Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

JOSE C. LEE v. RTC OF QUEZON CITY

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 190486 2014-11-26	STANLEY FINE FURNITURE v. VICTOR T. GALLANO LEONEN, J.
Before we discuss the substance of private respondent's motion, we note that attached to it were mere photocopies of the supporting documents and not "certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein" as required by the Rules of Court. However, given that the motion was verified and petitioners, who were given a chance to oppose or comment on it, made no objection thereto, we brush aside the defect in form and proceed to discuss the merits of the motion.[94] (Citation omitted)
	GR No. 156208 2014-06-30	NPC DRIVERS v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION BRION, J.
Supervening events refer to facts that transpire after judgment has become final and executory or to new circumstances that develop after the judgment has acquired finality.[97] In Dee Ping Wee v. Lee Hiong Wee,[98] we held that a supervening event affects or changes the substance of the judgment and renders its execution inequitable.
	GR No. 172053 2008-10-06	UNION BANK OF PHILIPPINES v. PACIFIC EQUIPMENT CORPORATION NACHURA, J.
We would like to stress that the instant petition is limited to the examination of the questioned writ of execution, in relation to the July 10, 2001 CA decision which had already attained finality. As we have repeatedly held in a number of cases,[35] a decision that has acquired finality becomes immutable and unalterable, and may no longer be modified in any respect even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law, and whether it will be made by the court that rendered it or by the highest court of the land. The reason for this is that litigation must end and terminate sometime and somewhere; and it is essential for the effective and efficient administration of justice that, once a judgment has become final, the winning party be not deprived of the fruits of the verdict. Courts must guard against any scheme calculated to bring about that result and frown upon any attempt to prolong the controversies. The only exceptions to the general rule are the correction of clerical errors, the so-called nunc pro tunc entries which cause no prejudice to any party, void judgments, and whenever circumstances transpire after the finality of the decision rendering its execution unjust and inequitable.