This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2012-02-15 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| It is a settled rule that the appellate court's findings of fact are binding and must be respected by this Court.[43] However, due to the conflicting factual findings of the trial court and the appellate court, we are constrained to delve into factual circumstances surrounding this case and weigh the same in the interest of justice. | |||||
|
2011-04-04 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Well settled is the rule that in the exercise of Our power of review the findings of facts of the CA are conclusive and binding on this Court. However, there are recognized exceptions, among which is when the factual findings of the trial court and the appellate court are conflicting.[23] The disagreement between the RTC and the CA in their respective factual conclusions with regard to the alleged forgery of the signature of Tamani authorizes this Court to re-examine the testimonies and evidence submitted by the parties. It is noteworthy to point out that two expert witnesses testified, each with a different opinion on the issue at hand. | |||||