Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

APOLONIA GOMEZ v. LEVY HEBMANOS

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR Nos. 162335 & 162605 2010-08-24	SEVERINO M. MANOTOK IV v. HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The following photographs taken of the questioned documents were also presented: Exh. XXV-C,[228] the front close-up of the tear on top of the page of Sale Certificate No. 1054; Exh. XXV-D,[229] front close-up of uneven browning and discoloration of paper (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-E,[230] front page browning and discoloration of tears and creases along the edges of document (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-F,[231] front of the Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-G,[232] back portion of Assignment of Sale Certificate dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-H[233], showing the staple wire marks that are clear and firm (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-I,[234] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-L,[235] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in blue, blue-black, black ballpoint pen ink and sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-M,[236] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in black ballpoint pen ink, sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-P,[237] showing the adhesive tape used to hold tears or cuts, uneven brown discoloration (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-Q,[238] showing the sharply cut line along letter/s and a distinct scratch/tear along the loop of the signature (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-X,[239] showing close-up portions of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Y,[240] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Z,[241] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-AA,[242] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; and Exh. XXV-BB,[243] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939.
	GR Nos. 162335 & 162605 2010-08-24	SEVERINO M. MANOTOK IV v. HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The following photographs taken of the questioned documents were also presented: Exh. XXV-C,[228] the front close-up of the tear on top of the page of Sale Certificate No. 1054; Exh. XXV-D,[229] front close-up of uneven browning and discoloration of paper (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-E,[230] front page browning and discoloration of tears and creases along the edges of document (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-F,[231] front of the Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-G,[232] back portion of Assignment of Sale Certificate dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-H[233], showing the staple wire marks that are clear and firm (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-I,[234] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-L,[235] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in blue, blue-black, black ballpoint pen ink and sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-M,[236] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in black ballpoint pen ink, sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-P,[237] showing the adhesive tape used to hold tears or cuts, uneven brown discoloration (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-Q,[238] showing the sharply cut line along letter/s and a distinct scratch/tear along the loop of the signature (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-X,[239] showing close-up portions of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Y,[240] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Z,[241] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-AA,[242] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; and Exh. XXV-BB,[243] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939.
	GR Nos. 162335 & 162605 2010-08-24	SEVERINO M. MANOTOK IV v. HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The following photographs taken of the questioned documents were also presented: Exh. XXV-C,[228] the front close-up of the tear on top of the page of Sale Certificate No. 1054; Exh. XXV-D,[229] front close-up of uneven browning and discoloration of paper (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-E,[230] front page browning and discoloration of tears and creases along the edges of document (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-F,[231] front of the Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-G,[232] back portion of Assignment of Sale Certificate dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-H[233], showing the staple wire marks that are clear and firm (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-I,[234] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-L,[235] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in blue, blue-black, black ballpoint pen ink and sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-M,[236] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in black ballpoint pen ink, sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-P,[237] showing the adhesive tape used to hold tears or cuts, uneven brown discoloration (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-Q,[238] showing the sharply cut line along letter/s and a distinct scratch/tear along the loop of the signature (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-X,[239] showing close-up portions of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Y,[240] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Z,[241] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-AA,[242] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; and Exh. XXV-BB,[243] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939.
	GR Nos. 162335 & 162605 2010-08-24	SEVERINO M. MANOTOK IV v. HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
[242] Id. at 4816.
	GR Nos. 162335 & 162605 2010-08-24	SEVERINO M. MANOTOK IV v. HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The following photographs taken of the questioned documents were also presented: Exh. XXV-C,[228] the front close-up of the tear on top of the page of Sale Certificate No. 1054; Exh. XXV-D,[229] front close-up of uneven browning and discoloration of paper (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-E,[230] front page browning and discoloration of tears and creases along the edges of document (Sale Certificate No. 1054); Exh. XXV-F,[231] front of the Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-G,[232] back portion of Assignment of Sale Certificate dated March 11, 1919; Exh. XXV-H[233], showing the staple wire marks that are clear and firm (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-I,[234] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated March 11, 1919); Exh. XXV-L,[235] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in blue, blue-black, black ballpoint pen ink and sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-M,[236] showing the aniline (violet) stamp pad ink entries that are clear and distinct with handwritten entries and signatures in black ballpoint pen ink, sign pen ink (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated June 7, 1920); Exh. XXV-P,[237] showing the adhesive tape used to hold tears or cuts, uneven brown discoloration (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-Q,[238] showing the sharply cut line along letter/s and a distinct scratch/tear along the loop of the signature (Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 1054 dated May 4, 1923); Exh. XXV-X,[239] showing close-up portions of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Y,[240] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-Z,[241] standard brown even discoloration of Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; Exh. XXV-AA,[242] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939; and Exh. XXV-BB,[243] water mark on Assignment of Sale Certificate No. 511 dated June 24, 1939.
	GR No. 130433 2002-04-17	REPUBLIC v. MAXIMO I. PLANES SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
It was only on October 25, 1993, or after one (1) year, when the Solicitor General received a copy of the October 30, 1992 Order granting respondent's petition for reconstitution.[14] Believing that the Order is contrary to law and evidence and that the proceedings conducted by the RTC were tainted with irregularities, the Republic, through the Solicitor General, interposed an appeal[15] to the Court of Appeals, docketed therein as CA-G.R. CV No. 45112. The Solicitor General alleged in the appellant's brief that respondent Planes did not comply with the jurisdictional requirements set forth by Republic Act No. 26 ("An Act Providing Special Procedure for the Reconstitution of Torrens Certificates of Title Lost or Destroyed"), particularly on the notice of hearing, publication and posting; and that, therefore, the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over respondent's petition for reconstitution.