Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

GUILLERMO v. CONCHITA FRANCIA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 152006 2009-10-02	MONTANO PICO v. CATALINA ADALIM-SALCEDO BRION, J.
In a petition for review on certiorari, we are limited to reviewing errors of law absent any showing that the findings of fact of the appellate court are not supported by the records.[7]
	GR NO. 149875 2007-04-02	AMA COMPUTER COLLEGE v. ATTY. A. D. VALMONTE SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Filing of petition with the Supreme Court. A party desiring to appeal by certiorari from a judgment or final order or resolution of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, the Regional Trial Court or other courts whenever authorized by law, may file with the Supreme Court a verified petition for review on certiorari. The petition shall raise only questions of law which must be distinctly set forth. (Emphasis supplied.) Clearly, in a petition for review on certiorari, this Court is limited to reviewing errors of law absent any showing that the findings of fact of the appellate court are not supported by the records.[7]
	GR NO. 141735 2005-06-08	SAPPARI K. SAWADJAAN v. CA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
From the foregoing, we find that the CSC and the court a quo committed no grave abuse of discretion when they sustained Sawadjaan's dismissal from service. Grave abuse of discretion implies such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as equivalent to lack of jurisdiction, or, in other words, where the power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility, and it must be so patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or to a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all in contemplation of law.[50] The records show that the respondents did none of these; they acted in accordance with the law.
	GR No. 137147 AND GR No. 137148 2003-11-18	BANK OF PHILIPPINE ISLANDS v. CARLOS LEOBRERA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
We agree with respondent that there was no basis for reducing the award of actual damages from P1,300,000.00 to P98,975.00. On the contrary, the records substantiate the amount of actual damages awarded by the trial court and the Court of Appeals. The trial court, in its decision, extensively quoted and lent credence to respondent's testimony as to the damages he suffered.[12] Likewise, the Court of Appeals evaluated anew the said evidence when it resolved the appeal and affirmed the judgment. Indeed, it is settled that when the factual findings of the trial court are confirmed by the Court of Appeals, said facts are final and conclusive on this Court, unless the same are not supported by the evidence on record.[13]