ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
September-1950 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-2134 September 1, 1950 - JUAN C. GEQUILLANA v. FELIPE BUENAVENTURA

    087 Phil 300

  • G.R. No. L-2180 September 1, 1950 - IN RE: JUAN P. PELLICER & CO., INC. v. PHILIPPINE REALTY CORPORATION

    087 Phil 302

  • G.R. No. L-1415 September 13, 1950 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. MAMERTO CORTEZ, ET AL.

    087 Phil 309

  • G.R. No. L-2684 September 14, 1950 - GENERAL CORPORATION OF THE PHIL., ET AL. v. UNION INSURANCE SOCIETY OF CANTON, ET AL.

    087 Phil 313

  • G.R. No. L-2071 September 19, 1950 - TIRSO DACANAY v. PEDRO V. FLORENDO, ET AL.

    087 Phil 324

  • G.R. No. L-2412 September 19, 1950 - JOSE MARQUEZ LIM v. JOHN G. NELSON, ET AL.

    087 Phil 328

  • G.R. No. L-2870 September 19, 1950 - CHUA NGO v. UNIVERSAL TRADING CO.

    087 Phil 331

  • G.R. No. L-3450 September 19, 1950 - IN RE: PURIFICACION M. JOSON, ET AL. v. MARIANO NABLE, ET AL.

    087 Phil 337

  • G.R. No. L-1944 September 20, 1950 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. JOHN RANDRUP

    087 Phil 341

  • G.R. No. L-2127 September 20, 1950 - VICENTA FELIX VDA. DE SALGADO, ET AL. v. MANUEL DE LA FUENTE, ET AL.

    087 Phil 343

  • G.R. No. L-1977 September 21, 1950 - KOPPEL (PHILIPPINES) INC. v. COLLECTOR OF INTERNAL REVENUE

    087 Phil 348

  • G.R. No. L-2374 September 21, 1950 - APOLINAR ABEL v. PILAR DE LIMA, ET AL.

    087 Phil 352

  • G.R. No. L-2475 September 21, 1950 - FRANCISCO OSORIO v. ESTEBAN SALUTILLO, ET AL.

    087 Phil 356

  • G.R. No. L-2526 September 21, 1950 - TOMAS MAPUA, ET AL. v. SUBURBAN THEATRES, INC.

    087 Phil 358

  • G.R. No. L-3581 September 21, 1950 - JAMES MCGUIRE v. MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE CO.

    087 Phil 370

  • G.R. No. L-4033 September 21, 1950 - MARCELO STEEL CORPORATION, ET AL. v. IMPORT CONTROL BOARD, ET AL.

    087 Phil 374

  • G.R. No. L-2995 September 22, 1950 - CRISPULO F. ARNALDO, ET AL. v. JOSE BERNABE, ET AL.

    087 Phil 379

  • G.R. No. L-2516 September 25, 1950 - ANG TEK LIAN v. COURT OF APPEALS

    087 Phil 383

  • G.R. No. L-3743 September 25, 1950 - PHIL. ASSO. OF MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL ENGINEERS v. PROSPERO SANIDAD, ET AL.

    087 Phil 387

  • G.R. No. L-2362 September 29, 1950 - ANISIA AQUINO, ET AL. v. SOTERO ESGUERRA, ET AL.

    087 Phil 396

  • G.R. No. L-2467 September 29, 1950 - C. N. HODGES v. MARIA GAY, ET AL.

    087 Phil 401

  • G.R. No. L-2670 September 29, 1950 - JANE E. EDMANDS v. PHILIPPINE TRUST COMPANY

    087 Phil 405

  • G.R. No. L-2726 September 29, 1950 - GREGORIO ESTRADA v. PROCULO NOBLE

    087 Phil 408

  • G.R. No. L-2668 September 30, 1950 - NATIONAL LEATHER CO., INC. v. UNITED STATES LIFE INSURANCE CO.

    087 Phil 410

  •  





     
     

    G.R. No. L-2726   September 29, 1950 - GREGORIO ESTRADA v. PROCULO NOBLE<br /><br />087 Phil 408

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    EN BANC

    [G.R. No. L-2726. September 29, 1950.]

    GREGORIO ESTRADA, Plaintiff, v. PROCULO NOBLE, Defendant.

    Jose M. Peñas, for Appellant.

    De Leon & Tiuseco, for Appellee.

    SYLLABUS


    1. COURTS; SUPREME COURT; JURISDICTION; APPEALS INVOLVING ONLY THE ERRORS OR QUESTIONS OF LAW. — Among the cases over which the Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction, are those in which only errors or questions of law are involved. Where appellant in his notice of appeal state that the issues to be raised in the appeal are mostly questions of law, and in his brief he assigns errors involving questions of fact, the appeal falls within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals.


    D E C I S I O N


    PARAS, J.:


    This is an action to redeem a parcel of land worth about P3,000. The Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiff. In the notice of appeal filed on November 22, 1948, the defendant announced his intention to appeal to the Supreme Court "inasmuch as the issues involved therein are mostly questions of law." The record was accordingly elevated to this Court. Several errors assigned in the brief for defendant-appellant unquestionably refer to questions of fact.

    Among the cases over which the Supreme Court has exclusive appellate jurisdiction, are those in which only errors or questions of law are involved. (Constitution, Art. VIII, see. 2, par. 5; see. 17, Rep. Act No. 296.) Conformably to this constitutional and statutory precept, the Rules of Court (see. 3, Rule 42) provide that "where the appeal is based purely on questions of law, the appellant shall so state in his notice of appeal, and then no other questions shall be allowed, and the evidence need not be elevated."cralaw virtua1aw library

    The case at bar is clearly not one falling under the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. In the first place, the appellant expressly stated in his notice of appeal that the issues involved in the appeal are "mostly questions of law," an expression plainly not synonymous to "only errors or questions of law." In the second place, in accordance with his notice of appeal, the appellant has assigned in his brief several errors involving questions of fact. This, the appellant has undoubtedly the right to do, because in his notice of appeal he did not state that the appeal is "based purely on questions of law," as provided in section 3 of Rule 42 of the Rules of Court.

    The present appeal, involving questions of fact and of law, falls within the exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals (sec. 29, Rep. Act No. 296) and must therefore be certified to said court, pursuant to section 31 of Republic Act No. 296 which provides that "all cases which may be erroneously brought to the Supreme Court or to the Court of Appeals shall be sent to the proper court, which shall hear the same, as if it had originally been brought before it. "Wherefore, let this case be forwarded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings.

    Moran, C.J., Ozaeta, Feria, Pablo, Bengzon, Tuason, Montemayor and Reyes, JJ., concur.

    G.R. No. L-2726   September 29, 1950 - GREGORIO ESTRADA v. PROCULO NOBLE<br /><br />087 Phil 408


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED