Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 5

ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

Like

Tweet

chanrobles.com

Search

Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1991 > April 1991 Decisions > A.C. No. 2152 April 19, 1991 TEODORO I. CHAVEZ v. ESCOLASTICO R. VIOLA:

Search

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review


THIRD DIVISION
[A.C. No. 2152. April 19, 1991.]
TEODORO I. CHAVEZ, Complainant, v. ATTY. ESCOLASTICO R. VIOLA, Respondent.

SYLLABUS

1. LEGAL ETHICS; ATTORNEYS; PRACTICE OF LAW; NOT A RIGHT BUT A PRIVILEGE. It is well to
stress again that the practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the State on those who
show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required by law for the conferment
of such privilege.

DebtKollect Company, Inc.

2. ID.; ID.; DUTY OF ATTORNEYS; FIRST DUTY OF LAWYERS IS NOT TO THEIR CLIENTS BUT TO THE
COURTS. It cannot be gainsaid that candidness, especially towards the courts, is essential for the
expeditious administration of justice. Courts are entitled to expect only complete candor and honesty
from the lawyers appearing and pleading before them. A lawyer, on the other hand, has the
fundamental duty to satisfy that expectation. Otherwise, the administration of justice would gravely
suffer if indeed it could proceed at all. It is essential that lawyers bear in mind at all times that their first
duty is not to their clients but rather to the courts, that they are above all officers of court sworn to
assist the courts in rendering justice to all and sundry, and only secondarily are they advocates of the
exclusive interests of their clients. For this reason, he is required to swear to do no falsehood, nor
consent to the doing of any in court.
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; CASE AT BAR. In the instant case, respondent Viola alleged in an earlier
pleading that his clients were merely lessees of the property involved. In his later pleading, he stated
that the very same clients were owners of the same property. One of these pleadings must have been
false; it matters not which one. What does matter is that respondent, who, as a member of the ancient
and learned profession of the law, had sworn to do no falsehood before the courts, did commit one. It
was incumbent upon respondent to explain how or why he committed no falsehood in pleading two (2)
incompatible things; he offered no explanation, other than that he had not originated but merely
continued the registration proceedings when he filed the Amended Application, and that he really
believed his clients were entitled to apply for registration of their rights. Respondents excuses ring very
hollow; we agree with the Solicitor General and the complainant that those excuses do not exculpate the
Respondent.
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; LAWYERS OATH AND CANON 22 OF THE CANONS OF PROFESSIONAL ETHICS,
VIOLATED BY RESPONDENT. It is clear to the Court that respondent Viola violated his lawyers oath
and as well Canon 22 of the Canons of Professional Ethics which stated that" [t]he conduct of the lawyer
before the court and with other lawyers should be characterized by candor and fairness" (now Canon 10
of the Code of Professional Responsibility prescribing that" [a] lawyer owes candor, fairness and good
faith to the courts"). He has been deplorably lacking in the candor required of him as a member of the
Bar and an officer of the court. In his apparent zeal to secure the title to the property involved for his
clients, he disregarded his overriding duty to the court and to the law itself.

ChanRobles Intellectual Property

ChanRobles Intellectual Property


Division

RESOLUTION

PER CURIAM:

In a letter-complaint dated 9 May 1990 1 addressed to this Court, complainant Teodoro I. Chavez
prayed for the disbarment of or other appropriate penalty upon respondent Escolastico R. Viola, a
member of the Philippine Bar, for gross misconduct or malpractice.
The letter-complaint stated that respondent Viola was engaged by Felicidad Alvendia, Jesus Alvendia and
Jesus Alvendia, Jr. as their counsel in connection with Civil Case No. 3330-M 2 filed sometime in 1966
with the then Court of First Instance ("CFI") of Bulacan against Teodoro Chavez (herein complainant),
Lucia dela Cruz, Alpon dela Cruz and Eugenio dela Cruz. In the complaint, 3 respondent alleged, on
behalf of the Alvendias (plaintiffs therein), that Felicidad Alvendia and Jesus Alvendia were the holders
of Foreshore Lease Applications Nos. V-1284 and 2807 covering portions of public land situated in Barrio
Baluarte, Municipality of Bulacan, Province of Bulacan, and that lease contracts 4 had been executed in
their favor by the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Respondent prayed in the complaint
that his clients (the Alvendias) be declared "bona fide lessees of the land in controversy . . . ." 5 In an
Order dated 2 October 1969, 6 the CFI dismissed the complaint filed in Civil Case No. 3330-M for nonappearance of the Alvendias.
On 18 June 1966, Congress passed Republic Act No. 470, which provides:

HZS35 Concrete Batching Plant

jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"SECTION 1. The parcel of public domain comprising a portion of the foreshore fronting the Manila Bay
along the Province of Bulacan . . . is hereby withdrawn from sale or settlement and reserved for
communal fishing ground purposes which shall hereafter be called the Bulacan Fishing Reservation." 7
(Emphasis supplied)
It appears that the foreshore land being occupied by the Alvendias was part of the communal fishing
ground reserved by Republic Act No. 470.
On 8 November 1977, respondent filed, on behalf of the Alvendias, Amended Application for Original
Registration of Title 8 in Land Registration Case ("LRC") No. 3711-M with the then CFI of Bulacan
praying that the land covered by Psu-141243, Amd. 2 9 be registered in the name of the spouses
Alvendias. Respondent alleged in the Amended Application that the applicant Alvendias were the owners
of the land, they having acquired the same from one Teresita Vistan by sale sometime in 1929.

China Top concrete batching plant


manufacture. Contact Us!

Get Info

It is petitioners contention that respondent, in filing the Amended Application for Original Registration of
Title in LRC No. 3711-M stating that his clients were the owners of the property applied for despite his
full knowledge of the fact that his clients were mere lessees of the land in controversy as so described in
the complaint respondent had filed in Civil Case No. 3330-M, had willingly aided in and consented to the
pursuit, promotion and prosecution of a false and unlawful application for land registration, in violation
of his oath of office as a member of the Bar.
In his Answer, 10 respondent alleged that the Application for Original Registration of Title was originally
instituted by one Atty. Montesclaro, and when said lawyer withdrew his appearance therein, respondent
filed the Amended Application for Original Registration of Title; that he believed his clients had the right
to apply for the registration of the land; and that assuming his clients did not in fact have any such
right, the court where the Application for Original Registration of Title was filed had not yet passed upon
it; hence, this complaint for disbarment was filed prematurely.
cralawnad

Complainant filed a Reply to the Answer. 11


In a Resolution dated 29 October 1980, the Court resolved to refer the case to the Solicitor General for
investigation, report and recommendation.

April-1991 Jurisprudence
G.R. No. 74854 April 2, 1991 - JESUS DACOYCOY v.
INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT
G.R. No. 75504 April 2, 1991 - VICENTE CU v. COURT
OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 79981 April 2, 1991 - ENGRACIA BACATE
AMBERTI v. COURT OF APPEALS
A.M. No. P-88-238 April 8, 1991 - GENEROSO V.
MIRASOL v. JOSE O. DE LA TORRE, JR.
A.M. No. P-89-348 April 8, 1991
PADRONES v. MELCHOR DIVINAGRACIA

ESTELITA

G.R. No. 49470 April 8, 1991 - DARIO N. LOZANO v.


IGNACIO BALLESTEROS
G.R. No. 52179 April 8, 1991 - MUN. OF SAN
FERNANDO, LA UNION v. ROMEO N. FIRME
G.R. No. 55109 April 8, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. EDUARDO M. AUSTRIA
G.R. No. 73647 April 8, 1991 - JOSE G. BUSMENTE,
JR. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION
G.R. No. 83959 April 8, 1991 - RUPERTO DE GUZMAN
v. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 87416 April 8, 1991 - CECILIO S. DE VILLA v.
COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 89745 April 8, 1991 - RUFINO O. ESLAO v.
COMMISSION ON AUDIT
G.R. No. 90580 April 8, 1991 - RUBEN SAW v. COURT
OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 90596 April 8, 1991 - SOLID MANILA
CORPORATION v. BIO HONG TRADING CO., INC.

On 11 March 1981, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss 12 the complaint for disbarment. In said
Motion, he alleged for the second time that he was not the original lawyer who filed the application
in the land registration case, but a certain Atty. Montesclaro. Respondent further alleged:
jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

". . . Your respondent, not content with just having conferred with Atty. Montesclaro when he took over,
even went to the extent of verifying from the Bureau of Lands if the application was proper. The Legal
Department of the Bureau of Lands assured your respondent that it was. He was informed that judicial
application for registration is one of the methods of acquiring such lands, said lands being alienable and
disposable. There are, however, other means of obtaining the said lands, but the applicants (with Atty.
Montesclaro) chose the present action for land registration.
Undersigned wishes to point out that he merely took over from the original lawyer when said counsel
withdrew his appearance. Your respondent, hence, was in good faith when he took over the land
registration case, subject matter of this present administrative investigation."
cralaw virtua1aw library

The Court, in a Resolution dated 8 June 1981, forwarded the Motion to Dismiss to the Solicitor General.
In a Report 13 dated 28 February 1990, the Solicitor General stated that:

jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"In his answer to the letter complaint, respondent avers that his clients, i.e., the Alvendias, have the
right to apply for registration of the land in question. However, respondent does not deny that he
prepared and signed the Amended Application for Original Registration of Title in Land Reg. Case No.
3711-M wherein he alleged that the Alvendias are the owners of the land covered by Psu 141243, Amd.
2. Respondent does not offer any explanation at all as to why his submission in said application was
diametrically opposite to his allegations in the complaint in the earlier Civil Case No. 3330-M that the
Alvendias were permittees and later the lessees of the same property.
It is evident, then, that respondent has knowingly made a false statement to the court in the land
registration case. As proven by complaint, respondent has willingly aided and consented in the filing and
prosecution of a groundless, if not false, application for land registration, in violation of his oath as a
lawyer and member of the bar. 14
It is well to stress again that the practice of law is not a right but a privilege bestowed by the State on
those who show that they possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications required by law for the
conferment of such privilege. 15 One of those requirements is the observance of honesty and candor. It
cannot be gainsaid that candidness, especially towards the courts, is essential for the expeditious
administration of justice. Courts are entitled to expect only complete candor and honesty from the

CORPORATION v. BIO HONG TRADING CO., INC.


G.R. No. 94284 April 8, 1991 - RICARDO C. SILVERIO
v. COURT OF APPEALS
A.M. No. 90-11-2709-RTC April 16, 1991 - MERIT
SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD v. RODOLFO P.
TORRELLA
G.R. No. 85718 April 16, 1991
CARANDANG v. COURT OF APPEALS

FEDERICO

G.R. No. 87119 April 16, 1991 - GEMILIANO C. LOPEZ,


JR. v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
G.R. No. 88589 April 16, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. CARLITO D. LINSANGAN
G.R. No. 91259 April 16, 1991 - PHILIPPINE PORTS
AUTHORITY v. RENATO A. FUENTES

lawyers appearing and pleading before them. A lawyer, on the other hand, has the fundamental duty to
satisfy that expectation. Otherwise, the administration of justice would gravely suffer if indeed it could
proceed at all. It is essential that lawyers bear in mind at all times that their first duty is not to their
clients but rather to the courts, that they are above all officers of court sworn to assist the courts in
rendering justice to all and sundry, and only secondarily are they advocates of the exclusive interests of
their clients. For this reason, he is required to swear to do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any
in court. 16
In the instant case, respondent Viola alleged in an earlier pleading that his clients were merely lessees
of the property involved. In his later pleading, he stated that the very same clients were owners of the
same property. One of these pleadings must have been false; it matters not which one. What does
matter is that respondent, who, as a member of the ancient and learned profession of the law, had
sworn to do no falsehood before the courts, did commit one. It was incumbent upon respondent to
explain how or why he committed no falsehood in pleading two (2) incompatible things; he offered no
explanation, other than that he had not originated but merely continued the registration proceedings
when he filed the Amended Application, and that he really believed his clients were entitled to apply for
registration of their rights. Respondents excuses ring very hollow; we agree with the Solicitor General
and the complainant that those excuses do not exculpate the Respondent.
chanrobles law library

It is clear to the Court that respondent Viola violated his lawyers oath and as well Canon 22 of the
G.R. No. 91925 April 16, 1991 - EDUARDO M.
COJUANGCO, JR. v. ANTONIO J. ROXAS
A.M. No. P-89-327 April 19, 1991 - THELMA GARCIA
v. ROMEO EULLARAN
A.M. No. RTJ-90-570 April 19, 1991 - ANTONIO
SOYANGCO v. ROMEO G. MAGLALANG
A.C. No. 2152 April 19, 1991 - TEODORO I. CHAVEZ v.
ESCOLASTICO R. VIOLA
A.C. No. 2697 April 19, 1991 - JOSE S. SANTOS v.
CIPRIANO A. TAN

Canons of Professional Ethics which stated that" [t]he conduct of the lawyer before the court and with
other lawyers should be characterized by candor and fairness" (now Canon 10 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility prescribing that" [a] lawyer owes candor, fairness and good faith to the
courts"). He has been deplorably lacking in the candor required of him as a member of the Bar and an
officer of the court. In his apparent zeal to secure the title to the property involved for his clients, he
disregarded his overriding duty to the court and to the law itself.
WHEREFORE, finding respondent Escolastico R. Viola guilty of committing a falsehood in violation of his
lawyers oath and of the Canons of Professional Ethics (now the Code of Professional Responsibility), the
Court Resolved to SUSPEND respondent from the practice of law for a period of five (5) months, with a
WARNING that commission of the same or similar offense in the future will result in the imposition of a
more severe penalty. A copy of this Resolution shall be spread on the personal record of respondent in
the Office of the Bar Confidant.

A.C. No. 2731 April 19, 1991 - GLORIA DELA ROSA


OBIA v. BASILIO M. CATIMBANG

Fernan, C.J., Gutierrez, Jr., Feliciano, Bidin and Davide, Jr., JJ., concur.

G.R. No. 73610 April 19, 1991 - PHILIPPINE


COMMERCIAL INTERNATIONAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE
APPELLATE COURT

Endnotes:

G.R. No. 78162 April 19, 1991 - J. ANTONIO M.


CARPIO v. ROMEO G. MAGLALANG
G.R. Nos. 85939 & 86968 April 19, 1991 - NEW
PANGASINAN REVIEW, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 92299 April 19, 1991 - REYNALDO R. SAN
JUAN v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 95861 April 19, 1991 - FRANCISCO L.
ABALOS v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
G.R. No. 96080 April 19, 1991
PADERANGA v. FRANKLIN M. DRILON

MIGUEL

P.

1. Rollo, pp. 1-4.


2. The complaint was filed for the purpose of having plaintiffs therein declared as the
bona fide lessees of the land involved therein and of having defendants therein vacate the
property.
3. Rollo, pp. 5-10, Annex "A" of complaint.
4. Id., pp. 13-16, Annex "C" of complaint.
5. Id., p. 9, Complaint in Civil Case No. 3330-M.
6. Id., p. 11, Annex "B" of complaint.
7. Id., p. 25, Annex "E" of complaint.

G.R. No. 31408 April 22, 1991 - DIRECTOR OF LANDS


v. COURT OF APPEALS

8. Id., pp. 28-31, Annex "G" of complaint.

G.R. No. 42725 April 22, 1991 - REPUBLIC BANK v.


COURT OF APPEALS

9. The land identified in Psu-141243, Amd. 2 had by that time been subdivided into four
(4) lots.

G.R. No. 45125 April 22, 1991 - LORETA SERRANO v.


COURT OF APPEALS

10. Rollo, pp. 39-40.


11. Id., pp. 42-44.

G.R. No. 50501 April 22, 1991 - RODOLFO GUIANG v.


RICARDO C. SAMANO
G.R. No. 74783 April 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ROBERTO B. SORIANO
G.R. No. 75389 April 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. HERNANDO B. MANANTAN
G.R. No. 75894 April 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. SANTIAGO TUGBO, JR.

12. Id., pp. 58-63.


13. Id., pp. 78-83.
14. Id., pp. 81-82; Report of the Solicitor General, pp. 4-5.
15. Sabayle v. Tandayag, 158 SCRA 497 (1988).
16. Pangan v. Ramos, 93 SCRA 87 (1979). See also Casals v. Cusi, Jr., 52 SCRA 58
(1973).

G.R. No. 76562 April 22, 1991 - ROGER B. PATRICIO


v. ENRIQUE P. SUPLICO
G.R. No. 76953 April 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. PONCIANO MANDAPAT
G.R. No. 77315 April 22, 1991 - CIRCLE FINANCIAL
CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS

Ads by Google
Ads by Google
Ads by Google

Property Law
Attorneys Law
Court Service

Family Law
Family Court
Lawyer Law
Civil Lawyer
Trust Law
A Law Legal
Law 22
Labor of Law
Labour Lawyer

Back to Home | Back to Main

G.R. No. 80767 April 22, 1991 - BOY SCOUTS OF THE


PHILIPPINES
v.
NATIONAL
COMMISSION, ET AL.

LABOR

RELATIONS

QUICK SEARCH

G.R. No. 82985 April 22, 1991 - MERVILLE PARK


HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION v. FRANCISCO X. VELEZ
G.R. No. 85647 April 22, 1991 - MERCANTILE
INSURANCE CO. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

1901

1902

1903

1904

1905

1906

1907

1908

1909

1910

1911

1912

1913

1914

1915

1916

G.R. No. 92570 April 22, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.


v. EVANGELINE NUNAG, ET AL.

1917

1918

1919

1920

1921

1922

1923

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

G.R. No. 93666 April 22, 1991 - GENERAL MILLING


CORPORATION v. RUBEN D. TORRES

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

1938

1939

1940

1941

1942

1943

1944

1945

1946

1947

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

1957

1958

1959

1960

1961

1962

1963

1964

1965

1966

1967

1968

1969

1970

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

1978

1979

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

G.R. No. 94571 April 22, 1991 - TEOFISTO


GUINGONA, JR. v. GUILLERMO CARAGUE

T.

G.R. No. 94925 April 22, 1991 - BPI-FAMILY SAVINGS


BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 94951 April 22, 1991 - APEX MINING
COMPANY, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 95011 April 22, 1991 - MY SAN BISCUITS
INC. v. BIENVENIDO E. LAGUESMA
G.R. No. 78254 April 25, 1991 - JOINT MOH-MOLE
ACCREDITATION COMMITTEE v. COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 78556 April 25, 1991 - ALFARO FORTUNADO,
ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 83354 April 25, 1991 - LEON MATEO v.
COURT OF APPEALS
G.R. No. 90296 April 25, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. MOISES M. INDAYA
A.M. No. RTJ-90-466 April 26, 1991 - DOMINGA AZOR
v. SOFRONIO G. SAYO
A.C. No. 1302,1391 and 1543 April 26, 1991 PAULINO VALENCIA v. ARSENIO FER. CABANTING
G.R. No. 45142 April 26, 1991 - SIMPROSA VDA. DE
ESPINA, ET AL. v. OTILIO ABAYA, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 49839-46 April 26, 1991 - JOSE B.L. REYES
v. PEDRO ALMANZOR, ET AL.
G.R. No. 51461 April 26, 1991 - CRISPIN DASALLA,
SR. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF NUEVA ECIJA
G.R. No. 69344 April 26, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE
PHIL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 76212 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ROBERTO TUGBANG
G.R. No. 83957 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. DANILO CABANBAN
G.R. No. 84728 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. CESAR ATENTO
G.R. No. 86641 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ERIC C. ANSING

G.R. No. 88838 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.


v. MOISES MOKA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 92586 April 26, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. EDGARDO L. PUEDAN
G.R. No. 93559 April 26, 1991 - ROMEO G. ELEPANTE
v. JOB B. MADAYAG
G.R. No. 50098 April 30, 1991
CITIZENS BANK v. RAMON V. JAPSON

ASSOCIATED

G.R. No. 69999 April 30, 1991 - LUZVIMINDA


VISAYAN, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION
G.R. No. 71835 April 30, 1991 - REPUBLIC OF THE
PHIL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT
G.R. Nos. 74670-74 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHIL. v. CHARLY S. GANOHON
G.R. No. 76211 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ALEJO M. CUYO
G.R. No. 76585 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. RODOLFO BAGUIO

Main Indices of the Library --->

Go!

G.R. No. 81374 April 30, 1991 - JOSE R. BAUTISTA v.


SEC. OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT
G.R. No. 85322 April 30, 1991 - ALFREDO M. ALMEDA,
ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 86042 April
30,
1991
FEAGLE
CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION v. MAURO DORADO, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 86517 April 30, 1991 - ANDRES MAMA, JR.,
ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 86760 April 30, 1991 ZAMBOANGA, ET AL. v. PELAGIO S. MANDI

CITY

OF

G.R. No. 87215 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.


v. ORLANDO I. DE LAS MARINAS
G.R. No. 87928 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. MATIAS F. GRAZA
G.R. No. 88631 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. FERNANDO COLLADO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 88880 April 30, 1991 NATIONAL BANK v. COURT OF APPEALS

PHILIPPINE

G.R. No. 92505 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.


v. ALEJANDRO MOTAR, ET AL.
G.R. No. 92591 April 30, 1991 - CITYTRUST BANKING
CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 92658 April 30, 1991 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. ARMANDO P. VASQUEZ, ET AL.
G.R. No. 94151 April 30, 1991 - EASTERN SHIPPING
LINES, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS

G.R. No. 94209 April 30, 1991 - FEATI BANK & TRUST
CO. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 94436 April 30, 1991 - LAGRIMAS V. ABALOS
v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

Security Two Way


Radios
Leading Two Way Radios
Provider, Expert on Security &
Safety!

Copyright 1998 - 2015 ChanRobles Publishing Company

| Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions

ChanRobles Virtual Law Library

| chanrobles.com

RED

Похожие интересы