Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 181284 2015-10-20	LOLOY UNDURAN v. RAMON ABERASTURI PERALTA, J.
On July 5, 2004, respondents filed a Motion to Amend and Supplement Complaint from Accion Reivindicatoria to one for "Injunction, Damages, and Other Relief," with the attached Amended and Supplemental Complaint[5] (amended complaint for injunction). On July 30, 2004, petitioners filed an Opposition thereto.
	GR No. 192270 2015-01-26	IRENE D. OFILADA v. SPS. RUBEN ANDAL AND MIRAFLOR ANDAL DEL CASTILLO, J.
The term also "refers to any controversy relating to, among others, tenancy over lands devoted to agriculture."[36]
	GR No. 199133 2014-09-29	ESPERANZA TUMPAG v. SAMUEL TUMPAG BRION, J.
It is well-settled that jurisdiction over a subject matter is conferred by law, not by the parties' action or conduct,[14] and is, likewise, determined from the allegations in the complaint.[15]
	GR Nos. 154470-71 2012-09-24	BANK OF COMMERCE v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK BRION, J.
Second, jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined not by the pleas set up by the defendant in his answer[85] but by the allegations in the complaint,[86] irrespective of whether the plaintiff is entitled to favorable judgment on the basis of his assertions.[87] The reason is that the complaint is supposed to contain a concise statement of the ultimate facts constituting the plaintiff's causes of action.[88]