Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

SUBHASH C. PASRICHA and JOSEPHINE A. PASRICHA v. DON LUIS DISON REALTY

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 193494 2014-03-07	LUI ENTERPRISES v. ZUELLIG PHARMA CORPORATION LEONEN, J.
An interpleader complaint may be filed by a lessee against those who have conflicting claims over the rent due for the property leased.[135] This remedy is for the lessee to protect him or her from "double vexation in respect of one liability."[136] He or she may file the interpleader case to extinguish his or her obligation to pay rent, remove him or her from the adverse claimants' dispute, and compel the parties with conflicting claims to litigate among themselves.
	GR No. 193494 2014-03-07	LUI ENTERPRISES v. ZUELLIG PHARMA CORPORATION LEONEN, J.
An interpleader complaint may be filed by a lessee against those who have conflicting claims over the rent due for the property leased.[135] This remedy is for the lessee to protect him or her from "double vexation in respect of one liability."[136] He or she may file the interpleader case to extinguish his or her obligation to pay rent, remove him or her from the adverse claimants' dispute, and compel the parties with conflicting claims to litigate among themselves.
	GR No. 145817 2011-10-19	URBAN BANK v. MAGDALENO M. PEÑA SERENO, J.
It must be emphasized that the prolonged resolution of the procedural issue in the Petitions in G. R. Nos. 145817 and 145822 on the execution pending appeal is due in no small part to the delays arising from Peña's peculiar penchant for filing successive motions for inhibition and re-raffle.[351] The Court cannot sanction Peña's repeated requests for voluntary inhibition of members of the Court based on the sole ground of his own self-serving allegations of lack of faith and trust, and would like to reiterate, at this point, the policy of the Court not to tolerate acts of litigants who, for just about any conceivable reason, seek to disqualify a judge (or justice) for their own purpose, under a plea of bias, hostility, prejudice or prejudgment.[352] The Court cannot allow the unnecessary and successive requests for inhibition, lest it opens the floodgates to forum-shopping where litigants look for a judge more friendly and sympathetic to their cause than previous ones.[353]
	GR No. 149193 2011-04-04	RICARDO B. BANGAYAN v. RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION SERENO, J.
A motion to inhibit shall be denied if filed after a member of the court has already given an opinion on the merits of the case, the rationale being that "a litigant cannot be permitted to speculate on the action of the court . . . (only to) raise an objection of this sort after the decision has been rendered." [137]
	GR No. 162103 2009-06-19	MARYLOU B. TOLENTINO v. SHENTON REALTY CORP. CARPIO, J.
In this case, although Virgilio Sintos, Jr. initially failed to show that he was authorized to sign the verification for the Ex-Parte Motion for Issuance of Writ of Possession, respondent submitted a Secretary's Certificate to the Court confirming that Virgilio Sintos, Jr. was indeed authorized by the board of directors. In the interest of justice, the Court may allow the relaxation of procedural rules where there is subsequent substantial compliance.[17]