Latest Entries »

SC CASE 2022-0051: CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION VS. ROSELLE C. ANNANG (G.R. NO. 225895, 28 SEPTEMBER 2022, HERNANDO J.) (BRIEF TITLE: CSC VS ANNANG)

Filed under: LATEST SUPREME COURT CASES, Uncategorized — Leave a comment
October 21, 2022

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

scd-2022-0051-civil-service-commission-vs.-roselle-c.-annangDownload

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

Comment

SC CASE 2022-0050: PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK VS. SPOUSES NESTOR AND FELICIDAD VICTOR AND SPOUSES REYNALDO AND GAVINA VICTOR (G.R. NO. 207377, 27 JULY 2022, HERNANDO, J.) (SUBJECT/S: NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL) (BRIEF TITLE: PNB VS SPOUSES VICTOR ET AL)

Filed under: LATEST SUPREME COURT CASES — Leave a comment
October 16, 2022

 

 

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

PNB ARGUES THAT THEIR COUNSELS WERE NEGLIGENT AND AS A RESULT THEY WERE DEPRIVED OF THEIR DAY IN COURT. SUPREME COURT SAID THE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL MUST BE GROSS. SUCH IS NOT THE CASE HERE. AS A GENERAL RULE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL BINDS THE CLIENT. THERE IS AN EXCEPTION: WHEN THE NEGLIGENCE OF COUNSEL IS SO GROSS THAT ORDINARY NEGLIGENCE COULD NOT HAVE GUARDED AGAINST IT.

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

scd-2022-0050-philippine-national-bank-vs.-spouses-nestor-and-felicidad-victor-and-spouses-reynaldo-and-gavina-victorDownload

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

Comment

SC CASE 2022-0049:GOVERNOR EDGARDO A. TALLADO, VICE GOVERNOR JONAH PEDRO P. PIMENTEL, BOARD MEMBER RODOLFO V. GACHE, BOARD MEMBER STANLEY G. ALEGRE, BOARD MEMBER RENEE F. HERRERA, BOARD MEMBER GERARDO G. QUIÑONES, BOARD MEMBER REYNOR V. QUIBRAL, BOARD MEMBER ERWIN L. LAUSIN, BOARD MEMBER ARTEMIO B. SERDON, JR., BOARD MEMBER JAY G. PIMENTEL, AND BOARD MEMBER RAMON R. BANING VS. HON. WINSTON S. RACOMA, PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 39, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, DAET, CAMARINES NORTE (A.M. NO. RTJ-22-022, 24 AUG 2022, SINGH, J.) (SUBJECT/S: COMPLAINT TO HARASS A JUDGE; INDIRECT CONTEMPT) (BRIEF TITLE: TALLADO ET AL VS JUDGE RACOM

Filed under: LATEST SUPREME COURT CASES — Leave a comment
October 4, 2022

DISPOSITIVE:

SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:

WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE?

THE SUPREME COURT CONSIDERED THE CASE FILED AGAINST JUDGE RACOMA AS HARASSMENT.

UNFOUNDED CRITICISMS AGAINST JUDGES DEGRADE THE JUDICIAL OFFICE. THEY DRAIN THE RESOURCES OF THE COURT IN RESOLVING THEM. THEY SOW THE SEEDS OF DISTRUST OF THE PUBLIC AGAINST THE JUDICIARY. THUS COMPLAINANTS MUST EXPLAIN THEIR ACT OF FILING PREMATURE COMPLAINT.

ON THE POWER TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT:

TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.

scd-2022-0049-gov-edgardo-a.-tallado-et-al-vs-judge-winston-s.-racomaDownload

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

Comment