Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 173976 2009-02-27	METROPOLITAN BANK v. EUGENIO PEÑAFIEL NACHURA, J.
Atty. Mendoza: Do you offer your newspaper to other persons other than the subscribers listed here? Witness: Yes, but we do not just offer it to anybody.[17] (Emphasis supplied.) It bears emphasis that, for the purpose of extrajudicial foreclosure of mortgage, the party alleging non-compliance with the requisite publication has the burden of proving the same.[18] Petitioner correctly points out that neither the publisher's statement that Maharlika Pilipinas is being circulated in Rizal and Cavite, nor his admission that there are no subscribers in Mandaluyong City proves that said newspaper is not circulated in Mandaluyong City.
	GR NO. 170215 2007-08-28	SPS. ESMERALDO v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The raison de etre is that it would obviously be senseless for the Sheriff or the Notary Public conducting the foreclosure sale to go through the idle ceremony of receiving the money and paying it back to the creditor, under the truism that the lawmaking body did not contemplate such a pointless application of the law in requiring that the creditor must bid under the same conditions as any other bidder. It bears stressing that the rule holds true only where the amount of the bid represents the total amount of the mortgage debt.[28]