Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
in the Official Gazette is not a sine qua general applicability; [3] decisions or
laws where the laws themselves provide Court and the Court of Appeals as may
for their own effectivity dates. It is thus be deemed by said courts of sufficient
effect, publication in the Official Gazette law; and [5] such documents or classes
The foregoing provision envisages a On the last day of the fifteen-day period
complaint filed against an entity which to file an appeal, petitioners filed a
has committed usury, for the recovery of motion for extension of time to file a
the usurious interest paid. In that case, motion for reconsideration, which was
if the entity sued shall not file its answer eventually denied by the appellate court.
under oath denying the allegation of An MR is also denied.
usury, the defendant shall be deemed to
No. CA correctly applied the rule laid rule for their failure to file a motion for
Beginning one month after the the Habaluyas decision in the Official
promulgation of this Resolution, the rule Gazette as of the time the subject
shall be strictly enforced that no motion decision of the Court of Appeals was
In the instant case, however, petitioners' issues have been clarified, consistently
motion for extension of time was filed on reiterated, and published in the advance
September 9, 1987, more than a year reports of Supreme Court decisions (G.
after the expiration of the grace period R. s) and in such publications as the
illegal. This fact, coupled with the urgent In January 1995, Abunado filed an
annulment case against Arceo. In May
tenor for its execution constrains one to 1995, Arceo filed a bigamy case against
act swiftly without question. Records Abunado. Both cases proceeded
simultaneously and independently in
show that the Sandiganbayan actively different courts.
took part in the questioning of a defense In 1999, the marriage between Arceo
witness and of the accused themselves. and Abunado was annulled. In 2001,
Abunado was convicted by the trial court
The questions of the court were in the for bigamy.
nature of cross examinations Abunado now questions the judgment of
conviction against him as he alleged that
characteristic of confrontation, probing
the annulment case he filed
and insinuation. Tabuena and Peralta against Arceo was a prejudicial
question to the bigamy case filed against
may not have raised the issue as an
him by Arceo. Hence, the proceedings
error, there is nevertheless no in the bigamy case should have been
suspended during the pendency of the
impediment for the court to consider
annulment case.
FACTS: This is a Petition for certiorari ISSUE: Whether or not the Nevada
and Prohibition, wherein petitioner Alice divorce decree is binding to the
Reyes Van Dorn seeks to set aside the petitioner
Orders issued by respondent Judge,
which denied her Motion to Dismiss, and RULING: Yes. The divorce in Nevada
released private respondent from the