REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. SUPREME COURT Manila
|
|
- Alexandrina Ellen Osborne
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REP. CLAVEL A. MARTINEZ et al., Petitioners -versus- THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of the 13 th CONGRESS, et al., SUPREME COURT Manila Respondents. X X GR NO URGENT MOTION TO RESOLVE Petitioners, by counsel, respectfully move for an urgent resolution of the instant case on the following discussion: 1. The instant case was filed before this Honorable Court in the hope of putting a resolution to the constitutional issues that arose from last year s impeachment proceeding against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo that are capable of repetition yet evading review. The Petition raised the following issues: THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN PLENARY COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION WHEN IT RATIFIED BY VOTE OF , THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE BY MAJORITY VOTE, AND AS EMBODIED IN COMMITTEE REPORT 1012, TO DISCUSS PREJUDICIAL AND THRESHOLD QUESTIONS AHEAD OF A DETERMINATION OF THE FORM AND 1
2 SUBSTANCE OF THE THREE IMPEACHMENT COMPLAINTS, IN VIOLATION OF THE CONSTITUTION AND ITS OWN RULES OF PROCEDURE. II. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN PLENARY COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION WHEN IT RATIFIED BY A VOTE OF , THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE BY MAJORITY VOTE, AND AS EMBODIED IN COMMITTEE REPORT 1012, TO TREAT THE AMENDED COMPLAINT AS SEPARATE AND DISTINCT FROM THE ORIGINAL LOZANO COMPLAINT, CONSIDERING THAT THE DEFECTIVE ORIGINAL LOZANO COMPLAINT HAS ALREADY BEEN SUPERSEDED BY THE AMENDED COMPLAINT WHILE THE LOPEZ COMPLAINT, IT BEING FRAUGHT WITH PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE INFIRMITIES, IS OF NO LEGAL EFFECT. III. THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES IN PLENARY COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION WHEN IT RATIFIED BY A VOTE OF , THE DECISION OF THE COMMITTEE ON JUSTICE BY MAJORITY VOTE, AND AS EMBODIED IN COMMITTEE REPORT 1012, TO DISMISS THE AMENDED COMPLAINT AS A PROHIBITED PLEADING UNDER THE RULING IN THE FRANCISCO CASE WHEN IT IS CLEAR THAT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, AND THE VARIOUS APPLICABLE RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE ONE-YEAR CONSTITUTIONAL BAR DOES NOT APPLY As has been ably shown by the conduct of President Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo s men, all kinds of technicalities have been raised against the impeachment complaint against her, in violation of the very intent of the constitutional clauses on impeachment. 1 See Petition for Certiorari, at 22. 2
3 3. But one year later, with the issues brought before this Honorable Court still pending, citizens of various groups and persuasions have converged to file yet another impeachment complaint against her before the House of Representatives and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo s lawyers are quick to raise the pendency of this case before the Honorable Court as an effective bar to the new effort to hold her accountable for her unconstitutional misdeeds in office. 4. The Petitioners draw the attention of this Honorable Court to a Manifestation made by lawyers Romulo B. Macalintal and Alberto C. Agra dated June 22, 2o06 informing the House of Representatives that as no impeachment complaint can be deliberated upon or considered by the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives and by the House of Representatives against the President at this time. The [one-year] ban on the filing of a new impeachment complaint remains operative to this day 2 5. The Macalintal-Agra Manifestation has explicitly referred to the instant proceeding the Martinez Petition to say that the initiation of new impeachment proceedings against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is still premature until such time as the Supreme Court decides with finality the Martinez Petition. 6. Pursuing the argument of the Macalintal-Agra Manifestation to its logical conclusion, it may give rise to the situation where the Court does not resolve a pending petition, such as the instant case, for the next four or five years while in the meantime, the President again and again commits impeachable offenses; does this mean that the citizens will have to wait for 2 A copy of the Manifestation is attached as ANNEX A. 3
4 the resolution of the case five years later before they can file another impeachment complaint? 7. It is in consideration of such absurd interpretation by Attys. Macalintal and Agra, and the equally absurd construction of the Respondents in the instant case, that the Petition in this case was filed, that is, for the Honorable Court to, among others, decide clearly and unequivocally, when the one-year bar rule on initiation of impeachment proceedings starts. 8. For if Attys. Macalintal and Agra are to be believed, the possibility of one year becoming more than three hundred sixty five (365) days, contrary to the legal 3 and ordinary acceptation of the term, is not remote; and the one year bar rule being applied to prohibit multiple impeachment proceedings initiated three hundred and sixty six (366) days apart from each other is neither an impossibility notwithstanding the very clear wording of the constitutional provision Given the conduct of the Respondents with respect to the impeachment complaints filed last year, what is feared as a not-so-remotely-possible scenario may well be in danger of becoming a very probable one. 10. And that may as well be if the issues raised in this instant case are not resolved by this Honorable Court with dispatch with no less than the principle of public office as a public trust becoming the victim in the process. 3 See Article 13, Civil Code. 4 Section 3 (5), Article XI of the Constitution states: No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year. 4
5 11. The importance of the resolution of the issues raised in this case cannot be overemphasized as they have a direct bearing on the principle of accountability upon which the claim, nay the principle enshrined in no less than the Constitution, of a democratic Philippine government rests. 12. The Macalintal-Agra Manifestation certainly goes against the fundamental principle of the Constitution for public officers and employees to at all times be accountable to the people and to hold impeachable public officers into account for their impeachable misdeeds, giving them only a breathing room of only one year between each initiation of impeachment proceedings. 13. Which is why the herein Petitioners argue that the issues they have raised in the instant proceeding should not be mooted and declared academic by this Honorable Court because of this month s filing of impeachment complaints against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. 14. For otherwise, the principle of accountability at all times would be put to naught, becoming merely a policy of accountability until the next year, or worse, until this Honorable Court finally decides once and for all, perhaps in a case other than the one at bar, what the rules are. 15. At the very least, these issues, as they are capable of repetition yet evading review, 5 should be settled once and for all, for the future guidance of citizens interested in holding accountable any impeachable public officer for their misdeeds in office; that is, to prevent similar questions from reemerging, as this Honorable Court decided in Lacson v. Perez. 6 In fact, all the requirements laid down by this Honorable Court in the 5 Alunan v. Mirasol. 276 SCRA 501 (1997), cited in Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, G.R Nos , and , February 3, Lacson v. Perez, GR No , May 10, 2001; 357 SCRA 756 (2001) 5
6 landmark case of Professor Randolf S. David, et al., v. Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo et. al., 7 applies in the instant case: The moot and academic principle is not a magical formula that can automatically dissuade the courts in resolving a case. Courts will decide cases, otherwise moot and academic, if: first, there is a grave violation of the Constitution; 8 second, the exceptional character of the situation and the paramount public interest is involved; 9 third, when constitutional issue raised requires formulation of controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, and the public; 10 and fourth, the case is capable of repetition yet evading review Obviously, there is a grave violation of the constitution here when the House of Representatives disregarded well-defined constitutional parameters for the proper conduct of an impeachment proceeding. 17. What is involved is also of exceptional character and situation involving paramount public interest a President accused of wrongdoing while in public office and the public s constitutional right to hold her accountable for her misdeeds is being denied them. 18. A judgment by this Honorable Court resolving the issues presented by this instant proceeding before it is required to formulate controlling principles to guide the bench, the bar, a and the public, precisely because unsettled issues in the procedures for impeachment are being utilized by the unscrupulous to transform a sacrosanct procedure into a rat race of who files first. 7 G.R. No ; G.R. No ; G.R. No ; G.R. No ; G.R. No ; G.R. No ; G.R. No , May 3, Citing Province of Batangas v. Romulo, G.R. No , May 27, 2004; 429 SCRA 736 (2004). 9 Citing Lacson v. Perez, G.R. No , May 10, 2001, 357 SCRA 756 (2001). 10 Citing Province of Batangas v. Romulo, G.R. No , May 27, 2004; 429 SCRA 736 (2004). 11 Citing Albaña v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No , July 23, 2004; 435 SCRA 98 (2004), Acop v. Guingona, Jr., G.R. No , July 2, 2002; 383 SCRA 577 (2002), and Sanlakas v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No , February 3, 2004; 421 SCRA 656. (2001). 6
7 19. Lastly, it is clear that precisely because of these unsettled issues, what obtains is a situation capable of repetition as it is now being repeated yet evading review. 20. Thus, one year later, the same questions have reemerged in the new efforts to impeach Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for her patently unconstitutional acts while illegally occupying the Office of the President. 21. And once again, this Honorable Court stands between the past and the future of this troubled nation with a historical burden which it has a constitutional duty to bear. 22. The records of the instant case to which were consolidated two other cases, namely G.R. No (Ernesto B. Francisco Jr. v. House of Representatives) and G.R. No (Rep. Benigno Simeon Aquino III et al., v. House of Representatives) show that the issues have already been joined with the exchange of pleadings between and among the parties. 23. In fact, in the instant case, GR NO , the Respondents have already filed their Comment to the Petition (The House of Representatives, through a Comment dated December 15, 2005 and the Office of the Solicitor General, through a Comment dated January 16, 2006). The Petitioners, in return, have likewise already submitted their Consolidated Reply dated March 24, 2006 to the Respondents Comment. 24. The Petitioners in G.R. No have likewise already filed their Consolidated Reply dated April 27, 2006 to the Respondent s Comment. Only the Petitioner in the second case has not filed any pleading 7
8 subsequent to his own Petition. In any case, it should not in any way affect the immediate resolution of the instant consolidated cases. PRAYER WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Petitioners respectfully pray that this Honorable Court immediately resolve the instant consolidated cases and render judgment declaring the patent unconstitutionality of the questioned acts. Other relief just and equitable are also prayed for. Makati City for the City of Manila, July 3, ROQUE AND BUTUYAN LAW OFFICES Unit 1904, Antel 2000 Corporate Center No. 121 Valero Street, Salcedo Village Makati City By: 8
9 H. HARRY L. ROQUE, JR. PTR No , , Makati City IBP No , , Lifetime Roll no JOEL R. BUTUYAN PTR No ; ; Makati City IBP No ; ; Lifetime Roll No ROGER R. RAYEL PTR No , , Quezon City IBP No , Lifetime, Quezon City Roll No ROMEL REGALADO BAGARES PTR No , , Makati City` IBP No , , SocSarGen Chapter Roll No COPY FURNISHED: THE HON. SOLICITOR GENERAL 134 Amorsolo St., Legaspi Village Makati City 1229 ATTY. LEONARDO B. PALICTE III Chief Counsel and Deputy Secretary General HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES LEGAL AFFAIRS DEPARMENT BATASAN COMPLEX, NATIONAL GOVERNMENT CENTER QUEZON CITY Atty. Ernesto B. Francisco, Jr. Francisco Law Office (Counsel for Petitioner in G.R. No ) Unit 201 Liberty Building 835 A. Arnaiz Avenue (Pasay Road) Legaspi Village, 1229 Makati City Attys. Jose Luis Martin Gascon & Roberto Eugenio T. Cadiz 9
10 (Counsel for Petitioners in G.R. No ) 1602-A West Trade Center 132 West Avenue, Quezon City EXPLANATION Because of time and personnel constraints, a copy of this Reply is being sent by registered mail to the other parties in accordance with the requirements of Sec. 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Revised Rules of Court. ROMEL REGALADO BAGARES 10
MOTION FOR RESOLUTION
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila REP. CLAVEL A. MARTINEZ, et al., Petitioners, - versus - G.R. No. 169561 THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES of the 13 TH CONGRESS, et al., Respondents. x--------------------------------------------------x
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION LITTON MILLS EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION-KAPATIRAN AND ROGELIO ABONG, Petitioners, -versus- G.R. No. 78061 November 24, 1988 HONORABLE PURA FERRER- CALLEJA, in her capacity as Director
More informationOPPOSITION TO MOTION TO DISMISS
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES REGIONAL TRIAL COURT NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION PASIG CITY, BRANCH 167 CHRISTOPHER G. BORJA, Plaintiff, Vs. CIVIL CASE NO. 70883-PSG BAN GOZA, INC. ET. AL. Defendants.
More informationRepublic of the Philippines COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Manila OPPOSITION. He is a Filipino citizen, a taxpayer and a duly registered voter;
Republic of the Philippines COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Manila IN THE MATTER OF PROPOSING AMENDMENTS TO THE 1987 CONSTITUTION THROUGH A PEOPLE S INITIATIVE A SHIFT FROM A BICAMERAL PRESIDENTIAL TO A UNICAMERAL
More informationPETITION. Petitioners, by counsel, and unto this Honorable Court, respectfully state, that:
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION MANILA BISHOP PEDRO DULAY ARIGO, CESAR N. SARINO, DR. JOSE ANTONIO N. SOCRATES PROF. H. HARRY L. ROQUE, JR. Petitioners, X X -versus- SC. G.R.
More informationx ~~~~--x SEP ARA TE OPINION
EN BANC G.R. No. 224302 (Hon. Pliilip A. Aguinaldo, Hon. Reynaldo A. Alliambra, Hon. Danilo S. Cruz, Hon. Benjamin T. Pozon, Hon. Salvador V. Timbang, Jr., and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION. -versus- G.R. Nos August 2, 2001 D E C I S I O N
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS, LTD., Petitioner, -versus- G.R. Nos. 141702-03 August 2, 2001 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and MARTHA Z. SINGSON, Respondents. x---------------------------------------------x
More informationl\epublic of tbe tlbilippine~ ~upren1e QCourt ;Jfllln n iln FIRST DIVISION
l\epublic of tbe tlbilippine~ ~upren1e QCourt ;Jfllln n iln FIRST DIVISION RADIO MINDANAO NETWORK, INC., Petitioner, - versus - G.R. No. 167225 Present: SERENO, CJ., LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, BERSAMIN, PEREZ,
More informationRepublic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR THE WRIT OF AMPARO AND HABEAS DATA IN FAVOR OF MELISSA C. ROXAS, MELISSA C. ROXAS, Petitioner, SP. PROC. NO. FOR: Writ
More informationREPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES SUPREME COURT MANILA
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES SUPREME COURT MANILA ALEXANDER ADONIS, VERAFILES INCORPORATED, represented by its President, ELLEN TORDESILLAS, MA. GISELA ORDENES-CASCOLAN, H. HARRY L. ROQUE, JR., ROMEL R.
More informationl\epublic of tbe ~bilippineg i>uprmtt lourt :ffianila
fm l\epublic of tbe ~bilippineg i>uprmtt lourt :ffianila SECOND DIVISION CE CASECNAN WATER and ENERGY COMPANY, INC., Petitioner, -versus - THE PROVINCE OF NUEV A ECIJA, THEOFFICEOFTHEPROVINCIAL ASSESSOR
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION CITYTRUST BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 104860 July 11, 1996 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, and MARIA ANITA RUIZ, Respondents. x----------------------------------------------------x
More information~;i.. r I,., ~~ 3&epublic of tbe i)bilippineit &upreme Court jffilanila EN BANC RESOLUTION
@" ~;i.. r I,., (ll ~~ 3&epublic of tbe i)bilippineit &upreme Court jffilanila EN BANC NORMA M. GUTIERREZ, Complainant, A.C. No. 10944 Present: - versus - ATTY. ELEANOR A. MARAVILLA ONA. SERENO, C.J.,
More informationRegn. No versus- Date Issued: November 05, 1991 Trademark: HAMMERHEAD
HAMMER GARMENTS CORP., Petitioner, INTER PARTES CASE NO.4069 Pet. for Cancellation Regn. No.51765 -versus- Date Issued: November 05, 1991 Trademark: HAMMERHEAD DANIEL YANG VILLANUEVA Respondent-Registrant.
More informationMALACANAN PALACE MANILA
MALACANAN PALACE MANILA B Y T H E P R E S I D E N T O F T H E PHILIPPINES M E M O R A N D U M O R D E R NO- 41 A U T H O R I Z I N G T H E O F F I C E O F T H E SOLICITOR G E N E R A L T O A U G M E N
More information3L\epublic of tbe!lbilippine~ ~upreme ([ourt :fflanila THIRD DIVISION. Respondent. January 15, 2014 ' DECISION
3L\epublic of tbe!lbilippine~ ~upreme ([ourt :fflanila THIRD DIVISION PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK, Petitioner, - versus- G.R. No. 186063 Present: VELASCO, JR., J., Chairperson, PERALTA, ABAD, MENDOZA, and
More informationSUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION
SUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION REY O. GARCIA, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 110494 November 18, 1996 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, Second Division, composed of HON. EDNA BONTO- PEREZ as Presiding
More information~ """"'...-. '~~,,.~:,~'~
~ """"'...-. 1\'."~' MIJe' --~ '~~,,.~:,~'~ ' --- 3Republic of tlje flbilippines $>upreme (!Court :fflnniln FIRST DIVISION TERELA Y INVESTMENT AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, Petitioner, - versus - G.R. No.
More informationRepublic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. L-54158 November 19, 1982 Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila SECOND DIVISION PAGASA INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, petitioner, vs. HE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, TIBURCIO S. EVALLE Director
More informationIMPEACHMENT - DEFINITION
IMPEACHMENT - DEFINITION A method of national inquest into the conduct of public men. (Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 65, Federalist Papers) 2 IMPEACHMENT is a method of national inquest to protect
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION ERNESTO L. MENDOZA, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 122481 March 5, 1998 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION and BALIWAG TRANSIT INC., Respondents. x----------------------------------------------------x
More informationrpu y DISSENTING OPINION ~-AtL-----
"' G.R. No. 199802 (Congressman Hermilando I. Mandanas, Mayor Efren B. Diona, Mayor Antonino Aurelio, Kagawad Mario Ilagan, Barangay Chair Perlito Manalo, Barangay Chair Medel Medrano, Barangay Kagawad
More information31\epnl.Jlic of tlje ~~{JilipplnefS $)upreme QCourt fflnnlln THIRD DIVISION. Respondent. ~ ~ DECISION
31\epnl.Jlic of tlje ~~{JilipplnefS $)upreme QCourt fflnnlln THIRD DIVISION ILAW BUKLOD NG MANGGAGAWA (IBM) NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC. CHAPTER (ICE CREAM AND CHILLED PRODUCTS DIVISION), ITS OFFICERS, MEMBERS
More information,lt\.epubltt Of tbe f}btltpptuesthird Division
. CERTIFIED TRUE CO.Pi I. LAP- ]1),,, Divisio Clerk of Court,lt\.epubltt Of tbe f}btltpptuesthird Division upreme Qtourt JUL 26 2011 Jmanila THIRD DIVISION. ALEJANDRO D.C. ROQUE, G.R. No. 211108 Petitioner,
More informationREPORT No. 160/17 PETITION
OEA/Ser.L/V/II.166 Doc. 191 30 November 2017 Original: Spanish REPORT No. 160/17 PETITION 531-07 REPORT ON ADMISSIBILITY FRANKLIN NIMA CURAY PERU Approved by the Commission at its session No. 2110 held
More information31\epuhlic of tbe ~bilippines
31\epuhlic of tbe ~bilippines ~upreme QCourt ;Manila THIRD DIVISION RENATO M. DAVID, Petitioner, - versus - G.R. No. 199113 Present: VELASCO, JR, J., Chairperson, PERALTA, VILLARAMA, JR., REYES, and PERLAS-BERNABE,*
More informationRepublic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT National Capital Region Quezon City
Republic of the Philippines REGIONAL TRIAL COURT National Capital Region Quezon City RAYMOND E. MANALO, Plaintiff, - versus - CIVIL CASE NO.: For: Damages, with Attorney s Fees (RET) LT. GEN. HERMOGENES
More informationl\epttblic of tbe tlbilippineti
l\epttblic of tbe tlbilippineti ~ttpreme ~ourt TJjaguio ~itp THIRD DIVISION HEIRS OF DANILO ARRIENDA, ROSA G ARRIENDA, MA. CHARINA ROSE ARRIENDA-ROMANO, MA. CARMELLIE ARRIENDA-MARA, DANILO MARIA ALVIN
More informationCase 4:05-cv Y Document 86 Filed 04/30/07 Page 1 of 7 PageID 789 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION
Case 4:05-cv-00470-Y Document 86 Filed 04/30/07 Page 1 of 7 PageID 789 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION RICHARD FRAME, WENDELL DECKER, and SCOTT UPDIKE, v. Plaintiffs,
More informationREPORT No.106/13 PETITION INADMISSIBILITY FRANCISCO JOSÉ MAGI ARGENTINA November 5, 2013
REPORT No.106/13 PETITION 951-01 INADMISSIBILITY FRANCISCO JOSÉ MAGI ARGENTINA November 5, 2013 I. SUMMARY 1. On August 3, 2001, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter the Commission
More informationCase 4:14-cv DDB Document 3 Filed 11/14/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 59
Case 4:14-cv-00732-DDB Document 3 Filed 11/14/14 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 59 CAUSE NO. 366-04404-2014 COLLIN COUNTY REPUBLICAN PARTY and JODIE LAUBENBERG, vs. Plaintiffs (Consolidated) LOVEJOY ISD and TED
More informationNO CRW STATE OF TEXAS ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT VS. ) 81ST/218TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT JACK SMITH ) WILSON COUNTY, TEXAS
NO. 08-0000-CRW STATE OF TEXAS ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT VS. ) 81ST/218TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT JACK SMITH ) WILSON COUNTY, TEXAS DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE INDICTMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID
More informationDECISION. The Verified Petition for Cancellation was filed on April 14, 2003 wherein Petitioner relied on the following grounds for cancellation:
FERRERO S.P.A. } IPC No. 14-2003-00031 Petitioner } Petition for Cancellation: } -versus- } Registration No.: 4-1993-92178 } Date Issued: 4 September 2000 SOLDAN HOLDING BONBON- } SPEZIALITATEN GmbH }
More informationRepublic of the Philippines COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS Manila PETITION
IN THE MATTER OF THE ROMP AND ILLEGAL ELECTIONS OF OFFICERS OF THE LIBERAL PARTY LIBERAL PARTY, represented by its President, FRANKLIN M.DRILON, Petitioner, Republic of the Philippines COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS
More informationConference of European Constitutional Courts XIIth Congress
Conference of European Constitutional Courts XIIth Congress The relations between the Constitutional Courts and the other national courts, including the interference in this area of the action of the European
More informationRepublic Act No. 8369
Republic Act No. 8369 An Act Establishing Family Courts, Granting Them Exclusive Original Jurisdiction Over Child and Family Cases, Amending Batas Pambansa Bilang 129, As Amended, Otherwise Known As Act
More informationReg'n. No. : 4730 Date Issued : May 23, 1980 Used For : Tennis Racket, Pelota racket, ping pong, tennis etc. -versus- Trademark : Pro-Kennex
KUNNAN ENTERPRISES, INC., Inter Partes Case No. 3709 Petitioner/Opposer Reg'n. No. : 41032 Date Issued : September 2, 1988 Used For : sporting goods Trademark : "Pro-Kennex" Inter Partes Case No. 3710
More information1U<-o,,,,.r+,.\ ('. :! ~ 'f. -M,.1,, ,~;;~,,~~ 3Repuhlic of tlje tlbilippineg. ~upreme QI:ourt. ;Mnniln FIRST DIVISION
1U
More information31\epublic of tbe 1flbilippines
31\epublic of tbe 1flbilippines ~upreme QCourt Jlf(anila THIRD DIVISION CORAZON M. DALUPAN, Complainant, - versus - A.C. No. 5067 Present: PERALTA, J.,* Acting Chairperson, VILLARAMA, JR., PEREZ,** PERLAS-BERNABE***
More informationTHIRD DIVISION. G.R. No G.R. No Present: Promulgated:
Page 1 of 15 Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila THIRD DIVISION CLARITA DEPAKAKIBO GARCIA, Petitioner, G.R. No. 170122 - versus - SANDIGANBAYAN and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
More informationThe Davide Impeachment Case: Restating Judicial Supremacy over Constitutional Questions
The Davide Impeachment Case: Restating Judicial Supremacy over Constitutional Questions Maricris C. Ang, * Mark Leinad R. Enojo, ** Divina Gracia P. de Ia Cerna,*** and Rosalyn C. Rayco**** I. INTRODUCTION
More informationLadlad v. Velasco: Reaffirmingjudicial Review
Ladlad v. Velasco: Reaffirmingjudicial Review as a Mechanism for Protecting Constitutional Rights joy Stephanie C. Tajan I. INTRODUCTION...,... 240 II. FACTS OF THE CASE... 24 I A. The Beltran Petition
More information3aepubHc of tbe flbilippines
3aepubHc of tbe flbilippines ~upreme Qtourt :!Manila FIRST DIVISION SPOUSES VICTOR P. DULNUAN and JACQUELINE P. DULNUAN,. Petitioners, - versus - G.R. No. 196864 Present: SERENO, C.J., Chairperson, LEONARDO
More information,,.,:.J,-.;..i>iC'1::oe-+... :: LA :I. ~ -~l/ ~;(' ~ --:.J>,,,~ Q~,!.~~N~--- Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC DECISION
,,.,:.J,-.;..i>iC'1::oe-+... '. :: LA :I ~ -~l/ ~;(' ~ --:.J>,,,~ Q~,!.~~N~--- Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC TERESITA P. DE GUZMAN, in her capacity as former General Manager;
More informationDECISION. Section 23. Novelty. An invention shall not be considered new if it forms part of prior art.
ROLANDO G. PEREZ, } IPC NO. 12-2007-00309 Petitioner, } Petition for Cancellation: } Utility Model (UM) No. 2-2006-000261 -versus- } Date Issued: 28 November 2006 } Title: An Improved Fire Truck TEOFISTA
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA RONALD COTE Petitioner vs. Case No.SC00-1327 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent / DISCRETIONARY REVIEW OF DECISION OF THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT BRIEF
More informationRULES & REGULATIONS ON STUDENT CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINE
RULES & REGULATIONS ON STUDENT CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINE (As approved by the Board of Regents at its 876 th meeting on September 2, 1976 superseding all provision rules on the subject, and as amended at the
More informationIN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION. CM No of 2005 in W.P. (C) No of 1987
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : LAND ACQUISITION CM No. 15134 of 2005 in W.P. (C) No. 1043 of 1987 Orders reserved on : 26th July, 2006 Date of Decision : 7th August, 2006 LATE BAWA HARBANS
More informationSupreme Court of the Philippines
Home Databases WorldLII Search Feedback Supreme Court of the Philippines You are here: AsianLII >> Databases >> Supreme Court of the Philippines >> 1990 >> [1990] PHSC 353 Database Search Name Search Recent
More informationBILLS REQUIRING SPECIFIED MAJORITY
( 65 ) CHAPTER XI BILLS REQUIRING SPECIFIED MAJORITY (a) Bills seeking to amend the Constitution and Bills providing for abolition of the Legislative Council. 156. (1) Each clause or schedule, or clause
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION SPOUSES INOCENCIO AND ADORACION SAN ANTONIO, Petitioners, -versus- G.R. No. 121810 December 7, 2001 COURT OF APPEALS AND SPOUSES MARIO AND GREGORIA GERONIMO, Respondents.
More informationlllj. ~. i;_l ~ I I '. ~~. ' : ; ) : j jhlt \6 I. '. i : i
lllj. ~. ~ -... ::.- ~i~.. ~~o.j.~1 ltit ~ 1 rt:.....,. ~ " I... t't,... f '.~j'. ' 0.._,;..,....., ~i.\ i..!,,..,, f".. t.i..1.~- ""''1;'. '.....!.;~n...,,~,-{ ". II ' I \ :.~......,,..-~. ' I I ; i i;_l
More informationunder the Right to Information Act about action taken if any on the complaint/representations made by him to the Governor of Goa against Advocate
SYNOPSIS AND LIST OF DATES DATES DATES 29.11.2010 Respondent No.3 herein sought information under the Right to Information Act about action taken if any on the complaint/representations made by him to
More informationPETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
E-Filed Document Jun 26 2018 15:21:02 2016-CT-00932-SCT Pages: 7 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI WILLIE PICKETT PETITIONER v. No. 2016-KA-932 STATE OF MISSISSIPPI APPELLEE PETITION FOR
More informationPlaintiffs, : versus Civil Action No : YUSUF ABDI ALI, : Defendant.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA (Alexandria Division) In re: : JANE DOE, et alii, : Plaintiffs, : versus Civil Action No. 04-1361 : YUSUF ABDI ALI, : Defendant.
More information=:~~~-~~;~~~~~t: _ -_
~hlic of tlfc Wlftlippines ~uprcnrc OO:our± ~n:girio OiitJJ THIRD DIVISION REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, represented by HONORABLE LOURDES M. TRASMONTE in her capacity as UNDERSECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT
More informationl.epublit of tfellbilipptne~,upreme Court ;flanila
-l l.epublit of tfellbilipptne~,upreme Court ;flanila FIRST DIVISION EXPRESS PADALA (ITALIA) S.P.A., now BDO REMITTANCE (ITALIA) S.P.A., Petitioner, -versus- HELEN M. OCAMPO, Respondent. G.R. No. 202505
More informationPetition for Order of Nondisclosure
Cause No. (1) In the Matter of In the (2) County, Texas (3) (4) Petition for Order of Nondisclosure ( Petitioner ) respectfully petitions (5) this Court for an Order of Nondisclosure regarding the offense
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION. -versus- G.R. No January 20, 2003 D E C I S I O N
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION LUDO & LUYM CORPORATION, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 140960 January 20, 2003 FERDINAND SAORNIDO as voluntary arbitrator and LUDO EMPLOYEES UNION (LEU) representing 214 of
More informationAFLRED B. WHITE, Chairman, RODERICK W. CIFERRI, III and AMEDEO LALLI, Board of Assessors of the Town of Washington, New York, Motion Date: 3/16/07
To commence the 30 day statutory time period for appeals as of right (CPLR 5513[a]), you are advised to serve a copy of this order, with notice of entry, upon all parties SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF
More informationThrough: Mr. Deepak Khosla, Petitioner in person.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI SUBJECT : CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE RESERVED ON: 12.09.2014 PRONOUNCED ON: 12.12.2014 REVIEW PET.188/2014, CM APPL.5366-5369/2014, 14453/2014 IN W.P. (C) 6148/2013
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA In the matter of an Application under and in terms of Articles 17 and 126 of the Constitution of the Democratic Socialist Republic
More informationSUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION. -versus- G.R. No November 24, 1999 D E C I S I O N
SUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION ALLIED INVESTIGATION BUREAU, INC., Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 122006 November 24, 1999 HON. SECRETARY OF LABOR & EMPLOYMENT, acting through Undersecretary CRESENCIANO B.
More informationNo IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
No. 17-5716 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TIMOTHY D. KOONS, KENNETH JAY PUTENSEN, RANDY FEAUTO, ESEQUIEL GUTIERREZ, AND JOSE MANUEL GARDEA, PETITIONERS v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION
More informationCERTIFICATE OF MAILING. The undersigned hereby certifies that she is a member of the Bar of the
STATE OF LOUISIANA PARISH OF ORLEANS CERTIFICATE OF MAILING The undersigned hereby certifies that she is a member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the United States, and that she caused the Supplemental
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Civ. No. -- THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT; THOMAS A. KIRK, Jr., Ph.D., Commissioner, Department of Mental
More informationSUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION
SUPREME COURT SECOND DIVISION CONSUELO VALDERRAMA, Petitioner, -versus- G.R. No. 98239 April 25, 1996 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, FIRST DIVISION AND MARIA ANDREA SAAVEDRA, Respondents. x---------------------------------------------------x
More informationCONSENT. DATED at the of, in the Province of (City or Town) (name of City/Town) Saskatchewan, this day of, 20. Signature of Solicitor {
CONSENT I,, of acknowledge (Name) (Name of Law Firm) and consent to the Assessment of my attached account dated in the amount of, by the Local Registrar of the Court of Queen s Bench, Judicial Centre of,
More information3aepublic of tbe flbilippines. ~upreme Qeourt jffilanila FIRST DIVISION
3aepublic of tbe flbilippines ~upreme Qeourt jffilanila FIRST DIVISION SPOUSES BYRON and MARIA LUISA SAUNDERS, Complainants, A.C. No. 8708 (CBD Case No. 08-2192) Present: - versus - ATTY. LYSSA GRACE S.
More information[ REPUBLIC ACT No ] SECTION 1. Article 234 of Presidential Decree No. 442, as amended, otherwise known as the Labor Code of the
S. No. 2466 H. No. 1351 Begun and held in Metro Manila, on Monday, the nineteenth day of February, two thousand seven. [ REPUBLIC ACT No. 9 4 8 1 ] AN ACT STRENGTHENING THE WORKERS' CONSTInrnoNAL RIGHT
More informationDo-Overs: Overviewing the Various Mechanisms for Reevaluating an Issued Patent and How They Have Changed Over the Last Five Years +
Do-Overs: Overviewing the Various Mechanisms for Reevaluating an Issued Patent and How They Have Changed Over the Last Five Years + By: Brian M. Buroker, Esq. * and Ozzie A. Farres, Esq. ** Hunton & Williams
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN. CIVIL APPEAL NO.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 158 OF 2012 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO. 868 of 2003 In the matter of:- People for Better Treatment (PBT).Petitioner Vs.
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION. CIVIL APPEAL No of versus J U D G M E N T
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.10863 of 2017 ABDULRASAKH.Appellant versus K.P. MOHAMMED & ORS... Respondents J U D G M E N T SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.
More informationTITLE I Nature of the Constitutional Court and scope of its jurisdiction
ANDORRA Qualified Law on the Constitutional Court enacted on 2 and 3 September 1993 TITLE I Nature of the Constitutional Court and scope of its jurisdiction Chapter I - Nature of the Constitutional Court
More informationSUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION. -versus- G.R. No April 3, 2003 D E C I S I O N
SUPREME COURT FIRST DIVISION AGAPITO CRUZ FIEL, AVELINO QUIMSON REYES and ROY CONALES BONBON, Petitioners, -versus- G.R. No. 155875 April 3, 2003 KRIS SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC., NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
More informationfif'\~-;~
GR. No. 198146 - Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue x _ Promulgated: August 8, 2017 ----------------------------fif'\~-;~ DISSENTING OPINION
More informationNotice of Petition; and, Verified Petition For Warrant Of Removal
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE XXXXXXXX DISTRICT OF XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX DIVISION Firstname X. LASTNAME, In a petition for removal from the Circuit Petitioner (Xxxxxxx below, Court of Xxxxxxx
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, -vs- EUGENE MICHAEL BYARS, Respondent.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA CASE NO. SC01-1930 STATE OF FLORIDA, Petitioner, -vs- EUGENE MICHAEL BYARS, Respondent. ON PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA,
More informationDirectors 1. Dr. Jaime C. Laya, Chairman and President* 2. Senior Justice Josue N. Bellosillo Vice Chairman and Corporate Counsel
MINUTES OF THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE STOCKHOLDERS OF PHILTRUST BANK HELD ON APRIL 28, 2015 AT THE PHILTRUST BANK BUILDING 1000 UNITED NATIONS AVENUE, CORNER SAN MARCELINO STREET MANILA 1. OPENING PRAYER
More informationNO. FIELD(MAT_Cause No) STATE OF TEXAS IN THE DISTRICT COURT. VS. FIELD(MAT_Court) JUDICIAL. TOUPPER(FIELD(MAT_Client Name)) BEXAR COUNTY, TEXAS
STATE OF TEXAS IN THE COURT MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE INDICTMENT TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Now comes TOUPPER(FIELD(MAT_Client Name)), defendant in the above-styled and numbered cause, and, prior
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA JESSE L. BLANTON, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) versus ) CASE NO. SC04-1823 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Respondent. ) ) ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIFTH
More informationRepublic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA RESOLUTION
Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila EN BANC A. M. No. 08-1-16-SC January 22, 2008 THE RULE ON THE WRIT OF HABEAS DATA RESOLUTION Acting on the recommendation of the Chairperson of the Committee
More information31\epublir of tbe i)bilippinrs
t. ' ~ f 31\epublir of tbe i)bilippinrs ~upreme QI:ourt Jmanila EN BANC NOTICE Sirs/Mesdames: Please take notice that the Court en bane issued a Resolution dated August 26, 2014, which reads as follows:
More information[J-41D-2017] [OAJC:Saylor, C.J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT : : : : : : : : : : : : : DISSENTING OPINION
[J-41D-2017] [OAJCSaylor, C.J.] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, Appellant v. ANGEL ANTHONY RESTO, Appellee No. 86 MAP 2016 Appeal from the Order of the
More informationORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF JUNE 18, CASE OF MOHAMED v. ARGENTINA
ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF JUNE 18, 2012 CASE OF MOHAMED v. ARGENTINA HAVING SEEN: 1. The Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the Inter-American
More informationMBE Constitutional Law Sample
MBE Constitutional Law Sample Approximately 50% of the Constitutional Law questions for each MBE will be based on Individual Rights such as due process, equal protections, and state action. "State Action"
More informationCase 3:05-cv JGC Document Filed 01/05/2006 Page 1 of 9
Case 3:05-cv-07309-JGC Document 226-1 Filed 01/05/2006 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION League of Women Voters of Ohio, et. al., and Jeanne
More information~epublic of tbe ~bilippines ~upreme ~ourt ;!ffilanila FIRST DIVISION. x
epublic of tbe ~bilippines ~upreme ~ourt ;!ffilanila FIRST DIVISION PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, - versus - ARIELLAYAG Accused-Appellants. G.R. No. 214875 Present: SERENO, C.J., Chairperson,
More informationCase 1:14-cv Document 1 Filed 03/20/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. Plaintiff, Case No.
Case 1:14-cv-00456 Document 1 Filed 03/20/14 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MACKINAC TRIBE, vs. Plaintiff, Case No. THE HONORABLE SALLY JEWELL, U.S. Secretary
More information~epublic of tbe ~bilippine~ ~upreme <!Court 1Jjaguto <!Citp SECOND DIVISION RESOLUTION
;,.-,.,_~A f?l'v ~epublic of tbe ~bilippine~ ~upreme
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BONGANI CHARLES CALHOUN PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT
NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BONGANI CHARLES CALHOUN PETITIONER VS. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA RESPONDENT PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GITHINJI, SICHALE & KANTAI, JJ. A CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 97 OF 2016 (UR 76/2016)
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL AT NAIROBI (CORAM: GITHINJI, SICHALE & KANTAI, JJ. A CIVIL APPLICATION NO. NAI 97 OF 2016 (UR 76/2016) BETWEEN SATROSE AYUMA... 1 ST APPLICANT JOSEPH SHIKANGA....2 ND APPLICANT JOSEPH
More informationIntroductory note. General provision. Receivability of the representation
Standing Orders concerning the procedure for the examination of representations under articles 24 and 25 of the Constitution of the International Labour Organization Adopted by the Governing Body at its
More informationCONCURRING OPINION. Nature of the Case
EN BANC G.R. No. 207246 (Jose M Roy Ill, petitioner; Wilson C. Gamboa, Jr., Daniel Cartagena, John Warren P. Gabinete, Antonio V. Pesina, Jr., Modesto Martin Y. Manon III and Gerardo C. Erebaren, petitioners-inintervention
More informationFLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO
1. Origin of the remedy: FLAG PRIMER ON THE WRIT OF AMPARO The writ of amparo (which means protection ) is of Mexican origin. Its present form is found in Articles 103 and 107 of the Mexican Constitution.
More informationPUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ORISSA NOTIFICATION The 20 th April 2010
PUBLISHED UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE ORISSA NOTIFICATION The 20 th April 2010 No.270-R- In exercise of powers conferred under Article 225 of the Constitution of India, and as per
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA. v. Case No. SC *********************************************************************
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA WINYATTA BUTLER, Petitioner v. Case No. SC01-2465 STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent / ********************************************************************* ON REVIEW FROM THE
More informationSpecial Appeal No. 390 of 2018
Reserved IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Special Appeal No. 390 of 2018 Paresh Tripathi Appellant Versus Mahesh Chandra Sharma and others. Respondents Mr. C.K. Sharma, Advocate for the appellant.
More information