Tuesday, September 30, 2014

JUSTICE PERALTA:

The People may assail a judgment of acquittal only via petition for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules.

          If the petition, regardless of its nomenclature, merely calls for an ordinary review of the findings of the court a quo, the constitutional right of the accused against double jeopardy would be violated. (VILLAREAL VS. ALIGA, 2014, PERALTA, J.)

Monday, September 29, 2014

JUSTICE PERALTA:

     when a complaint is dismissed without prejudice at the instance of the plaintiff, pursuant to Section 1, Rule 17 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, there is no need to state in the certificate of non-forum shopping in a subsequent re-filed complaint the fact of the prior filing and dismissal of the former complaint. (BENEDICTO vs. LACSON [2010], PERALTA, J.).

https://www.facebook.com/mvplawoffice

Saturday, September 27, 2014

JUSTICE PERALTA:

   In criminal cases, the grant of demurrer is tantamount to an acquittal and the dismissal order may not be appealed because this would place the accused in double jeopardy. Although the dismissal order is not subject to appeal, it is still reviewable but only through certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court. (PEOPLE vs. ATIENZA, 2012, PERALTA, J.).

Thursday, September 25, 2014

JUSTICE PERALTA:

     Forum-shopping can be committed in three ways: (1) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous case not having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis pendentia); (2) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous case having been finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal is res judicata); and (3) by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action but with different prayers (splitting of causes of action, where the ground for dismissal is also either litis pendentia or res judicata). (BORRA vs. CA [2013], PERALTA, J.)

Wednesday, September 24, 2014

JUSTICE PERALTA:

     JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT MATTER: It is a settled rule that jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by the allegations in the complaint. It is not affected by the pleas or the theories set up by the defendant in an answer or a motion to dismiss. Otherwise, jurisdiction would become dependent almost entirely upon the whims of the defendant. (MEDICAL PLAZA MAKATI CONDOMINIUM VS.  CULLEN [2013], PERALTA, J.)