This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-04-07 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The consistent stand of the Court has always been that a case should be decided in its totality, resolving all interlocking issues in order to render justice to all concerned and to end the litigation once and for all. Verily, courts should always strive to settle the entire controversy in a single proceeding, leaving no root or branch to bear the seed of future litigation.[51] Where the public interest so demands, the court will broaden its inquiry into a case and decide the same on the merits rather than merely resolve the procedural question raised.[52] Such rule obtains in this case. | |||||