Professional Documents
Culture Documents
*
NATIVIDAD C. CRUZ and BENJAMIN DELA CRUZ,
petitioners, vs. PANDACAN HIKERS CLUB, INC.,
represented by its President, PRISCILA ILAO, respondent.
_______________
* THIRD DIVISION.
386
387
388
389
PERALTA, J.:
Before the Court is a petition for review on certiorari
under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking to annul and
set aside the Court of Appeals Decision1 dated March 31,
2008 in C.A.-G.R. S.P. No. 104474. The appellate court
reversed and set aside the earlier decision of the Office of
the Ombudsman dismissing the complaint filed against
petitioners.
Below are the facts of the case.
Petitioner Natividad C. Cruz (Cruz) was Punong
Barangay or Chairperson of Barangay 848, Zone 92, City of
Manila.2 On November 10, 2006, around five oclock in the
afternoon, and along Central Street, Pandacan, Manila,
within the vicinity of her barangay, she allegedly
confronted persons playing basketball with the following
statements:
_______________
390
_______________
391
392
_______________
393
_______________
18 Id., at p. 209.
19 Id.
20 Id., at pp. 41-43.
21 Id., at p. 44.
22 Id., at p. 45.
23 Id., at pp. 10-13.
394
_______________
24 Id., at p. 23.
25 Tolentino v. Loyola, 670 Phil. 50, 62; 654 SCRA 420, 432 (2011).
26 Office of the Ombudsman v. Bernardo, G.R. No. 181598, March 6,
2013, 692 SCRA 557, 567.
27 Largo v. Court of Appeals, 563 Phil. 293, 305; 537 SCRA 721, 733
(2007).
28 Id.; Avenido v. Civil Service Commission, 576 Phil. 654, 662; 553
SCRA 711, 720-721 (2008).
29 National Power Corporation v. Olandesca, 633 Phil. 278, 291; 619
SCRA 264, 276 (2010).
395
_______________
396
_______________
397
_______________
37 Rana v. Wong, supra note 32, citing Salao v. Santos, 67 Phil. 547,
550-551 (1939).
38 City of Manila v. Laguio, Jr., 495 Phil. 289, 334; 455 SCRA 308, 356
(2005); Lucena Grand Central Terminal, Inc. v. JAC Liner, Inc., 492 Phil.
314, 327; 452 SCRA 174, 191 (2005).
39 Ynot v. Intermediate Appellate Court, 232 Phil. 615, 625; 148 SCRA
659, 669 (1987).
40 Estate of Gregoria Francisco v. Court of Appeals, 276 Phil. 649, 655;
199 SCRA 595, 601 (1991).
398
_______________
41 Lucena Grand Central Terminal, Inc. v. JAC Liner, Inc., supra note
38.
399
_______________
400
_______________
401
_______________
48 Emphasis supplied.
402
_______________
403