This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-04-13 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| This Court is constrained to once again reiterate the time-honored maxim that the trial court's assessment of the credibility of witnesses is entitled to the highest respect.[31] In People v. Bondoc,[32] a case also involving the accused's failure to return a minor, we explained the rationale of this maxim: We find no cogent reason to disturb the findings of the trial court. The issue involved in this appeal is one of credibility, and this Court has invariably ruled that the matter of assigning values to the testimony of witnesses is best performed by the trial courts because they, unlike appellate courts, can weigh the testimony of witnesses in the light of the demeanor, conduct and attitude of the witnesses at the trial, except when circumstances of weight or influence were ignored or disregarded by them which does not obtain in the present case. | |||||
|
2003-04-01 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| The award of interest on damages is proper and allowed under Article 2211 of the Civil Code, which states that in crimes and quasi-delicts, interest as a part of the damages may, in proper case, be adjudicated in the discretion of the court.[23] | |||||