[ G. R. No. 41003. August 18, 1934 ]
[ G. R. No. 41003. August 18, 1934 ]
G. R. No. 41003
[ G. R. No. 41003. August 18, 1934 ]
MARIA DE MORETA AND PAULINO M. SAMPEDRO, PLAINTIFFS AND APPELLEES, VS. THE MUNICIPALITY OF LAS PIÑAS, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
V. ALBERT, CLERK, SUPREME COURT, P.I.
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 ________2nd________day of ________August________, 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 __________Rizal_________, dated the _________6th__________ day of __________September_________, nineteen hundred and ___________thirty-three____________, and from which the above-entitled appeal was taken, be, and the same is hereby, affirmed with costs against the appellant.
It is further ordered that __________the appellees__________recover from __________the appellant__________the sum of P__40.00__, as costs.
More in SC Decisions
- [ A.M. No. 145-CFI. June 11, 1975 ](159-A Phil. 560; 71 OG 7145 (October 22, 1975))
- [ G.R. No. L-39373. September 30, 1974 ](158 Phil. 368; 71 OG 1257 (March, 1975))
- [ G.R. No. 173308. June 25, 2008 ](578 Phil. 314)
- A.C. No. 8243, July 24, 2009
- [ G.R. No. 161431. October 13, 2010 ](647 Phil. 350)
- [ A.M. No. P-98-1276. September 25, 1998 ](357 Phil. 79)
- [ G. R. No. 47456. April 08, 1941 ]
- [ G.R. No. 222637. April 20, 2022 ](922 Phil. 588; 121 OG No. 7, 1575 (February 17, 2025))
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.