Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 164875 2009-03-20	BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. LA SUERTE TRADING QUISUMBING, J.
As we had stressed time and again, questions of fact are beyond the ambit of a petition for review under Rule 45, since only questions of law may be raised therein. However, there are several exceptions to the said rule, and one of which is present in the instant case, i.e. the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record.[19]
	GR No. 174244 2009-02-13	MAYOR MARCEL S. PAN v. YOLANDA O. PEÑA CARPIO MORALES, J.
In their Comment[18] on the petition, respondents prefatorily contend that the petition calls for a re-assessment of the evidence adduced before the CSC and the appellate court which this Court, so they argue, is not permitted to do in the absence of any of the recognized exceptions.[19] On the substantive aspect, respondents merely quote, for the most part, the appellate court's conclusions.