Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2015 > January 2015 Decisions > G.R. No. 195671, January 21, 2015 - ROGELIO J. GONZAGA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.:




G.R. No. 195671, January 21, 2015 - ROGELIO J. GONZAGA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 195671, January 21, 2015

ROGELIO J. GONZAGA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

D E C I S I O N

PERLAS-BERNABE, J.:

Assailed in this petition for review on certiorari1 are the Decision2 dated September 18, 2009 and the Resolution3 dated January 26, 2011 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 00427-MIN, which affirmed the Decision4 dated July 31, 2006 of the Regional Trial Court of Malaybalay City, Bukidnon, Branch 10 (RTC) in Criminal Case No. 9832-99, finding petitioner Rogelio J. Gonzaga (Rogelio) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property under Article 365 in relation to Article 263 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC).cralawred

The Facts

At around 6 o’clock in the morning of June 25, 1997, Dionesio Inguito, Sr. (Dionesio, Sr.) was driving his motorcycle along Brgy. Kiara, Don Carlos, Bukidnon towards Brgy. Bocboc5 of the same municipality, to bring his two (2)minor children, Dionesio Inguito, Jr. (Dionesio, Jr.) and Cherry Inguito6 (Cherry), to school.7 While they were ascending the curving road going to Bocboc on their proper lane on the right side of the road, a Toyota Land Cruiser(Land Cruiser) driven by Rogelio was swiftly descending the same lane from the opposite direction.  Dionesio, Sr. blew the horn of his motorcycle to signal the Land Cruiser to return to its proper lane but the Land Cruiser remained.8In order to avoid collision, Dionesio, Sr.tried to swerve to the left, but the Land Cruiser suddenly swerved towards the same direction and collided head-on with the motorcycle.9chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

As a result of the collision, Dionesio, Sr. and his 2 children were thrown off the motorcycle.  Dionesio, Sr. was pinned beneath the Land Cruiser,10 while Cherry and Dionesio, Jr. were thrown over the hood of the Land Cruiser and fell on the side of the road,11 causing injuriesto their legs. Siblings Rolf, Cherry,12 and Jenny Ann Aquino,who were traversing the same road aboard their own motorcycle,stopped to help and placed the victims together13 on the rightmost side of the road facing Brgy. Bocboc,14while Rogelio remained inside the Land Cruiser.15chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Rolf left the scene of the incident to seek further assistance, leaving his two (2) sisters to cater to the victims.16 Eventually, he chanced upon Kagawad Nerio Dadivas (Kgd. Dadivas), who had just opened his store, and informed the latter of the vehicular accident.After reporting the incident to the police and getting his vehicle, Kgd. Dadivas proceeded to the site and loaded the victims to his vehicle with Rolf’s assistance.17 Meanwhile, Rolf went to Brgy. Kawilihan to inform Dionesio, Sr.’s wife, Clemencia Inguito (Clemencia), of what had transpired.18chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Thereafter, the victims were brought to the Emergency Hospital of Maramag where they were treated.19Operations were performed on the legs of Dionesio, Jr. and Dionesio, Sr., but the latter eventually expired. Cherry’s leg was placed in a cast and she was confined in the hospital, together with Dionesio, Jr., for more than one (1) month, or until July 26, 1997.20 All the expenses were shouldered by Clemencia.21chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

In view of the foregoing mishap, the provincial prosecutor filed an Information22 charging Rogelio for Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property “with the aggravating circumstance that accused failed to lend on the spot to the injured party such help that was in his hands to give”23 before the RTC.Upon arraignment,24 Rogelio entered a plea of not guilty.25chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

In his defense, Rogelio claimed that he was driving the Land Cruiser on his proper lane along the descending curving road towards the direction of Kalilangan, Bukidnon, when,from a distance of about 70 meters away, he saw the motorcycles driven by Dionesio, Sr.and Rolf racing towards the curve from the opposite direction.26 Dionesio, Sr. was driving his motorcycle in a zigzag manner on the Land Cruiser’s lane while Rolf was on his proper lane.27 Undecided which side of the road to take to avoid collision, Rogelio stopped the Land Cruiser but the motorcycle of Dionesio, Sr., nonetheless, bumped into it.28 As a result of the impact, Cherry and Dionesio, Jr. were thrown over the roof and the hood of the Land Cruiser, respectively, and fell on the side of the road, while Dionesio, Sr. and the motorcycle were pinned beneath the land Cruiser.29 With the use of a jack handle and the assistance of two (2) persons, i.e., Jose Bacus and Reynaldo Quidato, who arrived at the scene, he was able to retrieve both Dionesio, Sr. and the motorcycle from beneath the Land Cruiser. Thereafter, they loaded the victims on board the Land Cruiser so they may be brought to the hospital, but the vehicle turned out to have defective brakes,so he asked other persons to secure another vehicle instead.30chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

The RTC Proceedings

In a Decision31 dated July 31, 2006 (July 31, 2006Decision), the RTC found Rogelio guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property punishable under Article 365 in relation to Article 263 of the RPC.32chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

It held that Rogelio’s act of driving very fast on the wrong side of the road was the proximate cause of the collision, resulting to the death of Dionesio, Sr. and serious physical injuries to Dionesio, Jr. and Cherry. Considering further that Rogelio failed to offer any help to the victims,33 the RTC sentenced him to suffer a higher indeterminate penalty of four (4) years, two (2) months of prision correccional maximum, as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor medium, as maximum, and ordered him to pay the following civil liabilities: (a) P50,000.00 as moral damages for the death of Dionesio, Sr.; (b) P30,000.00as moral damages for the mental anguish suffered by the family; (c) P200,000.00 for the medical expenses incurred; (d) P25,000.00 for the expenses incurred during the wake and the burial; (e) P30,000.00 for the damaged motorcycle; (f) P60,000.00 for the loss of earning capacity; and (g) P30,000.00 as attorney’s fees.34chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

Rogelio filed a motion for reconsideration35 which was partly granted in a Resolution36 dated February 22, 2007, reducing the penalty to four (4) months and one (1) day of arresto mayor, as minimum, to four (4) years and two (2) months of prision correccional, as maximum, with the same civil liabilities. The RTC reconsidered its opinion regarding Rogelio’s claim of having extended aid to the victims, concluding that the jack handle that was used to get the body of Dionesio, Sr. beneath the Land Cruiser could have been his in the absence of showing who owned the same.37 Aggrieved, Rogelio appealed to the CA.cralawred

The CA Ruling

In a Decision38 dated September 18, 2009, however, the CA reinstated the RTC’s July 31, 2006 Decision, thereby imposing on Rogelio the original indeterminate penalty of four (4) years, two (2) months of prision correccional maximum, as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor medium, as maximum, and the same civil liabilities, 39 hence, this petition.

The Issue Before the Court

The essential issue for the Court’s resolution is whether or not the CA correctly upheld Rogelio’s conviction in accordance with the RTC’s July 31, 2006Decision.cralawred

The Court’s Ruling

The petition lacks merit.

Reckless imprudence, as defined in Article 36540 of the RPC, consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.

In order to establish a motorist’s liability for the negligent operation of a vehicle, it must be shown that there was a direct causal connection between such negligence and the injuries or damages complained of. To constitute the offense of reckless driving, the act must be something more than a mere negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle – a willful and wanton disregard of the consequences is required.41 Willful, wanton or reckless disregard for the safety of others within the meaning of reckless driving statutes has been held to involve a conscious choice of a course of action which injures another, either with knowledge of serious danger to others involved, or with knowledge of facts which would disclose the danger to any reasonable person. Verily, it is the inexcusable lack of precaution or conscious indifference to the consequences of the conduct which supplies the criminal intent and brings an act of mere negligence and imprudence under the operation of the penal law, without regard to whether the private offended party may himself be considered likewise at fault.42chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

In the present case, the RTC and the CA uniformly found that Rogelio’s act of driving very fast on the wrong side of the road was the proximate cause of the collision, resulting to the death of Dionesio, Sr. and serious physical injuries to Dionesio, Jr. and Cherry. Notably, the road where the incident occurred was a curve sloping upwards towards Brgy. Bocboc where the Inguitos were bound and descending towards the opposite direction where Rogelio was going. Indeed, the very fact of speeding, under such circumstances, is indicative of imprudent behavior.As a motorist, Rogelio was bound to exercise ordinary care in such affair by driving at a reasonable rate of speed commensurate with the conditions encountered, as this would enable him to keep the vehicle under control and avoid injury to others using the highway.43]  Moreover, it is elementary in traffic school that a driver slows down before negotiating a curve as it may be reasonably anticipated that another vehicle may appear from the opposite direction at any moment. Hence, excessive speed, combined with other circumstances such as the occurrence of the accident on or near a curve, as in this case, constitutes negligence.44  Consequently, the Court finds that Rogelio acted recklessly and imprudently in driving at a fast speed on the wrong side of the road while approaching the curve where the incident happened, thereby rendering him criminally liable, as well as civilly accountable for the material damages resulting therefrom.

Nonetheless, while the CA and the RTC concurred that the proximate cause of the collision was Rogelio’s reckless driving, the CA Decision made no mention as to the presence or absence of the limiting element in the last paragraph of Article 365 of the RPC, which imposes the penalty next higher in degree upon the offender who “fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such help as may be in his hands to give.” Based on case law, the obligation under this paragraph: (a) is dependent on the means in the hands of the offender, i.e., the type and degree of assistance that he/she, at the time and place of the incident, is capable of giving; and (b) requires adequate proof.45chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

It is well to point out that the RTC’s July 31, 2006Decision found that Rogelio failed to offer any help to the victims46 and, thus, imposed on him the penalty next higher in degree. However, upon Rogelio’s motion, the RTC reconsidered its earlier conclusion, holding that the jack handle that was used to get the body of Dionesio, Sr. beneath the Land Cruiser could have been his in the absence of showing who owned the same and, accordingly, reduced the penalty.47 Nothing was said on this point by the CA which affirmed Rogelio’s conviction based on the RTC’s July 31, 2006Decision.

The Court has perused the records and found contradictory testimonies presented by the prosecution and the defense on this matter. Considering however, that Cherry herself admitted that the victims were first loaded on the Land Cruiser before they were transferred to Kgd. Dadivas’s vehicle,48 the Court is inclined to sustain Rogelio’s claim that he tried to extend help to the victims, but when he started the engine with the intention to go to the hospital, he discovered that the vehicle had no brakes.49 Hence, in imposing the proper penalty on the accused, the qualifying circumstance under the last paragraph of Article 365of the RPC should not be considered.

Here, Rogelio was charged with the offense of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property under Article 365 in relation to Article 26350 of the RPC, a complex crime. Article 48 of the RPC provides that when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime, in this case, Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide, shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.

Under Article 365 of the RPC, when reckless imprudence in the use of a motor vehicle results in the death of a person, as in this case, the accused shall be punished with the penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods, i.e., two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day to six (6) years. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law,51 the minimum of said penalty should be taken from arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, or four (4) months and one (1) day to two (2) years and four (4) months. Consequently, the Court finds a need to modify the penalty to be imposed on Rogelio and thus, sentences him to suffer an indeterminate penalty of two (2) years of prision correccional in its minimum, as minimum, to six years of prision correccional in its maximum, as maximum.

As a final note, the Court clarifies that the order for the payment of “moral damages” in the amount of P50,000.00for the death of Dionesio, Sr.should be, properly speaking, denominated as one for the payment of “civil indemnity” as they were not awarded under the parameters of the Civil Code relevant thereto,52but was one “given without need of proof other than the fact of death as a result of the crime and proof of [the accused’s] responsibility for it.”53 This is a palpable legal error which the Court should correct if only for terminological propriety. With the private complainant not herein impleaded, the rest of the RTC’s July 31, 2006 Decision with respect to the civil liabilities awarded should remain undisturbed. Note that, in line with existing jurisprudence, interest at the rate of six percent (6) per annum shall be imposed on all damages awarded from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.54chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrarychanrobleslaw

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated September 18, 2009 and the Resolution dated January 26, 2011 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 00427-MIN, finding petitioner Rogelio J. Gonzaga guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide with Double Serious Physical Injuries and Damage to Property under Article 365 in relation to Article 263 of the Revised Penal Code are hereby AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS:

(a)
Petitioner is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of two (2) years of prision correccional in its minimum, as minimum, to six (6) years of prision correccional in its maximum, as maximum; and
(b)
The award of P50,000.00 for the death of Dionesio Inguito, Sr. in favor of his heirs is denominated as “civil indemnity,”instead of “moral damages.”
(c)
All monetary awards for damages shall bear interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of judgment until fully paid.


SO ORDERED.cralawlawlibrary

Sereno, C.J., (Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Bersamin, and Perez, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:


1Rollo, pp. 8-29.

2 Id. at 32-45. Penned by Associate Justice Edgardo A. Camello with Associate Justices Edgardo T. Lloren and Leoncia R. Dimagiba, concurring.

3 Id. at 47-49.

4 Id. at 50-58. Penned by Judge Josefina Gentiles Bacal.

5 “Bokbok” in some parts of the records.

6 “Cherry Enguito” in some parts of the records.

7 See Information, records, pp. 43-44. See also Transcript of Stenographic Notes (TSN), September 13, 2000, pp. 6-10.

8Rollo, p. 35.

9 TSN, September 13, 2000, pp. 15-16.

10Rollo, p. 35.

11 Id. at 60.

12 Incorrectly referred to as Rolf’s brother, Jerry, in the CA’s September 18, 2009 Decision; id. at 35. See also the RTC’s July 31, 2006 Decision relating to Rolf’s testimony that he was with his two younger sisters, Jenny Ann and Cherry, at the time and place of the incident; id. at 52. See Rolf’s testimony; TSN, September 25, 2000, p. 8.

13Rollo, p. 35.

14 See Sketch prepared by Rolf Aquino when he testified on September 25, 2000; records, p. 69. See also TSN, September 25, 2000, pp. 14-17 and 21-22.

15 TSN, September 25, 2000, pp. 24-25.

16 See TSN, September 25, 2000, pp. 25-26.

17 See TSN, July 25, 2001, pp. 6-12.

18 TSN, September 25, 2000, p.31.

19Rollo, p. 36.

20 Id. at 52.

21 Id. at 36.

22 Dated July 28, 1999.(Records, pp. 43-44.)

23 Id. at 43. See also rollo, pp. 50-51.

24 See Certificate of Arraignment dated November 17, 1999; id. at 51.

25 Id. See also rollo, p. 51.

26 TSN, March 13, 2003, pp. 6-8.

27 Id. at 7-8.

28Rollo, pp. 12-13 and 55.

29 TSN, March 13, 2003, p. 9.

30Rollo, p. 55.

31 Id. at 50-58.

32 Id. at 58.

33 Id. at57.

34 Id. at 58.

35 Dated September 27, 2006.(Records, pp. 193-210.)

36Rollo, pp.59-61.

37 Id. at 61.

38 Id. at 32-45.

39 Id. at 44.

40  Art. 365. Imprudence and negligence. — Any person who, by reckless imprudence, shall commit any act which, had it been intentional, would constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its medium period; if it would have constituted a less grave felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum and medium periods shall be imposed; if it would have constituted a light felony, the penalty of arresto menor in its maximum period shall be imposed.

Any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall commit an act which would, otherwise, constitute a grave felony, shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its medium and maximum periods; if it would have constituted a less serious felony, the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period shall be imposed.

When the execution of the act covered by this article shall have only resulted in damage to the property of another, the offender shall be punished by a fine ranging from an amount equal to the value of said damages to three times such value, but which shall in no case be less than 25 pesos.

A fine not exceeding two hundred pesos and censure shall be imposed upon any person who, by simple imprudence or negligence, shall cause some wrong which, if done maliciously, would have constituted a light felony.

In the imposition of these penalties, the court shall exercise their sound discretion, without regard to the rules prescribed in Article 64.

The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable:
  1. When the penalty provided for the offense is equal to or lower than those provided in the first two paragraphs of this article, in which case the court shall impose the penalty next lower in degree than that which should be imposed, in the period which they may deem proper to apply.

  2. When, by imprudence or negligence and with violation of the Automobile Law [Act No. 3992 entitled “An Act to Amend and Compile the Laws Relative to Motor Vehicles”], the death of a person shall be caused, in which case the defendant shall be punished by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods.

Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of intelligence, physical conditions and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place.

Simple imprudence consists in the lack of precaution displayed in those cases in which the damage impending to be caused is not immediate nor the danger clearly manifest.

The penalty next higher in degree to those provided for in this article shall be imposed upon the offender who fails to lend on the spot to the injured parties such help as may be in his hands to give. (Emphases supplied)

41Dumayag v. People, G.R. No. 172778, November 26, 2012, 686 SCRA 347, 359.

42Caminos, Jr. v. People, 605 Phil. 422, 434-435 (2009).

43 Id. at 437.

44Gabriel v. CA, 483 Phil. 142, 157-158 (2004).

45 Abueva v. People, 438 Phil. 610, 623-624 (2002).

46Rollo, p. 57.

47 Id. at 61.

48 TSN, October 11, 2000, pp. 15-17.

49 TSN, March 13, 2003, p. 15.

50  Art. 263. Serious physical injuries. — Any person who shall wound, beat, or assault another, shall be guilty of the crime of serious physical injuries and shall suffer:

  1. The penalty of prision mayor, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the injured person shall become insane, imbecile, impotent, or blind;

  2. The penalty of prision correccional in its medium and maximum period, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have lost the use of speech or the power to hear or to smell, or shall have lost an eye, a hand, a foot, an arm, or a leg, or shall have lost the use of any such member, or shall have become incapacitated for the work in which he was theretofore habitually engaged;

  3. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods, if in consequence of the physical injuries inflicted, the person injured shall have become deformed, or shall have lost any other part of his body, or shall have lost the use thereof, or shall have been ill or incapacitated for the performance of the work in which he as habitually engaged for a period of more than ninety days;

  4. The penalty of arresto mayor in its maximum period to prision correccional in its minimum period, if the physical injuries inflicted shall have caused the illness or incapacity for labor of the injured person for more than thirty days.
If the offense shall have been committed against any of the persons enumerated in Article 246, or with attendance of any of the circumstances mentioned in Article 248, the case covered by subdivision number 1 of this Article shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its medium and maximum periods; the case covered by subdivision number 2 by prision correccional in its maximum period to prision mayor in its minimum period; the case covered by subdivision number 3 by prision correccional in its medium and maximum periods; and the case covered by subdivision number 4 by prision correccional in its minimum and medium periods.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph shall not be applicable to a parent who shall inflict physical injuries upon his child by excessive chastisement.

51 Pertinently, Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence Law  which provides:ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary
Section 1. Hereafter, in imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code, or its amendments, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum term of which shall be that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed under the rules of the said Code, and the minimum shall be within the range of the penalty next lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense; and if the offense is punished by any other law, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall not exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum term prescribed by the same.
52 See Articles 2217 to 2220 of the Civil Code.

53People v. Berondo, Jr., 601 Phil. 538, 546 (2009); citing People v. Whisenhunt, 420 Phil. 677, 701 (2001).

54 See People of the Philippines v. Torres, G.R. No. 189850, September 22, 2014.



Back to Home | Back to Main


chanrobles.com



ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com





January-2015 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 200013, January 14, 2015 - BETTY GEPULLE-GARBO, REPRESENTED BY ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, MINDA G. ROSALES(NOW REPRESENTED BY HER NEW ATTORNEY-IN-FACT, GARY LLOYD G. ROSALES), Petitioner, v. SPOUSES VICTOREY ANTONIO GARABATO AND JOSEPHINE S. GARABATO, Respondents.

  • A.C. No. 8235, January 27, 2015 - JOSELITO F. TEJANO, Complainant, v. ATTY. BENJAMIN F. BATERINA, Respondent.

  • A.M. No. 09-6-1-SC, January 21, 2015 - RE: VIOLATION OF RULES ON NOTARIAL PRACTICE

  • G.R. No. 210634, January 14, 2015 - NORIEL R. MONTIERRO, Petitioner, v. RICKMERS MARINE AGENCY PHILS., INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 194499, January 14, 2015 - MANUEL R. PORTUGUEZ, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 187892, January 14, 2015 - UNGAY MALOBAGO MINES, INC. Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 203384, January 14, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. SPS. JOSE CASTUERA AND PERLA CASTUERA, Respondents.

  • A.M. No. P-14-3194 (Formerly A.M. No. 14-1-01-MTC), January 27, 2015 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. CONSTANTINO P. REDOÑA, FORMER CLERK OF COURT II, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT, TANAUAN, LEYTE, Respondent.

  • G.R. Nos. 212140-41, January 21, 2015 - SENATOR JINGGOY EJERCITO ESTRADA, Petitioner, v. BERSAMIN, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, FIELD INVESTIGATION OFFICE, OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, NATIONAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION AND ATTY. LEVITO D. BALIGOD, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 179491, January 14, 2015 - ALEJANDRO C. ALMENDRAS, JR., Petitioner, v. ALEXIS C. ALMENDRAS, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 168950, January 14, 2015 - ROHM APOLLO SEMICONDUCTOR PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondents.

  • A.M. No. P-08-2465 [Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 04-1849-P], January 12, 2015 - CONCHITA S. BAHALA, Complainant, v. CIRILO DUCA, SHERIFF III, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, BRANCH 1, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, Respondent.

  • A.C. No. 10568 [Formerly CBD Case No. 10-2753], January 13, 2015 - MARILEN G. SOLIMAN, Complainant, v. ATTY. DITAS LERIOS-AMBOY, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209346, January 12, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. ARNALDO BOSITO Y CHAVENIA, Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 200797, January 12, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANOLITO OPIANA Y TANAEL, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 207993, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. GERARDO ENUMERABLE Y DE VILLA, Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 206666, January 21, 2015 - ATTY. ALICIA RISOS-VIDAL, Petitioner, ALFREDO S. LIM, Petitioner-Intervenor, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 200333, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DOMINGO DILLA Y PAULAR, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 191540, January 21, 2015 - SPOUSES JOSE O. GATUSLAO AND ERMILA LEONILA LIMSIACO-GATUSLAO, Petitioners, v. LEO RAY V. YANSON, Respondent.

  • A.M. No. P-11-2940, January 21, 2015 - JUDGE GODOFREDO B. ABUL, JR., Complainant, v. GEORGE E. VIAJAR, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 4, BUTUAN CITY, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 209605, January 12, 2015 - NEIL B. AGUILAR AND RUBEN CALIMBAS, Petitioners, v. LIGHTBRINGERS CREDIT COOPERATIVE, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 212196, January 12, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAMIL DORIA DAHIL AND ROMMEL CASTRO Y CARLOS, Accused-Appellants.

  • A.C. No. 10576, January 14, 2015 - ARCATOMY S. GUARIN, Complainant, v. ATTY. CHRISTINE A.C. LIMPIN, Respondent.

  • A.C. No. 7325, January 21, 2015 - DR. DOMICIANO F. VILLAHERMOSA, SR., Complainant, v. ATTY. ISIDRO L. CARACOL, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 211211, January 14, 2015 - ROMMEL B. DARAUG, Petitioner, v. KGJS FLEET MANAGEMENT MANILA, INC., KRISTIAN GERHARD JEBSEN SKIPSREDER, MR. GUY DOMINO A. MACAPAYAG AND/OR M/V “IBIS ARROW,” Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 192270, January 26, 2015 - IRENE D. OFILADA, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES RUBEN ANDAL AND MIRAFLOR ANDAL, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 193451, January 28, 2015 - ANTONIO M. MAGTALAS, Petitioner, v. ISIDORO A. ANTE, RAUL C. ADDATU, NICANOR B. PADILLA, JR., DANTE Y. CEÑIDO, AND RHAMIR C. DALIOAN, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 197011, January 28, 2015 - ESSENCIA Q. MANARPIIS, Petitioner, v. TEXAN PHILIPPINES, INC., RICHARD TAN AND CATHERINE P. RIALUBIN-TAN, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 206562, January 21, 2015 - UNICOL MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC., LINK MARINE PTE. LTD. AND/OR VICTORIANO B. TIROL, III, Petitioners, v. DELIA MALIPOT, IN BEHALF OF GLICERIO MALIPOT, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 192406, January 21, 2015 - ONE SHIPPING CORP., AND/OR ONE SHIPPING KABUSHIKI KAISHA/JAPAN, Petitioner, v. IMELDA C. PEÑAFIEL, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 208790, January 21, 2015 - GLENN VIÑAS, Petitioner, v. MARY GRACE PAREL-VIÑAS, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015 - THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD, REPRESENTED BY THE MOST REV. BISHOP VICENTE M. NAVARRA AND THE BISHOP HIMSELF IN HIS PERSONAL CAPACITY, Petitioners, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND THE ELECTION OFFICER OF BACOLOD CITY, ATTY. MAVIL V. MAJARUCON, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 190912, January 12, 2015 - GARY FANTASTICO AND ROLANDO VILLANUEVA, Petitioners, v. ELPIDIO MALICSE, SR. AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 204702, January 14, 2015 - RICARDO C. HONRADO, Petitioner, v. GMA NETWORK FILMS, INC., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 178169, January 12, 2015 - NFF INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. G & L ASSOCIATED BROKERAGE AND/OR GERARDO TRINIDAD, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 204444, January 14, 2015 - VIRGILIO C. BRIONES, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS AND CASH ASIA CREDIT CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 213525, January 27, 2015 - FORTUNE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT (COA) PROPER; COA REGIONAL OFFICE NO. VI-WESTERN VISAYAS; AUDIT GROUP LGS-B, PROVINCE OF ANTIQUE; AND PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF ANTIQUE, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 210760, January 26, 2015 - KYLE ANTHONY ZABALA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. Nos. 183152-54, January 21, 2015 - REYNALDO H. JAYLO, WILLIAM VALENZONA AND ANTONIO G. HABALO, Petitioners, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION), PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES AND HEIRS OF COL. ROLANDO DE GUZMAN, FRANCO CALANOG AND AVELINO MANGUERA, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 187226, January 28, 2015 - CHERYLL SANTOS LEUS, Petitioner, v. ST. SCHOLASTICA’S COLLEGE WESTGROVE AND/OR SR. EDNA QUIAMBAO, OSB, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 191470, January 26, 2015 - AUGUSTO M. AQUINO, Petitioner, v. HON. ISMAEL P. CASABAR, AS PRESIDING JUDGE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT-GUIMBA, NUEVA ECIJA, BRANCH 33 AND MA. ALA F. DOMINGO AND MARGARITA IRENE F. DOMINGO, SUBSTITUTING HEIRS OF THE DECEASED ANGEL T. DOMINGO, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 193468, January 28, 2015 - AL O. EYANA, Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE TRANSMARINE CARRIERS, INC., ALAIN A. GARILLOS, CELEBRITY CRUISES, INC. (U.S.A.), Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 189571, January 21, 2015 - THE HONORABLE MONETARY BOARD AND GAIL U. FULE, DIRECTOR, SUPERVISION AND EXAMINATION DEPARTMENT II, AND BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS, Petitioners, v. PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 202837, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAKIM MINANGA Y DUMANSAL, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 194885, January 26, 2015 - C.F. SHARP CREW MANAGEMENT, INC. AND REEDEREI CLAUS PETER OFFEN, Petitioners, v. CLEMENTE M. PEREZ, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 205433, January 21, 2015 - OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, Petitioner, v. AVELINO DE ZOSA AND BARTOLOME DELA CRUZ, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 204866, January 21, 2015 - RUKS KONSULT AND CONSTRUCTION, Petitioner, v. ADWORLD SIGN AND ADVERTISING CORPORATION* AND TRANSWORLD MEDIA ADS, INC., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 163928, January 21, 2015 - MANUEL JUSAYAN,ALFREDO JUSAYAN, AND MICHAEL JUSAYAN, Petitioners, v. JORGE SOMBILLA, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 195272, January 14, 2015 - BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS (FORMERLY PRUDENTIAL BANK), Petitioner, v. SPOUSES DAVID M. CASTRO AND CONSUELO B. CASTRO, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 176508, January 12, 2015 - SAINT MARY CRUSADE TO ALLEVIATE POVERTY OF BRETHREN FOUNDATION, INC., Petitioner, v. HON. TEODORO T. RIEL, ACTING PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION, BRANCH 85, QUEZON CITY, Respondent.; UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINES, Intervenor.

  • G.R. No. 202687, January 14, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JERIC PAVIA Y PALIZA aka “JERIC” AND JUAN BUENDIA Y DELOS REYES aka “JUNE”, Accused-Appellants.

  • G.R. Nos. 193383-84, January 14, 2015 - CBK POWER COMPANY LIMITED, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent.; G.R. NOS. 193407-08 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. CBK POWER COMPANY LIMITED, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 206832, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALFREDO MORALES Y LAM, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 212932, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARNEL BALUTE Y VILLANUEVA, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. Nos. 209655-60, January 14, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PALMY TIBAYAN AND RICO Z. PUERTO, Accused-Appellants.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-15-2405 [Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 12-3919-RTJ], January 12, 2015 - ANTONIO S. ASCAÑO, JR., CONSOLACION D. DANTES, BASILISA A. OBALO, JULIETA D. TOLEDO, JOSEPH Z. MAAC, EMILIANO E. LUMBOY, TITA F. BERNARDO, IGMEDIO L. NOGUERA, FIDEL S. SARMIENTO, SR., DAN T. TAUNAN, AMALIA G. SANTOS, AVELINA M. COLONIA, ERIC S. PASTRANA, AND MARIVEL B. ISON, Complaints, v. PRESIDING JUDGE JOSE S. JACINTO, JR., BRANCH 45, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, SAN JOSE OCCIDENTAL MINDORO, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 198756, January 13, 2015 - BANCO DE ORO, BANK OF COMMERCE, CHINA BANKING CORPORATION, METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY, PHILIPPINE BANK OF COMMUNICATIONS, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK AND PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK, Petitioners, RIZAL COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION AND RCBC CAPITAL CORPORATION, Petitioners, CAUCUS OF DEVELOPMENT NGO NETWORKS, Petitioner-Intervenor, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE, SECRETARY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE, THE NATIONAL TREASURER AND BUREAU OF TREASURY, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 156995, January 12, 2015 - RUBEN MANALANG, CARLOS MANALANG, CONCEPCION GONZALES AND LUIS MANALANG, Petitioners, v. BIENVENIDO AND MERCEDES BACANI, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 207942, January 12, 2015 - YINLU BICOL MINING CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. TRANS-ASIA OIL AND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 185544, January 13, 2015 - THE LAW FIRM OF LAGUESMA MAGSALIN CONSULTA AND GASTARDO, Petitioner, v. THE COMMISSION ON AUDIT AND/OR REYNALDO A. VILLAR AND JUANITO G. ESPINO, JR. IN THEIR CAPACITIES AS CHAIRMAN AND COMMISSIONER, RESPECTIVELY, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 189272, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. CHI CHAN LIU A. K. A. CHAN QUE AND HUI LAO CHUNG A.K.A. LEOFE SENGLAO, Appellants.

  • G.R. Nos. 209672-74, January 14, 2015 - EDMUND SIA, Petitioner, v. WILFREDO ARCENAS, FERNANDO LOPEZ, AND PABLO RAFANAN, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 184458, January 14, 2015 - RODRIGO RIVERA, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES SALVADOR CHUA AND S. VIOLETA CHUA, Respondents.; G.R. NO. 184472 - SPS. SALVADOR CHUA AND VIOLETA S. CHUA, Petitioners, v. RODRIGO RIVERA, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 195671, January 21, 2015 - ROGELIO J. GONZAGA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • A.M. No. P-14-3281 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 12-3998-P), January 28, 2015 - FELISICIMO* R. SABIJON AND ZENAIDA A. SABIJON, Complainants, v. BENEDICT** M. DE JUAN, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF KABACAN, NORTH COTABATO, BRANCH 22, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 188016, January 14, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. TEAM (PHILS.) ENERGY CORPORATION (FORMERLY MIRANT (PHILS.) ENERGY CORPORATION), Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 182864, January 12, 2015 - EASTERN SHIPPING LINES, INC., Petitioner, v. BPI/MS INSURANCE CORP., & MITSUI SUMITOMO INSURANCE CO., LTD., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 166357, January 14, 2015 - VALERIO E. KALAW, Petitioner, v. MA. ELENA FERNANDEZ, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 195580, January 28, 2015 - NARRA NICKEL MINING AND DEVELOPMENT CORP., TESORO MINING AND DEVELOPMENT, INC., AND MCARTHUR MINING, INC., Petitioners, v. REDMONT CONSOLIDATED MINES CORP., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 210660, January 21, 2015 - FLOR G. DAYO, Petitioner, v. STATUS MARITIME CORPORATION AND/OR NAFTO TRADE SHIPPING COMMERCIAL S.A., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 204689, January 21, 2015 - STRONGHOLD INSURANCE COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, v. SPOUSES RUNE AND LEA STROEM, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 206526, January 28, 2015 - WINEBRENNER & IÑIGO INSURANCE BROKERS, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 203351, January 21, 2015 - PANAY POWER CORPORATION (FORMERLY AVON RIVER POWER HOLDINGS CORPORATION), Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondents.

  • UDK-15143, January 21, 2015 - IN THE MATTER OF: SAVE THE SUPREME COURT JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE AND FISCAL AUTONOMY MOVEMENT v. ABOLITION OF JUDICIARY DEVELOPMENT FUND (JDF) AND REDUCTION OF FISCAL AUTONOMY.

  • G.R. No. 209499, January 28, 2015 - MA. CHARITO C. GADIA, ERNESTO M. PEÑAS, GEMMABELLE B. REMO, LORENA S. QUESEA, MARIE JOY FRANCISCO, BEVERLY A. CABINGAS, IVEE U. BALINGIT, ROMA ANGELICA O. BORJA, MARIE JOAN RAMOS, KIM GUEVARRA, LYNN S. DE LOS SANTOS, CAREN C. ENCANTO, EIDEN BALDOVINO, JACQUELINE B. CASTRENCE, MA. ESTRELLA V. LAPUZ, JOSELITO L. LORD, RAYMOND G. SANTOS, ABIGAIL M. VILORIA, ROMMEL C. ACOSTA, FRANCIS JAN S. BAYLON, ERIC O. PADIERNOS, MA. LENELL P. AARON, CRISNELL P. AARON, AND LAWRENCE CHRISTOPHER F. PAPA, Petitioners, v. SYKES ASIA, INC./ CHUCK SYKES/ MIKE HINDS/ MICHAEL HENDERSON, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 200169, January 28, 2015 - RODOLFO S. AGUILAR, Petitioner v. EDNA G. SIASAT, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 199648, January 28, 2015 - FIRST OPTIMA REALTY CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. SECURITRON SECURITY SERVICES, INC., Respondents.

  • A.C. No. 10573, January 13, 2015 - FERNANDO W. CHU, Complainant, v. ATTY. JOSE C. GUICO, JR., Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 180147, January 14, 2015 - SARA LEE PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL.,1 Respondents.; G.R. NO. 180148 - ARIS PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 180149 - SARA LEE CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 180150 - CESAR C. CRUZ, Petitioner, v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 180319 - FASHION ACCESSORIES PHILS., INC., Petitioner, v. EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 180685 - EMILINDA D. MACATLANG, ET AL., Petitioners, v. NLRC, ARIS PHILIPPINES, INC., FASHION ACCESSORIES PHILS., INC., SARA LEE CORPORATION, SARA LEE PHILIPPINES, INC., COLLIN BEAL AND ATTY. CESAR C. CRUZ, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 185812, January 13, 2015 - MARITIME INDUSTRY AUTHORITY, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 203026, January 28, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NATHANIEL PASION Y DELA CRUZ A.K.A. “ATHAN” AND DENNIS MICHAEL PAZ Y SIBAYAN, Accused-Appellants.

  • G.R. No. 165354, January 12, 2015 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY THE NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. HEIRS OF SATURNINO Q. BORBON, AND COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 148748, January 14, 2015 - IMELDA, LEONARDO, FIDELINO, AZUCENA, JOSEFINA, ANITA AND SISA, ALL SURNAMED SYJUCO, Petitioners, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner-Intervenor, v. FELISA D. BONIFACIO AND VSD REALTY & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 206393, January 21, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MICHAEL JOSON Y ROGANDO, Defendant-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 168406, January 14, 2015 - CLUB FILIPINO, INC. AND ATTY. ROBERTO F. DE LEON, Petitioners, v. BENJAMIN BAUTISTA, RONIE SUALOG, JOEL CALIDA, JOHNNY ARINTO, CARLITO PRESENTACION, AND ROBERTO DE GUZMAN, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 191972, January 26, 2015 - HENRY ONG LAY HIN, Petitioner, v. COURT OF APPEALS (2ND DIVISION), HON. GABRIEL T. INGLES, AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF RTC BRANCH 58, CEBU CITY, AND THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 211002, January 21, 2015 - RICHARD RICALDE, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 174184, January 28, 2015 - G.J.T. REBUILDERS MACHINE SHOP, GODOFREDO TRILLANA, AND JULIANA TRILLANA, Petitioners, v. RICARDO AMBOS, BENJAMIN PUTIAN, AND RUSSELL AMBOS, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 109645, January 21, 2015 - ORTIGAS & COMPANY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Petitioner, v. JUDGE TIRSO VELASCO AND DOLORES V. MOLINA, Respondents.; [G.R. No. 112564] - DOLORES V. MOLINA, Petitioner, v. HON. PRESIDING JUDGE OF RTC, QUEZON CITY, BR. 105 AND MANILA BANKING CORPORATION, Respondents.; [G.R. No. 128422] - DOLORES V. MOLINA, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS AND EPIMACO ORETA, Respondents.; [G.R. No. 128911] - THE MANILA BANKING CORPORATION AND ALBERTO V. REYES, Petitioners, v. DOLORES V. MOLINA AND HON. MARCIANO BACALLA, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF QUEZON CITY, BRANCH 216, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 167519, January 14, 2015 - THE WELLEX GROUP, INC., Petitioner, v. U-LAND AIRLINES, CO., LTD., Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 201151, January 14, 2015 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NESTOR SUAREZ Y MAGTAGNOB, Accused-Appellant.

  • G.R. No. 191710, January 14, 2015 - DEMETRIA DE GUZMAN, AS SUBSTITUTED BY HER HEIRS OLGA C. BARBASO AND NOLI G. CEMENTTNA;* LOLITA A. DE GUZMAN; ESTHER G.MILAN; BANAAG A. DE GUZMAN; AMOR G. APOLO, AS SUBSTITUTED BY HIS HEIRS ALBERTO T. APOLO, MARK APOLO AND GEORGE APOLO;* HERMINIO A. DE GUZMAN; LEONOR G. VTVENCIO; NORMA A. DE GUZMAN; AND JOSEFINA G. HERNANDEZ, Petitioners, v. FBLINVEST DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 168616, January 28, 2015 - HOME GUARANTY CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. LA SAVOIE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Respondent.

  • G.R. No. 200628, January 13, 2015 - MARIA THERESA G. GUTIERREZ, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT AND AUDITOR NARCISA DJ JOAQUIN, Respondents.

  • G.R. No. 198587, January 14, 2015 - SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINES (SAUDIA) AND BRENDA J. BETIA, Petitioners, v. MA. JOPETTE M. REBESENCIO, MONTASSAH B. SACAR-ADIONG, ROUEN RUTH A. CRISTOBAL AND LORAINE S. SCHNEIDER-CRUZ, Respondents.