Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MAYOR RHUSTOM L. DAGADAG v. MICHAEL C. TONGNAWA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR Nos. 151983-84 2008-07-31	JOSE MAX S. ORTIZ v. SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The established rule is that a real party in interest is one who would be benefited or injured by the judgment, or one entitled to the avails of the suit. The word "interest," as contemplated by the Rules, means material interest or an interest in issue and to be affected by the judgment, as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved or a mere incidental interest. Stated differently, the rule refers to a real or present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest. As a general rule, one who has no right or interest to protect cannot invoke the jurisdiction of the court asparty-plaintiffinanaction.[44]
	GR No. 160846 2008-02-22	BENJAMIN B. GERONGA v. EDUARDO VARELA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
That said, however, the nullity of Memorandum Order No. 98-V-05 and the December 1, 1997 Resolution/Recommendation leaves Administrative Case No. 96-04 unresolved. Although the Court may already decide said case based on the records before us, the better policy is for us to defer to the prerogative granted under Section 17,[65] Rule 3 of the Rules of Court, to the primary disciplining authority, the incumbent mayor of Cadiz City,[66] whether or not to pursue said administrative case.
	GR NO. 168484 2007-07-12	LEAH M. NAZARENO v. CITY OF DUMAGUETE NACHURA, J.
Real party-in-interest, on the other hand, is a concept in civil procedure and is expressly defined in the Rules of Court[35] as the one who would be benefited or injured by the judgment, or one entitled to the avails of the suit. "Interest" within the meaning of the rule means material interest or an interest in issue and to be affected by the decree, as distinguished from mere interest in the question involved or a mere incidental interest. Otherwise stated, the rule refers to a real or present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy; or from a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest.[36]
	GR NO. 149999 2005-08-12	NATIONAL APPELLATE BOARD v. P & INSP. JOHN A. MAMAUAG CARPIO, J.
Subsequent decisions[20] of the Court affirmed Dacoycoy.