jurisprudence[ G. R. No. 39733. June 07, 1934 ] 1934-06-07

[ G. R. No. 39733. June 07, 1934 ]

[ G. R. No. 39733. June 07, 1934 ]

G. R. No. 39733

[ G. R. No. 39733. June 07, 1934 ]

ROSEL LABORATORIES CO., INC., PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE VS. VIUDA E HIJOS DE CHUA, PIENGCO ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

D E C I S I O N

J. STEVENS-ACTING CLERK OF COURT

This court having regularly acquired jurisdiction for the trial of the above-entitled cause submitted by both parties for decision,after consideration thereof by the Court upon the record, its decision and order for the judgment having been filed on the ________18th________day of ________May________, A. D. nineteen hundred and _________thirty-four________;

By virtue thereof it is hereby adjudged and decreed that the order of the Court of the First Instance of _________Manila__________, dated the__________7th______________ day of __________January_________, nineteen hundred and ___________thirty-three____________, and from which the above-entitled appeal was taken, be, and the same is hereby, affirmed with costs of this instance against the defendant-appellant.

It is further ordered that __________theappellee__________ recover from __________the appellant__________ the sum of P__40.00__, as costs.

Want an analysis of this document?

Ask ASG Legal AI to summarize it, compare it with other rulings, or explain how it applies to your situation — it researches from this same library.