This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-08-06 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| It appears petitioner has misinterpreted our ruling in Macaslang v. Zamora,[18] which petitioner cited in its petition before this Court.[19] In Macaslang, we stated that: [f]ailure to state a cause of action and lack of cause of action are really different from each other. On the one hand, failure to state a cause of action refers to the insufficiency of the pleading, and is a ground for dismissal under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court. On the other hand, lack of cause [of] action refers to a situation where the evidence does not prove the cause of action alleged in the pleading. Justice Regalado, a recognized commentator on remedial law, has explained the distinction: | |||||
|
2013-12-02 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| In the case of Macaslang v. Zamora,[56] the Court noted that the incorrect appreciation by both the RTC and the CA of the distinction between the dismissal of an action, based on "failure to state a cause of action" and "lack of cause of action," prevented it from properly deciding the case, and we quote:Failure to state a cause of action and lack of cause of action are really different from each other. On the one hand, failure to state a cause of action refers to the insufficiency of the pleading, and is a ground for dismissal under Rule 16 of the Rules of Court. On the other hand, lack of cause [of] action refers to a situation where the evidence does not prove the cause of action alleged in the pleading. Justice Regalado, a recognized commentator on remedial law, has explained the distinction: | |||||
|
2013-02-25 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| (c) The act or omission of the defendant in violation of said legal right.[18] | |||||