Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ANTON BURGOS

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 196171 2012-12-10	RCBC CAPITAL CORPORATION v. BANCO DE ORO UNIBANK VILLARAMA, JR., J.
On December 30, 2010, George L. Go, in his personal capacity and as attorney-in-fact of the other listed shareholders of Bankard, Inc. in the SPA (Individual Shareholders), filed a petition in the CA, CA-G.R. SP No. 117451, seeking to set aside the above-cited November 10, 2010 Order and to enjoin Branch 148 from further proceeding in SP Proc. Case No. M-6046. By Decision[57] dated June 15, 2011, the CA dismissed the said petition. Their motion for reconsideration of the said decision was likewise denied by the CA in its Resolution[58] dated December 14, 2011.
	GR No. 194379 2011-06-01	PEOPLE v. FELICIANO 'SAYSOT' CIAS VELASCO JR., J.
The exceptions to this rule are when the trial court's findings of facts and conclusions are not supported by the evidence on record, or when certain facts of substance and value, likely to change the outcome of the case, have been overlooked by the trial court, or when the assailed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts.[33] However, this Court finds none of these exceptions present in the instant case.
	GR No. 194259 2011-03-06	PEOPLE v. JIMMY ALVERIO VELASCO JR., J.
The exceptions to this rule are when the trial court's findings of facts and conclusions are not supported by the evidence on record, or when certain facts of substance and value likely to change the outcome of the case have been overlooked by the lower court, or when the assailed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts.[32] However, this Court finds none of these exceptions present in the instant case.
	GR No. 188601 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. JO HNNY BAUTISTA Y BAUTISTA VELASCO JR., J.
This rule admits of exceptions, however, such as when the trial court's findings of facts and conclusions are not supported by the evidence on record, or when certain facts of substance and value, likely to change the outcome of the case have been overlooked by the lower court, or when the assailed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts.[39] None of these exceptions exists in this case.
	GR No. 185724 2009-06-05	PEOPLE v. JESSIE MALATE Y CAÑETE VELASCO JR., J.
This rule admits of exceptions, however, such as when the trial court's findings of facts and conclusions are not supported by the evidence on record, or when certain facts of substance and value that would likely change the outcome of the case have been overlooked by the trial court, or when the assailed decision is based on a misapprehension of facts.[12] None of these exceptions exists in this case.