Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MAGDIWANG REALTY CORPORATION v. MANILA BANKING CORPORATION

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 185590 2014-12-03	METROPOLITAN BANK v. LEY CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND SPS. MANUEL LEY AND JANET LEY LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Preponderance of evidence is the weight, credit, and value of the aggregate evidence on either side and is usually considered to be synonymous with the term "greater weight of evidence" or "greater weight of the credible evidence." Preponderance of evidence is a phrase which, in the last analysis, means probability to truth. It is evidence which is more convincing to the court as worthier of belief than that which is offered in opposition thereto.[23] (Emphasis supplied, citation omitted.)
	GR No. 193791 2014-08-02	PRIMANILA PLANS v. SECURITIES REYES, J.
It bears emphasis that the arguments of Primanila on the matter present factual issues, which as a rule, are beyond the scope of a petition for review on certiorari. We underscore the basic rule that only questions of law may be raised in a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court. The Supreme Court is not a trier of facts. It is not our function to review, examine and evaluate or weigh the probative value of the evidence presented, for a question of fact would arise in such event.[18] Thus, it is equally settled that the factual findings of administrative agencies, such as the SEC, are generally held to be binding and final so long as they are supported by substantial evidence in the record of the case. Our jurisdiction is limited to reviewing and revising errors of law imputed to the lower court, the latter's findings of fact being conclusive and not reviewable by this Court.[19]
	GR No. 198660 2013-10-23	TING TING PUA v. SPS. BENITO LO BUN TIONG AND CAROLINE SIOK CHING TENG VELASCO JR., J.
In Magdiwang Realty Corp. v. Manila Banking Corp., We stressed that the quantum of evidence required in civil cases preponderance of evidence "is a phrase which, in the last analysis, means probability to truth. It is evidence which is more convincing to the court as worthier of belief than that which is offered in opposition thereto."[67] Based on the evidence submitted by the parties and the legal presumptions arising therefrom, petitioner's evidence outweighs that of respondents. This preponderance of evidence in favor of Pua requires that a judgment ordering respondents to pay their obligation be entered.