Temere Animus

Case Title : EVANGELINE D. IMANI,** petitioner, vs. METROPOLITAN BANK & TRUST COMPANY, respondent. Case Nature : PETITION for review on certiorari of the decision and resolution of the Court of Appeals. Division: SECOND DIVISION Docket Number: G.R. No. 187023 Ponente: NACHURA Dispositive Portion: WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision and the Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 93061 sustaining the validity of the writ of execution, the auction sale, and the certificate of sale are AFFIRMED. DOCTRINES: Contrary to the CA’s advice, the remedy of terceria or a separate action under Section 16, Rule 39 is no longer available to Sina Imani because he is not deemed a stranger to the case filed against petitioner: [T]he husband of the judgment debtor cannot be deemed a “stranger” to the case prosecuted and adjudged against his wife. Thus, it would have been inappropriate for him to institute a separate case for annulment of writ of execution. All property of t...

Case Title:   CIRILA ARCABA, petitioner, vs. ERLINDA TABANCURA VDA. DE BATOCAEL, SEIGFREDO C. TABANCURA, DORIS C. TABANCURA, LUZELLI C. TABANCURA, BELEN C. TABANCURA, RAUL A. COMILLE, BERNADETTE A. COMILLE, and ABNER A. COMILLE, respondents. Case Nature:   PETITION for review on certiorari of a decision of the Court of Appeals. Division:        SECOND DIVISION Docket Number:        G.R. No. 146683 Dispositive Portion: WHEREFORE, the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the decision of the trial court is hereby AFFIRMED. Doctrines: The general rule is that only questions of law may be raised in a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, subject only to certain exceptions: (a) when the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculations, surmises, or conjectures; (b) when the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible; (c) where there is grave abuse of discretion; (d) when the judgment is based...

In legal disputes, procedural rules dictate how appeals are reviewed , ensuring that courts address only properly raised legal issues . The Supreme Court case of Quirino T. Dela Cruz vs. National Police Commission emphasizes the restrictions of Rule 45 , the importance of timely filing appeals , and the need for substantial evidence in administrative cases. Background of the Case SPO4 Quirino T. Dela Cruz was dismissed for grave misconduct following the unlawful warrantless arrest of Sonny H. Villarias , who was later exonerated by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) . Villarias filed a Complaint-Affidavit narrating the circumstances of his arrest, prompting the National Police Commission (NAPOLCOM) to charge Dela Cruz and another officer . The NAPOLCOM ruled against Dela Cruz , dismissing him from service on January 12, 2010 . Dela Cruz filed a motion for reconsideration on September 21, 2010 , beyond the non-extendible 10-day period , resulting in its denial on December 15, 2010 . ...

G.R. No. 211053. November 29, 2017.* PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SEGFRED L. OROZCO, MANUEL D. OSIR, and ALBERTO B. MATURAN, accused,      ERNIE N. CASTRO, accused-appellant. Ponente :  LEONEN, J.: Doctrines:      To sustain a conviction under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, the prosecution must prove that a person was killed, that the accused killed him, that the killing was not parricide or infanticide, and that the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned under this Article. It is admitted that Mata was killed and that accused-appellant was one of those responsible for the stabs that led to his death. The only element disputed in this case is that the killing was attended by circumstances which qualify the crime as murder.      In People v. Dela Cruz, 612 SCRA 738 (2010), there is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, m...