Caffeinated Law Student

Posts

Case Digest: Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation Inc. vs. Municipality (now City) of Pasig | G.R. No. 152230 | Aug 9, 2005

Jesus is Lord Christian School Foundation Inc. vs. Municipality (now City) of Pasig G.R. No. 152230 | Aug 9, 2005 CALLEJO, SR., J FACTS: Petitioner Lourdes De La Paz Masikip is the owner of a parcel of land in Pasig City. Upon receiving notification from the City of Pasig regarding its intention to expropriate a portion of her property for sports development and recreational activities for the residents of Barangay Caniogan, Masikip contested the action, asserting that it is unconstitutional, invalid, and oppressive. She argued that such expropriation is unnecessary given the presence of an established sports and recreational center at Rainforest Park in Pasig City. Despite her objections, the City of Pasig proceeded by filing a complaint for expropriation. In response, Masikip filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, citing reasons including the lack of genuine necessity for the taking, the arbitrary choice of property for expropriation, and the discrepancy between the fair mark...

Case Digest: Masikip vs. City of Pasig | G.R. No. 136349 | Jan 23, 2006

Masikip vs. City of Pasig G.R. No. 136349 | Jan 23, 2006 SANDOVAL GUTIERREZ, J FACTS: Petitioner Lourdes De La Paz Masikip is the owner of a parcel of land in Pasig City. Upon receiving notification from the City of Pasig regarding its intention to expropriate a portion of her property for sports development and recreational activities for the residents of Barangay Caniogan, Masikip contested the action, asserting that it is unconstitutional, invalid, and oppressive. She argued that such expropriation is unnecessary given the presence of an established sports and recreational center at Rainforest Park in Pasig City. Despite her objections, the City of Pasig proceeded by filing a complaint for expropriation. In response, Masikip filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, citing reasons including the lack of genuine necessity for the taking, the arbitrary choice of property for expropriation, and the discrepancy between the fair market value of the property and the amount stated...

Case Digest: Republic vs. De Knecht | G.R. No. 87335 | Feb 12, 1990

Republic vs. De Knecht G.R. No. 87335 | Feb 12, 1990 GANCAYCO, J FACTS: The Republic of the Philippines initiated an expropriation proceeding against homeowners along Fernando Rein-Del Pan streets, including Cristina De Knecht, with the aim of extending Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) to Roxas Boulevard. In response, De Knecht filed a motion to dismiss, citing various grounds such as lack of jurisdiction, the pendency of an appeal with the President of the Philippines, prematurity of the complaint, and arbitrary and erroneous valuation of the properties. Despite this, the lower court issued a writ of possession. However, the Supreme Court intervened and on October 30, 1980, nullified the writ. The Supreme Court determined that the selection of Fernando Rein-Del Pan streets as the route for the EDSA extension was arbitrary and should not be endorsed by the judiciary. As a result, the decision became final, and the lower court was instructed to dismiss the expropriation c...

Case Digest: De Knecht vs. Bautista | G.R. No. L-51078 | Oct 30, 1980

De Knecht vs. Bautista G.R. No. L-51078 | Oct 30, 1980 FERNANDEZ, J FACTS: Cristina de Knecht lodged a petition for certiorari and prohibition against Judge Pedro JL. Bautista and the Republic of the Philippines in response to a significant alteration in the government's infrastructure plans. Originally, the government intended to extend Epifanio de los Santos Avenue (EDSA) to Roxas Boulevard via Cuneta Avenue. However, this plan was revised to pass through Fernando Rein and Del Pan Streets, consequently impacting owners of residential houses, including the petitioner. In an effort to address this change, the petitioner submitted a petition to President Ferdinand E. Marcos urging a return to the original route. Despite this appeal, the Ministry of Public Highways persisted in enforcing the new pathway. Subsequently, the government initiated legal action by filing a complaint for expropriation against the owners of the affected properties, which encompassed the petitioner's hol...

Case Digest: Municipality of Meycauayan vs. Intermediate Appellate Court | G.R. No. 72126 | Jan 29, 1988

Municipality of Meycauayan vs. Intermediate Appellate Court G.R. No. 72126 | Jan 29, 1988 GUTIERREZ, JR., J FACTS: The Municipality of Meycauayan, Bulacan, initially attempted to expropriate a private road owned by Philippine Pipes & Merchandizing Corporation, which had applied to fence the land for storage purposes. Despite the corporation's intentions, the Municipal Council of Meycauayan passed a resolution to expropriate the land. However, a special committee recommended against it, citing a lack of genuine necessity. Consequently, the Provincial Board of Bulacan disapproved of the resolution. In 1983, undeterred, the Municipal Council passed another resolution to expropriate the land, thistime gaining approval from the Provincial Board. Subsequently, the Municipality filed a special civil action for expropriation and obtained a writ of possession. Following this, the trial court declared the taking of the property as lawful and appointed a court commissio...

Case Digest: Tang vs. Court of Appeals | G.R. No. L-48563 | May 25, 1979

Tang vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-48563 | May 25, 1979 ABAD SANTOS, J FACTS: The case of Tang v. Court of Appeals involves a 61-year-old illiterate widow named Lee See Guat who only spoke Chinese. She applied for two insurance policies on her life with the Philippine American Life Insurance Company (PALIC). The first policy was issued based on her answers indicating that she was healthy, with Vicente E. Tang as her beneficiary. She then applied for and was issued a second policy using the same answers from her previous application. However, five months after the second policy was issued, Lee See Guat passed away from lung cancer. PALIC refused to pay the claim, alleging that Lee See Guat had concealed and misrepresented her health condition. The trial court dismissed the claim due to the insured's concealment, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision. ISSUE: Whether or not Lee See Guat should be held guilty of concealment due to her illiteracy and inability to under...