Talaan ng mga Kaso

Filter by Subject

Text Search

There are 472 results on the current subject filter

Title	IDs & Reference #s	Background	Primary Holding	Subject Matter
Arenas vs. City of San Carlos (Pangasinan) (5th April 1978)	AK735400 82 SCRA 318 , 172 Phil. 306 , No. L-34024	Isidro G. Arenas, serving as City Judge of San Carlos City, claimed entitlement to a higher salary based on Republic Act No. 5967. The city government refused to pay the differential, citing that the law mandates the judge's salary to be lower than the mayor's. Arenas filed a mandamus petition, which was dismissed by the Court of First Instance.	The Supreme Court held that the proviso in Republic Act No. 5967, which states that a city judge's salary must be at least P100 less than that of the city mayor, qualifies the general provision establishing city judges' salaries.	Statutory Construction
Arianza vs. Workmen’s Compensation Commission (28th February 1978)	AK230860 81 SCRA 698 , 171 Phil. 616 , No. L-43352	Arianza worked for Central Azucarera de la Carlota, Inc. from 1960, performing various physically demanding tasks, including packing and piling bagasse and working as a water tender in the fire-room. He developed liver cirrhosis, which he claimed was aggravated by his work conditions. His claim was initially dismissed by the Workmen’s Compensation Commission but was later reversed by the Supreme Court.	The Supreme Court held that Arianza’s liver cirrhosis, though not directly caused by his employment, was aggravated by his working conditions, making it compensable under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.	Philosophy of Law
Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp. vs. Hontanosas (31st August 1977)	AK095815 168 Phil. 608 , G.R. No. L-35951	The dispute originated from a collection suit filed by Allied Overseas Commercial Co., Ltd. (Allied) against Ben Uy Rodriguez in the CFI of Manila, where Allied obtained a writ of preliminary attachment secured by a bond from Pioneer Insurance & Surety Corp. (Pioneer). Although the Manila case was dismissed for improper venue, Rodriguez subsequently filed a separate action in the CFI of Cebu against Pioneer and Allied (later including Allied's assignee, Hadji Esmayaten Lucman) to claim damages for the alleged wrongful and malicious attachment.	A claim for damages arising from a wrongful preliminary attachment must be prosecuted in the same court where the attachment bond was filed and the writ of attachment was issued, pursuant to Rule 57, Section 20 of the Rules of Court; prosecuting such a claim in a separate action before a different court is improper and that court lacks jurisdiction.	Civil Procedure I Pre-trial
Cruz vs. J. M. Tuason and Co., Inc. (29th April 1977)	AK142238 167 Phil. 261 , G.R. No. L-23749	The case arose from claims over a large tract of land. The Deudor family, asserting rights based on an "informacion posesoria," allegedly engaged Faustino Cruz to make improvements on a portion of this land. Subsequently, J.M. Tuason & Co., Inc. and Gregorio Araneta, Inc. (defendants-appellees), who were the registered owners, purportedly engaged Cruz to act as an intermediary to settle a civil case (Civil Case No. Q-135) with the Deudors concerning 50 quiñones of land, promising him 3,000 square meters as compensation. A compromise agreement was indeed reached between the Deudors and the defendants.	A motion for reconsideration that merely reiterates arguments already considered and resolved by the court is pro-forma and does not suspend the reglementary period for filing an appeal; consequently, an appeal filed beyond this period must be dismissed as the assailed order has become final and executory.	Obligations and Contracts
Bagatsing vs. Ramirez (17th December 1976)	AK142723 74 SCRA 306 , 165 Phil. 909 , G.R. No. L-41631	June 12–15, 1974: Manila’s Municipal Board enacted and Mayor Bagatsing approved Ordinance No. 7522, imposing fees on public market stalls. February 17, 1975: The Federation of Manila Market Vendors sued to invalidate the ordinance, claiming non-compliance with the City Charter’s publication rules. August 29, 1975: The Court of First Instance (Manila) nullified the ordinance for lacking pre-enactment publication.	Tax ordinances are governed by the Local Tax Code’s publication requirements (post-approval only), overriding the Revised City Charter’s stricter pre- and post-enactment rules.	Statutory Construction
Purugganan vs. Paredes (21st January 1976)	AK605464 69 SCRA 69 , 161 Phil. 91 , No. L-23818	Plaintiff Purugganan owned lots burdened by a registered easement of drainage in favor of Defendant Paredes' adjacent property. Paredes constructed a house that exceeded the easement's specifications, causing rainwater to improperly drain onto Purugganan's property. Purugganan sued to enforce the easement, while Paredes claimed her house was pre-existing and not in violation.	A summary judgment was correctly rendered because the defendants-appellants violated the conditions of a registered easement of drainage and failed to demonstrate a genuine issue of material fact that would necessitate a full trial. Furthermore, any prescriptive easement of light and view was extinguished by the registration of the servient estate under the Torrens System without such easement being annotated.	Property and Land Law
Padua vs. Robles (29th August 1975)	AK406269 66 SCRA 485 , No. L-40486	On January 1, 1969, a taxi owned by Bay Taxi Cab, driven by Romeo Punzalan, hit and killed 10-year-old Normandy Padua in Olongapo City. The victim's parents (Paulino and Lucena Padua) filed a civil case against Punzalan and the Bay Taxi Cab (Civil Case No. 427-O), while Punzalan faced criminal charges for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide (Criminal Case No. 1158-O). The civil court ruled in favor of the Paduas, ordering Punzalan to pay damages but absolving Bay Taxi Cab. The criminal court later convicted Punzalan and sentenced him to imprisonment, stating that his civil liability had already been determined in Civil Case No. 427-O. However, when the Paduas attempted to execute the civil judgment, Punzalan was found to be insolvent. They then filed a separate action (Civil Case No. 1079-O) to enforce Robles’ subsidiary liability. The lower court dismissed the case, ruling that there was no cause of action. The Paduas appealed, and the Court of Appeals referred the case to the Supreme Court due to the legal question involved.	The Supreme Court ruled that Robles, as the employer of the negligent driver Punzalan, was subsidiarily liable for the civil indemnity awarded to the Paduas under the judgment in the criminal case, in accordance with Article 103 of the Revised Penal Code. The dismissal by the lower court was set aside, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.	Philosophy of Law
Aquino, Jr. vs. Enrile (17th September 1974)	AK831150 59 SCRA 183 , 158-A Phil. 1 , No. L-35546 , No. L-35538 , No. L-35539 , No. L-35540 , No. L-35547 , No. L-35556 , No. L-35567 , No. L-35571 , No. L-35573	The case primarily revolved around the legality of arresting individuals without a court order, based solely on martial law powers. The petitioners argued that the martial law proclamation was unconstitutional, and that the arrests violated due process. The respondents maintained that the arrests were necessary for national security given the ongoing rebellion.		Constitutional Law I
Victoriano vs. Elizalde Rope Workers' Union (12th September 1974)	AK917809 158 Phil. 60 , G.R. No. L-2524	The case arose from a conflict between an employee's religious beliefs prohibiting labor union membership and a collective bargaining agreement's closed shop provision. Benjamin Victoriano, an employee of Elizalde Rope Factory Inc. and a member of the Iglesia ni Cristo, a religious sect prohibiting its members from joining labor organizations, was compelled by a closed shop agreement between his employer and the Elizalde Rope Workers' Union to be a member of the Union. Following the enactment of R.A. No. 3350, which exempts such individuals from closed shop provisions, Victoriano resigned from the Union. The Union then demanded his dismissal from the company, leading to the legal challenge.	Republic Act No. 3350, which amends Section 4(a)(4) of the Industrial Peace Act (R.A. No. 875) by exempting members of religious sects prohibiting affiliation with labor organizations from the coverage of closed shop agreements, is constitutional. It validly protects the fundamental right to freedom of religion without unduly infringing upon other constitutional rights or established legal principles.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Religion
Republic vs, Vda. de Castellvi (15th August 1974)	AK859862 58 SCRA 336 , 157 Phil. 329 , No. L-20620	The Republic needed to expand the Basa Air Base and initiated expropriation proceedings against Carmen M. Vda. de Castellvi and Maria Nieves Toledo-Gozun, landowners of adjacent properties. The Republic had previously leased Castellvi’s land since 1947. Disagreement arose over the just compensation, with landowners claiming a much higher value (P15.00 per square meter) compared to the Republic's initial valuation (P0.20 per square meter).	The Supreme Court held that the "taking" of the properties occurred upon the filing of the expropriation complaint in 1959, not in 1947 when the Republic initially leased Castellvi's land. The just compensation for the expropriated lands, classified as residential, was fixed at P5.00 per square meter. The Republic was ordered to pay interest on the compensation from the time of deposit of provisional value and from the actual taking in possession.	Constitutional Law II Eminent Domain
Cabanas vs. Pilapil (25th July 1974)	AK516159 58 SCRA 94 , 157 Phil. 97 , No. L-25843	The case arose from a dispute over the custody of insurance proceeds intended for a minor beneficiary. The deceased, Florentino Pilapil, had named his brother Francisco as the trustee for his daughter Millian's insurance benefits. However, Millian's mother, Melchora Cabanas, sought to obtain the proceeds, arguing that as the child's mother and guardian, she was entitled to administer the funds.		Constitutional Law I
Astorga vs. Villegas (30th April 1974)	AK503127 56 SCRA 714 , No. L-23475	The case originated from the passage of House Bill No. 9266, which sought to define the powers of the Manila Vice-Mayor. After its passage, controversy erupted when it was discovered that the version signed into law did not include substantial amendments made by Senator Tolentino on the Senate floor.	The Supreme Court declared Republic Act 4065 invalid as it was not properly enacted into law, ruling that when there is a conflict between the enrolled bill and the legislative journal records, the latter may be consulted to determine whether a bill was duly enacted.	Statutory Construction
Republic vs. Villasor (28th November 1973)	AK095335 54 SCRA 83 , 153 Phil. 356 , No. L-30671	The case arose from an arbitration award against the Republic of the Philippines. When the respondents sought to execute the judgment, they obtained an order from Judge Villasor declaring the decision final and executory. This led to the issuance of an alias writ of execution and notices of garnishment against funds of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. The Republic then filed this petition to challenge the validity of the order and execution.		Constitutional Law I
Miller vs. California (21st June 1973)	AK558260 413 U.S. 15	The case arose from a re-examination by the Supreme Court of the standards for regulating obscenity, an area that had caused significant legal difficulty and a lack of consistent majority opinions in previous cases. The Court sought to provide more concrete guidelines for states to regulate pornographic materials, particularly when disseminated to unwilling recipients or juveniles, while still protecting First Amendment rights for serious expression.	The Court established a new three-part test for obscenity: (a) whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards" would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest; (b) whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by the applicable state law; and (c) whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value. The Court also held that "contemporary community standards" are those of the local or state community, not a national standard.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
Javellana vs. The Executive Secretary (31st March 1973)	AK643524 50 SCRA 30 , 151-A Phil. 35 , 69 OG 7975 , No. L-36142	Following the declaration of Martial Law and the drafting of a new Constitution by the 1971 Constitutional Convention, President Marcos submitted the proposed constitution for ratification via Citizens Assemblies, bypassing a traditional plebiscite. This prompted several legal challenges questioning the process and the President's authority.	The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the petitions, with a majority finding the issues either moot or not properly raised. The Court was divided on whether the 1973 Constitution had been validly ratified, but a majority considered it effectively in force.	Constitutional Law I Constitutional Law II
Commissioner of Customs vs. Court of Tax Appeals (31st January 1972)	AK064106 43 SCRA 192 , 150 Phil. 222 , No. L-33471	Eusebio Dichoco’s shipment of 438 packages of foodstuffs was seized by customs for lacking a Central Bank release certificate. The CTA initially allowed release under bond, reversed itself, then reinstated the bond order. The Commissioner of Customs challenged this via certiorari.	Importations violating Central Bank circulars are “prohibited importations” under Section 102(k) of the Tariff and Customs Code and cannot be released under bond pursuant to Section 2301.	Statutory Construction
Tumalad vs. Vicencio (30th September 1971)	AK332768 41 SSCRA 143 , 148-B Phil. 625 , No. L-30173	Defendants-Appellants executed a chattel mortgage over their house, built on rented land, to Plaintiffs-Appellees to secure a loan. Upon default, Plaintiffs-Appellees extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgage and purchased the house at auction. Plaintiffs-Appellees then filed an ejectment case against Defendants-Appellants in the municipal court to recover possession and collect rent.	A house constructed on rented land can be validly constituted as personal property and subject to a chattel mortgage if the parties to the contract agree to treat it as such. Furthermore, the mortgagor is not obligated to pay rent to the purchaser during the one-year redemption period following an extrajudicial foreclosure sale, unless the purchaser legally obtains possession through proper court procedures and posting of a bond.	Property and Land Law
Cohen vs. California (7th June 1971)	AK728188 403 U.S. 15	The case arose during the Vietnam War era, a period of significant social and political unrest in the United States, particularly concerning the military draft. Cohen's act of wearing the jacket was a form of protest against the draft and the war, reflecting a common sentiment among dissenters at the time. The public display of such an expletive in a courthouse, a public forum, brought to the forefront the conflict between an individual's right to free expression and the state's interest in maintaining public order and decency.	A state cannot, consistent with the First and Fourteenth Amendments, criminalize the public display of a single offensive expletive when that display does not incite immediate violence, is not directed at a specific individual in a personally abusive manner, is not obscene in the legal sense, and does not intrude upon substantial privacy interests in an intolerable way; the emotive function of speech is also protected.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
Edu vs. Ericta (24th October 1970)	AK811997 35 SCRA 481 , 146 Phil. 469 , No. L-32096	Respondent Teddy Galo challenged the Reflector Law and Administrative Order No. 2 (requiring vehicles to install reflectors) as violations of due process and non-delegation. The lower court issued a preliminary injunction against the order, prompting the petitioner to seek Supreme Court review.	The Reflector Law (RA 5715) and Administrative Order No. 2 are constitutional, as they reasonably advance public safety under the state’s police power and adhere to non-delegation principles.	Statutory Construction
Sta. Maria vs. Lopez (18th February 1970)	AK782342 31 SCRA 637 , No. L-30773	Sta. Maria was appointed Dean of the College of Education at UP for a five-year term. Due to student protests and demands for his resignation, UP President Salvador P. Lopez transferred him to a Special Assistant role. Sta. Maria argued this was a removal without cause or due process.	The transfer of Sta. Maria from his deanship to a Special Assistant role was a removal from office without due process, violating his constitutional right to security of tenure. The Court ordered his reinstatement as Dean.	Philosophy of Law
Automotive Parts & Equipment Company, Inc. vs. Lingad (31st October 1969)	AK801807 30 SCRA 248 , 140 Phil. 580 , No. L-26406	The petitioner, Automotive Parts & Equipment Company, was incorporated in 1961 and had been paying its employees on both daily and monthly bases. Following the enactment of Republic Act No. 4180 in 1965, which amended the minimum wage law, the Secretary of Labor mandated an increase in monthly wages to a minimum of P180.00. The company contested this requirement, seeking a declaratory relief to interpret its obligations under the law.	The Supreme Court ruled that Section 19 of Republic Act No. 602, which prohibits the reduction of wages exceeding the minimum wage, applies to all employers regardless of when they commenced operations.	Statutory Construction
National Marketing Corp. vs. Tecson (27th August 1969)	AK067424 29 SCRA 70 , 139 Phil. 584 , No. L-29131	The Price Stabilization Corporation obtained a final judgment in 1955 against Miguel Tecson. Years later, the National Marketing Corporation, as its successor, attempted to revive this judgment in 1965. The trial court dismissed the case, finding that the action was filed beyond the ten-year prescription period. The only issue on appeal was whether the action to revive had prescribed.	An action to revive a judgment must be filed within ten years or 3,650 days from the date the judgment became final, as defined by Article 13 of the Civil Code. Beyond this period, revival is barred by prescription.	Statutory Construction
People vs. Lava (16th May 1969)	AK022947 28 SCRA 72 , No. L-4974, , No. L-4975, , No. L-4976 , No. L-4977 , No. L-4978	The accused, high-ranking members of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (HMB), were charged with rebellion for engaging in armed attacks, raids, and assassinations aimed at overthrowing the government. The trial court found them guilty of rebellion with multiple murders, arsons, and robberies, sentencing several to death or life imprisonment. On appeal, the Supreme Court re-evaluated the conviction under established jurisprudence.	The Supreme Court ruled that the accused should only be charged with simple rebellion, as established in People v. Hernandez (1956), and that rebellion cannot be complexed with other common crimes like murder, arson, and robbery. The Court upheld the doctrine that when common crimes are committed in furtherance of rebellion, they are absorbed into the crime of rebellion itself.	Philosophy of Law
City of Baguio vs. Marcos (28th February 1969)	AK680073 27 SCRA 342 , 136 Phil. 569 , No. L-26100	The case originated from a 1912 cadastral proceeding (Civil Reservation Case No. 1) declaring the land public in 1922. In 1961, Belong Lutes petitioned to reopen the case, claiming ancestral possession. Petitioners, as tree farm lessees, opposed the reopening but were dismissed by lower courts. The Supreme Court reversed these rulings.	Lessees of public land possess legal standing to oppose petitions to reopen cadastral proceedings under R.A. 931. The 40-year period under R.A. 931 is calculated from the law’s approval (1953), making the 1922 cadastral decision eligible for reopening.	Statutory Construction
Republic vs. PLDT (27th January 1969)	AK453367 136 Phil. 20 , 26 SCRA 620 , No. L-18841	The Bureau of Telecommunications, a government entity, sought to interconnect its Government Telephone System (GTS) with PLDT's telephone network to provide broader telecommunication services to the public, including overseas calls. PLDT initially allowed interconnection through leased trunk lines but later severed these connections, citing unauthorized commercial use and competition from the Bureau. The Republic then filed suit to compel interconnection.	The Republic of the Philippines, exercising its sovereign power of eminent domain, can compel PLDT to interconnect its telephone system with the government system, even without a voluntary contract, provided that just compensation is paid to PLDT for the use of its facilities and services.	Constitutional Law II Eminent Domain
Tijam vs. Sibonghanoy (15th April 1968)	AK037088 23 SCRA 29 , No. L-21450	The case originated from a simple collection suit for P1,908.00 filed by the spouses Tijam against the spouses Sibonghanoy in the CFI of Cebu shortly after the Judiciary Act of 1948 (RA 296) took effect, which placed such amounts under the exclusive original jurisdiction of inferior courts. A writ of attachment against the Sibonghanoys' property was dissolved upon the posting of a counter-bond by the Manila Surety and Fidelity Co., Inc. (Surety).	A party is barred by laches from invoking the defense of lack of jurisdiction when they have actively participated in the case proceedings through various stages for an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, sought affirmative relief, and only raised the jurisdictional question after receiving an unfavorable decision on the merits.	Civil Procedure I
Province of Zamboanga del Norte vs. City of Zamboanga (28th March 1968)	AK384710 22 SCRA 1334 , 131 Phil. 446 , No. L-24440	The Municipality of Zamboanga was the capital of Zamboanga Province. Commonwealth Act 39 converted the Municipality into Zamboanga City and stipulated that the City would purchase provincial properties in Zamboanga City when the capital moved. The capital moved to Dipolog, and later Republic Act 711 divided Zamboanga Province into Zamboanga del Norte and Zamboanga del Sur. Republic Act 3039 later amended Commonwealth Act 39 to transfer the properties to Zamboanga City for free, leading to this legal challenge by Zamboanga del Norte, seeking payment for its share of the properties.	Republic Act 3039 is constitutional insofar as it transfers properties of the former Zamboanga province used for governmental purposes (public properties) to Zamboanga City without compensation, but unconstitutional for properties not used for such purposes (patrimonial properties), as the latter requires due process and just compensation for valid transfer.	Property and Land Law
Katz vs. United States (18th December 1967)	AK574343 389 U.S. 347	The case arose from an FBI investigation into the petitioner's suspected involvement in transmitting gambling information via telephone between Los Angeles, Miami, and Boston, in violation of federal law.	The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places, and its reach does not depend on physical penetration into a constitutionally protected area; electronic eavesdropping on conversations made from a public phone booth, where the user has a justifiable expectation of privacy, constitutes a "search and seizure" requiring a warrant based on probable cause.	Constitutional Law II Searches and Seizures
Gonzales vs. Commission on Elections (9th November 1967)	AK403726 21 SCRA 774 , 129 Phil. 7 , No. L-28196 , No. L-28224	Congress passed Resolutions 1 and 3 (proposing amendments) and Resolution 2 (calling a future constitutional convention) on March 16, 1967. RA 4913 scheduled the plebiscite during the 1967 general election. Petitioners argued the amendments were rushed and inadequately publicized.	The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 4913 and the congressional resolutions proposing the amendments, ruling that submission during a general election complied with Article XV. However, six justices in concurring opinions found the public’s awareness insufficient for valid ratification.	Statutory Construction
Lidasan vs. Commission on Elections (25th October 1967)	AK047045 21 SCRA 496 , 128 Phil. 526 , No. L-28089	RA 4790 aimed to create Dianaton from barrios in Lanao del Sur and Cotabato. The Office of the President urged suspending its implementation, but COMELEC enforced it. Petitioner Bara Lidasan, a Cotabato resident, challenged the law’s validity.	RA 4790 is void for violating the Single Subject Rule under Article VI, Section 21(1) of the 1935 Constitution.	Statutory Construction
Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association, Inc. vs. City Mayor of Manila (31st July 1967)	AK423474 20 SCRA 849 , 128 Phil. 473 , No. L-24693	The Ermita-Malate Hotel and Motel Operators Association challenged Ordinance No. 4760, arguing it was unconstitutional and beyond the powers of the Manila Municipal Board. They claimed the ordinance violated due process by imposing unreasonable fees and regulations, invading privacy, and lacking certainty. The City Mayor defended the ordinance as a valid exercise of police power to curb immorality.	Ordinance No. 4760 of the City of Manila is constitutional, as the petitioners failed to present sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of its validity, and the ordinance is a valid exercise of police power aimed at safeguarding public morals.	Constitutional Law II Police Power
Stonehill vs. Diokno (19th June 1967)	AK432252 20 SCRA 383 , 126 Phil. 738 , G. R. No. L-19550	Government prosecutors applied for and were granted 42 search warrants by various judges against the petitioners (corporate officers) and the corporations they managed. The applications alleged violations of Central Bank Laws, Tariff and Customs Laws, the Internal Revenue Code, and the Revised Penal Code, leading to searches of offices, warehouses, and residences, and the seizure of numerous documents and items.	Search warrants must be issued based upon probable cause for one specific offense and must particularly describe the things to be seized to be constitutionally valid; evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional right against unreasonable searches and seizures is inadmissible (exclusionary rule); the right to object to an unlawful search and seizure is personal and cannot be invoked by corporate officers for searches conducted on corporate premises.	Constitutional Law II Searches and Seizures
Loving vs. Virginia (12th June 1967)	AK356953 388 U.S. 1	The case arose within the context of Virginia's long-standing statutory scheme aimed at preventing interracial marriages, rooted in historical practices dating back to the colonial period and solidified by the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. At the time of the litigation, Virginia was one of 16 states still enforcing such anti-miscegenation laws, which reflected historical doctrines of white supremacy and racial purity.	Statutes prohibiting marriage solely on the basis of racial classifications violate the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, as the freedom to marry is a fundamental right and racial classifications are subject to the most rigid scrutiny and must serve a permissible state objective independent of racial discrimination.	Constitutional Law II Equal Protection
Caltex (Philippines), Inc. vs. Palomar (29th September 1966)	AK979503 18 SCRA 247 , 124 Phil. 763 , No. L-19650	Caltex designed the “Caltex Hooded Pump Contest” in 1960 to boost sales. Participants estimated gas pump output for prizes. The Postmaster General blocked mail use for the contest, calling it a lottery. Caltex sought declaratory relief to affirm its legality.	Promotional contests lacking consideration (no payment, purchase, or value given by participants) do not qualify as lotteries or prohibited gift enterprises under the Postal Law.	Statutory Construction
Pelaez vs. The Auditor General (24th December 1965)	AK139410 122 Phil. 965 , G. R. No. L-23825	The President of the Philippines, from September 4 to October 29, 1964, issued thirty-three Executive Orders creating new municipalities, purportedly pursuant to Section 68 of the Revised Administrative Code. This action prompted Vice-President Emmanuel Pelaez, as a taxpayer, to question the legality of these creations and the underlying statutory authority, fearing the unauthorized expenditure of public funds.	The power to create municipal corporations is strictly legislative in nature and cannot be delegated to the President; Section 68 of the Revised Administrative Code, insofar as it grants the President the power to create municipalities, constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power because it fails to provide a sufficient standard for the President to follow, and is therefore unconstitutional.	Constitutional Law I
Bolinao Electronics Corporation vs. Valencia (30th June 1964)	AK243676 11 SCRA 486 , 120 Phil. 469 , No. L-20740	The Secretary of Public Works and Communications improperly initiated license renewal investigations after condoning late filings through an official circular. The Philippine Broadcasting Service (PBS) unlawfully attempted to operate a TV channel in Luzon despite budgetary restrictions.	The Secretary of Public Works and Communications improperly initiated license renewal investigations after condoning late filings through an official circular. The Philippine Broadcasting Service (PBS) unlawfully attempted to operate a TV channel in Luzon despite budgetary restrictions.	Statutory Construction
Jacobellis vs. Ohio (22nd June 1964)	AK737310 378 U.S. 184	The case arose from the criminal prosecution of a movie theater manager in Cleveland Heights, Ohio, for exhibiting a film deemed obscene under state law. This occurred during a period of significant legal debate and development regarding the definition of obscenity and the extent of First Amendment protection for expressive materials, particularly those dealing with sex.	Material cannot be proscribed as obscene unless it is "utterly without redeeming social importance," and the "contemporary community standards" by which obscenity is judged are those of the nation as a whole, not a particular local community; furthermore, the Supreme Court has an obligation to make an independent constitutional judgment on the facts of the case as to whether the material is constitutionally protected.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
People vs. Hernandez (30th May 1964)	AK952010 11 SCRA 223 , No. L-6025 , No. L-6026	The accused were leaders or members of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the Hukbong Mapagpalaya ng Bayan (HMB), formerly known as Hukbalahap (Huks). The government alleged that they conspired to overthrow the government through armed rebellion, organizing violent raids, ambushes, and assassinations. The trial court sentenced several defendants to death or life imprisonment, leading to an appeal before the Supreme Court.	The Supreme Court affirmed the doctrine in People v. Hernandez (1956), holding that rebellion absorbs all crimes committed in furtherance of rebellion and cannot be charged as a complex crime with murder, arson, or robbery. The Court modified the penalties imposed, aligning them with those prescribed for rebellion under Articles 134 and 135 of the Revised Penal Code.	Philosophy of Law
De Ramas vs. Court of Agrarian Relations (29th May 1964)	AK885506 11 SCRA 171 , 120 Phil. 168 , No. L-19555	Geronimo B. Ramos, a tenant of Mateo de Ramas, sought to change their tenancy agreement from share to leasehold under Section 14 of Republic Act No. 1199. De Ramas refused, leading Ramos to file a petition with the Court of Agrarian Relations, which ruled in favor of Ramos. De Ramas appealed, challenging the constitutionality of Section 14.	Section 14 of Republic Act No. 1199, which allows tenants to change their tenancy contract from share to leasehold, is constitutional and does not violate the constitutional prohibition against impairment of contracts.	Philosophy of Law
New York Times Co. vs. Sullivan (9th March 1964)	AK220660 376 U.S. 254	The case arose during the height of the Civil Rights Movement in the United States, specifically in Montgomery, Alabama, a focal point of civil rights activism and resistance. The advertisement in question, "Heed Their Rising Voices," sought support for the civil rights movement and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and criticized the actions of Southern officials, including those in Montgomery, in suppressing civil rights activities.	A State cannot, under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, award damages to a public official for defamatory falsehood relating to his official conduct unless he proves that the statement was made with "actual malice"—that is, with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard of whether it was true or false.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression
Sherbert vs. Verner (17th June 1963)	AK644642 374 U.S. 398	The case arose from the conflict between an individual's religious observance, specifically the Seventh-Day Adventist practice of observing Saturday as the Sabbath, and a state's unemployment compensation law requiring availability for work. Appellant Adell Sherbert was a member of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and was discharged by her employer when she refused to work on Saturdays after her employer switched to a six-day work week. Her subsequent inability to find other employment that did not require Saturday work led to her claim for unemployment benefits.	A state cannot constitutionally apply its unemployment compensation eligibility provisions to deny benefits to an individual who refuses to work on their Sabbath due to sincerely held religious beliefs, as such a denial imposes an unconstitutional burden on the free exercise of religion, unless the state can demonstrate a compelling state interest justifying such infringement and that no alternative forms of regulation would suffice.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Religion
Vera vs. People of the Philippines and Court of Appeals (31st January 1963)	AK623026 117 Phil. 170 , G. R. No. L-18184	The case arose in the aftermath of World War II in the Philippines, during which various guerrilla units operated. The Amnesty Proclamation No. 8, series of 1946, was issued to provide a means for individuals who committed acts penalized under the Revised Penal Code in furtherance of the resistance movement against the Japanese or against persons aiding the enemy to be absolved of criminal liability. The petitioners were members of Vera's Guerrilla Party, and the victim, Amadeo Lozañes, was a lieutenant of the Hunter's ROTC Guerrilla organization, with a history of rivalry between the two groups.	Amnesty presupposes the commission of a crime; therefore, an accused who denies committing the offense charged cannot simultaneously invoke the benefits of an amnesty proclamation, as amnesty is in the nature of a plea of confession and avoidance.	Constitutional Law I
Engel vs. Vitale (25th June 1962)	AK957958 370 U.S. 421	The New York State Board of Regents, a governmental agency with supervisory powers over the State's public school system, composed and recommended a prayer for recitation in public schools. The prayer was part of a "Statement on Moral and Spiritual Training in the Schools." The respondent Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 9, New Hyde Park, New York, adopted this recommendation and directed its principal to have the prayer said aloud by each class at the beginning of each school day in the presence of a teacher.	State officials may not compose an official state prayer and require its recitation in public schools, even if the prayer is denominationally neutral and pupils may remain silent or be excused, because such a practice violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Religion
Cui vs. Arellano University (30th May 1961)	AK734243 112 Phil. 135 , G.R. No. L-15127	The case arose from a dispute between Emeterio Cui, a law student, and Arellano University. Cui had been awarded scholarship grants by the university for scholastic merit. Before receiving these grants, he was made to sign a contract waiving his right to transfer to another school without refunding the scholarship amount. Cui later transferred to another university, and Arellano University refused to release his academic transcripts necessary for the bar examination unless he repaid the scholarship funds.	A contractual stipulation requiring a student to waive their right to transfer to another school unless they refund the scholarship benefits previously granted is void for being contrary to public policy, as scholarships are awarded in recognition of merit and not as a business scheme to retain students.	Obligations and Contracts
Republic vs. La Orden de PP. Benedictinos de Filipinas (28th February 1961)	AK396070 1 SCRA 646 , 111 Phil. 230 , No. L-12792	To alleviate traffic congestion on Legarda Street, the government planned to extend Azcarraga Street. This extension required acquiring a portion of land owned by La Orden de PP. Benedictinos de Filipinas, where San Beda College is located. Negotiations failed, leading the government to initiate expropriation proceedings.	The trial court erred in dismissing the expropriation case without receiving evidence on the necessity of taking the appellee's property for public use. The issue of necessity is a question of fact that requires presentation of evidence by both parties.	Constitutional Law II Eminent Domain
Caltex (Phil.) Inc. vs. Felias (30th June 1960)	AK597591 108 Phil. 873 , No. L-14309	Caltex sought to enforce a judgment against Felisa Felias's husband, Simeon Sawamoto, by levying and selling a land parcel (Lot No. 107) originally owned by Felisa Felias's parents and later donated to her. Caltex claimed the land became conjugal property due to the construction of a conjugal house on it during the marriage and was thus subject to levy for the husband’s debt.	Paraphernal property of the wife is not liable for the debts of the husband, even if a conjugal house is built on it, if the land was exclusively owned by the wife prior to the construction and debt incurrence.	Property and Land Law
Commissioner Internal Revenue vs. Filipinas Compañia de Seguros (29th April 1960)	AK186834 107 Phil. 1055 , No. L-14880	Respondent Filipinas Compañía de Seguros, a real estate dealer, paid P150 as the 1956 fixed annual tax under the original National Internal Revenue Code. RA 1612 (effective August 24, 1956) introduced graduated rates. The Commissioner later demanded an additional P350, claiming retroactive application. The Court of Tax Appeals ruled for the respondent, prompting the Commissioner’s appeal to the Supreme Court.	Tax laws are prospective unless expressly stated otherwise; Republic Act No. 1612’s increased rates for real estate dealer’s fixed annual tax applied prospectively from its effective date (August 24, 1956) and could not retroactively impose additional liability for taxes already paid for 1956.	Statutory Construction
Gerona vs. Secretary of Education (12th August 1959)	AK011651 106 Phil. 2 , No. L-13954	On June 11, 1955, Republic Act No. 1265, "An Act Making Flag Ceremony Compulsory in all Educational Institutions," was approved. Section 2 of this Act authorized the Secretary of Education to issue rules and regulations for the proper conduct of the flag ceremony. Consequently, on July 21, 1955, the Secretary of Education issued Department Order No. 8, series of 1955, detailing the rules for the compulsory daily flag ceremony in all public and private schools.	The requirement of observing the flag ceremony, including saluting the flag, singing the national anthem, and reciting the patriotic pledge, as mandated by Department Order No. 8, s. 1955, does not violate the constitutional provision on freedom of religion and the exercise thereof, as the flag ceremony is a civic and patriotic exercise, not a religious one, and compliance with such non-discriminatory school regulations is a prerequisite for attendance in public schools.	Constitutional Law II Philosophy of Law Freedom of Religion
Evangelista vs. Alto Surety & Ins. Co., Inc. (23rd April 1958)	AK523989 103 Phil. 401 , No. L-11139	Santos Evangelista sued Ricardo Rivera for a sum of money and obtained a writ of attachment on a house Rivera built on leased land. Later, Alto Surety & Insurance Co., Inc. claimed ownership of the same house based on a prior auction sale resulting from a separate case against Rivera. Evangelista sued to establish his title and gain possession.	A house constructed on leased land is considered immovable property, not personal property, for purposes of attachment and execution, regardless of agreements between private parties treating it as chattel. Therefore, the rules for attaching immovable property must be followed.	Property and Land Law
Roth vs. United States (24th June 1957)	AK704418 354 U.S. 476	The cases arose from separate prosecutions under federal and state laws aimed at curbing the dissemination of obscene materials. Roth operated a publication and sales business in New York, utilizing mails for circulars and advertising. Alberts ran a mail-order business in Los Angeles, selling books deemed obscene. These prosecutions reflected societal concerns and legislative efforts to regulate materials considered harmful to public morals, specifically those dealing with sex in a manner deemed offensive or appealing to prurient interest.	Obscenity is not within the area of constitutionally protected speech or press under the First Amendment (as applied to the Federal Government) or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (as applied to the States); the appropriate standard for judging obscenity is whether, to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest.	Constitutional Law II Freedom of Expression