Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ASSOCIATED COMMUNICATIONS v. FIDELO Q. DUMLAO

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 191998 2010-12-07	WALDEN F. BELLO v. COMELEC BRION, J.
In filing the present petition, the mandamus petitioners also violated the rule on the exhaustion of administrative remedies. The rule on exhaustion of administrative remedies provides that a party must exhaust all administrative remedies to give the administrative agency an opportunity to decide and thus prevent unnecessary and premature resort to the courts.[44] While this is not an ironclad rule as it admits of exceptions,[45] the mandamus petitioners failed to show that any of the exceptions apply. The filing of a petition for mandamus with this Court, therefore, was premature. It bears stressing that mandamus, as an extraordinary remedy, may be used only in cases of extreme necessity where the ordinary forms of procedure are powerless to afford relief.[46]
	GR No. 160367 2009-12-18	EVELYN S. CABUNGCAL v. SONIA R. LORENZO DEL CASTILLO, J.
The instant case does not fall under any of the exceptions. Petitioners' filing of a petition for mandamus and prohibition with the CA was premature. It bears stressing that the remedies of mandamus and prohibition may be availed of only when there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.[20] Moreover, being extraordinary remedies, resort may be had only in cases of extreme necessity where the ordinary forms of procedure are powerless to afford relief.[21]
	GR No. 167614 2009-03-24	ANTONIO M. SERRANO v. GALLANT MARITIME SERVICES AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Along the same line of reasoning, the Court further holds that the subject clause violates petitioner's right to substantive due process, for it deprives him of property, consisting of monetary benefits, without any existing valid governmental purpose.[136]
	GR NO. 158253 2007-03-02	REPUBLIC v. CARLITO LACAP AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
The general rule is that before a party may seek the intervention of the court, he should first avail of all the means afforded him by administrative processes.[29] The issues which administrative agencies are authorized to decide should not be summarily taken from them and submitted to a court without first giving such administrative agency the opportunity to dispose of the same after due deliberation.[30]