Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 103 views

    Armando Lagon v. Dennis A. Velasco

    Uploaded by

    Ronnel Bulgado
    Lagon obtained a cash loan from Dizon but failed to repay it when the check bounced. Dizon sued Lagon for recovery. Judge Velasco ordered both parties to submit judicial affidavits with their evidence. Lagon argued this violated his due process rights. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the judicial affidavit rule helps organize proceedings and prepare defenses, without unduly burdening defendants. Procedural rules are meant to efficiently resolve cases while respecting parties' rights. The rule was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content

    Armando Lagon v. Dennis A. Velasco

    Uploaded by

    Ronnel Bulgado
    103 views1 page
    Lagon obtained a cash loan from Dizon but failed to repay it when the check bounced. Dizon sued Lagon for recovery. Judge Velasco ordered both parties to submit judicial affidavits with their evidence. Lagon argued this violated his due process rights. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the judicial affidavit rule helps organize proceedings and prepare defenses, without unduly burdening defendants. Procedural rules are meant to efficiently resolve cases while respecting parties' rights. The rule was upheld.

    Original Description:

    constitutional cases

    Original Title

    Armando Lagon v. Dennis a. Velasco

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Lagon obtained a cash loan from Dizon but failed to repay it when the check bounced. Dizon sued Lagon for recovery. Judge Velasco ordered both parties to submit judicial affidavits with their evidence. Lagon argued this violated his due process rights. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the judicial affidavit rule helps organize proceedings and prepare defenses, without unduly burdening defendants. Procedural rules are meant to efficiently resolve cases while respecting parties' rights. The rule was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    103 views1 page

    Armando Lagon v. Dennis A. Velasco

    Uploaded by

    Ronnel Bulgado
    Lagon obtained a cash loan from Dizon but failed to repay it when the check bounced. Dizon sued Lagon for recovery. Judge Velasco ordered both parties to submit judicial affidavits with their evidence. Lagon argued this violated his due process rights. The Supreme Court disagreed, finding the judicial affidavit rule helps organize proceedings and prepare defenses, without unduly burdening defendants. Procedural rules are meant to efficiently resolve cases while respecting parties' rights. The rule was upheld.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Armando Lagon V. Dennis A.

    Velasco
    GR No. 208424, Feb 14, 2018

    FACTS:
    Lagon obtained a cash loan from private respondent Dizon, in the amount of Php
    300,000.00. In payment thereof, Lagon issued PCIBank Check No. 0064914, postdated,
    in an equal amount. However, when Dizon presented the check for payment, it was
    dishonored for being Drawn Against Insufficient Funds. When Lagon demanded for
    payment, Dizon refused to pay. Then Dizon field a Complaint for Sum of Money,
    Damages and Attorney's Fees against Lagon.
    Judge Velasco issued the assailed Order requiring the parties to submit their respective
    judicial affidavits. Lagon filed a Motion for Partial Reconsideration requesting that he be
    allowed to submit the judicial affidavit of his witnesses after the plaintiff shall have
    adduced his evidence, but it was denied.
    Dissatisfied with the ruling, Lagon sought direct recourse to this Court by filing the
    instant Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Court.

    ISSUE:
    Whether or not Section 2 of the Judicial Affidavit Rule, which requires a defendant to
    adduce his testimony and that of his witnesses by judicial affidavits, is violative of
    procedural due process?

    HELD:
    No. This is necessary for the orderly administration of the proceeding before the courts. It
    must be remembered that in as early as the pre-trial conference, the defendant is already
    required to submit a pre-trial brief, where he is then tasked to state the number and names
    of his witnesses, as well as the substance of their testimonies; the issues to be tried and
    resolved; and the documents or exhibits to be presented and the purpose thereof. Thus,
    the defendant is already required in this early stage of the proceedings to formulate his
    defense and plan his strategy to counter the plaintiffs complaint. There is nothing too
    tedious or burdensome in requiring the submission of the judicial affidavit. In fact, this
    would even help the defendant in preparing his opposing arguments against the plaintiff.

    All told, the Court has always emphasized that procedural rules should be treated with
    utmost respect and due regard, since they are designed to facilitate the adjudication of
    cases to remedy the worsening problem of delay in the resolution of rival claims and in
    the administration of justice.

    You might also like