This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2012-12-05 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Also, this Court will not review the factual findings of the trial court simply because the judge who heard and tried the case was not the same judge who penned the decision. This fact alone does not diminish the veracity and correctness of the factual findings of the trial court.[65] Indeed, "the efficacy of a decision is not necessarily impaired by the fact that its writer only took over from a colleague who had earlier presided at the trial, unless there is showing of grave abuse of discretion in the factual findings reached by him."[66] In this case, there was none. | |||||
|
2008-03-03 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| We have held that the trial judge is the best and the most competent person who can weigh and evaluate the testimonies of witnesses.[47] Likewise, the trial court is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses and their testimonies because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses, their demeanor, conduct and attitude on the witness stand.[48] | |||||