SOUND BOARD: ALFM GLOBAL MULTI-ASSET INCOME MUTUAL FUND

NEW MUTUAL FUND ALERT!

 

Snapshot of COL's Overview of ALFM Global Multi-Asset Income Fund

I have just noticed today that there is a new mutual fund listed in COL Financial. It's the ALFM Global Multi-Asset Income Fund, with fund code XALGMIF. It was launched last June 01. 

It caught my attention because (1) XALGMIF is multi-asset, meaning, it invests in bonds and other investment vehicles, not just equities, (2) it is income paying, hence, dividends can be expected of the fund, (3) it is global because the target fund (of the feeder fund) invests in assets found outside the Philippines, where economies are so much better; and (4) it is relatively affordable because it is a feeder fund, which requires a minimum initial investment and minimum additional contribution of Php 5,000.00 and Php 1,000.00, respectively. A feeder fund is a pooled-investment fund that will allow us to invest in a relatively "expensive" target fund like Blackrock's BGF Global Multi-Asset Income Fund, with just a min. initial investment of Php 5,000.00, compared to USD 100,000.00 if we are to directly invest in the target fund without going through the feeder fund. The discussion on feeder fund and target fund, however, deserves a separate blog entry.

In other words, XALGMIF is like a Balanced Mutual Fund only that you are invested in the global market instead of the Philippine market. It becomes possible for us to afford investing in global market because of the feeder fund.

I only peeked at its Fund Fact Sheet and will study it thoroughly after I finish all my deadlines at work. (Hehehe!)

Sneak peek: the  asset allocation of the target fund of XALGMIF is comparable to that of ATRAM Global Multi-Asset Income Feeder Fund. The latter, however, is a UITF and therefore not available in COL. Neither is it available in Seedbox and GInvest, making XALGMIF the more accessible fund to invest in for COL account holders like me.

To do: I am quite excited to dive deeper into multi-asset income paying feeder funds like XALGMIF. Unlike equity feeder funds, which are high-risk high-reward investment,  multi-asset feeder funds provide us diversification and a certain level of stability. Thus, it is something worth studying. Maybe, it is worth my longer Think Piece!  

x--------------------x

You may want to check the news report about ALFM Global Multi-Asset Income Mutual Fund at 

BIMI launches feeder and income-paying mutual fund

Sample: Special Power of Attorney (to claim bond)

SPECIAL POWER OF ATTORNEY

    I ____________, of legal age, Filipino, and a resident of ____________________, do hereby name and appoint, and constitute ___________________, of legal age, Filipino, and with postal address __________, to be my true and lawful Attorney-in-Fact for me and in my name, place and stead, to do and perform any of the following acts and deeds, to wit:

1. To get, claim, and receive the  bail bond/cash bond amounting to _______________ Pesos only (Php ______) with Official Receipt No. ___ dated _____  from the Office of the Clerk of Court of Municipal Trial Court in Cities of Davao City, pertaining to case entitled, “People of the Philippines vs. ____________”, docketed as Criminal Case No.  _____________, pending before Branch ___, Municipal Trial Court in Cities in Davao City;

2. To encash the check representing the said bail bond/cash bond with the bank in the amount of _____________ (Php ____________);

3. To sign, process and facilitate any documents necessary for the completion of the above-mentioned transactions, and any other legal documents that may be required; and

4. To do any other act or thing that may be required, necessary or incidental to carry out effectively any and all of the purposes for which this authority is hereby given.

    HEREBY GIVING AND GRANTING unto my Attorney-in-Fact full power and authority to do and perform all and every act and thing whatsoever requisite, necessary to be done in and about the premises as fully to all intents and purposes as I might or could do if personally present, and acting in person; and

    HEREBY RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING all that my said Attorney-in-Fact shall lawfully do or cause to be done under and by virtue of these presents.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hands on this ___ day of ____ 2021 in _____________.

____________

PRINCIPAL

Accepted by:

_______________

ATTORNEY-IN-FACT

Signed in the presence of:

_______________ _______________

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

DIGEST: Tamano vs. Ortiz, G.R. No. 126603, June 29, 1998

 

Facts:

On May 31, 1958, Senator Mamintal Abdul Jabar Tamano (Sen Tamano) married private respondent Zorayda in civil rites. Sen Tamano died on May 18, 1994 but prior to his death, particularly on June 2, 1993, he also married petitioner Estrellita in civil rites in Lanao del Sur.

On November 23, 1994, respondent Zorayda joined by her son Adib filed a Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage of Sen Tamano and Estrellita on ground that it was bigamous. They contended that Sen Tamano and Estrellita misrepresented themselves as divorced and single, respectively, thus making the entries in the marriage contract false and fraudulent.

According to the private respondents, Sen Tamano allegedly never divorced Zorayda and that Estrellita was not single as the decision annulling her previous marriage with Romeo Llave never became final and executory for non-compliance with publication requirements.

Estrellita filed a motion to dismiss alleging that: 1.) RTC of QC was without jurisdiction over the complaint for the declaration of nullity of marriage and that the “only a party to the marriage” could file an action for annulment of marriage against the other spouse; and 2.) Shari’a courts pursuant to Art 155 of the code of Muslim Personal Laws have jurisdiction to hear and try the instant case since Zorayda and Sen Tamano were both Muslims and married in Muslim rites.

RTC Ruling: RTC denied the motion to dismiss and ruled that the instant case of declaration of nullity of marriage was properly cognizable by the RTC since Estrellita and Sen Tamano were married in accordance with the Civil Code and not exclusively in accordance with P.D. No 1083 or the Code of Muslim Personal Laws. The motion for reconsideration was likewise denied.

Petitioner Estrellita filed the instant petition with this Court seeking to set aside the orders of respondent presiding Judge Ortiz of RTC denying petitioner’s motion to dismiss and reconsideration.

In a resolution dated 13 December 1995, SC referred the case to the CA for consolidation with GR No. 118371. Zorayda and Adib however filed a motion, which the CA granted to resolve the Complaint for Declaration of Nullity of Marriage.

CA Ruling: CA ruled that the instant case would fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the shari’a courts only when filed in places where there are shari’a courts. But in places where there are no shari’a courts like QC, the instant case could properly be filed before the RTC.

Issue/s: WON the RTC has jurisdiction to hear and try the case at hand?

Held/Ratio:

The instant petition is DENIED. The decision of the CA sustaining the orders of the RTC denying the motion to dismiss and reconsideration is AFFRIMED.

Under the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, Regional Trial Courts have jurisdiction over all actions involving the contract of marriage and marital relations. Personal actions, such as the instant complaint for declaration of nullity of marriage, may be commenced and tried where the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or where the defendant or any of the principal defendants resides, at the election of the plaintiff.

In the complaint for declaration of nullity of marriage filed by private respondents herein, it was alleged that Sen Tamano and Estrellita were married in accordance with the provisions of Civil Code. Interestingly, Estrellita never stated in her Motion to Dismiss that she and Sen Tamano were married under Muslim laws or PD 1083. This was however first mentioned only in her Motion for Reconsideration.

Nevertheless, the RTC was not divested of jurisdiction to hear or try the instant case despite the allegation on the Motion of Reconsideration that Estrellita and Sen Tamano were married in Muslim rites because a court’s jurisdiction cannot be made to depend upon defenses set up in the answer, in a motion to dismiss, or in a motion for reconsideration, but only upon allegations of the complaint. Jurisdiction over the subject matter of a case is determined from the allegations of the complaint as the latter comprises a concise statement of the ultimate fact constituting the plaintiff’s causes of action.

Indeed, Article 13, Title II of PD 1083 states that shari’a courts have jurisdiction over instant cases of marriages and divorce wherein both parties are Muslims, or wherein only the male party is a Muslim and the marriage is solemnized in accordance with Muslim law; however, this law does not provide for a situation where the parties were married both in civil and Muslim rites. Consequently, the shari’a courts are not vested with original and exclusive jurisdiction when it comes to marriages under both civil and Muslim laws. Consequently, the RTCs are not divested of their general jurisdiction under Sec 19, par (6) of BP Blg. 129 which provides-

Sec 19. Jurisdiction in Civil Cases- Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction: XXX (6) In all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions xxxx

SAMPLE: Verification and Certification Against Forum Shopping

 

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

 

I/We,(Name/names)_______________________________, of legal age, Filipino / _____________   , and a resident of _______________________________________

after having been duly sworn under in accordance with law, hereby depose and state:                                                                                   

   

1.      That I am the complainant/ we are the complainants in the above-entitled case and have caused this Complaint to be prepared;

 

2.     That I/we read and understood its contents which are true and correct of my/our own personal knowledge and/or based on true records;

 

3.     That I/we have not commenced any action or proceeding involving the same issue or subject matter in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or agency;

4.      That to the best of my/our knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals or any other tribunal or agency, and that, if I/we should learn thereafter that a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is pending before these courts or tribunal or agency, I/we undertake to report that fact to the Court within five (5) days therefrom.

 

 

 

__________

Complainant

 

[ACKNOWLEDGMENT]

 

THINK PIECE: HOW TO SHOP FOR MUTUAL FUNDS or UITFS

My tip: check the Cumulative and Annualized Performance report of the funds and pit them against each other.

 

These two indicators are important because they give us an idea on the possible return on our investment based on historical data, but with no guarantees.

  

Here is the “nosebleed” part! By definition, a “cumulative return on an investment (or cumulative performance)” means the aggregate amount that the investment has gained or lost over time, independent of the amount of time involved.[1] While an “annualized performance” is the rate at which an investment grows each year over the period to arrive at the final valuation.[2] Let us skip the definitions and go straight to the application.

 

Below is the Fund Fact Sheet dated 30 April 2021 of one of the most popular mutual funds in the Philippines, ATRAM Alpha Opportunity Fund, Inc.

Snapshot of ATRAM's Fund Fact Sheet dated 30 April 2021

Simply bring your attention to the 5-year (long-term), 3-year(medium-term) and 1- year (short-term) returns, which give us the following information:

 

Cumulative ->           5yrs: 5.81%;               3 yrs.: -19.75 %;         1 yr.: 30.49%

Annualized ->           5 yrs.: 1.14%;             3 yrs.: -7.07%;            1 yr.: 30:49%

 

How can we interpret the numbers in simplest terms?

 

Cumulative, it means if you would invest in the fund 5 years ago, and sell it on 30 April 2021, you would earn 5.81% from staying invested over that 5 years; if you started investing 3 years ago, you lost -19.75% over that 3-year span; if you invested just last year, you would generate 30.49% return on investment over 1 year of staying invested. (“kung nag-invest ka sa fund 5 years ago, nag-increase na investment mo ng 5.81% as of 30 April 2021; kung nagsimula ka nag-invest 3 years ago, talo ka na ng -19.75%; kung last year ka lang naginvest, kumita ka na ng 30.49%”).

 

Annualized, it means your initial investment 5 years ago would grow constantly by 1.14% every year for five years, and the profits were reinvested at the end of each year; if you started investing 3 years ago, your initial investment would lose -7.07% every year for that 3-year span; if you invested just last year, your initial investment would grow by 30.49% after a year. (“kung naginvest ka sa fund 5 years ago, lumalago siya every year ng 1.14% until 30 April 2021; kung naginvest ka 3 years ago, natatalo ang fund ng -7.07% every year; kung last year ka nag-invest, kumita ka ng 30.49% after a year. In short, Compounded Annualized Growth Rate. For easier recall, “kapag annualized performance ang pinaguusapan, isipin niyo na lang na parang utang na compounded ang interest”.)

Gets? 

Understanding Cumulative and Annualized Performance becomes handy when you are looking for several mutual funds to invest in, and cannot decide which one is better.   

Let us say, you are torn between ATRAM Alpha Opportunity Fund, Inc., and PhilEquity Fund, which is another popular mutual fund in the Philippines. You can check PhilEquity’s Fund Fact Sheet dated 30 April 2021 below and compare it with ATRAMS’s.

Snapshot of PhilEquity's Fund Fact Sheet dated 30 April 2021

Based on the information above, the respective performances of the two funds can be summarized  as follows:

 

Cumulative	5 yrs	3 yrs	1 yr
ATRAM	5.81	-19.75	30.49
Philequity	-8.28	-16.88	11.87

 

Annualized	5 yrs	3 yrs	1 yr
ATRAM	1.14%	-7.07%	30.49
Philequity	-1.71%	-5.98%	11.87

 

Now, ceteris paribus, which fund do you think performs better in the last five years? Which one is worth the risk? You may answer in the comment box below.

Happy Shopping 7.7!

(DISCLAIMER: This is not an investment recommendation.)

You can also check Fitz Villafuerte's vlog on Cumulative Performance vs Annualized Performance on the link below:

https://youtu.be/Q9TVmc1h37s

---

[1] Investopedia, Cumulative Return, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cumulativereturn.asp

 

[2] Investopedia, Annualized Rate of Return, https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/annualized-rate.asp

 

SAMPLE: Contract of Lease

CONTRACT OF LEASE

 

    This Contract of Lease (this "Contract") made and executed this ______________ at _______________, by and between:

 

_______________________________, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with office address at ________________, represented herein by its duly authorized representative, ______________, hereinafter referred to as the LESSOR;

 

                                       and

 

               _____________, a corporation duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with office address at ______________________ represented herein by its duly authorized representative, ______________, hereinafter referred to as the LESSEE;

 

RECITALS

 

The  LESSOR is the registered owner of a parcel of land, with an approximate area of ______________,more or less, situated at_____________, covered by Transfer Certificate of Title No. ___________ of the Registry of Deeds for the _________, (hereinafter the "Leased Premises");

             

The LESSOR has offered for lease and the LESSEE wants to lease the Leased Premises;

 

    The parties therefore agree as follows:

 

1.                   TERM OF LEASE: This lease shall be for a period of  _________ commencing on _____________, renewable for another _________________ by giving written notice to renew at least ___________ days prior to the expiration of the original term of lease, upon terms and conditions mutually agreed by the parties.

 

2.                  RENTALS: The LESSOR shall pay [annual or monthly] rentals in the amount of ___________ Pesos (Php ____________) payable in advance within ___ (__) days from the start of the [year or month], exclusive of VAT. The [monthly/annual] rentals shall be subject to escalation equivalent to ___percent ( ___%) at the end of every ___ (_) years.

 

3.                  REAL ESTATE TAXES. All real estate taxes levied or assessed or those which may thereafter be levied or assessed on the Leased Premises, including real estate taxes assessed on the improvements introduced by the LESSEE on the Leased Premises shall be for the account of the LESSEE for the duration of the lease.

 

4.                  SECURITY DEPOSIT. Upon signing of this Contract and upon delivery of the LESSOR of the Leased Premises to the LESSEE, the LESSEE shall remit the sum of _____________Pesos (Php_____________) (the "Security Deposit"). The Security Deposit shall remain intact during the entire term of this lease and shall not be applied by the LESSOR as payment for rentals, but shall serve as security to answer for any unpaid utility bills, charges and other obligations due to the LESSOR under this Contract, and real property taxes due on the improvements introduced by the LESSEE, which are payable by the LESSEE at the termination or expiration of this Contract. The Security Deposit shall be refunded by the LESSOR and returned to the LESSEE, within ___ (__) days after the expiration or termination of this Contract and after presentation by the LESSEE to the LESSOR of proof that the former has paid all of its utility bills and real property taxes, if any, and provided that the LESSEE has vacated the Leased Premises.

 

5.                  ADVANCE RENTAL – Upon execution of this Contract, the LESSEE shall pay to the LESSOR the amount of ___________ Pesos (Php ___________) as Advance Rental to be applied as rental payment for the last month prior the expiration of the lease period.

 

6.                  RIGHTS OF LESSEE NON-TRANSFERABLE - LESSEE shall not directly sublease, assign, or transfer all or any portion of the Leased Premises to any third party, written consent of the LESSOR, which consent shall not be unreasonably conditioned, withheld or delayed.

 

7.                  ALTERATIONS/IMPROVEMENT. - The LESSEE hereby expressly acknowledges that the Leased Premises is in good tenantable condition at the commencement of the lease and undertakes its exclusive expense all ordinary repairs necessary to maintain the same in such condition.

 

All improvements or alterations as may be made in the Leased Premises, whether the same be with or without the consent of the LESSOR, except those which are not permanently attached thereto, such as air conditioning units and systems,  refrigerators and similar items, shall form a part of the Leased Premises and shall not be removed therefrom but shall belong to and become the exclusive property of the LESSOR upon the termination of the lease, without need for reimbursement for the cost thereof.

 

8.                 UTILITIES AND SERVICES. Payment of all utilities bills, including electric, telephone, and water bills, if any, shall be for the account of the LESSEE.

 

9.                  OPTION TO PURCHASE. Should the LESSOR decide to sell the Leased Premises, the LESSEE shall be granted the first option to purchase the Leased Premises at the same terms and conditions as offered by the LESSOR to a third party, and such option shall be exercisable by the LESSEE within ___(__) days from receipt by the LESSEE of written notice of LESSOR's intention to sell or transfer the Leased Premises. The LESSEE shall have the right to assign its option to purchase the Leased Premises to a qualified designee.

 

10.              SALE OR ENCUMBRANCE OR PREMISES. In the event of a sale, transfer, or mortgage or any encumbrance of the Leased Premises to any person other than the LESSEE, the LESSOR shall warrant and ensure that the purchaser, transferee, mortgagee or person in whose favor the encumbrance is constituted shall respect all the terms and conditions of this Contract, including the provision for renewal thereof. To this end, the LESSOR shall cause the pertinent deed or agreement with such person to reflect this foregoing commitment.

 

11.               TERMINATION.

 

(a)The LESSOR shall have the right to terminate this Contract upon a  ___ (__) day prior written notice to the LESSEE in any of the following instances:

 

(i)  the LESSEE fails to pay rentals; or

(ii) in the event of any violation by the LESSEE of the terms and conditions stipulated in this Contract and the LESSEE fails to rectify or remedy the default within ___ (__) days from its receipt of written demand from the LESSOR.

 

(b) The LESSEE shall have the option to terminate this Contract upon a ___ (__) day written prior notice to the LESSOR in the event of any breach by the LESSOR of this Contract, and the LESSOR fails to rectify or remedy such breach or default within __(__) days from its receipt of the written demand of the LESSEE.

 

 (c) Should the LESSEE decide to pre-terminate this Contract without just cause, the LESSEE shall forfeit as liquidated damages in favor of the LESSOR the Security Deposit and the Advance Rental, and LESSOR is without further recourse of any other remedy at law or in equity.

 

(d) In the event of termination by the LESSOR of this Contract for causes under (a), the LESSEE shall forfeit the Security Deposit as liquidated damages in favor of the LESSOR, and shall padlock the Leased Premises.

 

12.              RETURN OF PREMISES. Upon expiration or termination of this Contract, the LESSEE shall immediately vacate the Leased Premises and peacefully surrender complete possession thereof to the LESSOR, devoid of all occupants, furniture, articles and effects of any kind, in the same good and tenantable condition, normal wear and tear excepted and other than for such alterations, additions or improvements which pertain to the LESSOR in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 6 hereof.

 

13.              ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Contract represents the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior expression of intent, representation or warranty with respect to this transaction. This Contract may only be modified by an instrument in writing signed by both parties.

 

14.              VENUE.  The parties hereby agree that the venue for the settlement of the dispute shall fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the proper courts in _____ or in ______________, at the option of the plaintiff.

 

15.              SEVERABILITY. If any one or more of the provisions of this Contract is declared invalid or unenforceable in any respect under any applicable law, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions contained therein shall not in any way be affected or impaired.

 

16.              COUNTERPARTS. If the parties sign this Contract in several counterparts, each will be deemed an original but all counterparts together will constitute one instrument.

 

    The parties are signing this Contract on the date and at the place above-mentioned. 

 

 

_______________                                                       ______________

(LESSOR)                                                                               (LESSEE)

 

 

By:

 

 

Signed in the presence of:

 

_______________                                                       ______________

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

 

SAMPLE: Acknowledgment (representative)

 

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)

____________________________  )S.S.

 

 

 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

 

BEFORE ME, this ___of _______ personally appeared the following:
 
                        Name                           Competent Evidence of Identity        Issued on/at
 
________
      (for_____)
 
______
(for _____)
 
 
known to me and to me known to be the same persons who executed the foregoing instrument and they acknowledged that the same is their free and voluntary act and deed, as well as of the corporation represented.
 
 
            This document is a ______ consisting of ___(_) pages, including the page where this Acknowledgment is written, and was executed and signed by the parties on each and every page hereof.
 
            WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL on the date and place first above written.
 
 
 
 
Doc. No.  ____;
Page No.  ____;                                                                                 
Book No.  ____.                                                                                 
Series of  _____.

DIGEST: Eisenstadt vs. Baird, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)

Parties Involved	Thomas S. EISENSTADT, Sheriff of Suffolk County, Massachusetts, Applellant vs. William R. BAIRD, 405 U.S. 438 (1972)
Facts	The story starts when the appellee exhibited contraceptive articles during his lecture on contraception and overpopulation then afterwards personally handed a package of contraceptive foam (Emko vaginal foam) to a young woman. Because of this, he was convicted for violating a Massachusetts  statute which makes  it a felony  to sell, lend or give away any contraceptive drug or medicine, instrument or article except in the case of:  a) a registered physician administering or prescribing it for a married person; or b) an active registered pharmacist furnishing it to a married person presenting a registered physician’s prescription.   The appellee’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed by the United States (US) District court for the District of Massachusetts; the dismissal however was vacated by the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. The Court of Appeals holds that the statute is a prohibition on contraception per se and conflicts "with fundamental human rights" under Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479. Appellant, inter alia, argues that appellee lacks standing to assert the rights of unmarried persons denied access to contraceptives because he was neither an authorized distributor under the statute nor a single person unable to obtain contraceptives   On appeal, US Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the CA.
Issues	W/N William Baird should be convicted for violating the Massachusetts law.
Judgment	US Supreme Court upholds the decision of CA that Baird should not be convicted.
Rationale	I.                    Appellee has standing to assert the rights of unmarried persons denied access to contraceptives because their ability to obtain them will be materially impaired by enforcement of the statute. Cf. Griswold, supra; Barrows v. Jackson, 346 U.S. 249 . Pp. 443-446. II.                 By providing dissimilar treatment for married and unmarried persons who are similarly situated, the statute violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 446-455.   (a)    The deterrence of fornication, cannot reasonably be regarded as the purpose of the statute (b)    Similarly, the protection of public health through the regulation of the distribution of potentially harmful articles cannot reasonably be regarded as the purpose of the law, (c)    Nor can the statute be sustained simply as a prohibition on contraception per se, for whatever the rights of the individual to access to contraceptives may be, the rights must be the same for the unmarried and the married alike.
Interpretation	Since the statute is riddled with exceptions making contraceptives freely available for use in premarital sexual [405 U.S. 438, 439]   relations and its scope and penalty structure are inconsistent with that purpose (deterrence of fornication). Pp. 447-450.   If health were the rationale (behind the Massachusetts Law), the statute would be both discriminatory and overbroad, and federal and state laws already regulate the distribution of drugs unsafe for use except under the supervision of a licensed physician. Pp. 450-452.
Major Opinions	In an opinion delivered by Brennan J. it was held that:   I.                    He had a standing to assert the rights of unmarried persons denied access to contraceptives.   The Court of Appeals held that the statute under which Baird was convicted is not a health measure. If that view is correct, we do not see how Baird may be prevented, because he was neither a doctor nor a druggist, from attacking the statute in its alleged discriminatory application to potential distributees. We think, too, that our self-imposed rule against the assertion of third-party rights must be relaxed in this case just as in Griswold v. Connecticut, supra.   The relationship between Baird and those whose rights he seeks to assert is not simply that between a distributor and potential distributees, but that between an advocate of the rights of persons to obtain contraceptives and those desirous of doing so. The very point of Baird's giving away the vaginal foam was to challenge the Massachusetts statute that limited access to contraceptives… he seeks to assert is the impact of the litigation on the third-party interests. II.                 The statute by providing dissimilar treatment for married and unmarried persons who were similarly situated violated the equal protection clause of Fourteenth Amendment. The question for our determination in this case is whether there is some ground of difference that rationally explains the different treatment accorded married and unmarried persons under Massachusetts General Laws Ann., c. 272, 21 and 21A. 7 For the reasons that follow, we conclude that no such ground exists because: Deterrence of premarital sex cannot reasonably be regarded as its (law) aim. We conclude, accordingly, that, despite the statute's superficial earmarks as a health measure, health, on the face of the statute, may no more reasonably be regarded as its purpose than the deterrence of premarital sexual relations. Whatever the rights of the individual to access to contraceptives may be, the rights must be the same for the unmarried and the married alike.
	Douglas J. concurring but would also base the decision on the First Amendment…free speech. (See page 350 ^-^)   White and Blackmun JJ., concurring … The appellee could not constitutionally be convicted for distributing contraceptive foam to a married person and since nothing in the record indicated whether the recipient of the form was married or unmarried… I.                    The State did not purport to charge or convict Baird for distributing to an unmarried person. No proof was offered as to the marital status of the recipient.   II.                 Nothing in the record even suggests that the distribution of vaginal foam should be accompanied by medical advice in order to protect the user's health.
	Mr. Chief Justice Burger, dissenting…   I.                    It is undisputed that appellee is not a physician or pharmacist and was prohibited under Massachusetts law from dispensing contraceptives to anyone, regardless of marital status.   II.                 There is no need to labor this point, however, for everyone seems to agree that if Massachusetts has validly required, as a health measure, that all contraceptives be dispensed by a physician or pursuant to a physician's prescription, then the statutory distinction based on marital status has no bearing on this case.   III.               The appellee has succeeded, it seems, in cloaking his activities in some new permutation of the First Amendment although his conviction rests in fact and law on dispensing a medicinal substance without a license.

x