Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MUSTANG LUMBER v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 158182 2008-06-12	SESINANDO MERIDA v. PEOPLE CARPIO, J.
We further hold that the lone narre tree petitioner cut from the Mayod Property constitutes "timber" under Section 68 of PD 705, as amended. PD 705 does not define "timber," only "forest product" (which circuitously includes "timber.")[31] Does the narra tree in question constitute "timber" under Section 68? The closest this Court came to defining the term "timber" in Section 68 was to provide that "timber," includes "lumber" or "processed log."[32] In other jurisdictions, timber is determined by compliance with specified dimensions[33] or certain "stand age" or "rotation age."[34] In Mustang Lumber, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,[35] this Court was faced with a similar task of having to define a term in Section 68 of PD 705 - "lumber" - to determine whether possession of lumber is punishable under that provision. In ruling in the affirmative, we held that "lumber" should be taken in its ordinary or common usage meaning to refer to "processed log or timber," thus:The Revised Forestry Code contains no definition of either timber or lumber. While the former is included in forest products as defined in paragraph (q) of Section 3, the latter is found in paragraph (aa) of the same section in the definition of "Processing plant," which reads:
	GR No. 131442 2003-07-10	BANGUS FRY FISHERFOLK DIWATA MAGBUHOS v. ENRICO LANZANAS AS JUDGE OF RTC OF MANILA CARPIO, J.
prosecution of violators of environmental laws.[34] Legal actions to achieve this end, however, must be done in accordance with established rules of procedure that were intended, in the first place, to achieve orderly and efficient administration of justice. WHEREFORE, we DENY the petition for lack of merit.
	GR No. 148560 2001-11-19	JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA v. SANDIGANBAYAN BELLOSILLO, J.
Moreover, it is a well-settled principle of legal hermeneutics that words of a statute will be interpreted in their natural, plain and ordinary acceptation and signification,[7] unless it is evident that the legislature intended a technical or special legal meaning to those words.[8] The intention of the lawmakers - who are, ordinarily, untrained philologists and lexicographers - to use statutory phraseology in such a manner is always presumed. Thus, Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary contains the following commonly accepted definition of the words "combination" and "series:"
	GR No. 123137 2001-10-17	PEOPLE v. PO2 ALBERT ABRIOL QUISUMBING, J.
There are eight (8) instances where a warrantless search and seizure is valid. They are: (1) consented searches;[57] (2) as an incident to a lawful arrest;[58] (3) searches of vessels and aircraft for violation of immigration, customs, and drug laws;[59] (4) searches of moving vehicles;[60] (5) searches of automobiles at borders or constructive borders; (6) where the prohibited articles are in "plain view;"[61] (7) searches of buildings and premises to enforce fire, sanitary, and building regulations; and (8) "stop and frisk" operations.[62]