Practice question
A claimant must establish that a collision caused the particular injury sued upon. Photographs show car damage but do not establish the necessary medical link. What is the correct factum analysis?
- Medical causation is the ultimate proposition, and the damage photographs do not by themselves supply sufficient supporting facts for that link
- Car damage and every medical consequence are necessarily the same fact
- The photograph's exhibit label is the ultimate cause of injury
- Calling photographs factum probans makes the missing link irrelevant
- No evidence of impact can ever be relevant
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/pdf/am_19-08-15-sc_2019.pdf — A.M. No. 19-08-15-SC, 2019 Revised Rules on Evidence, effective May 1, 2020; Rules 128 §§1–4, 130 §§1–2, 131 §1, and 133 §§1–2,6.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/dec2013/gr_182356_2013.html — Dela Llana v. Biong, G.R. No. 182356, December 4, 2013, MAIN decision (evidentiary facts, ultimate fact, and admissibility versus weight).
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.