false article is libelous. Therefore, the writer of the article which
contains false claims should be held liable for libel.

a. Accident
b. Converse accident
c. Ad ignoratiam
d. None

25. What logical fallacy is committed in the following statement?

There is no valid reason for the opposition congressmen to call for the
decrease of tariff and customs fee on imports. When they were in the
administration, not once did they decrease the tariff on imports.

a. Ad ignoratiam
b. Slippery slope
c. Red herring
d. Tu quoque

26. What is a premise of an argument?

a. A statement which acts as the reason or evidence to support a conclusion

b. The first statement at the beginning of an argument
c. An acceptable form of evidence
d. A false statement that sounds believable

27. What is a Conditional Statement?

a. A statement dependent upon a false premise

b. A correct statement only when all evidence is present
c. If... then... statement
 d. None of the above

28. What is a fallacy in an argument?

a. A failure in reasoning that renders an argument invalid

b. A point in an argument where one individual will not let the other speak
c. When one person dominates the conversation
d. The losing point in a discussion

29. “In my five-year practice in law, I had the chance to work with twenty
lawyers from the Public Attorney’s Office, and all of them have excellent
writing skills, so it is safe to assume that there are many lawyers from the
Public Attorney’s Office who have excellent writing skills.” This is an
example of which kind of reasoning?

a. Deductive
b. Inductive
c. Logical
d. Irrational

30. Fill in the missing premise. Choose the best option.

All crimes committed by public officers carries with it an accessory penalty.

a. Perpetual disqualification is an accessory penalty.

b. Clark is a public officer.
c. Bribery is a crime committed by public officer.
d. Bribery is an accessory penalty.

Therefore, bribery carries with it an accessory penalty.

31. What fallacy is committed?

If the defendant has no knowledge that his statement is untrue, he cannot be

guilty of fraud.
The defendant knows that his statement is untrue.
Therefore, he is guilty of fraud.

a. Exclusive premises
b. Denying the antecedent
c. Affirming the consequent
d. None

32. What fallacy is committed?

All dolphins are mammals.

No whales are dolphins.
Therefore, no whales are mammals.
 a. Equivocation
b. Illicit minor
c. Illicit major
d. None

33. What fallacy is committed?

War is inherently wrong.

The drug problem in the Philippines is a war that the Philippine
government is fighting.
Therefore, the war on drugs is inherently wrong.

a. Illicit minor
b. Illicit major
c. Equivocation
d. None

34. Fill in the missing premise. Choose the best option.

Most winners in the 2022 local elections came from political dynasties.

e. Most winners in the 2022 local elections are corrupt.

f. All winners in the 2022 local elections are corrupt.
g. No winner in the 2022 local elections is corrupt.
h. None of the above.

Therefore, some of the winners who came from political dynasties are
corrupt.

35. What fallacy is committed?

If you are eligible to run for the office of the mayor, then you must
be 25 years and above.
My friend is above 25 years of age.
Therefore, my friend is eligible to run for the office of the mayor

a. Exclusive premises
b. Denying the antecedent
c. Affirming the consequent
d. None

36. What fallacy is committed?

Civil offenses are not criminal offenses.

Slander is not a criminal offense
Therefore, slander is a civil offense.

a. Exclusive premises
b. Denying the antecedent
c. Affirming the consequent
 d. None

37. An argument always has a conclusion and a premise.

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

38. The admissibility of factual evidence offered in the court is not a significant
issue of legal reasoning.

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

39. It is a reasoning process where the mind proceeds from specific to universal

a. Enthymemes
b. Induction
c. Deduction
d. Syllogism

40. The two general criteria for distinguishing correct from incorrect legal
reasoning are:

a. Truth and logic

b. Induction and deduction
c. Formal and informal syllogism
d. Evidence and procedure

41. It is that component of legal reasoning which refers to any matter of

controversy or uncertainty?

a. Issue
b. Rule
c. Analysis
d. Conclusion

42. It is that component of legal reasoning which is supposed to show the link
between the rules and the facts presented to establish what is claimed in the
argument:

a. Issue
b. Rule
c. Analysis
d. Conclusion

43. _______ occur when the premises “miss the point” and fail to provide logical
support for the conclusion.

a. Fallacies of relevance
 b. Fallacies of ambiguity
c. Formal syllogism
d. Logical antecedence

44. A syllogism must contain two negative premises.

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

45. For a valid syllogism, there must be four pairs of equivocal terms.

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

46. For a valid syllogism, if the term in the conclusion is universal, the term in
the premise must be universal:

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

47. It is an argument in which one premises is not explicitly stated.

a. Conditional syllogism
b. enthymemes
c. polysyllogism
d. inductive generalization

48. For purposes of inductive generalization, a sample is representative if there

is homogeneity in the sample.

a. True
b. False
c. Neither true nor false

49. When the evidence of the parties is evenly balanced, this principle must be
upheld:

a. Stare decisis
b. Equipoise doctrine
c. Res judicata
d. Ad elenchi

50. It consists in presenting a claim or argument whose meaning can be

interpreted in two or more ways because of its grammatical construction:

a. Improper accent
b. Vicious abstraction
c. Amphiboly
d. Accident
 II.

Give an example of polysyllogism with a minimum of five logical steps

concerning the commission of the crimes of either estafa, qualified theft,
falsification of public document, or robbery with violence or intimidation of
persons or with force upon things. (10%)

III.

In 2005, Loid Forger, who was then 16-years old, married Yor Briar, who was then
23 years old, in a civil ceremony at the Municipal Hall of San Fernando, La Union,
solemnized by Mayor Sylvia Sherwood. The marriage of Loid and Yor was blessed
with a child born in 2006 – Anya Forger.

The couple lived together until 2005 when Loid stopped going home to their
conjugal dwelling. When confronted by Yor, Loid admitted that he is having an
affair with Fiona Frost. Later on, Yor learned that Loid and Fiona entered into a
marriage on 15 July 2010, this time solemnized in a Roman Catholic wedding, by
Reverend Father Donovan Desmond. In the Marriage Certificate of Loid and
Fiona, it was indicated that Loid’s civil status is single.

Deeply hurt and felt betrayed, on 3 December 2012, Yor filed a complaint against
Loid and Fiona before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of La Union. In her
Complaint, Yor charged them with Bigamy. Finding probable cause to indict them,
the provincial prosecutor filed an Information against Loid and Fiona before the
Regional Trial Court of San Fernando, La Union.

a. In no more than seven sentences, give the material facts and identify the
issue/issues in the given problem. (10%)

b. Based on the issues you spotted, and if you are the judge, will you hold
Loid criminally liable for bigamy? Explain your answer. (10%)

IV.

Seri All ran and was elected as vice president during the 2016 national and local
elections. As her running mate, Ferdz Macoy, was also elected as the president,
Seri All publicly announced that she will take her oath on 6 June 2016 at the City
Hall of Davao, for her to attend the inauguration of Ferdz Macoy on 30 June 2016.

Thus, on 4 June 2016, took her oath as vice president of the Philippines before a
COMELEC Commissioner.

On 30 June 2016, Ferdz Macoy took his oath as the president, which was witnessed
by Seri All. Seri All no longer took another oath on the said date. At 12:01 pm of
30 June 2016, Seri All went to the Office of the Vice President and immediately
performed her duties as vice president.
Concerned and believing that Seri All cannot assume duties considering that she
did not take her oath on 30 June 2016, Teddy Ty and Howie Sy filed a petition for
quo warranto against Seri All before the Supreme Court. They alleged that the oath
taking of Seri All on 4 June 2016 was premature, and that she should have taken
her oath on 30 June 2016. Considering therefore, that she did not take her oath on
30 June 2016, she cannot assume the office of the vice president. Thus, the act of
Seri All in assuming the position of vice president without taking an oath is a
ground to oust her of the position of vice president.

According to them, the provision of Section 4, Article VII of the 1987 Constitution
is clear. It provides:

SECTION 4. The President and the Vice-President shall be

elected by direct vote of the people for a term of six years which
shall begin at noon on the thirtieth day of June next following the
day of the election and shall end at noon of the same date six
years thereafter. The President shall not be eligible for any
reelection. No person who has succeeded as President and has
served as such for more than four years shall be qualified for
election to the same office at any time.

a. Will the petition for quo warranto against Seri All prosper? (10%)

b. Is the oath taking of Seri All on 4 June 2016 valid? Explain. (10%)

-xXx-