Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

BPI FAMILY BANK v. EDGARDO BUENAVENTURA

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 179952 2009-12-04	METROPOLITAN BANK v. BA FINANCE CORPORATION CARPIO MORALES, J.
x x x The law allows the grant of exemplary damages to set an example for the public good. The business of a bank is affected with public interest; thus it makes a sworn profession of diligence and meticulousness in giving irreproachable service. For this reason, the bank should guard against in injury attributable to negligence or bad faith on its part. The award of exemplary damages is proper as a warning to [the petitioner] and all concerned not to recklessly disregard their obligation to exercise the highest and strictest diligence in serving their depositors.[43] (Italics and underscoring supplied)
	GR No. 173891 2008-09-08	HRS. OF LATE SPS. LUCIANO P. LIM AND SALUD NAKPIL BAUTISTA v. PRESIDING JUDGE OF RTC OF QUEZON CITY TINGA, J,
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."[21] To qualify a person to be a real party-in-interest in whose name an action must be prosecuted, he must appear to be the present real owner of the right sought to be enforced.[22]
	GR No. 123498 2007-11-23	BPI FAMILY BANK v. AMADO FRANCO NACHURA, J.
In a related case, Edgardo Buenaventura, Myrna Lizardo and Yolanda Tica (Buenaventura, et al.),[19] recipients of a P500,000.00 check proceeding from the P80,000,000.00 mistakenly credited to Tevesteco, likewise filed suit. Buenaventura et al., as in the case of Franco, were also prevented from effecting withdrawals[20] from their current account with BPI-FB, Bonifacio Market, Edsa, Caloocan City Branch. Likewise, when the case was elevated to this Court docketed as BPI Family Bank v. Buenaventura,[21] we ruled that BPI-FB had no right to freeze Buenaventura, et al.'s accounts and adjudged BPI-FB liable therefor, in addition to damages.
	GR NO. 153059 2007-08-14	PEPSICO v. EMERALD PIZZA NACHURA, J.
Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party-in-interest, the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.[25] "Interest" within the meaning of the rule means material interest, 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.[26]