This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2013-04-02 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| A bank manager has the duty to ensure that bank rules are strictly complied with, not only to ensure efficient bank operation, but also to serve the bank's best interest.[50] His responsibility over the functions of the employees of the branch cannot simply be overlooked as their acts normally pass through his supervision and approval. He should serve as the last safeguard against any pretense employed to carry out an illicit claim over the bank's money. | |||||
|
2007-07-10 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Dissatisfied, petitioner filed with the Court of Appeals a Petition for Certiorari[13] under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court, which was docketed as CA-G.R. SP No. 63293. Petitioner alleged that RTC Judge Estrella T. Estrada committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in denying the Petition for Certiorari in Civil Case No. Q-99-39358, and in effect sustaining the denial by MeTC-Branch 43 of petitioner's motion to suspend the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 90721, as well as his subsequent motion for reconsideration thereof. | |||||
|
2007-07-10 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| On 5 March 2001, the Court of Appeals dismissed[14] the Petition in CA-G.R. SP No. 63293 on the ground that petitioner's remedy should have been an appeal from the dismissal by RTC-Branch 83 of his Petition for Certiorari in Q-99-39358. The Court of Appeals ruled that:Is this instant Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 the correct and appropriate remedy? | |||||