Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this
29Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
SCA_MELO Notes Compiled

SCA_MELO Notes Compiled

Ratings: (0)|Views: 651 |Likes:
Published by jinx1147
Under Atty. Jorge Melo AY 2009-2010 1st sem
Under Atty. Jorge Melo AY 2009-2010 1st sem

More info:

Published by: jinx1147 on Jan 19, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

06/18/2013

pdf

text

original

 
RULE 62 INTERPLEADER
Diane Shayne
 
(WHAT) Elements:
 
Parties with conflicting interest
 
Party plaintiff has no interest or an interest not disputed by theclaimants
 
Same subject matter(WHEN)
 
OCAMPO V TIRONA: interpleader is proper before judgment hasbecome final
 
ALVAREZ V COMMONWEALTH: there must be an active assertionor demand by the party with conflicting interest
 
WACK WACK GOLF V LEE: party-plaintiff should not have beenadjudged of its liability with finality or not independently liable
 
RAMOS V RAMOS: estate was already impleaded; an interpleaderis an action in rem, thus the individual heirs need not be sentsummons; interest must be actual, not inchoate
 
BELTRAN V PHHC: conflicting interest was between PHHC andGSIS; conflict of interest must be against the interest of theparty plaintiff 
 
SY-QUIA V SHERIFF OF ILOCOS: interpleader is an actionemployed to avoid double vexation (not double liability) for thesame liability.
 
DE JESUS V LA SOCIEDAD: to avoid risk of paying damages forwithholding payment of claims, file an interpleader; aninterpleader is an equity remedy, thus must be filed in goodfaith.
 
MESINA V IAC: an interpleader must be filed within a reasonabletime from notice (in GF); in this case, there was a sign of GF,when the complaint was later amended to replace JOHN DOE asMARCELO MESINA.(WHERE TO FILE)
 
depends on which court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to BP 129
 
basis of jurisdiction: amount and nature of claim
 
DE CAMILO V JP OF MALANGAS: an interpleader on real propertyclaims VS issue of ownership as defense
 
dianelips2009 SCA MELO MIDTERMS REVIEWER
o
 
NB: issue of ownership is within CFI jurisdiction;
o
 
In this case, subject matters were distinct, thus no conflict;party plaintiff has interest: to prolong his unlawfuldetainer/occupation/possession.
 
MAKATI DEV’T CORP V TANJUATCO:
o
 
amt of vexation= amt of SM;
o
 
Thus, jurisdiction was within the JP since the property wasvalued at Php 5,198 and was capable of pecuniaryestimation.
 
RCBC V METROCON: party plaintiff, with UD case amicablysettled, has no more conflicting claims with defendant
o
 
Decision was fishy though: the amicable settlementbetween the mortgagor (LEYCON) and lessee (METROCON)was to the detriment of mortgagee (RCBC); obviouslythere is history between LEYCON and METROCON and theymust’ve colluded against RCBC
 
RULE 63 DECLARATORY RELIEF and RULE 64
Diane Shayne
 
(WHO) any person interested(WHAT)
 
in a deed, contract, will or other written instrument or
 
prejudiced by a statute, regulation, EO or ordinance
ALLIED BROADCASTING v REPUBLIC:
o
 
petition for declaratory relied is not within the original jurisdiction of the SC even if only questions of law areinvolved
o
 
belated complaint and estopped since Allied alreadycomplied with the law
WHERE TO FILE:
 
RTC
o
 
Exception: case of SALVACION v CB
WHEN
 
where there’s a justiciable controversy ripe foradjudication;
 
file before breach or violation
 SALVACION v CB
o
 
SC has no original and exclusive jurisdiction over petitionfor declaratory relief 
 
Except: where the petition has far-reachingimplications and raised questions that should beresolved and may be treated as one for mandamus
o
 
Height of injustice: to be denied a civil action where theheinous crime has undoubtedly been committed againstthe rape victimTOLENTINO v BOARD OF ACCOUNTANCY:
o
 
Relief asked is improper: No actual justiciable controversyexists because there is no personal violation of a right tospeak of or any prejudice or damage to him by the saidlaw recognizing the right of accountants to use a tradename.
o
 
The law did not preclude other profession from use of tradename

Activity (29)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Romeo de la Cruz liked this
roansalanga liked this
Sam Leynes liked this
Fe Portabes liked this
Christy Tiu liked this
Rheneir Mora liked this
Clint M. Maratas liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->