Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 188165 2013-12-11	PEOPLE v. SANDIGANBAYAN BERSAMIN, J.
The State now argues, however, that the Sandiganbayan thereby committed grave abuse of discretion resulting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction for applying the interpretation of the term transaction in Soriano, Jr. considering that the term transaction should be construed more liberally, and positing that Soriano, Jr. was already abandoned by the Court, citing for that purpose the rulings in Mejia v. Pamaran,[82] Peligrino v. People,[83] and Chang v. People.[84]
	GR NOS. 142369-70 2007-04-13	JUANITO T. MERENCILLO v. PEOPLE CORONA, J.
(5) he has the right to intervene, in an official capacity under the law, in connection with a contract or transaction has the right to intervene.[31]