Practice question
A court orders two cases to be tried together solely for common evidence and expressly preserves their separate character, without actual merger. A party argues that every defendant in one is automatically a party in the other and liable on its claim. Which is correct?
- Every joint trial automatically transfers every party and liability
- Common evidence conclusively proves liability in every case
- The separate-character joint-trial arrangement does not itself merge the suits or automatically make parties in one parties in the other
- Joint trial eliminates all distinct causes of action
- Only the order’s title matters, never its actual effect
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 31 sections 1–2, consolidation, joint hearing and separate trials.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/am_19-10-20-sc_2019.html — 2019 amendments retaining Rule 31 without amendment.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/apr2012/gr_173820_2012.html — Producers Bank v. Excelsa Industries, G.R. No. 173820, April 16, 2012, main decision distinguishing forms and effects of consolidation.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/jun2009/gr_183211_2009.html — PNB v. Gotesco Tyan Ming Development, G.R. No. 183211, June 5, 2009, jurisdiction and protection against prejudice in consolidation.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.