Yahoo Web Search

Search results

1. lawphil.netThe Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.

   lawphil.net

   • Cached

   The court found that the respondent was guilty of violating Canon 13, Rule Case 13.02, and Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, Section 3, 7 and 8 of Canon 1, Sections 1 and 2 of Canon 2.

   • About Us

     The Lawphil Project - About Us ... Arellano Law Foundation...

   • 1987 Philippine Constitution

     The LawPhil Project provides the full text of the 1987...

   • Archives of Bar Questions

     Philippine Jurisprudence - Bar Questionaires Archive. BAR...

     Bar Questions 2007

     · Criminal Law

     · Commercial Law

     · Labor Law & Social Legislation

     · Bar Examination Questionnaire for Civil Law

     · Legal Ethics & Practical Exercises

   • Acts

     The Lawphil Project. ACTS - PHILIPPINE STATUTES. 1972; ......

     Act No. 3815

     · Republic Acts

   • Supreme Court

     The Lawphil Project. Supreme Court of the Philippines....

     Jurisprudence

     · SC

     · Rules of Court

     · Civil Procedure

     · Special Proceedings

     · B.P. 129

   • Administrative Agencie

     Government Agencies. Office of the President; Office of the...

     Office of The President

     · Department of Labor and Employment

2. lawphil.net › judjuris › judjurisPhilippine Jurisprudence - The LawPhil Project

   lawphil.net › judjuris › judjuris

   • Cached

   Click on the year to read the full text of the decision.

3. lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2020G.R. No. 238298 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2020

   • Cached

   This Petition for Review on Certiorari2 under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeks to reverse the Resolution3 dated February 6, 2018 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP No. 142093, which denied Joel F. Latogan's (petitioner) Omnibus Motion for Reconsideration and affirmed its previous Resolution4 dated September 29, 2015, which denied due ...

4. lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2019G.R. No. 237738 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2019

   • Cached

   G.R. No. 237738. FILOMENA L. VILLANUEVA, Petitioner. vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent. D E C I S I O N. PERLAS-BERNABE, J.: Before this Court is a petition for review on certiorari 1 seeking to annul the Decision 2 dated November 3, 2017 of the Sandiganbayan (SB) in SB-11-A/R/0002 which affirmed the Resolution 3 dated November 22, 2007 ...

5. lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2019G.R. No. 230642 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2019

   • Cached

   Substantively, they contend that R.A. No. 7662, specifically Section 3(a)(2)43 on the objective of legal education to increase awareness among members of the legal profession, Section 7(e) on law admission, 7(g)44 on law practice internship, and 7(h) on adopting a system of continuing legal education, and the declaration of policy on continuing ...

6. lawphil.net › courts › supremeA.M. No. 01-7-01-SC - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net › courts › supreme

   • Cached

   Jul 1, 2001 · Manila. A.M. No. 01-7-01-SC July 17, 2001. RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE. Acting on the Memorandum dated 18 June 2001 of the Committee on the Revision of the Rules of Court to Draft the Rules on E-Commerce Law [R.A. No. 8792] submitting the Rules on Electronic Evidence for this Court's consideration and approval, the Court Resolved to APPROVED ...

7. People also ask

   Was the respondent guilty of violating canon 13 rule case 1302?

   • The court found that the respondent was guilty of violating Canon 13, Rule Case 13.02, and Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, Section 3, 7 and 8 of Canon 1, Sections 1 and 2 of Canon 2.

   The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc

   lawphil.net/

   See all results for this question

   What is the Supreme Court of the Philippines?

   • As early as Manila Electric Co. v. Pasay Transportation Co., 162 the Court already stressed: The Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands represents one of the three divisions of power in our government. It is judicial power and judicial power only which is exercised by the Supreme Court.

   G.R. No. 230642 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/sep2019/gr_230642_2019.html

   See all results for this question

   Are certiorari and prohibition proper to assail the constitutionality of Ra 7662?

   • Procedurally, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), representing the LEB, argues that certiorari and prohibition are not proper to assail the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7662 either under the traditional or expanded concept of judicial power.

   G.R. No. 230642 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/sep2019/gr_230642_2019.html

   See all results for this question

   Does section 7(E) of Ra 7662 violate the law school's academic freedom?

   • Thus, they argue that Section 7 (e) of R.A. No. 7662 and the PhiLSAT violate the law school's academic freedom.

   G.R. No. 230642 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2019/sep2019/gr_230642_2019.html

   See all results for this question

8. lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2021G.R. No. 215370 - The Lawphil Project

   lawphil.net › judjuris › juri2021

   • Cached

   EN BANC. [ G.R. No. 215370. November 09, 2021 ] RICHELLE BUSQUE ORDOÑA, PETITIONER, VS. THE LOCAL CIVIL REGISTRAR OF PASIG CITY AND ALLAN D. FULGUERAS, RESPONDENTS. D E C I S I O N. INTING, J.: This is a Petition 1 for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking to annul the Decision 2 dated April 10, 2014 and the ...