This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-09-09 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| The mere filing of an affidavit reciting the facts required by Section 3, Rule 57, however, is not enough to compel the judge to grant the writ of preliminary attachment. Whether or not the affidavit sufficiently established facts therein stated is a question to be determined by the court in the exercise of its discretion.[18] "The sufficiency or insufficiency of an affidavit depends upon the amount of credit given it by the judge, and its acceptance or rejection, upon his sound discretion."[19] Thus, in reviewing the conflicting findings of the CA and the RTC on the pivotal issue of whether or not Watercraft's affidavit of merit sufficiently established facts which constitute as grounds upon which attachment may be issued under Section 1 (a)[20] and (d),[21] Rule 57, the Court will examine the Affidavit of Preliminary Attachment[22] of Rosario E. Rañoa, its Vice-President, which reiterated the following allegations in its complaint to substantiate the application for a writ of preliminary attachment:x x x x | |||||