recursal/Fanatic-Fandom huggingface dataset:
Baguio

video File:Placeholder

```
Supreme Court Summer Session.

```

**Baguio** is where the Supreme Court of the Philippines holds its Summer Session.

## Supreme Court Baguio

* https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/200482-reasons-supreme-court-justices-baguio-every-april

## Issues

* Lorenzo Gadon
* https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/984013/gadon-faces-third-disbarment-case-for-baguio-incident-gadon-sereno-supreme-court-complaints-baguio-dirty-finger

## Trivia

* Cheif JusticeLucas Bersamin with the Supreme Court in Baguio
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1115047999086796801
Henri Inting

**Henri Jean Paul Inting** is a Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/aboutsc/justices/images/lazaro-javier.jpg

## Notes

Justice Henri Jean Paul B. Inting obtained his Bachelor of Laws degree from Ateneo de Davao University in 1982
where he graduated *cum laude*. Prior thereto, he earned a degree in Bachelor of Science, Major in Psychology from
the University of San Carlos Cebu. He completed his elementary and secondary education from Ateneo de Davao.

For more than thirty years, he has devoted his entire career to public service.

In 1978, as a working law student, he started as Clerk in the Bureau of Lands and, a year later, as Legal Researcher in the City Court of Davao City. After passing the 1982 Bar Examinations, he began his legal career as Senior Corporate Attorney in the National Housing Authority in 1983, and, as Appellate Court Supervising Staff Assistant of the then Intermediate Appellate Court (now Court of Appeals) in 1984.

In 1986, he entered the then Citizen’s Legal Assistance Office, which later became known as the Public Attorney’s Office, where he served for nine years or until 1995. Subsequently, he became a prosecutor for three years.

In 1998, he began his career in the
judiciary when he was appointed as Presiding Judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 33, where he served for six years until his promotion to Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 95 in 2004. Eight years later or in September 2012, he was appointed as Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals joining his sister, Associate Justice Socorro B. Inting, who would subsequently be appointed as Comelec Commissioner in 2018.

On May 29, 2019, he was appointed as the 183rd Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Justice Inting was born on September 4, 1957 in Bansalan, Davao del Sur to the late retired Regional Trial Court Judge Enrique B. Inting, Sr. and Ursulina B. Inting.

## Trivia

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1133254860479049728
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1134381598336475136
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1133548263313793026
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1133545681656791040
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/3969/
Michael Tañamor y Acibo Vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 228132. March 11, 2020

Michael Tañamor y Acibo Vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 228132. March 11, 2020

Caguioa

https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/66109

## Issues

The sole issue for the Court's resolution is whether the lower courts erred in convicting petitioner for violating Section 5, Article II of RA 9165.
The phrase "immediately after seizure and confiscation" means that the physical inventory and photographing of the drugs must be at the place of apprehension and/or seizure.
Using the language of the Court in People v. Mendoza, without the insulating presence of the representative from the media or the DOJ and any elected public official during the seizure and marking of the drugs, the evils of switching, "planting" or contamination of the evidence that had tainted the buy-busts conducted under the regime of RA 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972) again reared their ugly heads as to negate the integrity and credibility of the seizure and confiscation of the subject sachet that was evidence of the corpus delicti, and thus adversely affected the trustworthiness of the incrimination of the accused.
The presence of the three witnesses must be secured not only during the inventory but more importantly at the time of the warrantless arrest.

## Decisions

**WHEREFORE**, in view of the foregoing, the Petition is hereby **GRANTED**. The Decision dated April 27, 2016 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CEB CR-HC No. 02070 is hereby **REVERSED** and **SET ASIDE**. Accordingly, petitioner Michael Tañamor y Acibo is **ACQUITTED** of the crime charged on the ground of reasonable doubt, and is **ORDERED IMMEDIATELY RELEASED** from detention unless he is being lawfully held for another cause. Let an entry of final judgment be issued immediately.

 Let a copy of this Decision be furnished the Superintendent of the New
Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa City, for immediate implementation. The said
Superintendent is **ORDERED** to **REPORT** to this Court within five (5) days from receipt of this Decision the action he has taken.
Supreme Court of the Philippines This Month in History

**Supreme Court** of the Philippines This Month in History
March2

* - In 1847, the Court’s 1st Associate Justice and its 1st Chief Justice, Hon. Cayetano S. Arellano, was born.
* - SC designates 99 Regional Trial Courts (RTCs) nationwide as special courts to hear, try and decide cases involving extrajudicial killings in 2007.

6

* - Hon. Lourdes Paredes-San Diego is appointed the first woman Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals in 1980
* - Chief Justice Ramon C. Aquino resigns in 1986 upon the request of the administration of President Corazon C. Aquino

7

* - A Provisional Law on the Judiciary is passed by the Malolos Congress in 1899

10

* - The Court of Appeals is abolished in 1945 (EO 37)

11

* - The "Parity Amendment" to the 1935 Constitution is ratified in a plebiscite in 1947

12

* - The Philippine Judicial Academy is established with Hon. Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera as Chancellor in 1996 (SC-AO 35-96)

14

* - The RP-US Military Bases Agreement is signed by President Manuel A. Roxas and US Ambassador Paul V. McNutt in 1947

17

* - President Ramon Magsaysay dies in a plane crash in 1957

18

* - Vice President Carlos P. Garcia is sworn in as President of the Philippines in 1957

20

* - Chief Justice Manuel V. Moran retires in 1951

- In 1987, the Supreme Court strikes down Executive Order 626-A, which banned transportation and slaughter of carabaos, as unconstitutional in G.R. No. 74457 (Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court)

22

* - Gen. Emilio F. Aguinaldo takes his oath as President of the Revolutionary Government in 1897

24

* - The Tydings-McDuffie Act (Public Act 127) is signed by US President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1934

25

* - President Corazon C. Aquino issues Proclamation No. 1, directing “all public officials to submit their courtesy resignations beginning with the members of the Supreme Court" in 1986
* - Proclamation No. 3 providing for the "Freedom Constitution" is issued in 1986
* - The jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts (MeTCs), Municipal Trial Courts (MTCs), and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTCs) is expanded in 1994 (RA 7691)

30

* - Maria V. Francisco is the first woman admitted to the Bar in 1911

31

* - In 1993, the Court’s 90th Associate Justice and its 15th Chief Justice, Hon. Ramon C. Aquino, passed away.
Rodil Zalameda

**Rodil Zalameda** is a Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines. vice Mariano Del Castillo.

## Notes

Justice Rodil V. Zalameda was sworn in as a member of the Supreme Court of the Philippines by Chief Justice Lucas P. Beramin on August 6, 2019. Justice Zalameda’s appointment completed the 15-member roster of the High Tribunal.

Born in Caloocan City on August 2, 1963, Justice Zalameda obtained his Bachelor of Laws Degree from the Ateneo de Manila University in 1987. A member of the Fraternal Order of Utopia, he also served as Associate Editor of the Ateneo Law Journal and was a senior staff member of the Ateneo Law Bulletin.

After passing the Bar examinations in 1988, he joined the Judiciary as Branch Clerk 1 of the Makati City Regional Trial Court. A year later, he served as Clerk of Court V. From 1990-1995, he engaged in private practice but returned to government service as Prosecutor I in 1995 at the Office of the City Prosecutor, Mandaluyong City. He served as Prosecutor II (1997-2002) until he was appointed City Prosecutor in 2002.

On September 11, 2008, then City Prosecutor Zalameda was appointed as Court of Appeals (CA) Associate Justice. He was the Chairperson of the CA 17th Division when he got appointed to the High Tribunal.

Named Ulirang Mandaleño in the field of public service by the City Government of Mandaluyong in 2010, Justice Zalameda is married to Ma. Vilma Amor and they are blessed with a son, Jasper Rodil II.

## Source

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1158642293986881537
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1158643126338146309
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/5650/
A.M. No. RTJ-18-2514. January 30, 2018

**[A.M. No. RTJ-18-2514. January 30, 2018]** is a decision 2018 made by the Supreme Court.

A judge is dismissed from the job.

## Case Details

* Office of the Court Administrator Vs. Judge Hector B. Salise
* [A.M. No. RTJ-18-2514. January 30, 2018]
* Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/january2018/RTJ-18-2514.pdf
* Dismissal of Judge

## Info

"Judge xxx also dismissed similar cases under highly questionable circumstances and without due regard to the applicable procedural rules, xxx"
Decisions 2017

List of SC Decisions by the Supreme Courtof the Philippines on 2017.

## Decisions

1. January
	* A.M. No. MTJ-16-1887. January 9, 2017 Lower Court Decision in 3 months
	* Estate of Ferdinand E. Marcos Vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. 213027. January 18, 2017 Marcos
	* G.R. No. 193150. January 23, 2017 Two decisions: guilty and acquittal
2. February
	* A.M. No. 2016-03-SC, February 21, 2017 Digging
3. March
	* G.R. No. 193887, March 29, 2017 Transfer of Lot
4. April
	* G.R. No. 213948. April 25, 2017 Rizal Monument
5. May
6. June
	* G.R. No. 221096. June 28, 2017 Pre-mature Dismissal
7. July
	* G.R. No. 209555. July 31, 2017 CBA
	* A.C. No. 11663. July 31, 2017 Litigation Fees
	* G.R. No. 170341. July 05, 2017 Media Defamation
	* G.R. No. 232413 [Formerly UDK 15419]. July 25, 2017 Release from Jail
8. August
	* A.M. No. RTJ-10-2219, August 01, 2017 Judge Fined for 3mos. Salary
9. September
	* A.M. No. 16-05-142-RTC. September 5, 2017 OCA sent a Spot Audit of Search Warrant
	* G.R. No. 198119. September 27, 2017 Sandiganbayan Acquital
10. October
	* G.R. No. 229781. October 10, 2017 De Lima
11. November
	* G.R. No. 197519. November 8, 2017 BIR Case
	* G.R. No. 206113, November 6, 2017 Permanent Disability
12. December
	* G.R. No. 217426. December 4, 2017 Fit to Work
	* G.R. No. 216871, December 6, 2017 Doctrine of Condonation
G.R. No. 209555. July 31, 2017

**G.R. No. 209555. July 31, 2017** is a decision 2018 made by the Supreme Court.

Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA)

## Case Details

* United Polyresins, Inc., Ernesto Uy Soon, Jr. and/or Julito Uy Soon Vs. Marcelino Pinuela
* G.R. No. 209555. July 31, 2017
* Justice Mariano Del Castillo
* http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63208
* xxx

## Issue

1. THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN RULING THAT THE CHARGES OF MISAPPROPRIATION AGAINST THE RESPONDENT WERE INSUFFICIENT (SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS)
2. THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN RULING THAT THE RESPONDENT WAS NOT PROPERLY INFORMED OF THE CHARGES AGAINST HIM (PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS).
3. THE APPELLATE COURT ERRED IN RULING THAT THE RESPONDENT IS ENTITLED TO SEPARATION PAY, BACKWAGES FROM DISMISSAL TO THE FINALITY OF ITS DECISION, AND 13TH MONTH PAY.

## Info

"However, these provisions refer to impeachment and recall of union officers, and not expulsion from union membership. This is made clear by Section 2(e) of the same Article XV, which provides that "(t)he union officers impeached shall 'IPSO FACTO' to [sic] be considered resigned or ousted from office and shall no longer be elected nor appointed to any position in the union." In short, any officer found guilty of violating these provisions shall simply be removed, impeached or recalled, from office, but not expelled or stripped of union membership."

"The matter of respondent's alleged failure to return petitioners' P300,000.00 which was lent to PORFA is immaterial as well. It may not be used as a ground to terminate respondent's employment; under the Labor Code, such a contribution by petitioners to PORFA is illegal and constitutes unfair labor practice."

## Decision

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Petition is hereby DENIED. The December 11, 2012 Decision and October 10, 2013 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 115402 are AFFIRMED.

## Triva

* Polyresins Rank and File Association (PORFA) is a labor union
Supreme Court of the Philippines

**Supreme Court of the Philippines** is the highest court of the Republic of the Philippines. The Supreme Court *En Banc* has several landmark ruling or leading cases. Location Padre Faura Street, Ermita, Manila, Metro Manila. Baguio is where the Supreme Court of the Philippines holds its Summer Session.

## Requirements

A person must meet the following requirements in order to be appointed to the Supreme Court:

* natural-born citizenship
* at least 40 years old
* must have been for fifteen years or more a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.
* a judge must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence.

## Supreme Court Justices

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/aboutsc/justices/

* List of Chief Justices of the Philippines
* List of Senior Associate Justice
* List of Associate Justices

## Supreme Court Divisions

* Supreme Court First Division
* Supreme Court Second Division
* Supreme CourtThird Division
* see SC Divisions

## Reviews

* Court of Appeals
* Court of Tax Appeals
* Sandiganbayan
* Commission on Elections

## Jurisprudence, Decisions and Resolutions

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/

* List of SC Decisions
* List of Supreme Court *En Banc* Decisions
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/resolutions/resolutions.php

## Special Decisions

* A.M. No. 16-05-142-RTC. September 5, 2017 OCA sent a Spot Audit of Search Warrant
* G.R. No. 229781. October 10, 2017 De Lima
* A.C. No. 235935/G.R. No. 236061/G.R. No. 236145/G.R. No. 236155 Martial Law Extension
* G.R. Nos. 158622, 169441, 172958, 173194, 196958, 197120, 205463. January 27, 2016 Writ of Possession
* G.R. Nos. 221697 & 221698-700. March 8, 2016 Grace Poe
* G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018 Quo Warranto Chief Justice of the Philippines

## Reorganization

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1134381598336475136

## Annual Report

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pio/annualreports/SC\_Annual\_17.pdf

## Issues

* Impeachment Renato Corona
* Impeachment Maria Lourdes Sereno (ousted by Quo Warranto)
* Impeachment Marvic Leonen

## Trivia

* It supervises the Supreme Court PIO.
* Special Orders
* https://korte.fandom.com/wiki/Korte\_Wiki

## Sources

* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/387/
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/389/
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme\_Court\_of\_the\_Philippines
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO
SC Divisions

**Supreme Court Divisions** are the Supreme Court Divisions of the Philippines. The Chief Justice manages the **SC Divisions** and issues Special Orders.

## Peralta Court

**Special Order no. 2724** Reorganization of the Three Divisions of the Court and the Designation of the Chairpersons and Members thereof (Oct 28, 2019)

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187599257001349120
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187598603214188544

**Special Order no. 2723** Reorganization of the Raffle Committees (Oct 28, 2019)

**En Banc Raffle Committee**

* SAJ Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe
* Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa
* Alexander G. Gesmudo

**Division Raffle Committee**

* Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen
* Andres B. Reyes, Jr.
* Jose C. Reyes, Jr.

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187599110666256386

## First Division

1. see Chief Justice
2. Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa
3. Jose C. Reyes, Jr.
4. Amy C. Lazaro-Javier
5. Henri Jean Paul B. Inting as Additional Member of the 1st Division;

## Second Division

1. see Senior Associate Justice
2. Andres B. Reyes, Jr.
3. Ramon Paul L. Hernando
4. Henri Jean Paul B. Inting
5. Rodil V. Zalameda as Additional Member of the 2nd Division;

## Third Division

1. Chairperson is the Third Most Senior SC Justice
2. Alexander G. Gesmudo
3. Rosmari D. Carandang
4. Rodil V. Zalameda
5. Amy Lazaro-Javier Additional Member of the 3rd Division

## Adjudication of Cases

https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187600149146558465

https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187599506122014720

https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187599110666256386
Legal Education Board

The **Legal Education Board** was created pursuant to R.A. No. 7662, also
 known as the Legal Education Reform Act of 1993.  The law was approved
by **President Fidel V. Ramos** on 23 December 1993.

http://leb.gov.ph/philsat/

## Law Schools in the Philippines

* Arellano University School of Law
* Ateneo School of Law
* VISION

We envision graduates who are not only skilled in the science and art of the law but also leaders imbued with a burning passion for justice and the desire to serve the nation for the greater glory of God.
IDENTITY
The Ateneo Law School is a Filipino, Catholic, and Jesuit institution within the larger Ateneo de Manila University.
As a Filipino law school, we form lawyers who will identify and enrich Philippine culture and contribute to nation building through service of country and the global community.
As a Catholic law school, we inspire our students, following the teachings and examples of Christ, to devote their lives to the service of others, especially the poor and powerless, through the promotion of justice.
As a Jesuit law school, we seek the goals of a Jesuit liberal education through the harmonious development of moral and intellectual virtues. Imbued with the Ignatian spirit, we lead our students to see God in all things and to strive for the greater glory of God and the greater service of others.

* Central Philippine University College of Law
* De La Salle Lipa College of Law
* De La Salle University College of Law
* University of the East College of Law
* Far Eastern University Institute of Law
* HNU College of Law
* Philippine Law School
* University of the Philippines College of Law
* PLM College of Law
* PLM Graduate School of Law
* Polytechnic University of the Philippines College of Law
* San Beda College of Law
* University of Santo Tomas Faculty of Civil Law
* Silliman University College of Law

## The Board shall have the following powers and functions:

* **a.** To administer the legal education system.
* **b.**To supervise the law schools.
* **c.** To set accreditation standards for law schools.
* **d.** To accredit law schools.
* **e.** To set minimum standards for law admission and minimum qualifications and compensation of faculty members.
* **f.** To prescribe the basic curricula for the

course of study aligned to the requirements for admission to the bar,
law practice and social consciousness,and such other courses
 of study as may be prescribed by the law schools.

* **g.** To establish a law practice internship as a requirement for taking the bar.
* **h.** To perform such other functions and prescribe

 such rules and regulations necessary for the attainment of the policies
 and objectives of the Legal Education Reform Act.

## Board

http://leb.gov.ph/profile-of-chairman-and-commissioner/

* Emerson B. Aquende
* Zenaida V. Necesito-Elepaño
* Josefe C. Sorrera-Ty
* Abelardo T. Domondon
* Catherine P. Pedrosa

## Others

* https://www.barristasolutions.com/
* https://twitter.com/Mvmt4LawNJstice
* https://abogado.com.ph/
* https://politics.com.ph/
* https://www.laeprepper.com/top-10-law-schools-in-the-philippines/
Decisions 2018

List of SC Decisions by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on 2018.

## Decisions

1. January
	* A.C. No. 10689. January 8, 2018 Notary Suspension
	* A.M. No. RTJ-18-2514. January 30, 2018 Judge Dismissed
	* A.M. No. P-09-2633/A.M. No. RTJ-12-2338. January 30, 2018
2. February
	* A.C. No. 235935/G.R. No. 236061/G.R. No. 236145/G.R. No. 236155. February 6, 2018
	* Republic of the Philippines Vs. Virgie (Virgel) L. Tipay G.R. No. 209527. February 14, 2018 Birth Certificate Correction
	* L.C. Big Mak Burger Inc. Vs. McDonald's Corporation G.R. No. 233073, February 14, 2018 Infringement Contempt
3. March
	* G.R. No. 178083/A.M. No. 11-10-1-SC. March 13, 2018 Second Motion for Reconsideration
4. April
	* Estrelitta Tadeo-Matias Vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. 230751. April 25, 2018 PVAO AFP Presumtive Death on Missing Serviceman
5. May (landmark ruling or leading case)
	* G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018 Quo Warranto Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno
6. June
7. July
	* G.R. No. 206800. July 2, 2018
8. August
9. September
10. October
	* G.R. No. 216930/G.R. No. 217451/G.R. No. 217752/G.R. No. 218045/G.R. No. 218098/G.R. No. 218123/G.R. No. 218465. October 9, 2018 K-12 program
11. November
	* Eliseo Soriano Vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 225010. November 21, 2018 Ang Dating Daan Libel
12. December
	* G.R. No. 212735. December 5, 2018 Value-added Tax (VAT)
	* G.R. No. 170867/G.R. No. 185941. December 4, 2018 Malampaya
	* G.R. No. 214667. December 3, 2018 NLRC
A.C. No. 11981. July 3, 2018

A.C. No. 11981. July 3, 2018 is a decision 2018 of the Supreme Court.

Lawyer disbarred when it was found that respondent authored a fake decision.

## Case Details

Leah B. Taday Vs. Atty. Dionisio B. Apoya, Jr.

http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/july2018/11981.pdf

## Info

On November 17, 2011, while complainant was on vacation in the Philippines and after paying respondent his legal fees amounting to P14,500.00, respondent delivered a Decision dated November 16, 2011 which granted the annulment of complainant's marriage. The said decision was promulgated by a certain Judge Ma. Eliza Becamon-Angeles of RTC Branch 162. Complainant became suspicious as the said decision came from a different branch presided by a different judge where the case was originally filed. Complainant's family became skeptical as the said decision seemed to come too soon and was poorly crafted.

However, instead of withdrawing as counsel, respondent filed an urgent motion to withdraw the petition. In its Order dated June 25, 2012, the RTC Branch 131 granted the said motion and the case was dropped from the civil docket of the court.

The Commission also found that respondent authored a fake decision. It opined that the said decision was fake because it bore the same format and grammatical errors as that of the petition prepared by respondent. The Commission disregarded the defense of respondent that it was complainant's parents who made the fake decision. It stressed that any reasonable mind would know that a fake decision would not benefit complainant. Moreover, complainant's parents continuously paid the legal fees of respondent, which would show their lack of intent to create the fabricated decision.

In its Resolution No. XXI-2015-100 dated January 31, 2015, the IBP Board of Governors (Board) modified the recommended penalty of two (2) years suspension to a penalty of disbarment.

## Decision

WHEREFORE, the Court adopts the recommendation of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors and finds Atty. Dionisio B. Apoya, Jr. GUILTY of violating Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 2, Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice. He is DISBARRED from the practice of law and his name ordered stricken off the Roll of Attorneys, effective immediately.
Impeachment in the Philippines

**Impeachment in the Philippines** against public officials.

## Subjected to Impeachment

Based on Article XI, Section 2 of the Constitution The following officials may be subjected to impeachment:

* President of the Philippines
* Vice President of the Philippines
* Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines
* Members of the Constitutional Commissions:
	+ Commission on Elections
	+ Civil Service Commission
	+ Commission on Audit
* Ombudsman

Other officials can be removed from offices but not by impeachment:
those under the executive department may be dismissed by the president;
members of Congress can be expelled by two-thirds vote of the chamber
the member is a part of; local elected officials can be removed from
office through recall.

In the 1935 and 1973 constitutions, the President, the Vice
President, the Justices of the Supreme Court, and the Auditor General
were the impeachable officials.

G.R. No. 160261, G.R. No. 160262, G.R. No. 160263, G.R. No. 160277, G.R. No. 160292, G.R. No. 160295, G.R. No. 160310, G.R. No. 160318, G.R. No. 160342, G.R. No. 160343, G.R. No. 160360, Etc., November 10, 2003

## Link

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment\_in\_the\_Philippines
G.R. No. 212448. January 11, 2018

**G.R. No. 212448. January 11, 2018**  is a decision 2018 made by the Supreme Court.

May Philippine courts exercise jurisdiction xxx when the alleged illicit relationship occured or is occurring outside the country?

## Case Details

* AAA Vs. BBB
* G.R. No. 212448. January 11, 2018
* Justice xxx
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/january2018/212448.pdf
* Marraige

## Info

"We say that even if the alleged extra-marital affair causing the offended wife mental and emotional anguish is committed abroad, the same does not place a prosecution under R.A. No. 9262 absolutely beyond the reach of Philippine courts."

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2013/jun2013/gr\_179267\_2013.html
G.R. No. 198119. September 27, 2017

video File:Placeholder
**G.R. No. 198119. September 27, 2017** is part of the List of SC Decisions of the Supreme Court.
A petition for certiorari questioning a judgment of acquittal must at least allege these essential grounds. Without these, the Petition must fail.

## Case Details

* People of the Philippines Vs. Sandiganbayan and Juan Roberto L. Abling
* G.R. No. 198119. September 27, 2017
* Justice
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/september2017/198119.pdf
* forwhatxxx

## Issues

PUBLIC RESPONDENTS COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION WHEN THEY ACCEPTED THE DEFENSE OF ABLING THAT HE FORWARDED THE FUNDS TO PRESIDENT MARCOS AS BEING SUFFICIENT TO OVERTURN THE LEGAL PRESUMPTION OF MALVERSATION

## Info

"Public respondent Sandiganbayan noted that the prosecution should have presented direct evidence showing that private respondent xxx appropriated the amount in question for his personal use. Absent which, the testimony of private respondent xxx coupled with the three memoranda, cast reasonable doubt over the latter's guilt of the crime charged."

*First*, petitioner People accuses public respondent Sandiganbayan of committing grave abuse of discretion when it held that private respondent Abling's defense - that he forwarded the funds to President Marcos - sufficiently overturned the '**prima facie'** case of malversation against him.
*Second*, petitioner People failed to assail public respondent Sandiganbayan's jurisdiction by not substantiating the grave abuse of discretion that the latter supposedly committed when it acquitted private respondent Abling of the crime charged. In the petition, there is no allegation that public respondent Sandiganbayan acted with bias, partiality or bad faith when it rendered the assailed judgment.
*Third*, even if we assume that public respondent Sandiganbayan's error in judgment resulted in a denial of due process or a sham trial and the same was properly alleged, the Court is still prevented from making a complete evaluation of this aspect because petitioner People did not even attach to the present Petition the very documents at the center of its argument, pursuant to Section 1, Paragraph 2, Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, as amended, which reads:
SECTION 1. *Petition for certiorari*. - x x x.

**The petition shall be accompanied by** a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution subject thereof, **copies of all pleadings and documents relevant and pertinent thereto**, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping as provided in the third paragraph of section 3, Rule 46.

## Decision

**WHEREFORE**, the Petition for *Certiorari* is **DISMISSED** for lack of merit.
Re: News Report of Mr. Jomar Canlas in the Manila Times Issue of 8 March 2016 A. M. No. 16-03-10-SC. October 19, 2019

video File:Placeholder
**Re: News Report of Mr. Jomar Canlas in the Manila Times Issue of 8 March 2016 A. M. No. 16-03-10-SC. October 19, 2019** is part of the List of SC Decisions of the Supreme Court.

## Case Details

* Re: News Report of Mr. Jomar Canlas in the Manila Times Issue of 8 March 2016
* A. M. No. 16-03-10-SC
* Antonio Carpio
* https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/65859
* JUSTICES OFFERED P50-million bribe To disqualify Poe-sources

## Issues

* First, the Court notes that the statement of the unnamed Justice did not confirm the allegation of bribery; the unnamed Justice only stated that the Court will not allow itself to be pressured by anyone.
* Second, the legitimacy of the news article is misleading and has not been sufficiently established. Third, a reading of the article shows its intention to sensationalize.
* The article, in full, emphasizes the bad that overshadows the short disclaimer that the Justices refused the bribe. Again, because of the close voting in the Poe cases, the article created a doubt in the minds of the readers, against some of the Justices and in the process, the Court as a whole.
* The Court is not immune from criticisms, and it is the duty of the press to expose all government agencies and officials and to hold them responsible for their actions. However, the press cannot just throw accusations without verifying the truthfulness of their reports.

## Info

WHEREFORE, the Court finds Jomar Canlas GUILTY of Indirect Contempt of Court in accordance with Section 3(d), Rule 71 of the Rules of Court, and hereby SEVERELY REPRIMANDS him with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar act in the future shall merit a more severe sanction.

## Trivia

* En Banc
* News Report
* https://www.manilatimes.net/author/jomar-canlas/
* https://news.abs-cbn.com/news/10/15/19/supreme-court-severely-reprimands-print-reporter-over-2016-bribe-try-article
* https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1022732
* https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/764475/pet-to-calida-explain-why-you-should-not-be-cited-in-contempt/story/
Samuel Martires

**Samuel Martires** is an Ombudsman and a Justice of the Supreme Court.

## Notes

Martires finished his law degree in San Beda College. He was appointed to the High Court in March 2017 after serving the Sandiganbayan for 12 years.

## Ombudsman

Marties was selected as 7th Ombudsman by President Rodrigo Duterte.

Duterte made the announcement during his speech in a program held at the town plaza as the guest of honor of the 69th “Araw ng Ipil.”

## Trivia

**Supreme Court PIO** tweets his birthdayhttps://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/947980766004350976

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSM\_V-\_V4AAscNW.jpg
Lazaro-Javier

**Amy Lazaro Javier** is a Justice of the Supreme Court. She was appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte as an Associate Justice.

## Background

* vice Noel Tijam
* Associate Justice August 29, 2007
* Assistant Solicitor-General thereat in 1994
* Trial Attorney in the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) in 1983
* University of Santo Tomas (UST)
* Philippine Normal University (PNU) manga cum laude

## Shortlisted

* Appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte on March 6, 2019 (Wednesday)
* February 2019 to replace Chief Justice Lucas Bersamin (as Associate Justice)
* December 2018 to replace justice Noel Tijam
* November 2018 to replace justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro
* October 2018 to replace justice Samuel Martires
* June 2018 to replace justice Presbitero Velasco Jr
* July 2017 to replace justice Jose Mendoza
* June 2017 to replace justice Bienvenido Reyes
* December 2016 to replace justice Arturo Brion

## Trivia

* "I do not see the President as an enemy of women. I see him as a person who respects and loves his late mother, who he credits to have unconditionally loved him, and brought out the leader that he is."
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1104965065927618560
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1103619138704957440

## Links

* http://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1063862
* https://abogado.com.ph/look-sc-justice-javiers-first-flag-raising-ceremony/
L.C. Big Mak Burger Inc. Vs. McDonald's Corporation G.R. No. 233073, February 14, 2018

L.C. Big Mak Burger Inc. Vs. McDonald's Corporation G.R. No. 233073, February 14, 2018

Tijam

https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63925

## Issues

Is petitioner guilty of indirect contempt?

During the trial of the infringement and unfair competition case, the wrappers and bags for petitioner's burger sandwiches already reflected its corporate name instead of the words "Big Mak."

It bears stressing that the proscription in the injunction order is
against petitioner's use of the mark "Big Mak." However, as established,
 petitioner had already been using its corporate name instead of the
proscribed mark. The use of petitioner's corporate name instead of the
words "Big Mak" solely was evidently pursuant to the directive of the
court in the injunction order. Clearly, as correctly found by the RTC,
petitioner had indeed desisted from the use of "Big Mak" to comply with
the injunction order.

To be sure, the complaint for change of corporate name before the SEC is
 a separate and distinct case from that of the infringement and unfair
competition case before the trial court.

It was also not unreasonable for the petitioner, through its officers,
to think that the stalls and products bearing its corporate name would
send the message to the public that the products were the petitioner's
and not those of respondent's, the very evil sought to be prevented
and/or eradicated by the decision in the infringement/unfair competition
 case.

We are, therefore, one with the Contempt Court in dismissing the
contempt case. There being no issue raised as to the damages awarded and
 more importantly, finding that the Contempt Court had correctly
discussed the rationale for such award, We find it unnecessary to
disturb the same.

## Decisions

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is GRANTED. The assailed Decision dated February 2, 2017 and Resolution dated July 26, 2017 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 36768 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accordingly, the Decision dated April 7, 2014 of the Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 59 is REINSTATED.

SO ORDERED.

Sereno, C.J., (Chairperson), Leonardo-De Castro, Del Castillo, and Jardeleza, JJ., concur.
Wie Begreifen ?

Dann muss du den Nutzen einer Information suchen. Du wirst immer einen Nutzen finden. Nur der beste Nutzen kann es sein erst einmal überhaupt Nichts mit der Information zu machen - So zu sagen warten und erst einmal Tee trinken.

Wenn du bis hier kommst hast du jetzt in diesem Moment für diesen Moment die Information begriffen. Doch im nächsten Moment hast du den Griff wieder verloren und du musst von neuem Beginnen. ( https://www.findyournose.com/dankbar-jetzt-in-diesem-moment | http://www.songtexte.com/songtext/frittenbude/jetzt-ist-der-moment-7bef6e80.html | http://mymonk.de/der-unsinn-vom-staendigen-leben-im-hier-und-jetzt/ )
G.R. No. 202426, January 27, 2016

G.R. No. 202426, January 27, 2016 is a decision 2016 made by the Supreme Court.

In resolving the Petition for Review, the CA lost sight of the legal principle that in resolving the issue of possession in an ejectment case, the registered owner of the property is preferred over the transferee under an unregistered deed of sale. In *Co v. Militar*,[21] this Court held that -
In the instant case, the evidence showed that as between the parties, it is the petitioner who has a Torrens Title to the property. Respondents merely showed their unregistered deeds of sale in support of their claims. The Metropolitan Trial Court correctly relied on the transfer certificate of title in the name of petitioner.==Case Details==

* Gina Endaya Vs. Ernesto V. Villaos
* G.R. No. 202426, January 27, 2016
* Justice xxx
* http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/61597
* xxx

## Issue

* The Honorable Court of Appeals erred in affirming the findings of the MTCC of Puerto Princesa City and RTC Branch 49 on the issue of ownership of the subject properties.
* The Honorable Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the issue of jurisdiction, or lack of it, of the MTCC over the complaint for ejectment filed by the Respondent cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.

## Info

It is settled that a Torrens title is evidence of indefeasible title to property in favor of the person in whose name the title appears. It is conclusive evidence with respect to the ownership of the land described therein. It is also settled that the titleholder is entitled to all the attributes of ownership of the property, including possession. Thus, in *Arambulo v. Gungab*, this Court declared that the age-old rule is that the person who has a Torrens title over a land is entitled to possession thereof.

## Decision

**WHEREFORE**, the Petition is **GRANTED**. The assailed January 2, 2012 Decision and June 11, 2012 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 110427 are **REVERSED** and **SET ASIDE**. Civil Case No. 1940 for ejectment is ordered **DISMISSED**.
G.R. No. 206113, November 6, 2017

**G.R. No. 206113, November 6, 2017** is a Decision 2017 by the Supreme Court.

The company-designated physicians' failure to arrive at a final and definite assessment of a seafarer's fitness to work or level of disability within the prescribed periods means that the seafarer shall be deemed to be totally and permanently disabled.

## Case Details

* Sharpe Sea Personnel, Inc., Monte Carlo Shipping, and Moises R. Florem, Jr.
* G.R. No. 206113, November 6, 2017
* Justice Marvic Leonen
* http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/63565
* xxx

## Info

"We also grant petitioner's prayer for moral and exemplary damages. Private respondents acted in bad faith when they belatedly submitted petitioner's Grade 8 disability rating only via their motion for reconsideration before the NLRC. By withholding such disability rating from petitioner, the latter was compelled to seek out opinion from his private doctors thereby causing him mental anguish, serious anxiety, and wounded feelings, thus, entitling him to moral damages of P50,000.00. Too, by way of example or correction for the public good, exemplary damages of P50,000.00 is awarded."
Supreme Court PIO

**Supreme Court PIO (@SCPh\_PIO)** is the Official account of the Philippine Supreme Court's Public Information Office on twitter.com.

## SC PIO Chief

* Midas Marquez
* Theodore Te

## SC PIO News

* Black Nazarene suspension of work
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1081123162316627969

## Public Information

* Feedback: pio@sc.judiciary.gov.ph
* Questions: pio\_questions@sc.judiciary.gov.ph
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pio/news/

Media Briefer https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/935401089796513792

## Controversy

The CJ’s response to VACC claim of undue delay in a specific case. https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/941201702392233986

## Trivia

They tweet notices and Justices birthdays.
G.R. No. 202678. September 5, 2018

**G.R. No. 202678. September 5, 2018**

* Ernestina A. Pagdanganan, et al. Vs. The Court of Appeals, et al.
* G.R. No. 202678. September 5, 2018
* Justice Marvic Leonen
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/september2018/202678.pdf

## Issue

A petition for mandamus praying for this Court to compel the Court of Appeals to resolve a case becomes moot if the Court of Appeals resolves the case with finality during the pendency of the petition.

## Info

* The Petition is dismissed for being moot and academic.

* Even assuming that this Court could still pass upon the substantive

issue in this case, the Petition would still be denied for lack of merit. The Court of Appeals did not delay in resolving CA-G.R. SP No. 104291.

## Decision

**WHEREFORE**, the Petition is **DISMISSED** for being moot and academic.
G.R. No. 191810. July 22, 2015

**G.R. No. 191810. July 22, 2015** is a decision 2015 made by the Supreme Court.

## Case Details

* Jimmy T. Go a.k.a. Jaime T. Gaisano Vs. Bureau of Immigration and Deportation and its Commissioners and Luis T. Ramos
* G.R. No. 191810. July 22, 2015
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2015/july2015/191810.pdf
A.M. No. MTJ-16-1887. January 9, 2017

**A.M. No. MTJ-16-1887. January 9, 2017**  is a Decision 2017 by the Supreme Court.

* Section 15, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution requires the lower courts to decide or resolve cases or matters for decision or final resolution within three (3) months from date of submission.
* In complaints for forcible entry and unlawful detainer as in this case, Section 10 of the Rules on Summary Procedure specifically requires that the complaint be resolved within thirty (30) days from receipt of the last affidavits and position papers. Without any order of extension granted by this Court, failure to decide even a single case within the required period constitutes gross inefficiency.

## Case Details

* Trinidad Gamboa-Roces Vs. Judge Ranhel A. Perez
* A.M. No. MTJ-16-1887. January 9, 2017
* Justice xxx
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2017/january2017/MTJ-16-1887.pdf
* Php 10,000 fine

## Info

"A judge is expected to keep his own listing of cases and to note therein the status of each case so that they may be acted upon accordingly and without delay. He must adopt a system of record management and organize his docket in order to monitor the flow of cases for prompt and effective dispatch of business."
A.M. No. P-09-2633/A.M. No. RTJ-12-2338. January 30, 2018

**A.M. No. P-09-2633/A.M. No. RTJ-12-2338. January 30, 2018** is a decision 2018 made by the Supreme Court.

A judge and clerk of court.

## Case Details

* Office of the Court Administrator Vs. Rolando C. Tomas and Angelina C. Rillorta/Angelina C. Rillorta Vs. Judge A. Madrid
* A.M. No. P-09-2633/A.M. No. RTJ-12-2338. January 30, 2018
* Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno
* http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/january2018/P-09-2633.pdf
* xxx
Teresita Leonardo-de Castro

**Teresita Leonardo-De Castro** is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. She was appointed by President Rodrigo Duterte. She was appointed by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as an Associate Justice.

## SC Justice

* De Castro is Duterte’s first Chief Justice.
* De Castro retires on October 8, 2018 (41 days as Chief Justice)
* She is the first female Chief Justice after Maria Lourdes Sereno was ousted
* Justice Zone Cebu City

## Notes

* vice Cancio Garcia
* University of the Philippines Diliman

## Controversy

* Maria Lourdes Sereno
* Quo Warranto

## Trivia

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1034239413662834689

## Sources

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1033287567016259584
* https://web.archive.org/web/20071016171159/http://www.gmanews.tv/erapplundertrial/decastro
* http://cnnphilippines.com/news/2018/08/25/Chief-Justice-Teresita-Leonardo-de-Castro.html
* http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/08/25/18/de-castro-is-new-chief-justice-guevarra#
G.R. NO. 150917. September 27, 2006

G.R. NO. 150917. September 27, 2006

ARTEMIO YADAO, PETITIONER, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, RESPONDENT.

http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/43661

## Overview

The principle has been dinned into the ears of the bench and the bar that in this jurisdiction, accusation is not synonymous with guilt.[45] The proof against him must survive the test of reason; the strongest suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment.[46] ***If the evidence is susceptible of two interpretations, one consistent with the innocence of the accused and the other consistent with his guilt, the accused must be acquitted***.[47] The overriding consideration is not whether the court doubts the innocence of the accused but whether it entertains a reasonable doubt as to his guilt.[48] If there exist even one iota of doubt, this Court is "under a long standing legal injunction to resolve the doubt in favor of herein accused-petitioner."[49]

From the foregoing, the inevitable conclusion is that the guilt of petitioner xxx has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt. The facts of the case, the autopsy reports, as well as the testimony of Dr. xxx do not definitely establish that the assault was the proximate cause of the death of the victim. Even assuming for the sake of argument that the blow inflicted on the head of the victim resulted in an edematous condition of the brain, petitioner xxx would still not be held liable for the death as the prosecution failed to present proof that said act was the ***efficient*** and ***proximate*** cause of the victim's demise. An acquittal based on reasonable doubt will prosper even though the accused's innocence may be doubted.[50] It is better to free a guilty man than to unjustly keep in prison one whose guilt has not been proved by the required quantum of evidence. For only when there is proof beyond any shadow of doubt that those responsible should be made answerable.[51]

## Decision

**WHEREFORE**, the 28 March 1996 Decision of the Regional Tial Court of Bauang, La Union, Branch 33, as well as the 18 April 2001 Decision and 13 November 2001 Resolution both of the Court of Appeals are hereby **REVERSED** and **SET ASIDE**. Petitioner xxx is **ACQUITTED** of the charge of homicide on the ground of reasonable doubt. His immediate release from custody is hereby ordered unless he is being held for other lawful causes. However, Petitioner xxx is ordered to pay the heirs of victim xxx in the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as civil indemnity. Costs *de oficio*.
Special Orders

**Special Orders** by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

## List of Special Courts

Peralta Court

**Special Order no. 2724** Reorganization of the Three Divisions of the Court and the Designation of the Chairpersons and Members thereof (Oct 28, 2019)

* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187599257001349120
* https://twitter.com/SCPh\_PIO/status/1187598603214188544

**Special Order no. 2723** Reorganization of the Raffle Committees (Oct 28, 2019) **En Banc Raffle Committee** and **Division Raffle Committee**

**Special Order no. 2722** Designation of Signatories pursuant to A.M. No. 99-12-08-SC (January 18, 2000)