This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2013-02-27 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| "It is often held that the validity of a decision is not necessarily impaired by the fact that the ponente only took over from a colleague who had earlier presided at the trial, unless there is a showing of grave abuse of discretion in the factual findings reached by him."[26] | |||||
|
2012-08-23 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| There is likewise no merit in Rodica's allegation that the Lazaro Law Office extorted from her more than P7 million for alleged professional and legal fees and penalties relative to Strong's immigration case. To support her claim, Rodica attached four statements of account issued by the Lazaro Law Office for US$2,650.00 under Statement of Account No. 13837,[37] US$2,400.00 under Statement of Account No. 13838,[38] US$1,550.00 under Statement of Account No. 13839[39] and US$8,650.00 under Statement of Account No. 13835,[40] or for a total amount of US$15,250.00. She likewise presented photocopies of portions of her dollar savings account passbook to show where the aforesaid funds came from. | |||||
|
2009-03-20 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| However, the Information stated that appellant is the "stepfather" of AAA. A "stepfather" is the husband of one's mother by virtue of a marriage subsequent to that of which the person spoken of is the offspring. It presupposes a legitimate relationship between the appellant and the victim's mother.[18] The evidence adduced by the prosecution showed that appellant is not the stepfather of AAA but the common law spouse of BBB, mother of AAA. In fact, the trial court itself, in its decision,[19] found that appellant and BBB were not married and therefore he is not the stepfather of AAA. During the trial, AAA, when asked why she kept calling appellant "Tiyo," testified that appellant is the third husband of her mother and that the name of her real father is CCC, who at that time was in Manila. She explained that her mother lived separately from CCC since she was eight months old and on 2 August 1994, her mother was living with appellant.[20] Her birth certificate and the Social Case Study Report likewise showed that her father is CCC, not appellant. CCC was married to BBB and appellant was never married to BBB. There was no proof of marriage between BBB and appellant. | |||||
|
2008-10-17 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| On 27 February 1981, Equitable Insurance Corporation (Equitable) filed an action for damages against Aboitiz to recover by way of subrogation the value of the cargoes insured by Equitable that were lost in the sinking of M/V P. Aboitiz.[22] The complaint, which was docketed as Civil Case No. 138395, was later amended to implead Seatrain Pacific Services S.A. and Citadel Lines, Inc. as party defendants.[23] The complaint against the latter defendants was subsequently dismissed upon motion in view of the amicable settlement reached by the parties. | |||||
|
2008-10-17 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| On 27 February 1981, Equitable Insurance Corporation (Equitable) filed an action for damages against Aboitiz to recover by way of subrogation the value of the cargoes insured by Equitable that were lost in the sinking of M/V P. Aboitiz.[22] The complaint, which was docketed as Civil Case No. 138395, was later amended to implead Seatrain Pacific Services S.A. and Citadel Lines, Inc. as party defendants.[23] The complaint against the latter defendants was subsequently dismissed upon motion in view of the amicable settlement reached by the parties. | |||||
|
2003-09-23 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| The trial court should always make a categorical finding as to the age of the victim. In the case at bar, no birth certificate or any similar authentic document was presented and offered in evidence to prove Michelle's age. Moreover, there is no evidence that said certificate of birth was lost or destroyed or was unavailable without the fault of the prosecution. The testimony of Michelle as to her age, even if corroborated by her mother, is not sufficient proof of minority.[25] | |||||