Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CRISTETA CHUA-BURCE v. CA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 197058 2015-10-14	GREGORY BALUYO Y GAMORA v. SPS. JOAQUIN AND REBECCA DE LA CRUZ BRION, J.
In ejectment cases, such as in forcible entry, the only question to be resolved is who between the contending parties is entitled to the physical or material possession of the property involved, independent of any claim of ownership set forth by the parties-litigants.[30] In ejectment cases, possession means nothing more than actual physical possession (possession de facto),[31] it is not juridical possession (possession de jure), which gives the transferee a right over the thing that he may set up even against the owner.[32] Thus, "an ejectment case will not necessarily be decided in favor of one who has presented proof of ownership of the subject property."[33]
	GR No. 203466 2015-02-25	CHERRY ANN M. BENABAYE v. PEOPLE PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
Under the first element, when the money, goods, or any other personal property is received by the offender from the offended party (1) in trust or (2) on commission or (3) for administration, the offender acquires both material or physical possession and juridical possession of the thing received. Juridical possession means a possession which gives the transferee a right over the thing which the transferee may set up even against the owner.[41]
	GR No. 179061 2009-07-13	SHEALA P. MATRIDO v. PEOPLE CARPIO MORALES, J.
x x x When the money, goods, or any other personal property is received by the offender from the offended party (1) in trust or (2) on commission or (3) for administration, the offender acquires both material or physical possession and juridical possession of the thing received. Juridical possession means a possession which gives the transferee a right over the thing which the transferee may set up even against the owner. In this case, petitioner was a cash custodian who was primarily responsible for the cash-in-vault. Her possession of the cash belonging to the bank is akin to that of a bank teller, both being mere bank employees.[30] (Italics in the original omitted; underscoring and emphasis supplied)
	GR No. 171121 2008-08-26	GINA DIAZ Y JAUD v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In general, the elements of estafa are: (1) that the accused defrauded another (a) by abuse of confidence or (b) by means of deceit; and (2) that damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused the offended party or third person. Deceit is not an essential requisite of estafa with abuse of confidence, since the breach of confidence takes the place of the fraud or deceit, which is a usual element in the other estafas.[41]