This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-01-14 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| A ruling on prescription necessarily requires an analysis of the plaintiff's cause of action based on the allegations of the complaint and the documents attached as its integral parts. A motion to dismiss based on prescription hypothetically admits the allegations relevant and material to the resolution of this issue, but not the other facts of the case.[45] | |||||
|
2006-01-31 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Moreover, a motion to dismiss based on prescription hypothetically admits the truth of the facts alleged in the complaint.[29] Such hypothetical admission is limited to the facts alleged in the complaint which relate to, and are necessary for, the resolution of the grounds stated in the motion to dismiss as preliminary matters involving substantive or procedural laws, but not to the other facts of the case. As applied herein, the hypothetical admission extends to the date of execution of the Deed of Sale in favor of the respondent and to the date of registration of title in favor of the petitioners. | |||||