Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. RICARDO NOTARION Y ZANORIA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 211027 2015-06-29	PEOPLE v. JOSE BRONIOLA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Conformably with People v. Gambao,[26] we sustain the award of P100,000 as civil indemnity and increase the awards of moral and exemplary damages to P100,000 each. In addition, we award P25,000 to the victim’s heirs as temperate damages in lieu of unproven actual damages.[27] The CA correctly added that damages assessed in this case shall be subject to interest at six percent (6%) per annum.
	GR No. 184704 2009-06-30	PEOPLE v. LEODEGARIO BASCUGIN Y AGQUIZ VELASCO JR., J.
As regards damages, we agree with the appellate court's award of PhP 100,000 as civil indemnity; PhP 75,000 as moral damages; and temperate damages amounting to PhP 25,000 in lieu of actual damages, all consistent with prevailing jurisprudence for rape with homicide.[20] The Court also awards exemplary damages in the amount of PhP 50,000. Article 2229 of the Civil Code grants the award of exemplary or correction damages in order to deter the commission of similar acts in the future and to allow the courts to mould behaviour that can have grave and deleterious consequences to society.[21]
	GR No. 178301 2009-04-24	PEOPLE v. ROLANDO 'BOTONG' MALIBIRAN ACCUSED AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
However, the award of P80,000.00 by the RTC as actual damages is deleted for lack of competent evidence to support it. Only substantiated and proven expenses, or those that appear to have been genuinely incurred in connection with the death, wake or burial of the victim will be recognized by the court.[46] In lieu thereof, appellant should pay temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00, said amount being awarded in homicide or murder cases when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court,[47] and in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[48] Under Article 2224 of the Civil Code, temperate damages "may be awarded when the Court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be proved with certainty."
	GR No. 143230 2004-08-20	NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY v. BAELLO CALLEJO, SR., J.
The Republic of the Philippines, through the Director of Bureau of Lands, did not appeal the decision. After the decision became final and executory, the CFI ordered the Land Registration Commission to issue the appropriate decree. Pursuant to such order, Decree No. 13400 was issued on October 27, 1954 in favor of "Pedro T. Baello, married to Josefa Caiña," over the two-thirds (2/3) portion of the property, and "Nicanora T. Baello, married to Manuel J. Rodriguez," over the remaining one-third (1/3) undivided portion thereof.[5] The Register of Deeds thereafter issued Original Certificate of Title (OCT) No. (804) 53839 in favor of Pedro and Nicanora. The property was then subdivided into two (2) parcels: Lot A, with an area of 98,648 square meters covered by TCT No. 181493 in the name of Pedro T. Baello; and Lot B, with an area of 49,324 square meters in the name of Nicanora T. Baello. The subdivision plan was approved by the court on July 27, 1971.[6]