Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

VIRGILIO S. DAVID v. MISAMIS OCCIDENTAL II ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 203786 2013-10-23	AQUILES RIOSA v. TABACO LA SUERTE CORPORATION MENDOZA, J.
Notably, the issues raised in the petition are factual in nature. Essentially, Aquiles asks the Court to review the factual determination of the CA. As a rule, only questions of law may be raised in a petition for review on certiorari because the Court is not a trier of facts and is not to review or calibrate the evidence on record.[12] When supported by substantial evidence, the findings of fact by the CA are conclusive and binding on the parties and are not reviewable by this Court, unless the case falls under any of the recognized exceptions.[13] An acceptable exception is where there is a conflict between the factual determination of the trial court and that of the appellate court. In such a case, it becomes imperative to digress from this general rule and revisit the factual circumstances surrounding the controversy.[14]
	GR No. 203786 2013-10-23	AQUILES RIOSA v. TABACO LA SUERTE CORPORATION MENDOZA, J.
The elements of a contract of sale are: a] consent or meeting of the minds, that is, consent to transfer ownership in exchange for the price; b] determinate subject matter; and c] price certain in money or its equivalent.[17]
	GR No. 186014 2013-06-26	ALI AKANG v. MUNICIPALITY OF ISULAN REYES, J.
By the contract of sale, one of the contracting parties obligates himself to transfer the ownership of and to deliver a determinate thing, and the other to pay therefore a price certain in money or its equivalent. The elements of a contract of sale are: (a) consent or meeting of the minds, that is, consent to transfer ownership in exchange for the price; (b) determinate subject matter; and (c) price certain in money or its equivalent.[34]