Scribd
Upload
65 views

Legal Technique and Logic - Syllabus.v1

The syllabus outlines the course structure for 'Legal Technique and Logic' for the 2nd semester of SY 2024-2025, detailing evaluation criteria including recitation, midterm, and final exams. It covers key topics in legal reasoning, bias, and the Philippine legal system, with assigned readings from various legal scholars and cases. The professor reserves the right to amend the syllabus as needed and emphasizes the importance of attendance.

Uploaded by

Carmela Luchavez Andes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
65 views

Legal Technique and Logic - Syllabus.v1

The syllabus outlines the course structure for 'Legal Technique and Logic' for the 2nd semester of SY 2024-2025, detailing evaluation criteria including recitation, midterm, and final exams. It covers key topics in legal reasoning, bias, and the Philippine legal system, with assigned readings from various legal scholars and cases. The professor reserves the right to amend the syllabus as needed and emphasizes the importance of attendance.

Uploaded by

Carmela Luchavez Andes
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

LEGAL TECHNIQUE AND LOGIC

Course Syllabus
nd
2 Semester, SY 2024 – 2025
Jonas Josh C. Cabochan

Administrative Matters:

Basis for Evaluation:

Recitation / Quizzes – 40% [Note: Recitation is random per session, and the Professor may skip
cases. There is the chance that one can be called multiple times per session.]

Midterm Exam – 20%

Final Exam – 40%

• The professor reserves the right to amend / revise the syllabus as necessary based on the
exigencies of the class, issuances or new rulings of the Supreme Court.
• Quizzes / Writing Exercises may be given; they may be announced or unannounced. Each
quiz counts as one (1) Recitation, unless otherwise decided by the Professor.
• At the discretion of the professor, presentations on certain topics may be assigned to
students who need to make up.
• There is a premium for perfect attendance.

I. Introduction

Ø Kenneth J. Vandevelde, Thinking Like a Lawyer: An Introduction to Legal Reasoning (2nd


Ed)
o Introduction (pp. 1-6);
o Appendix: Thinking Like a Law Student (pp. 291-302);

Ø IRAC Analysis

Ø Duncan Kennedy, Legal Education as Training for Hierarchy

Ø Orin S. Kerr, How to Read a Legal Opinion: A Guide for New Law Students (2007)

II. Basics of Legal Reasoning

Legal Reasoning
Ø Antonin Scalia & Bryan A. Garner, Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges
(2008 ed.)
o Legal Reasoning (pp. 39-55);
o Briefing (pp. 57-67)

Judicial Justification

Ø Vincent A. Wellman, Practical Reasoning and Judicial Justification: Toward an Adequate


Theory
o Introduction and Theory of Judicial Justification (pp. 45-63);
o Two Dominant View of Judicial Justification (pp. 63-87)

Ø Richard A. Posner, How a Judge Thinks (2008)

Bias

Ø Lorraine Bannai, Anne Enquist, (Un)Examined Assumptions and (Un)Intended Messages:


Teaching Students to Recognize Bias in Legal Analysis and Language, 27 Seattle University
Law Review 1 (2003).

Ø Debra Lyn Bassett, Deconstruct and Superstruct: Examining Bias Across the Legal System, 46
University of California Davis 1563 (2013).

III. Philippine Legal System & Legal Theory

Ø Dean Salvador Carlota, The Three Most Important Features of the Philippine Legal System
That Others Should Understand

Ø Justice JBL Reyes (+), Reflections on the Reform of Hereditary Succession


o pp. 279-281

Ø Dean Cesar Villanueva, Comparative Study of the Judicial Role and its Effect on the Theory on
Judicial Precedents in the Philippines Hybrid Legal System (PLJ Vol. 65, 1990)

Ø Vincent A. Wellman, Practical Reasoning and Judicial Justification: Toward an Adequate


Theory
o Practical Reasoning and Judicial Justification (pp. 87-109);
o Practical Reasoning and Legal Theory (pp. 109-115)

Ø Cases (read the majority, dissenting, and separate opinions carefully. Compare and
contrast the arguments used in these opinions):

Political Law Cases

1) Oposa v. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, 30 July 1993.

2) Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, G.R. No. L-14078, 07 March 1919.


3) MVRS Productions v. Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines, Inc., et al., G.R. No.
135306, 28 January 2003.

4) Ocampo et al. vs. Enriquez, G.R. Nos. 225973, 225984, 226097, 226116, 226117,
226120, and 226294, 08 November 2016.
5) Lagman v. Medialdea, G.R. Nos. 231658, 231771, and 231774, 04 July 2017.

Civil Law Cases

1) Republic v. Molina, G.R. No. 108763, 13 February 1997 (Majority only).


2) Tan-Andal v. Andal, G.R. No. 196359, 11 May 2021 (Majority, Opinion of J.
Caguioa, and Opinion of J. Lopez)

Criminal Law Case

1) People v. Sapla, G.R. No. 244045, 16 June 2020 (Majority and Opinion of J.
Lopez)

Ø Sample works
o Bornales, Mac Norhen E., Roses are Red, Violets are Blue, is this Meme Libelous for
You? (ALS JD Thesis, 2021)

o Cabochan, Jonas Josh Florentino C., Determining Approximate Levels of Duty in


Tort Law (Bedan Law Review Vol. XII, July 2024)

o Veloso, Nicole Beatriz Y., Life and Death Sentence: A Case for the Accelerated
Decongestion of Prisons and Jails in the Philippine in Light of Covid-19 (PLJ Vol.
93:217, August 2020)

You might also like