Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILIPPINES v. VALENTINA GARCIA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 193684 2014-03-05	ONE NETWORK RURAL BANK v. DANILO G. BARIC DEL CASTILLO, J.
With regard to Baric's argument that he should be reinstated to the premises and awarded damages, this may not be allowed. He did not question the CA ruling in an appropriate Petition before this Court. "It is well-settled that a party who has not appealed from a decision cannot seek any relief other than what is provided in the judgment appealed from. An appellee who has himself not appealed may not obtain from the appellate court any affirmative relief other than the ones granted in the decision of the court below."[25]
	GR No. 182397 2011-09-14	ALERT SECURITY v. SAIDALI PASAWILAN VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Further, according to Alert Security itself, respondents continued to report for work and loiter in the DOST after the alleged transfer order was issued. Such circumstance makes it unlikely that respondents have clear intention of leaving their respective jobs. In any case, there is no dispute that in cases of abandonment of work, notice shall be served at the worker's last known address.[24] This petitioners failed to do.
	GR No. 179761 2010-01-15	CATMON SALES INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION v. ATTY. MANUEL D. YNGSON NACHURA, J.
This Court's ruling in Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc. v. Garcia[27] is instructive: It is well-settled that a party who has not appealed from a decision cannot seek any relief other than what is provided in the judgment appealed from. An appellee who has himself not appealed may not obtain from the appellate court any affirmative relief other than the ones granted in the decision of the court below. The appellee can only advance any argument that he may deem necessary to defeat the appellant's claim or to uphold the decision that is being disputed, and he can assign errors in his brief if such is required to strengthen the views expressed by the court a quo. These assigned errors in turn may be considered by the appellate court solely to maintain the appealed decision on other grounds, but not for the purpose of reversing or modifying the judgment in the appellee's favor and giving him other reliefs.[28]
	GR No. 182499 2009-10-02	CONCEPCION FAELDONIA v. TONG YAK GROCERIES YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
It should be noted that respondents also failed to observe the requirements of procedural due process in effecting petitioner's dismissal. In dismissing an employee, the employer has the burden of proving that the dismissed worker has been served two notices: (1) the first to inform the employee of the particular acts or omissions for which the employer seeks his dismissal, and (2) the second to inform the employee of his employer's decision to terminate him. [26]