Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1954 > October 1954 Decisions > G.R. No. L-5805 October 7, 1954 - SAMONTE v. SAMONTE, ET AL

096 Phil 1:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-5805. October 7, 1954.]

POTENCIANA LACSON SAMONTE and SOL. L. SAMONTE, in substitution of the deceased FELINO SAMONTE, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. FRANCISCO SAMONTE, Defendant-Appellee.

Sisenando Palarca and Cabral & Crisostomo for Appellants.

Sumcad, Samonte & Bernal for Appellee.


SYLLABUS


APPEALS INVOLVING QUESTIONS OF BOTH LAW AND FACT. — Appeals where questions of both fact are raised, either by appellant or appellee, or by both, should be taken to the Court of Appeals for its consideration and decision, pursuant to the provisions of sections 17 and 29 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.


D E C I S I O N


MONTEMAYOR, J.:


This case was, on appeal, taken directly to this Tribunal by the plaintiffs-appellants as per their notice of appeal dated January 21, 1952, from the decision of the trial court dated December 29, 1951. Studying the case, however, we found that several questions of fact have been raised and discussed by the plaintiffs-appellants and discussed by the appellee in their respective briefs. The following assignment of errors by appellants will show this:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

I


The trial court erred in finding that the plaintiff is the dummy of the defendant and in not finding that the plaintiff is the owner of the concession and that the defendant is merely the agent of the plaintiff.

II


The trial court erred in finding that the plaintiff did not have any intervention in the operation of his concession.

III


The trial court erred in finding that the defendant operated the concession of the plaintiff with his (defendant’s) money.

IV


The lower court erred in finding that the plaintiff had not invested any money in the operation of his concession.

V


The trial court erred in finding that plaintiff did not have any interest in the equipments used in the operation of the concession.

VI


The trial court erred in not giving more weight to the evidence submitted by the plaintiff than that submitted by the defendant.

In fact, the Attorney for plaintiffs-appellants in his prayer before the trial court for the approval and transmission of his Record on Appeal said the following:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Wherefore, it is respectfully prayed that this Record on Appeal be approved and duly transmitted to the Supreme Court. An issue of fact and of law being raised in this appeal, the whole oral and documentary evidence are hereby included by reference in this Record on Appeal."cralaw virtua1aw library

In similar cases 1 where we found that questions of fact were raised either by appellant or appellee, or by both, we have sent the same to the Court of Appeals for their consideration and decision, pursuant to the provisions of Sections 17 and 29 of the Judiciary Act of 1948.

In view of the foregoing, and because the present appeal involves questions both of law and fact, let the present case be sent to the Court of Appeals for consideration and decision.

Paras, C.J., Pablo, Bengzon, Padilla, Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion and Reyes, J. B. L., JJ., concur.

Endnotes:



1. Justo Et. Al., v. Hernando, 89 Phil. 268 and Samson v. Andal, 89 Phil. 627.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






October-1954 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-5805 October 7, 1954 - SAMONTE v. SAMONTE, ET AL

    096 Phil 1

  • G.R. No. L-5629 October 11, 1954 - LILI SISON JARANILLA v. CONSOLACION GONZALES

    096 Phil 3

  • G.R. No. L-6730 October 15, 1954 - PEDRO GABRIEL, ET AL v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL, ET AL

    096 Phil 10

  • G.R. No. L-6515 October 18, 1954 - DAGUHOY ENTERPRISES v. RITA L. PONCE

    096 Phil 15

  • G.R. No. L-7251 October 18, 1954 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. IRENEA ALIPAO

    096 Phil 20

  • G.R. No. L-7154 October 23, 1954 - PACIFIC MICRONISIAN LINE v. N. BAENS DEL ROSARIO

    096 Phil 23

  • G.R. No. L-6305 October 25, 1954 - AGUSTIN GIL v. ROSA S. TALAÑA

    096 Phil 32

  • G.R. No. L-6317 October 25, 1954 - RUFO SALVADOR v. ISIDRO ROMERO

    096 Phil 34

  • G.R. No. L-5572 October 26, 1954 - PEDRO GUERRERO v. SERAPION D

    096 Phil 37

  • G.R. No. L-7079 October 26, 1954 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO V. BAUTISTA

    096 Phil 43

  • G.R. No. L-6295 October 27, 1954 - WORLD WIDE INSURANCE AND SURETY CO. v. Hon. FRANCISCO E. JOSE

    096 Phil 45

  • G.R. No. L-7084 October 27, 1954 - SMITH v. REGISTRADOR DE TITULOS DE DAVAO

    096 Phil 53

  • G.R. No. L-6491 October 29, 1954 - LAKAS NG PAGKAKAISA SA PETER PAUL v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

    096 Phil 63

  • G.R. No. L-7057 October 29, 1954 - MACHINERY & ENGINEERING SUPPLIES v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS

    096 Phil 70

  • G.R. No. L-5767 October 30, 1954 - PLACIDA MINA, ET AL v. LAZARO DEGALA, ET AL

    096 Phil 77

  • G.R. No. L-6114 October 30, 1954 - SOUTHERN LUZON EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION v. JUANITA GOLPEO

    096 Phil 83

  • G.R. No. L-6301 October 30, 1954 - THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT OF CALOOCAN v. CHOAN HUAT & CO.

    096 Phil 88

  • G.R. No. L-6453 October 30, 1954 - ERNEST BERG v. VALENTIN TEUS

    096 Phil 102

  • G.R. No. L-6725 October 30, 1954 - AMPARO JOAQUIN GUTIERREZ ET AL. v. JOSE CAMUS

    096 Phil 114

  • G.R. No. L-6913 October 30, 1954 - SERGIO F. DEL CASTILLO v. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

    096 Phil 119

  • G.R. No. L-7189 October 30, 1954 - RAYMUNDO CABANGCALA v. SEVERO DOMINGO

    096 Phil 124

  • G.R. No. L-7198 October 30, 1954 - PACIENCIA G. PICZON v. JOHN DOE

    096 Phil 127