JURIS NOTES EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE: (1)DYING DECLARATION Requisites: (1) Death is imminent and declarant is conscious

of that fact. (2)The preliminary facts which bring the declaration within its scopemust be made to appear. (3)The declaration relates to the facts or circumstances pertaining tothefatal injury or death. (4) Declarant would have been competent to testify had he survived. (2)DECLARATION AGAINST INTEREST Requisites: (1) Declarant must be deceased or unable to testify. (2) The declaration must concern a fact cognizable by declarant. (3) The circumstances must render it improbable that a motive to falsify existed. Admissible against: (1) Declarant; (2) Declarants successors-in-interest; (3) Third persons (3)ACT OR DECLARATION ABOUT PEDIGREE PEDIGREE:history of family descent which is transmitted from one generation toanother by both oral and written declarations and by traditions.

Includes the ff.: Requisites: (1) Declarant is dead or unable to testify. (2)Necessity that pedigree be in issue. (3)Declarant must be a relative of the person whose pedigree is inquestion. (4)Declaration must be made before the controversy occurred. (5)The relationship between the declarant and the person whose pedigree is in question must be shown by evidence other than such act or declaration. (4)FAMILY REPUTATION OR TRADITION REGARDING PEDIGREE Requisites: (1) There is controversy in respect to the p e d i g r e e o f a n y m e m b e r s o f a family. (2)The reputation or tradition of the pedigree of the person concerned existed previous to the controversy. (3)The witness testifying to the reputation or tradition regarding the pedigree of the person concerned must be a member of the family of said person, either by consanguinity or affinity. (5)COMMON REPUTATION Matters that may be established by common reputation: (1)Facts of public or general interest more than 30 years old; (2)Marriage and related facts; (3)Individual moral character. Requisites:

(1) The facts must be of public or general interest and more than 30years old. (2)The common reputation must have been ancient i.e. 30 years or one generation old. (3)The reputation must have been one formed among a class of persons who were in a position to have some sources of information and to contribute intelligently to the formation of the opinion. (4)The common reputation must have been existing prior to the controversy. (6)PART OF THE RES GESTAE (a)Spontaneous statements -statements or exclamations made immediately after some exciting occasion by a participant or spectator and asserting the circumstances of that occasion as it is observed by him. Requisites: (1) There must be a startling occurrence. (2)The statement must relate to the circumstances of the startling occurrence. (3)The statement must be spontaneous. (b)Verbal Acts -utterances which accompany some act or conduct to which it isdesired to give a legal effect. Requisites: (1) The act or occurrence must be equivocal. (2)Verbal acts characterize or explain the equivocal act. (3)Equivocal act must be relevant to the issue. (4)Verbal acts must be contemporaneous with equivocal act.

(7)ENTRIES IN THE COURSE OF BUSINESS Requisites: (1) Entries must have been made at or near the time of the transaction to which they refer. (2)Entrant must have been in a position to know the facts stated in the entries. (3)Entries must have been made by entrant in his professional capacity or in the performance of his duty. (4)Entries were made in the ordinary or regular course of business or duties. (5)Entrant must be deceased or unable to testify. (8)ENTRIES IN OFFICIAL RECORDS (9)COMMERCIAL LISTS AND THE LIKE (10)LEARNED TREATISES

TESTIMONY OR DEPOSITION AT A FORMER PROCEEDING AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS When is evidence of the authenticity of a private document not necessary? When the document is: (1)more than 30 years old, (2)produced from a custody in which it w o u l d n a t u r a l l y b e f o u n d i f g e n u i n e , and (3)unblemished by any alterations or c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f s u s p i c i o n . ( R u l e 1 3 2 , Sec. 21)

How may the genuineness of handwriting be proved? (1)It may be proved by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person because: (a)he has seen the person write, or (b)he has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been charged and has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person. (2) It may also be proved by way of comparison, made by: (a)the witness; or ( b ) t h e c o u r t with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is offered, or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge.(Rule 132, Sec. 22) How may official records be proved? (1)By an official publication thereof; or (2)By a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or by his deputy. Note: If the record is not kept in the Philippines, the attestation must beaccompanied with a certificate that such officer has the custody. If the office in which the record is kept is in a foreign country, the certificate maybe made by: (1)secretary of the embassy or legation; (2)consul-general; (3)consul; (4)vice-consul; (5)consular agent; or

(6)any officer of the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in theforeign country in which the record is kept. In all these cases, the certification must be authenticated by the seal of his office.(Rule 132, Sec. 24) How may a judicial record be impeached? By evidence of:(1)want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer;(2)collusion between the parties; or (3)fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings.(Rule 132, Sec. 29) How must alterations be accounted for? The party producing a document as genuine may show that the alteration: (1)was made by another without his concurrence; or (2)was made with the consent of the parties affected by it; or (3)was otherwise properly or innocently made, or (4)did not change the meaning or language of the instrument. What is the effect of failure to explain alterations in a document? The document shall not be admissible in evidence.