Thread by @lex_do_this

Chair’s cases (Rem)
· Ramirez v. Elomina GR 202661 (2021) - MR was filed out of time; appeal is merely a statutory privilege
· Radaza v. Sandiganbayan GR 201380 (2021) – deficiency remains formal, non-jurisdictional, and curable at any stage of the criminal proceedings

· PNB-Republic Bank v. Sian-Limsiaco GR 196323 (2021) – cancellation of mortgage is a personal action; no transfer or disposition of real property rights; mortgagor is a real party-in-interest in a representative capacity #incrediBar2023 #HernandoBar2023 #hernanDoIt

· Pineda v. Miranda GR 204997 (2021) – revival of judgment is different and distinct from the original judgment, cause of action is the decision itself and not the merits of the action

· PNB v. Fontanoza GR 213673 (2022) – writ of possession is ex-parte. Exceptions: (a) gross inadequacy of the purchase price; (b) third party claiming right adverse to the mortgagor; and (c) failure to pay surplus proceeds of the sale to the mortgagor

· PNB v. Daradar GR 180203 (2021) – First Order of the RTC dismissing the case provisionally without prejudice is void, hence did not attain finality; no provisional dismissal in civil case; Second Order sans appeal became final and executory; adjudication on the merits

· People v. Tuyay GR 206579 (2021) – if the remedy of an appeal is available, a petition for certiorari under Rule 65 will not prosper as it is not a substitute for a lost appeal; should have filed Petition for Review under Rule 45.

· People v. Sergio GR 240053 (2019) –Rule 23 ROC may be applied in criminal cases in extra-ordinary circumstance and in the interest of justice; testimony was in a form of a dying declaration and accused’s right to confrontation was not violated

· Patdu v. Carpio-Morales GR 230171 (2021) – the proper mode to assail the OMB’s finding of probable cause in criminal cases - petition for certiorari under Rule 65 before the SC; If admin case - petition for review under Rule 43 before the CA

· People v. Sandiganbayan GR 239878 (2022) – there is inordinate delay taking into the parameters in Cagang v. Sandiganbayan
· People v. Mallari GR 197164 (2019) – receipt of the lawyer is receipt of the party

· Palajos v. Abad GR 226272 (2022) – possession can be acquired not only by material occupation, but also by the fact that a thing is subject to the action of one’s will or by the proper acts and legal formalities established for acquiring such right

· Palafox v. Mendiola GR 209551 (2021) – applied hierarchy of courts; exceptions: (1) public welfare and the advancement of public policy; (2) broader interest of justice; (3) patent nullities; or (4) when analogous exceptional and compelling circumstances

· Morada v. Rias GR 222226 (2022) – Writ of Amparo should be dismissed. State's refusal to acknowledge or give information on the fate or whereabouts of the person and intention to remove subject person from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time were absent

· Monterde v. Jacinto GR 214102 (2022) – remedy should be Rule 43 to be filed before the CA
·Seming v. Alamag GR 202284 (2021) – the genuineness of the signature may be proved in a manner provided by R132S22; there was no comparison at all and no other evidence to validate

· Ngo v. Gabelo GR 207707 (2020) – referral of lupon to institute action is precondition to filing of complaint in court – should now be alleged in affirmative defense, MTD not allowed

· MRT v. Trackworks Rail Transit GR 204452 (2021) – while it is true that the promulgation is moot, the rule admits certain exception as when the orders complained of were completely null and void because it violated the doctrine of judicial stability and litis pendencia

· Mega Fishing Corp v. Estate of Gonzales GR 214781 (2022) –the mistakes of counsel bind the client may not be strictly followed; in rendering justice, procedural infirmities take a backseat against substantive rights of litigants.

· Spouses Liu v. Espinosa GR 238513 (2019) – SC not a trier of facts. Re-examination of facts for the findings of the MTCC and RTC are in conflict with that of the CA
· Meralco v. AAA Cryogenics GR 207429 (2020) – SC not a trier of facts. Exceptions factual-issue bar rule

•Linden Suites v. Meridien Far East Properties GR 211969 (2021) – doctrine of separate juridical personality finds no application in the case at bar; remedy is to file motion for the examination of judgment debtor

·  Leones v. Corpuz GR 204106 (2021) – final and executory Decision in Court may be modified by a compromise agreement that was voluntary, freely, and intelligently executed by the parties, and not contrary to law, morals, good customs and public policy.

•Land Bank v. Spouses De Jesus GR 221133 (2021) – status quo order is in the nature of a “cease-and-desist order” and is “intended to maintain the last, actual, peaceable and uncontested state of things which preceded the controversy”; only SC may issue status quo order