Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR NO. 165771 2007-06-29	HEIRS OF ANTONIO BOBADILLA v. JAIME CASTILLO CARPIO MORALES, J.
As the decree is not self-executing,[11] Proclamation No. 1967 (issued on May 14, 1980) was issued identifying 244 specific sites[12] in Metropolitan Manila as Areas for Priority Development (APD) and Urban Land Reform Zones (ULRZ). It amended Proclamation No. 1893 (issued on September 11, 1979) by expressly limiting the operation and narrowing the coverage of PD No. 1517 from the entire Metropolitan Manila to the specific areas declared as APD/ULRZ.[13]
	GR NO. 143666 2005-03-18	SOLEDAD MENDOZA AND SPS. PHILIP AND MA. CARIDAD CASIÑO v. PURITA BAUTISTA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
On February 11, 2000, petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration arguing that the decision is contrary to P.D. No. 1517.[27] They alleged that respondent did not allege in her complaint, and neither has she proven by her evidence that the lot involved is within the urban zone proclaimed as urban land reform area so that she, as an actual occupant thereof, might be the rightful beneficiary of the right of first refusal, invoking Parañaque Kings Enterprises, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals[28] and Lagmay vs. Court of Appeals.[29] Petitioners subsequently filed a supplemental motion for reconsideration citing Solanda Enterprises, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals[30] to bolster their position.[31] Respondent opposed petitioners' motion for reconsideration.[32]