Posts

Showing posts with the label Case brief

Case Digest: Vercide vs Hernandez AM No MTJ-00-1265

Valencides Vercide vs Judge Priscilla Hernandez AM No. MTJ-00-1265                                             April 6, 2000 Judge Hernandez was charges for grave abuse of authority and ignorance of the law for her dismissal of a case which complainant Vericde filed against Galleros for recovery of possession of land. The land is located in Upper Centro, Tudela, Misamis Occidental. Defendant Galleros is a resident of the same municipality while complainant are residents of Dipolog City. Because of this fact, the case was filed in court without prior referral to the Lupong Tagapamayapa.  Issue: 1. Whether or not the lupon has jurisdiction in this case? 2. Whether or not Judge Hernandez is guilty of grave abuse of authority and ignorance of the law? Ruling: 1. No, under Sec. 408 of RA 7160: “The lupon shall have authority to bring together the parties ...

Case Digest: Aglipay vs Ruiz GR No L-45459

Aglipay vs. Ruiz  GR No. L-45459                             March 13, 1937 Facts: The Director of Post announced that he would order the issues of postage stamps commemorating the celebration of City of Manila of the 33 rd International Eucharistic Congress organized by the Roman Catholic Church pursuant to Act No. 4052 for the purpose of appropriating funds for the making of new postage stamps. Aglipay requested Atty. Vicente Sotto to denounce the matter to the President. It was alleged that Ruiz is in direct violation of the Constitution by issuing and selling postage stamps commemorative of the 33 rd International Eucharistic Congress. That such act was violative of Art. VI, Sec. 23 (3) of the Philippines, to wit: No public money or property shall ever be appropriated, applied, or used, directly or indirectly, for the use, benefit, or support of any sect, church, denomination, secretarian, institut...

Case Digest: Leviste vs CA GR No 189122

Leviste vs CA  GR No 189122                                                                 March 17, 2010 Facts: Jose Antonio Leviste  was charged with the crime of murder but was convicted by the RTC for the lesser crime of homicide. He appealed the RTC's decision to the CA then he field an application for admission to bail pending appeal, due to his advanced age and health condition, and claiming the absence of any risk or possibility of flight on his part. The CA denied his application on the ground that the discretion to extend bail during the course of appeal should be exercised with grave caution and only for strong reasons. That bail is not a sick pass for an ailing or aged detainee or a prisoner needing medical care outside the prison facility. On this matter, Levisete questioned the ruling of ...

Case Digest: Canlas et al vs NAPICO Homeowners Association GR No 182795

Canlas et. al., vs NAPICO Homeowners Association  GR No 182795                                                                                  June 5, 2008 Facts: Petitioners are settlers in a certain parcel of land. Their dwellings have been demolished or is about to be demolished pursuant to a court judgment. They filed a petition for writ of amparo to summon some unprincipled Land Officials as they allege to answer their participation in the issuance of fraudulent titles to NAPICO.  Issue: Whether or not  writ of amparo is proper in this case. Ruling: No, writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty, and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or empl...

Case Digest: Quelnan vs People GR No 166061

Quelnan vs People  GR No 166061                                                                                      July 6, 2007 Facts: Sometime in 1996, the Police Assistance and Reaction Against Crime (PARAC) was tasked to implement a search warrant to a certain Bernard Lim for probably possessing MA HCI (Shabu). The team was escorted to the unit by the security officer (Punsaran), upon arrival at the place to be searched, a male person naked from the waist up opened the door, which was later identified as Quelnan. The team presented the search warrant and proceeded with the search. In the presence of Quelnan and Punsaran, they found on top of a bedroom table 3 pieces of transparent plastic sachet containing white crystalline substance which was later exami...

Case Digest: People vs Meliton Jalbuena GR No 171163

People vs Meliton Jalbuena GR No 171163                                                                                          July 4, 2007 Facts: In the morning of August 1996, AAA a minor, was raped by her father Jalbuena. while her mother BBB was out of the house, Jalbuena approached AAA while she was in bed and pulled down her underwear, placed himself on top of her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. AAA was threatened not to report the incident to anyone, otherwise something bad will happen to her. The incident happened on two other occasions, the last was in the morning and witnessed by her uncle CCC while Jalbuena was on top of her. CCC reported what he saw to AAA’s grandfather who advised AAA to avoid her father, to an aunt as well as to BBB...

Case Digest: Rizal Alih et al vs Castro GR No L-69401

Rizal Alih et. al., vs Castro GR No L-69401                                                                                 June 23, 1987 Facts: A group of more than 200 Philippine marines and home defense forces raided the compound occupied by the petitioners (Rizal Alih et. al.) is search of loose firearms, ammunition and other explosives. The people inside the compound resisted the invasion and a crossfire between the Philippine marines and the petitioner occurred, resulting in number of casualties. The petitioners surrendered the next morning and 16 occupants were arrested, later to be finger-printed, paraffin-tested and photographed over their objection. The military also inventoried and confiscated several M16 rifles, M14 rifle, rifle grenades and rounds of ammunition. Petition...

Case Digest: Desierto vs Heirs of Margarita Ventura GR No 151800

Desierto vs Heirs of Margarita Ventura GR No 151800                                                    November 5, 2009 Facts: Heirs of Margarita Ventura ( the Heirs) filed with the Office of the Ombudsman a complaint for Falsification of Public Documents and violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 against Zenaida Palacio and spouses Edilberto and Celerina Darang. Palacio being the OIC of DAR designated Celerina to investigate the claims of the Heirs agaist her former husband Edilberto. Celerina supported the report with public documents which she falsified and Palacio issed a recommendation based on that report to award the landholding in dispute to Edilberto. The DARAB recommended that the charged against the respondents be dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. The CA then took cognizance of the case and granted the provisional dismissal the c...

Case Digest: MERALCO, Alexander Deyto and Ruben Sapitula vs Rosarion Gopez Lim GR No 184769

MERALCO, Alexander Deyto and Ruben Sapitula vs Rosarion Gopez Lim GR No 184769                                                                   October 5, 2010 Facts: Lim is an administrative clerk at MERALCO, an anonymous letter was posted at the door of her assigned office denouncing respondent. By Memorandum of Alexander (head of MERALCO Human Resource Staffing), he directed the transfer of respondent to another sector due to the accusations and threats against her from unknown individuals and which could possible compromise her safety and security. Lim then requested deferment of his transfer, but due to futility, she filed a TRO for her transfer and a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas data against MERALCO commanding MERALCO, to wit: Full disclosure of a the data or information about respondent in relati...

Case Digest: Ramiscal Jr vs SANDIGANBAYAN and People of the Philippines GR Nos 172476-99

Ramiscal Jr vs SANDIGANBAYAN and People of the Philippines GR Nos 172476-99                                                                         September 15, 2010 Facts: Ramiscal Jr (Ramiscal) was a retired officer of AFP and the former president of AFP-Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS). During his incumbency, the BOD of AFP-RSBS approved the acquisition of 15,020 sq. m. of land for development as housing projects. On August 1, 1997 AFP-RSBS as represented by Ramiscal Jr., and Flaviano the attorney-in-fact of 12 individual vendors executed and signed a bilateral Deed of Sale (1st Deed) over the subject property at the agreed price of P 10,500.00 per sq. m. After the payment @ P 10,500.00 per sq. m., Flaviano executed and signed a unilateral Deed of Sale (2nd Deed) over the same pro...

Case Digest: People vs Combate GR No 189301

People vs Combate GR No 189301                                                 December 15, 2010 Facts: Jose Pepito Combate (Combate) was charged for killing Edmundo O. Prayco and Leopoldo P. Guiro, Jr. The prosecution’s version of the facts was that on March 16, 1995, Tomaro parked hiss passenger jeepney at the garage of Leopoldo’s mother, at the house of Leopoldo. Upon entering the gate of Leopoldo’s house he met Leopoldo and Edmundo who was on their way out and also invited him to join then in drinking liquor which he decline for he was already tired. As he was about to went up the stairs he heard a gunshot. He rushed back to the road and saw Combate pointing a gun at the fallen Leopoldo. Edmund was about to intervene, but Combate also shot him at a very close range. Thereafter he fired another shot against Leopoldo. Tomaro rushed to help them and ple...

Case Digest: Bonifacio et al., vs RTC Makati and Jessie John Gimenez GR No 184800

Bonifacio et al., vs RTC Makati and Jessie John Gimenez GR No 184800                                                                           May 5, 2010 Facts: Jessie John Gimenez (Gimenez) filed in behalf of Yuchenco Family of Yuchenco Group of Companies (YGC) and Malayan Insurance Co., (Malayan), a criminal complain for 13 counts of libel under Art. 355 in relation to Art. 353 of the RPC against the members of Paents Enabling Parents Coalition Inc (PEPCI), a group of discontented planholders of Pacific Plans, Inc (PPI) which is owned by the Yuchengco’s, for they previously purchased traditional pre-need educational plans but were unable to collect thereon or avail of the benefits of such after PPI, due to liquidity concerns, filed for corporate rehabilitation with prayer of suspension of paymen...

Case Digest: LBP vs Honeycomb Farms Corp GR No 166259

Case Digest: LBP vs Honeycomb Farms Corp GR No 166259                                                                         November 12, 2012 Facts: Honeycomb Farms Corp. (HFC) is a registered owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. T-2550 with an area of 29.0966 hectares. Through a letter HFC voluntarily offered its land to the DAR for acquisition pursuant to CARP for P 581,932.00 @ P 20,000.00 per hectare. The DAR and LBP determined an acquirable and compensable area of 27.5871 hectares while the remaining were excluded for being hilly and underdeveloped. LBP pursuant to DAR-AO No. 6 fixed the value of the land in the amount of P 165,739.44. HFC rejected the said valuation and filed with the DARAB a petition for determination of just compensation. HFC claimed that the just compensation sh...

Case Digest: LBP vs Heirs of Maximo Puyat and Gloria Puyat GR No 175055

Case Digest: LBP vs Heirs of Maximo Puyat and Gloria Puyat  GR No 175055                                                              June 27, 2012 Facts: Gloria and Maximo Puyat (deceased) owns a parcel of riceland consisting of 46.8731 hectares. The said land was subjected to acquisition pursuant to PD 27 but the records does not show when the DAR acquired the same. Sometime in December 1989 DAR then, issued several emancipation patents in favor of various farm-beneficiaries. The Puyat's however, did not receive any compensation for the acquisition. Sometime in September 1992 LBP received DAR's instruction to pay the just compensation to the Puyats. The LBP made its evaluation, but the heirs of the Puyat rejected the valuation and filed a complain for determination of just compensation with the RTC. The following a...

Case Digest: LBP vs Montinola-Escarilla and Co Inc GR No 178046

LBP vs Montinola-Escarilla and Co., Inc. GR No 178046                                                                        June 13, 2012 Facts: Montinola-Escarilla and Co., Inc., (MECO) is the owner of a parcel of agricultural land covered by OCT No. T-70 with an area of 159.0881 hectares was acquired by the government under RA 6657. LBP initially valued the subject land at P 823,204.08 but MECO rejected the valuation. Pending summary administrative proceedings for determination of just compensation before the RARAD, MECO filed a complaint for determination of just compensation before the RTC which appointed 4 Board of Commissioners (BOC) to evaluate and appraise the just compensation for the subject property covering 4.4825 hectares of rainfed rice land and 154.6056 hectares of idle land. Then the R...

Case Digest: Natalia Realty, Inc. and Estate Developer and Investors Corp vs DAR GR No 103302

Natalia Realty, Inc. and Estate Developer and Investors Corp vs DAR GR No 103302                                                                                     August 12, 1993 Facts: Natalia is the owner of 3 contiguous parcels of land with an area of 120.9793 hectares, 1.3205 hectares and 2.7080 hectares or a total of 125.0078 hectares, which are covered by TCT No. 31527. Presidential Proclamation No. 1637 set aside 20,312 hectares of land as townsite areas to absorb the population overspill in the metropolis which were designated as the Lungsod Silangan Townsite. The Natalia properties are situated within the areas proclaimed as townsite reservation. Since private landowners were allowed to develop their properties into low-cost housing subdivisions with the reserv...

Case Digest: LBP vs Livioco GR No 170685

Case Digest: LBP vs Enrique Livioco  GR No 170685                                                         September 22, 2010 Facts: Livioco was the owner of a 30.6329 hectares sugarland. Sometime in 1987 to 1988 he offered his sugarland to the DAR for acquisition under the CARP at P 30.00 per square meter, for a total of P 9,189,870.00. The voluntary offer-to-sell form he submitted to the DAR indicated that his property is adjacent to residential subdivision and to an international paper mill. LBP valuated the 26 hectares of such land for P 827,943.48 at P 3.21 per square meter. Livioco was promptly informed of the valuation and that the cash portion of the claim proceeds have been kept in trust pending his submission of the requirements. LBP did not act upon the notice given to him by both government agencies. Thereafter the LBP i...

Case Digest: LBP vs Spouses Rosa and Pedro Costo GR No 174647

LBP vs Spouses Rosa and Pedro Costo  GR No 174647                                                                December 5, 2012 Facts: Rosa and Pedro Costo (Spouses Costo) are registered owner of a parcel of land covered by OCT No. P-6487 with an area of 9.1936 hectares. Spouses Costo voluntarily offered the said property to the DAR under CARP and its implementing rules. 7.3471 hectares was deemed qualified for acquisition, consequently LBP comuted and valued the said land in the amount of P 104,077.01. Spouses Costo then rejected the valuation and filed a determination of just compensation with the PARAD. PARAD then recomputed the land valuation and fixed the value of the property at P 468,575.92. LBP then sought relief from SAC and filed a petition for just compensation. SAC sustained the valuation of PARA...

Case Digest: Abelita vs Doria

Judge Felimon Abelita III vs P/Supt German Doria & SPO3 Cesar Ramirez GR No. 170627                                                                                     August 14, 2009 Facts: Petitioner (Judge Abelita) filed a complaint for damages under Art. 32(4) and (9) of the Civil Code against Respondents (Doria and Ramirez). Petitioner alleged that he and his wife was on their home when the respondents accompanied by 10 unidentified police officers,requested them to proceed to the PNP headquarters. Petitioner alleged that he would proceed to to the PNP HQ after he had brought his wife home. Petitoner alleged  that when she parked his car in front of their house, SPO3 Ramirez grabbed him and took his car keys, bared into the vehicle and conducted as search ...

Case Digest: People vs Cabiguez y Alastra

People vs Cabiguez GR No. 185708                                                               September 29, 2010 Facts: Cabiguez and Grondiano was charged for robbery for allegedly ransacking AAA’s sari-sari’s store and taking cash and grocery items. Cabiguez was also charged for raping AAA in the presence of her children BBB, CCC and DDD. AAA did not file a complaint for fear that the accused will kill her and her children. Thereafter, Cabiguez and Grondiano were separately arrested for illegal possession of drugs. Then, AAA had the courage to file the case for both accused is now incarcerated. During the trial a DNA testing was conducted from the vaginal swabs for AAA, but it failed to match Cabiguez’s DNA profile since the sample merely contained vaginal discharge. Issue: Whether or not a negative result of a DNA te...