Scribd
Upload
143 views1 page

Arangco Vs Baloso

Vicente Abanño mortgaged land he owned with his wife Soledad to Gloria Baloso in 1946 and 1964 to secure loans. In 1966, Vicente's four children with Soledad and his widow filed a case to redeem the land, claiming the total owed was P2,600. The court ruled the appeal could not succeed because there was no violation of applicable legal norms raised. It reminded counsel to temper clients' inclinations that go against legal ethics and their duty to the judiciary.

Uploaded by

Jairus Lacaba
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
143 views1 page

Arangco Vs Baloso

Vicente Abanño mortgaged land he owned with his wife Soledad to Gloria Baloso in 1946 and 1964 to secure loans. In 1966, Vicente's four children with Soledad and his widow filed a case to redeem the land, claiming the total owed was P2,600. The court ruled the appeal could not succeed because there was no violation of applicable legal norms raised. It reminded counsel to temper clients' inclinations that go against legal ethics and their duty to the judiciary.

Uploaded by

Jairus Lacaba
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Arangco vs.

Baloso

G.R. No. L-28617

Facts:

This is a petition to appeal. If there is a violation of the applicable legal norm, the appeal
then cannot prosper.

Vicente Abanñ o was married to Soledad Arangco. Vicente has (four) children with Soledad
namely: Laurente, Jorge, Fatima and Gracita. Vicente has (three) children with Anacorita
Andes namely: Calixto, Jocelyn and Soriano after his marriage to Soledad. In 1946, Soledad
had been confine in National Mental Hospital. On May 1946, Vincente mortgaged a parcel of
land to Gloria Baloso for P 800.00 which is Vicente and Soledad acquire after their
marriage. On July 24, 1964, another mortgage was executed by Vicente where the
consideration was raised to P1, 200.00; another mortgage was executed by Laurente Abanñ o
with the conformity of Leonor Abanñ o for P1, 800.00. On June 16, 1966, Vicente’s four
children and his widow file an action to redeem the land from the defendant. Defendant
insists that the total sum is P2, 600.00 because the plaintiffs took a total P800.00 from her
through all the year of 1965. At that time, Leonor was not yet appointed guardian of the
minor plaintiffs and that Jorge, Fatima and Gracita were then minors.

Issue:

Whether or not litigants raise a question of law that is not applicable to legal norms

Ruling:

No. If there is a violation of the applicable legal norm, the appeal then cannot prosper.
Counsel, if faithful to the command of legal ethics insofar as their duty to the judiciary is
concerned, would do well to temper such inclination on the part of clients.

As set forth at the outset, this appeal is doomed to futility.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy