Synopsis: This case concerns a dispute over a right of way between the owners of three parcels of land in Clarita Village: Lot No. 5808-F-1, Lot No. 5808-F-2-A, and Lot No. 5808-F-2-B. The Spouses Bardilas owned Lot No. 5808-F-2-B and had a right of way that exited into Clarita Village. The Clarita Village Association erected a fence that blocked the exit point of the right of way, which led to a meeting between the parties involved. A subsequent investigation by an engineer revealed that the fence and a portion of a house owned by the Spouses Mercader had encroached on the right of way. The Spouses Bardilas demanded P30,000 from the Spouses Mercader for the encroachment. The Spouses Mercader claimed they were entitled to the right of way as owners of Lot No. 5808-F-2-A and proposed to buy the equivalent portion of the right of way. The Spouses Bardilas rejected this claim, and both parties brought lawsuits against each other. The RTC held in favor of the Spouses Mercader, while the CA

Full Text: Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares v. Commission on Elections, G.R. Nos. 221697 & 221698-700, March 8, 2016 FACTS: The case is about Mary Grace Natividad S. Poe-Llamanzares, who was found abandoned as a newborn infant in the Parish Church of Jaro, Iloilo, and was later adopted by celebrity spouses. She married a citizen of the Philippines and the U.S. and obtained U.S. citizenship, but later moved to the Philippines with her family. She then reacquired Philippine citizenship and relinquished her U.S. citizenship. She was appointed as Chairperson of the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB) but resigned to run for public office. She filed her Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for Senator and later for President, which led to several COMELEC cases filed against her. One of these cases found that her COC contained false material representations, leading to the denial of due course or cancellation of her candidacy. ISSUE: (1) WON the COMELEC has the

Full Text: Felisa Agricultural Corp. v. NTC, G.R. Nos. 231655 and 231670, July 02, 2018 Felisa Agricultural Corp vs. National Power Corp: Transmission Line Dispute Learn about the transmission line dispute between Felisa Agricultural Corp and National Power Corp. The Supreme Court decision and its impact on landowners explained. Synopsis: The case is about a complaint filed by Felisa Agricultural Corporation (FAC) against the National Power Corporation (NPC) for recovery of possession with damages or payment of just compensation regarding the transmission towers and transmission lines located within its lands situated in Brgy. Felisa, Bacolod City. NPC claimed that it was granted the permit to enter the subject land in 1989 for the construction of the 138 KV Mabinay-Bacolod Transmission Line, and since the transmission lines have been in existence for more than ten years, a continuous easement of right of way has already been established. The issue is whether or not the Court of Appeal

Full Text:  Diaz v. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 203217, July 02, 2018 The Case of Jose L. Diaz: Using Government Gasoline for Personal Use Read about the case of Jose L. Diaz who was found guilty of dishonesty and violations of R.A. No. 3019 and the Revised Penal Code for allegedly using government gasoline for personal use. The Court emphasized the importance of integrity and honesty in public service and the need for disciplinary action to maintain the public's trust and confidence in the government. Synopsis: The case of Jose L. Diaz vs. The Office of the Ombudsman deals with Diaz's alleged use of government gasoline for personal use, which was discovered through the Supplies Ledger Cards (SLC) showing his withdrawals from February 1999 to March 2003. The Ombudsman found Diaz guilty of dishonesty and violations of Section 3 (e) and (i) of R.A. No. 3019 and Article 220 of the Revised Penal Code. Diaz argued that the findings were not supported by substantial evidence, and the dismiss

Full Text of the case: See: https://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/20821/ ROSANNA L. TAN-ANDAL (Petitioner) v. MARIO VICTOR M. ANDAL, (Respondent) May 11, 2021 Ponente: Leonen, J. FACTS: Mario Andal and Rosanna Tan got married in 1995 and had a daughter named Ma. Samantha in 1996. They separated in 2000, and Rosanna has since had sole custody of their child. In 2001, Mario filed a petition for custody of their daughter, arguing that they had equal rights. However, in 2003, Rosanna filed a petition for the nullity of their marriage, claiming that Mario was psychologically incapacitated to fulfill his marital obligations. The prosecutor found no signs of collusion between the two, and the cases for custody and nullity were consolidated in 2004. The case involves Rosanna and Mario, who first met in 1975 and reconnected in 1995. They eventually got married in December of the same year, but Mario exhibited irresponsible and erratic behavior, including drug use, financial mismanagement, and paranoia. R

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee,  -versus-  MICHAEL DELIMAN and ALLAN DELIMA, Accused-Appellants.  G.R. No. 222645, THIRD DIVISION,  June 27, 2018,  MARTIRES, J. Full text:  People v. DELIMAN and DELIMA, G.R. No. 222645, 2018 Synopsis: This case involves the appeal of two brothers who were found guilty of murder by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in the Philippines, and whose appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) was denied. The two were convicted of killing Ramel Mercedes Congreso in a stabbing incident. The prosecution presented witnesses who testified that Michael and Allan were holding and stabbing Ramel. The defense argued that Michael was at a disco on the night of the stabbing and slept at home until the following morning. The RTC found the two guilty and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the appeal was partly meritorious, but Michael and Allan were found guilty of homicide and not murder. The court found that there was no pr

HILARIO B. ALILING, Petitioner, v.  EOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. G.R. No. 230991, SECOND DIVISION, June 11, 2018, Ponente: Caguioa SYNOPSIS: Nature of Petition: Before the Court is a Petition for Review (Petition) under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, assailing the Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the Decision of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) finding petitioner Hilario B. Aliling alias "Larry" (Aliling), guilty of Frustrated Murder;  FACTS: VERSION OF THE PROSECUTION: In this case, the prosecution presented three witnesses to testify against the accused, Hilario Aliling, who was alleged to have shot and injured the victim, Jerry Tumbaga. The first witness was Tumbaga himself, who testified that he was shot in the back by the accused while he was leaving a basketball game. The second witness, Jesus Marasigan, testified that he was with Tumbaga at the basketball court and saw the accused shoot Tumbaga twice. The third witness, Dr. Mark Lou