CASE 2019-0015: JOAQUINA ZAMBALES ET AL VS SALVACION VILLON ZAMBALES (G.R. No. 216878, 03 April 2019, PERALTA, J) (SUBJECT/S: FACTUAL FINDINGS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS GENERALY CONCLUSIVE; EVIDENCE NOT OFFERED CANNOT BE CONSIDERED) (BRIEF TITLE: ZAMBALES VS ZAMBALES)

 

DISPOSITIVE:

 

“WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby DENIED for lack of merit. The September 30, 2013 Decision and the December 12, 2014 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 97079 are AFFIRMED.



SO ORDERED.”

 

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

 

LIMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE SC:

 

REVIEW OF ERRORS OF LAW ALLEGEDLY COMMITTED BY THE APPELLATE COURT.

 

“It bears emphasis that the factual findings of the appellate court generally are conclusive, and carry even more weight when said court affirms the findings of the trial court, absent any showing that the findings are totally devoid of support in the records, or that they are so glaringly erroneous as to constitute grave abuse of discretion.[19]E As a rule, the jurisdiction of this Court is limited to a review of errors of law allegedly committed by the appellate court. It is not bound to analyze and weigh all over again the evidence already considered in the proceedings below.”

 

EXCEPTIONS TO THE ABOVE RULE:

 

“In several cases, however, it has been repeatedly held that the rule that factual findings of the appellate are binding on the Court are subject to the following exceptions: (1) when the findings are grounded entirely on speculations, surmises or conjectures; (2) when the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd or impossible; (3) when there is grave abuse of discretion; (4) when the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts; (5) when the findings of fact are conflicting; (6) when in making its findings the Court of Appeals went beyond the issues of the case, or its findings are contrary to the admissions of both the appellant and the appellee; (7) when the findings are contrary to that of the trial court; (8) when the findings are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based; (9) when the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioner’s main and reply briefs are not disputed by the respondent; (10) when the findings of fact are premised on the supposed absence of evidence and contradicted by the evidence on record; or (11) when the Court of Appeals manifestly overlooked certain relevant facts not disputed by the parties, which, if properly considered, would justify a different conclusion.”

 

WHY IS EVIDENCE NOT FORMALLY CANNOT BE CONSIDERED?

 

 

BECAUSE THE COURT CANNOT DETERMINE THE VERACITY OF THE CLAIMS OF THE WITNESSES.

 


“In this case, the records show that apart from the fact that the Extrajudicial Settlement Among Heirs with Waiver of Rights and Sale sought to be annulled and the titles sought to be cancelled were not offered in evidence,[26] the Extrajudicial Settlement itself alluded to in the testimonial evidence presented was not offered in order to allow the trial court to determine the veracity of the claims of the witnesses.”

 

 

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW.

 

 

SC-2019-0015-SC CASE G.R. NO. G.R. No. 216878-03 APR 2019-JOAQUINA ZAMBALES ET AL VS SALVACION VILLON ZAMBALES ET ALDownload

 

 

NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH  JUST TYPE “jabbulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST  TYPE “jabbulao and forum shopping”.