SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com

Endnotes:


1 Penned by Pacita Canizares-Nye; Manuel C. Herrera and Justo P. Torres, Jr., concurring.

2 Entitled Dominium Realty and Construction Corporation and Enrique D. Hemedes vs. R & B Insurance Corporation and Maxima Hemedes.

3 Annex D of Maxima Hemedes Petition; Rollo, pp. 113-114.

4 Annex E of Maxima Hemedes Petition; Rollo, pp. 115-117.

5 Annex "H" of Maxima Hemedes' Petition; Rollo, pp. 122-124.

6 Rollo of G.R. No. 108472, p. 17.

7 Docketed as Civil Case No. B-1766.

8 Rollo of G.R. No. 107132, pp. 107-108.

9 Entitled Maxima Hemedes vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals, Eleventh Division, Dominium Realty and Construction Corporation, Enrique D. Hemedes, and R & B Insurance Corporation.

10 Rollo of G.R. No. 107132, p. 28.

11 Entitled R & B Insurance Corporation vs. The Honorable Court of Appeals, Eleventh Division, Dominium Realty and Construction Corporation, Enrique D. Hemedes, and Maxima Hemedes.

12 Rollo of G.R. No. 108472, p. 34.

13 Ibid., pp. 63-64, 91-96.

14 Rollo of G.R. No. 107132, pp. 29-41.

15 Chavez vs. IAC, 191 SCRA 211 (1990).

16 Rollo, pp. 61, 90-96.

17 Rules of Court, Rule 131, sec. 3(e); Sulit vs. Court of Appeals, 268 SCRA 441 (1997).

18 Rollo of G.R. No. 107132, p. 94.

19 Ibid., p. 37.

20 Ibid., pp. 39-40.

21 People vs. Dones, 254 SCRA 696 (1996).

22 People vs. Subido, 253 SCRA 196 (1996), citing People vs. Aguilar, 222 SCRA 394 (1993).

23 Bunyi vs. Reyes, 39 SCRA 504 (1971), citing the Report of the Code Commission, p. 136.

24 Yanas vs. Acaylar, 136 SCRA 52 (1985); Heirs of Enrique Zambales vs. CA, 120 SCRA 897 (1983); Bunyi vs. Reyes, supra.

25 Civil Code, arts. 1331-1344.

26 Id., art. 1331.

27 Id., art. 1338.

28 Rollo of G.R. No. 108472, p. 64

29 Bunyi vs. Reyes, supra., citing Robinson vs. Villafuerte, 18 Phil. 171; Jocson vs. Estacion, 60 Phil. 1055.

30 Civil Code, art. 1409.

31 Heirs of Leopoldo Vencilao, Sr. vs. CA, 288 SCRA 574 (1998).

32 Ibid; Titong vs. CA, 287 SCRA 102 (1998).

33 People vs. Cahindo, 266 SCRA 554 (1997).

34 Rollo of G.R. No. 108472, pp. 65-66.

35 Ibid., pp. 47-55.

36 Legarda vs. CA, 280 SCRA 642 (1997).

37 The phrase innocent purchaser for value or any equivalent phrase shall be deemed to include an innocent lessee, mortgagee, or other encumbrancer for value. Presidential Decree No. 1529, sec. 32.

38 Mathay vs. CA, 295 SCRA 556 (1998).

39 Civil Code, art. 562.

40 Id., art. 566.

41 Id., art. 572.

42 Tolentino, II Civil Code of the Philippines, 318 (1992), citing Eleizegui vs. Manila Lawn Tennis Club, 2 Phil 309.

43 Ibid., 46.

44 Civil Code, art. 581.

45 Id., art. 600.

46 Cruz vs. CA, 281 SCRA 491 (1997).

47 Exceptional circumstances that would compel the Supreme Court to review the findings of fact of the lower courts are: (1) when the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculations, surmises or conjectures; (2) when the inference made is manifestly absurd, mistaken or impossible; (3) when there is grave abuse of discretion in the appreciation of facts; (4) when the judgment is premised on a misapprehension of facts; (5) when the findings of fact are conflicting; (6) when the Court of Appeals in making its findings, went beyond the issues of the case and the same is contrary to the admissions of both appellant and appellee; (7) when the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties and which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion; and (8) when the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are contrary to those of the trial court, or are mere conclusions without citation of specific evidence, or where the facts set forth by the petitioner are not disputed by the respondent, or where the findings of fact of the Court of Appeals are premised on absence of evidence but are contradicted by the evidence of record. Limketkai Sons Milling, Inc. vs. CA, 255 SCRA 626 (1996); Carolina Industries, Inc. vs. CMS Stock Brokerage, Inc., G.R. No. L-46908, May 17, 1980; Manlapaz vs. CA, 147 SCRA 236 (1987).

48 Carolina Industries, Inc. vs. CMS Stock Brokerage, Inc., supra.

49 Binalay vs. Manalo, 195 SCRA 374 (1991).

50 Arcelona vs. Court of Appeals, 280 SCRA 20 (1997).

51 Rules of Court, Rule 3, sec. 9.

52 Civil Code, art. 2229.

53 Morales vs. CA, 274 SCRA 282 (1997).




chanrobles.com



ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc. : www.chanroblesprofessionalreview.com
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com
ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles CPALE Review Online : www.chanroblescpareviewonline.com
ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series - Memory Man : www.chanroblesbar.com/memoryman