TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE , premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiffs, dismissing the complaint for lack of merit. As to defendant's counterclaim should be, as it is hereby dismissed as the plaintiffs should not be penalized for pursuing a claim which they believed to be actionable and tenable. SO DECIDED. [9] (Emphasis in the original) Aggrieved by the trial court's Decision, Antonio, Jr.
WHEREFORE , premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiffs, dismissing the complaint for lack of merit. As to defendant's counterclaim should be, as it is hereby dismissed as the plaintiffs should not be penalized for pursuing a claim which they believed to be actionable and tenable. SO DECIDED. [9] (Emphasis in the original) Aggrieved by the trial court's Decision, Antonio, Jr. and Rafael appealed to the CA. The CA Ruling In its October 12, 2020 Decision, the CA denied the Appeal of Antonio, Jr. and Rafael and affirmed the RTC ruling. Its dispositive portion reads as follows: WHEREFORE , the Appeal is hereby DENIED . The Decision dated [November 29, 2018] of the Regional Trial Court, Second Judicial Region, Aparri, Cagayan, Branch 09, in Civil Case No. II-5815, is AFFIRMED . SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 176841 - ANTHONY ORDUÑA, DENNIS ORDUÑA, AND ANTONITA ORDUÑA, VS. EDUARDO J. FUENTEBELLA, MARCOS S. CID, BENJAMIN F. CID, BERNARD G. BANTA, AND ARMANDO GABRIEL, JR..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 176841 -
CaseG.R. No. 160554 - FLORANTE VIDAD, SR., ARLENE VIDAD-ABSALON AND FLORANTE VIDAD, JR., VS. ELPIDIO TAYAMEN AND LAUREANA TAYAMEN.DECISION - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 160554 -
CaseG.R. No. 230307 - HEIRS OF WILFREDO C. BOTENES, V. MUNICIPALITY OF CARMEN, DAVAO, REPRESENTED BY MUNICIPAL MAYOR GONZALO O. CUARENTA, AND RURAL BANK OF PANABO (DAVAO), INC..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 230307 -