Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    $. Upretne Qcourt: of Tbe Flbilippines

    Uploaded by

    Dennise Talan
    The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ejectment of petitioners from Lot No. 2846-G. The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that respondents-spouses proved their possessory right over the lot through documents showing heirship, sale, and confirmation of sale. The Court also affirmed that factual findings of lower courts, supported by evidence, are deemed final absent exceptions such as ignoring relevant facts. Further, the Court agreed petitioners could not invalidate respondents' title through a collateral attack.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    $. Upretne Qcourt: of Tbe Flbilippines

    Uploaded by

    Dennise Talan
    15 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ejectment of petitioners from Lot No. 2846-G. The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that respondents-spouses proved their possessory right over the lot through documents showing heirship, sale, and confirmation of sale. The Court also affirmed that factual findings of lower courts, supported by evidence, are deemed final absent exceptions such as ignoring relevant facts. Further, the Court agreed petitioners could not invalidate respondents' title through a collateral attack.

    Original Description:

    l;

    Original Title

    214545

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ejectment of petitioners from Lot No. 2846-G. The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that respondents-spouses proved their possessory right over the lot through documents showing heirship, sale, and confirmation of sale. The Court also affirmed that factual findings of lower courts, supported by evidence, are deemed final absent exceptions such as ignoring relevant facts. Further, the Court agreed petitioners could not invalidate respondents' title through a collateral attack.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    15 views2 pages

    $. Upretne Qcourt: of Tbe Flbilippines

    Uploaded by

    Dennise Talan
    The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision to uphold the ejectment of petitioners from Lot No. 2846-G. The Court of Appeals correctly ruled that respondents-spouses proved their possessory right over the lot through documents showing heirship, sale, and confirmation of sale. The Court also affirmed that factual findings of lower courts, supported by evidence, are deemed final absent exceptions such as ignoring relevant facts. Further, the Court agreed petitioners could not invalidate respondents' title through a collateral attack.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    t

    ~epublic

    of tbe flbilippines

    $.>upretne QCourt
    ;ifl!lmtiln
    FIRST DIVISION

    NOTICE
    Sirs/Mesdames:
    Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution
    dated

    November 10, 2014 which reads as follows:

    "G.R. No. 214545 (Spouses Nemesio and Geronima Paclauna,


    Spouses Rodolfo and Leonila Garcia, Spouses Marlon and Nina
    Visagas, Spouses Rodulfo and Alicia Publico, Julia Bongcaras, and
    Genodrita Tabaloc v. Spouses Galileo Lozada and Concepcion
    Villaflor). - After a judicious review of the records, the Court resolves to
    DENY the instant petition and AFFIRM the February 12, 2014 Decision 1
    and August 28, 2014 Resolution2 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R.
    SP No. 02844 for failure of Spouses Nemesio and Geronirila Paclauna,
    Spouses Rodolfo and Leonila Garcia, Spouses Marlon and Nina Visagas,
    Spouses Rodulfo and Alicia Publico, Julia Bongcaras, and Genodrita
    Tabaloc (petitioners) to show that the CA committed any reversible error in
    upholding their ejectment from Lot No. 2846-G.

    As correctly ruled by the CA, Spouses Galileo Lozada and


    Concepcion Villaflor (respondents-spouses), through the documents
    entitled Heirship and Sale executed by one Galicano L. Sibala and a Deed
    of Extrajudicial Settlement and Confirmation of Sale executed by the heirs
    of Pilar Lozada, have proven their possessory right over the said lot. It is
    well-settled that factual findings of the Regional Trial Court, when
    affirmed by the CA, are entitled to great weight by the court and are
    deemed final and conclusive when supported by the evidence on
    record. 3 Absent any exceptions to this rule - such as when it is established

    Rollo, pp. 39-48A. Penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando with Associate
    Justices Carmelita Salandanan-Manahan and Ma. Luisa C. Quijano-Padilla, concurring.
    Id. at 49-50. Penned by Associate Justice Ramon Paul L. Hernando with Associate Justices
    Ma.Luisa C. Quijano-Padilla and Renato C. Francisco, concurring.
    R.odolfo Guevarra and Joey Guevarra v. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 170462, February 5,
    2014, citations omitted.

    - over- two (2) pages ......

    197

    RESOLUTION

    G.R. No. 214545


    November 10, 2014

    that the trial court ignored, overlooked, misconstrued, or misinterpreted


    cogent facts and circumstances that, if considered, would change the
    outcome of the case4 - such findings must stand, as in this case.
    ;;3>~!i 1 :U1t<'i . Ji,l 1(} Ulf;;l :Md~";'~
    l:t H;'; lHJ. IHt"~~H. Jl~'UU"

    /'--::--.-,r.

    ~It;r~

    ....... ~,..:\

    r:-~

    _,

    -1

    i(!: tf...i. !..._:... . : i\n6'f,~~,; the


    41

    CA was also correct in ruling that petitioners cannot


    : '.;: ; 1'ifilipJgrtf3fhe,: ~lidity of the title of respondents-spouses and their
    \\~ , :~~:.~-prm~ifiterest over Lot No. 2846-G described in Transfer
    - - - Certificate-of"3Iale No. 18941, since it is tantamount to a collateral attack
    .. - . o~ sL~~Y{titTe:which is not allowed.:;

    SO ORDERED." SERENO, C.J., on. official travel; DEL


    CASTILLO, J., acting member per S.O. No. 1862 dated November 4,
    2014. BERSAMIN, J., on official travel; VELASCO, JR., J., acting
    member per S.O. No. 1870 dated November 4, 2014.

    Very truly yours,

    R 0. ARICHETA
    Division Clerk of Co6~J

    Atty. Gloria G. Futalan


    Counsel for Petitioners
    Rm. I 04, Ground Floor, CBA Bldg.
    Silliman University
    6200 Dumaguete City
    The Hon. Presiding Judge
    Municipal Trial Court in
    Cities
    Tanjay City 6204
    (Civil Case No. 837)
    Judgment Division (x)
    Supreme Comi

    97

    Court of Appeals
    6000 Cebu City
    (CA-G.R. SP No. 02844)
    Atty. Nilo Ruperto
    Counsel for Respondents
    Rm. 413, Portal West Bldg.
    Cor. Silliman and Hibbard Avenues
    6200 Dumaguete City
    The Hon. Presiding Judge
    Regional Trial Court, Br. 43
    Tanjay City 6204 Negros Oriental
    Stationed at Dumaguete City
    (Civil Case No. 837)
    Public Information Office (x)
    Library Services (x)
    Supreme Court
    (For uploading pursuant to A.M.
    No. 12-1-7-SC)

    SR

    People v. Anod, 613 Phil. 565, 572 (2009).


    See Esmaque/ v. Coprada, G.R. No. 152423, December 15, 20 I 0, 638 SCRA 428.

    You might also like