Blog

GR 15756 (February, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court’s exclusion of Exhibit C was a clear error, as the testimony of the legitimate son, Generoso de Gala, […]

GR 16215 (February, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court correctly prioritizes vested rights under the former law, the Leyes de Toro, over the procedural limitations of the […]

Tionko; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court’s reasoning in In re Tionko correctly identifies a breach of the attorney’s duty of diligence and communication, grounding its […]

Horrilleno; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court’s reasoning in In re Impeachment of Honorable Antonio Horrilleno correctly anchors its analysis in the statutory standard for judicial […]

GR 18624; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court correctly anchors its denial of the writ on the established jurisdictional scope of certiorari, distinguishing it from a […]

GR 18664; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe Court correctly denied the mandamus, as the petitioner failed to establish a ministerial duty on the part of the […]

GR 18699; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court’s issuance of the subpoena duces tecum was a proper exercise of its inherent power to compel the production […]

GR 18402; (March, 1922) (CRITIQUE)__________________________________________________________________THE AI-ASSISTED CRITIQUEThe court’s reliance on Section 174 of the Code of Civil Procedure to justify the appointment of a receiver is […]