SEVERINO MANOTOK IV, G.R. Nos. 162335 & 162605
FROILAN M. MANOTOK,
FERNANDO
M. MANOTOK,
FAUSTO
M. MANOTOK III,
MARIA
MAMERTA M. MANOTOK, Present:
PATRICIA
L. TIONGSON, PACITA
L.
GO, ROBERTO LAPERAL III,
MICHAEL
MARSHALL V. MANOTOK,
MARY
ANN V. MANOTOK, PUNO,
C.J.
FELISA
MYLENE V. MANOTOK, QUISUMBING,
IGNACIO V. MANOTOK, JR., YNARES-SANTIAGO,
MILAGROS V. MANOTOK, CARPIO,
SEVERINO MANOTOK III, ROSA R. AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ,
MANOTOK, MIGUEL A.B. SISON,
GEORGE M. BOCANEGRA, MA. CARPIO
MORALES,
CRISTINA E. SISON, PHILIPP L. AZCUNA,
MANOTOK, JOSE CLEMENTE L. TINGA,
MANOTOK, RAMON SEVERINO L. CHICO-NAZARIO,
MANOTOK, THELMA R. MANOTOK VELASCO, JR.,
JOSE MARIA MANOTOK, JESUS JUDE NACHURA,
MANOTOK, JR., and MA. THERESA L. LEONARDO DE CASTRO,
MANOTOK, represented by their BRION, and
Attorney-in-fact,
Petitioners,
-
versus -
HEIRS OF HOMER L. BARQUE, Promulgated:
represented by TERESITA BARQUE-
HERNANDEZ,
Respondents. February 13, 2009
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
x
R E S O L U
T I O N
Tinga, J.:
This treats of respondents’ Omnibus
Motion dated
Respondents
convey therein that the Court’s Resolution dated 18 December 2008 did not
obtain the requisite number of votes for its adoption, citing in particular the
Separate Concurring Opinion of Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio, which was
joined by Associate Justice Conchita Carpio Morales, and the Separate Opinion
filed by Associate Justice Renato C. Corona.
It would be recalled that the Resolution was penned by Associate Justice
Dante O. Tinga, who was joined without qualification by four (4) other Justices
namely: Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno;
and Associate Justices Alicia Austria-Martinez, Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. and
Arturo D. Brion.
Associate
Justice Carpio’s opinion is labeled “Separate Concurring Opinion.” A “concurring opinion” has been defined as
“[a] separate opinion delivered by one or more judges which agrees with the
decision of the majority of the court but offering its own reason for reaching
that decision.”[1] Indeed,
the tenor of Associate Justice Carpio’s opinion, as well as that of Associate Justice
Corona, reflects their agreement with the action taken by the Court. In addition, it can be gleaned from the
Resolution that Associate Justice Carpio Morales signed the same
with the statement:
“I also concur
with J. Carpio’s
Separate Opinion.”[2] It
is evident that by the use of “also,” Associate Justice Carpio Morales
manifested that she had concurred in the Resolution penned by Justice Tinga and
joined the other members of the Court who were of the same persuasion as regards
the Resolution.
Likewise
notable is the fact that Justice Corona’s Separate Opinion reaches the same
conclusions and substantially favors the same relief granted by the Court. He concludes that the
To
dispel whatever misgiving, if any there be, as to whether the Resolution dated
18 December 2008 was adopted by a majority of the members of the Court en banc, the Court through this
Resolution attests that eight (8) Justices have affirmed their vote in favor of
the relief extended in the Resolution dated December 18, 2008, to wit:
WHEREFORE, the Decision
dated
The instant cases are hereby REMANDED to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings in accordance with this Resolution. The Court of Appeals is directed to raffle these remanded cases immediately upon receipt of this Resolution.
This Resolution is immediately executory.
The
other arguments raised in the Omnibus Motion are bereft of merit and are not
cause for us to set aside the
With
respect to arguments that raise factual issues concerning the validity of the
Barque or Manotok titles, the same can be duly brought before the Court of
Appeals to which the cases have been remanded for further reception of
evidence.
WHEREFORE, the OMNIBUS MOTION is DENIED with
FINALITY.
SO ORDERED.
DANTE O. TINGA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
|
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING Associate
Justice |
CONSUELO YNARES-SANTIAGO Associate Justice |
|
ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate
Justice |
MA. ALICIA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ Associate Justice |
|
RENATO C. CORONA Associate
Justice |
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES Associate Justice |
|
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA Associate
Justice |
MINITA V. CHICO-NAZARIO Associate Justice |
|
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate
Justice |
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate Justice |
|
TERESITA J. LEONARDO DE
CASTRO Associate
Justice |
ARTURO D. BRION Associate
Justice |
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
C
E R T I F I C A T I O N
Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13
of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above Resolution
were reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the
opinion of the Court.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice