Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1990 > February 1990 Decisions > G.R. No. 85642 February 12, 1990 - EMILIO C. MACIAS, II v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 85642. February 12, 1990.]

EMILIO C. MACIAS, II, Petitioner, v. HON. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND HERMINIO G. TEVES, Respondents.

Lenin R. Victoriano and Victoriano L. Tizon for Petitioner.

Pablo E. Cabahug for Private Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; ELECTIONS; FACTUAL ISSUES ARE NOT REVIEWABLE BY THE SUPREME COURT. — Petitioner submits that the COMELEC should not have taken cognizance of the private respondent’s election protest since the same was filed on February 4, 1988 or eleven (11) days after the petitioner’s proclamation on January 24, 1988. Petitioner’s submission holds no water. As found by respondent COMELEC, the date of proclamation was January 25, 1988. Undeniably, this issue is factual, and as We have held time and again, "where the issues raised are factual, the same is not reviewable by the Supreme Court on certiorari (Cuerdo v. Commission on Audit, 166 SCRA 657). And therefore, the election protest filed on February 4, 1988, which is the tenth (10th) day from the date of proclamation, January 25, 1988, was well — within the prescribed period.

2. ID.; ID.; PROTEST; PRE-PROCLAMATION PROTEST APPEAL SUSPENDS RUNNING OF THE PERIOD FOR FILING AN ELECTION PROTEST. — Assuming however that the date of proclamation was January 24, 1988, the filing of the protest on February 4, 1988 was still within the period since private respondent filed a "Pre-Proclamation Protest Appeal" on January 24, 1988 effectively suspending the running of the period for filing an election protest as provided for in Section 248, Article XX of BP 881.

3. ID.; ID.; ID.; THAT CANDIDATE "DULY FILED A CERTIFICATE OF CANDIDACY" NOT REQUIRED TO BE SPECIFICALLY ALLEGED. — Anent the second issue, petitioner argues that because private respondent failed to allege in his original petition that he "duly filed a certificate of candidacy," respondent COMELEC did not acquire jurisdiction over the election protest. Petitioner’s argument is untenable. As correctly held by the COMELEC in the assailed Decision: "The Commission, First Division, notes that the above-mentioned legal provision does not require that a protest must state that it is being filed "by a candidate who has duly filed his certificate of candidacy." Sec. 250 of the Omnibus Election Code only provides that a protest must be filed by a candidate who "has duly filed his certificate of candidacy and has been voted for the same office", without requiring in said section that this matter must be specifically alleged in the protest. The Commission however notes that the original petition and/or protest filed by petitioner on February 4, 1988, pertinently alleges that the petitioner was a candidate for the position of Governor in the Province of Negros Oriental and was voted upon by the electorate during the election held on January 18, 1988. The Commission rules that this allegation substantially complies with the requirements of Sec. 250 of the Omnibus Election Code.


D E C I S I O N


PARAS, J.:


Questioned in this petition for certiorari are the orders of the respondent Commission on Elections (COMELEC), dated September 12, 1988 and October 26, 1988 denying petitioner’s (then protestee) motion to dismiss and motion for reconsideration, respectively. Petitioner contends that respondent COMELEC, through its First Division, acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction, in issuing said questioned orders.

Petitioner Emilio Macias II and private respondent Herminio G. Teves both ran for the position of Governor of Negros Oriental during the elections held on January 18, 1988. Petitioner was proclaimed Governor by the Provincial Board of Canvassers. The proclamation was actually held, as found by respondent COMELEC, on January 25, 1988 (p. 82, rollo), although the "Certificate of Canvass and Proclamation" evidencing said proclamation was dated January 24, 1988. (Annex "B-11," p. 30, Rollo).

On January 24, 1988, or the day before the proclamation, private respondent filed a "Pre-Proclamation Protest Appeal" with the COMELEC, docketed as SPC Case No. 88-212. On January 26, 1988, or the day after the proclamation, private respondent also filed with respondent Commission a "Petition to Set Aside, Suspend the Effects of or Annul the Proclamation of [the Petitioner] as Governor of Negros Oriental." The COMELEC dismissed the private respondent’s aforesaid protest and petition on January 30, 1988 and denied his Motion for Reconsideration on April 26, 1988.

On February 4, 1988, the private respondent filed a post-election protest with the COMELEC, docketed as Election Protest Case No. 88-14, and paid the docket fee of P200.00, as charged by the Electoral Adjudication Board. On February 12, 1988, the private respondent fled an "Amended Petition-Protest." The petitioner filed his Motion to Dismiss to the Original Petition and Amended Petition on February 23, 1988 and March 3, 1988, respectively. Thereafter, the parties filed their respective memoranda. On September 12, 1988, the COMELEC issued an Order denying the petitioner’s motion to dismiss. The COMELEC also denied the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration on October 26, 1988.

Hence, this Petition.

In a resolution dated February 28, 1989, the petition was given due course and the parties were required to file simultaneously their respective memoranda.chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

Petitioner raises the following issues:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"(1) Whether or not the election protest was seasonably filed; and

"(2) Whether or not the failure of herein private respondent to allege in his original petition that it was being filed "by a candidate who has duly filed his certificate of candidacy" and to pay the correct filing fee of P300.00 at the time of the filing of the original petition are jurisdictional defects which deprived the COMELEC of jurisdiction over his election protest." (p. 131, Rollo)

Petitioner submits that the COMELEC should not have taken cognizance of the private respondent’s election protest since the same was filed on February 4, 1988 or eleven (11) days after the petitioner’s proclamation on January 24, 1988. Petitioner anchors his first argument on the following:chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library

(a) the date typewritten in the "Certificate of Canvass and Proclamation" which is the best evidence is January 24, 1988; and

(b) that under Sec. 250 of BP 881, the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines, a sworn petition contesting the election of any regional, provincial or city official, shall be filed within ten (10) days after the proclamation of the results of the election. (Emphasis ours)

Petitioner’s submission holds no water. As found by respondent COMELEC, the date of proclamation was January 25, 1988. Undeniably, this issue is factual, and as We have held time and again, "where the issues raised are factual, the same is not reviewable by the Supreme Court on certiorari (Cuerdo v. Commission on Audit, 166 SCRA 657). And therefore, the election protest filed on February 4, 1988, which is the tenth (10th) day from the date of proclamation, January 25, 1988, was well — within the prescribed period. Assuming however that the date of proclamation was January 24, 1988, the filing of the protest on February 4, 1988 was still within the period since private respondent filed a "Pre-Proclamation Protest Appeal" on January 24, 1988 effectively suspending the running of the period for filing an election protest as provided for in Section 248, Article XX of BP 881:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Sec. 248. Effect of filing petition to annul or to suspend the proclamation. — The filing with the Commission of a petition to annul or to suspend the proclamation of any candidate shall suspend the running of the period within which to file an election protest or quo warranto proceedings."cralaw virtua1aw library

Anent the second issue, petitioner argues that because private respondent failed to allege in his original petition that he "duly filed a certificate of candidacy," respondent COMELEC did not acquire jurisdiction over the election protest.

Petitioner’s argument is untenable. As correctly held by the COMELEC in the assailed Decision:cralawnad

"The Commission, First Division, notes that the above-mentioned legal provision does not require that a protest must state that it is being filed "by a candidate who has duly filed his certificate of candidacy." Sec. 250 of the Omnibus Election Code only provides that a protest must be filed by a candidate who "has duly filed his certificate of candidacy and has been voted for the same office", without requiring in said section that this matter must be specifically alleged in the protest. The Commission however notes that the original petition and/or protest filed by petitioner on February 4, 1988, pertinently alleges that the petitioner was a candidate for the position of Governor in the Province of Negros Oriental and was voted upon by the electorate during the election held on January 18, 1988. The Commission rules that this allegation substantially complies with the requirements of Sec. 250 of the Omnibus Election Code. Be that as it may, the defect if any in the preliminary allegations of the original protest pertinent to the requirements of Section 250 of the Omnibus Election Code was cured when protestant filed his amended protest on February 12, 1988, before an answer could be filed by any protestee. Protestee’s answer was filed only on February 23, 1988, as disclosed by the records of this Commission. (pp. 3-4, Order; pp. 84-85, Rollo)

Petitioner also contends that because private respondent only paid P200 instead of P300 as required under COMELEC Resolution No. 1996, the Commission should have dismissed the protest. The COMELEC countered that the "blame however, should not be laid on the protestant for failure to pay in full the P300.00 docket fee on February 4, 1988, when the protest was filed considering that the docket clerk of the Electoral Contest Adjudication Department charged the said amount which protestant duly paid. Injustice will result if the instant protest is dismissed for failure of the protestant to pay the full amount of P300.00 docket fee on February 4, 1988, when he filed the original protest considering that it was not protestant’s fault that there was underpayment of the docket fee." (p. 84, Rollo) We agree with the contention of the respondent COMELEC.

PREMISES CONSIDERED, the instant petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit and the Temporary Restraining Order issued on December 27, 1988 is LIFTED.

SO ORDERED.

Fernan C . J., Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Feliciano, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento, Cortés, Griño-Aquino, Medialdea and Regalado, JJ., concur.




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






February-1990 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 48494 February 5, 1990 - BRENT SCHOOL, INC., ET AL. v. RONALDO ZAMORA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 66394 February 5, 1990 - PARADISE SAUNA, ET AL. v. ALEJANDRO NG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 75909 February 6, 1990 - RAMON FRANCISCO, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77457 February 5, 1990 - ANITA LLOSA-TAN v. SILAHIS INTERNATIONAL HOTEL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77777 February 5, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO BAGANO

  • G.R. No. 81322 February 5, 1990 - GREGORIO D. CANEDA, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86603 February 5, 1990 - ACTIVE WOOD PRODUCTS CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86647 February 5, 1990 - VIRGILIO P. ROBLES v. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88623 February 5, 1990 - REGISTER OF DEEDS OF MALABON, ET AL. v. RTC, MALABON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 40399 February 6, 1990 - MARCELINO C. AGNE, ET AL. v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 44980 February 6, 1990 - VIRGINIA MARAHAY v. MENELEO C. MELICOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 75154-55 February 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGER VICTOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76707 February 6, 1990 - RICARDO MEDINA, SR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77050 February 6, 1990 - TOMAS BAYAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77713 February 6, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO AGAN

  • G.R. No. 77867 February 6, 1990 - ISABEL DE LA PUERTA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80157 February 6, 1990 - AMALIA NARAZO v. EMPLOYEES’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-88-272 February 6, 1990 - RAUL H. SESBREÑO v. PEDRO T. GARCIA

  • G.R. No. 72129 February 7, 1990 - FILIPRO, INC. v. BLAS F. OPLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 74621 February 7, 1990 - BROKENSHIRE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77401 February 7, 1990 - SUZANO F. GONZALES, JR. v. HEHERSON T. ALVAREZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81100-01 February 7, 1990 - BACOLOD-MURCIA MILLING CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 81344 February 7, 1990 - IRENE BENEDICTO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82272 February 7, 1990 - PONCIANO M. LAYUG v. LOURDES QUISUMBING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84392 February 7, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SERGIO A. NABUNAT

  • G.R. No. 84448 February 7, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR T. BADUYA

  • G.R. Nos. 78432-33 February 9, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO CALDITO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 61570 February 12, 1990 - RUPERTO FULGADO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 62024 February 12, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GINA M. SAHAGUN

  • G.R. No. 72742 February 12, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TEOFILO OBANDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83308 February 12, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARCELINO ECLARINAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83484 February 12, 1990 - CELEDONIA SOLIVIO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85642 February 12, 1990 - EMILIO C. MACIAS, II v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87335 February 12, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. CRISTINA DE KNECHT, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 1625 February 12, 1990 - ANGEL L. BAUTISTA v. RAMON A. GONZALES

  • G.R. No. L-54305 February 14, 1990 - ATLAS CONSOLIDATED MINING & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 78732-33 February 14, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOVENIANO C. SOLIS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-31065 February 15, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. PIO R. MARCOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-45618 February 15, 1990 - MARIA C. ROLDAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-47747 February 15, 1990 - TAN ANG BUN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-49833 February 15, 1990 - JUANITO RAMOS, ET AL. v. BIENVENIDO A. EBARLE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-50373 February 15, 1990 - MANILA LIGHTER TRANSPORTATION, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-52295 February 15, 1990 - GUINOBATAN HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL ASSO., ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ALBAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-53585 February 15, 1990 - ROMULO VILLANUEVA v. FRANCISCO TANTUICO, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-59670 February 15, 1990 - LEONARDO N. ESTEPA v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-61293 February 15, 1990 - DOMINGO B. MADDUMBA, ET AL. v. GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 62572-73 February 15, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 69580 February 15, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JESUS FRANCISCO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 73382 February 15, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GORGONIO CAPILITAN

  • G.R. Nos. 75005-06 February 15, 1990 - JOSE RIVERA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79011 February 15, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SEMION L. MANGALINO

  • G.R. No. 79672 February 15, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROSENDO DELGADO

  • G.R. No. 81450 February 15, 1990 - JOHNSON G. CHUA v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84048 February 15, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LETICIA SANIDAD DE DEL SOCORRO

  • G.R. No. 84193 February 15, 1990 - DIOSDADO V. RUFFY v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85519 February 15, 1990 - UNIVERSITY OF STO. TOMAS, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86408 February 15, 1990 - BETA ELECTRIC CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88442 February 15, 1990 - FELIX A. VELASQUEZ v. UNDERSECRETARY OF JUSTICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-44409 February 1, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. IGNACIO O. GONZALES, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-50889 February 21, 1990 - MAXIMINO QUILISADIO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-54411 February 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MELECIO BIAGO

  • G.R. No. L-61113 February 21, 1990 - RICARDO MAXIMO, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF CAPIZ, BRANCH III, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-66574 February 21, 1990 - ANSELMA DIAZ, ET AL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76922 February 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO A. CORRALES

  • G.R. No. 80728 February 21, 1990 - PEARL S. BUCK FOUNDATION, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83613 February 21, 1990 - FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE CO. v. METRO PORT SERVICE, INC.

  • G.R. No. 85448 February 21, 1990 - BANCO DE ORO SAVINGS & MORTGAGE BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 87439 February 21, 1990 - ODIN SECURITY AGENCY v. DIONISIO C. DE LA SERNA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90639 February 21, 1990 - ESTATE OF CONCORDIA T. LIM, v. CITY OF MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25660 February 23, 1990 - LEOPOLDO VENCILAO, ET AL. v. TEODORO VANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-52018 February 23, 1990 - EFREN I. PLANA v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-52482 February 23, 1990 - SENTINEL INSURANCE CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-55854 February 23, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL., ET AL. v. OTILIO G. ABAYA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-60211 February 23, 1990 - PERSEVERANDO N. HERNANDEZ v. GREGORIO G. PINEDA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 75093 February 23, 1990 - DELIA R. SIBAL v. NOTRE DAME OF GREATER MANILA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76042 February 23, 1990 - JOSE M. BELEN v. FELICIDARIO M. BATOY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79160 February 23, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO P. BUSTARDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 84685 February 23, 1990 - ILAW AT BUKLOD NG MANGGAGAWA v. PURA FERRER-CALLEJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85733 February 23, 1990 - ENRIQUE LIM, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 46613 February 26, 1990 - SILLIMAN UNIVERSITY v. LUCIO BENARAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 71838 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LAMBERTO M. BORJA

  • G.R. No. 73722 February 26, 1990 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. K.M.K. GANI, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 76338-39 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENATO H. TAC-AN

  • G.R. Nos. 76493-94 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VIRGILIO URIBE

  • G.R. No. 76590 February 26, 1990 - MARIA G. DE LA CRUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 76607 February 26, 1990 - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL. v. ELIODORO B. GUINTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78885 February 26, 1990 - FILINVEST LAND, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79434 February 26, 1990 - DEOCRECIO DAVID v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80738 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LYDIA T. RAMA

  • G.R. No. 81356 February 26, 1990 - REYNOSO B. FLOREZA v. JAIME ONGPIN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85333 February 26, 1990 - CARMELITO L. PALACOL, ET AL. v. PURA FERRER-CALLEJA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86147 February 26, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 86250 February 26, 1990 - ALBERTO F. LACSON, ET AL. v. LUIS R. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 88190 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. URIEL TABLIZO

  • G.R. No. 88232 February 26, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HENEDINO P. EDUARTE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 89132 February 26, 1990 - LEONCIA BACLAYON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 77830 February 27, 1990 - VICTOR TALAVERA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 80270 February 27, 1990 - CITY MAYOR OF ZAMBOANGA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 90641 February 27, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO HERNANDEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 26539 February 28, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GAUDENCIO VERA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 48362 February 28, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FERNANDO RAFANAN

  • G.R. No. 70261 February 28, 1990 - MAURO BLARDONY, JR. v. JOSE L. COSCOLLUELA, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 70997 February 28, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANIEL JAVIER, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72145 February 28, 1990 - MA. EPPIE EDEN, ET AL. v. MINISTRY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 72805 February 28, 1990 - FILIPINAS MANUFACTURERS BANK v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 73741 February 28, 1990 - TEOFILO LINAZA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 77042-43 February 28, 1990 - RADIOWEALTH FINANCE CO., INC. v. INTERNATIONAL CORPORATE BANK, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 78903 February 28, 1990 - SEGUNDO DALION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79385 February 28, 1990 - STASA INCORPORATED v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 82488 February 28, 1990 - VICENTE ATILANO v. DIONISIO C. DE LA SERNA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 83768 February 28, 1990 - RADIO COMMUNICATIONS OF THE PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL. v. RUFUS B. RODRIGUEZ

  • G.R. No. 85284 February 28, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.