This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2013-02-13 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Contrary to the petitioners' assertion, the Court finds that the issues on the supposed defects and actual nature of the Deed of Quitclaim are questions of fact that require not only a review or re-evaluation of the evidence already adduced by the parties but also the reception of new evidence as the petitioners themselves have acknowledged when they attached in the petition several certifications[32] in support of their new argument. It is settled that questions of fact are beyond the province of a Rule 45 petition since the Court is not a trier of facts.[33] | |||||