Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

DE LOS SANTOS v. CA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	AM No. RTJ-11-2262 2011-02-09	GAUDENCIO B. PANTILO III v. JUDGE VICTOR A. CANOY VELASCO JR., J.
In BPI v. Court of Appeals, We underscored that "procedural rules have their own wholesome rationale in the orderly administration of justice. Justice has to be administered according to the Rules in order to obviate arbitrariness, caprice, or whimsicality."[17] In other words, "[r]ules of procedure are intended to ensure the orderly administration of justice and the protection of substantive rights in judicial and extrajudicial proceedings."[18] In this case, the reason of Judge Canoy is hardly persuasive enough to disregard the Rules.[19]
	GR NO. 184948 2009-07-21	CONG. GLENN A. CHONG v. PHILIP L. DELA CRUZ NACHURA, J.
A petition for certiorari is an extraordinary remedy.[4] As such, the party who seeks to avail of the same must strictly observe the procedural rules laid down by law,[5] and non-observance thereof may not be brushed aside as mere technicality.[6] The decision on whether or not to accept a petition for certiorari, as well as to grant due course thereto, is generally addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[7]
	GR No. 175338 2008-04-29	AIR MATERIEL WING SAVINGS v. COL. LUVIN S. MANAY YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
A party who seeks to avail of the extraordinary remedy of certiorari must observe the rules laid down by law and non-observance thereof may not be brushed aside as mere technicality.[12]
	GR No. 171098 2008-02-26	JUAN G. GARCIA v. CA and GARCIA PASION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The acceptance of a petition for certiorari, as well as the grant of due course thereto is, in general, addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[13] It must be stressed that certiorari, being an extraordinary remedy,[14] the party who seeks to avail of the same must strictly observe the rules laid down by the law[15] and non-observance thereof may not be brushed aside as mere technicality.[16]
	GR NO. 148247 2006-08-07	AIR PHILIPPINES CORPORATION v. ENRICO E. ZAMORA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
As a general rule, a petition lacking copies of essential pleadings and portions of the case record may be dismissed.[28] This rule, however, is not petrified. As the exact nature of the pleadings and parts of the case record which must accompany a petition is not specified, much discretion is left to the appellate court to determine the necessity for copies of pleading and other documents. [29]There are, however, guideposts it must follow.