Comments on: SC is not a trier of facts – Sigaw ng Bayan http://attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/ Legal thoughts and beyond. The personal blog of Atty. Fred Pamaos Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:08:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: New writer at the Forum; Alex Magno is "Off-line" at Atty-at-Work http://attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/comment-page-1/#comment-4178 New writer at the Forum; Alex Magno is "Off-line" at Atty-at-Work Sun, 17 Jun 2007 04:53:06 +0000 http://www.attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/#comment-4178 [...] - that the SC is not a trier of facts - is the same complaint of Atty. Lambino. There’s a previous discussion in this site that the SC, in certain cases (like the “resignation” of former President [...] [...] – that the SC is not a trier of facts – is the same complaint of Atty. Lambino. There’s a previous discussion in this site that the SC, in certain cases (like the “resignation” of former President [...]

Thumb up Thumb down 0

]]> By: AttyatWork http://attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/comment-page-1/#comment-33 AttyatWork Mon, 30 Oct 2006 02:12:07 +0000 http://www.attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/#comment-33 Very well said, Atty Erwin, and as you said, vigilance is the key =) Very well said, Atty Erwin, and as you said, vigilance is the key =)

Thumb up Thumb down 0

]]> By: the bystander http://attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/comment-page-1/#comment-25 the bystander Sun, 29 Oct 2006 04:49:17 +0000 http://www.attyatwork.com/sc-is-not-trier-of-facts-sigaw-ng-bayan/#comment-25 hello atty, i fully subscribe to your analysis that the SC, in its discretion, may tackle factual questions especially so when the present case involves an issue of transcendental importance. in fact, as you correctly observed, this is not without precedent. the very existence and legitimacy of the arroyo government itself when it took over the administration from erap circa 2001 was founded upon that infamous ruling in <i>estrada vs desierto</i>. funny that lambino now cries foul over what seems to be the SC's indignation on his bogus initiative. but as you said, his tantrums are understandable. hello atty,

i fully subscribe to your analysis that the SC, in its discretion, may tackle factual questions especially so when the present case involves an issue of transcendental importance. in fact, as you correctly observed, this is not without precedent. the very existence and legitimacy of the arroyo government itself when it took over the administration from erap circa 2001 was founded upon that infamous ruling in estrada vs desierto. funny that lambino now cries foul over what seems to be the SC’s indignation on his bogus initiative. but as you said, his tantrums are understandable.

Thumb up Thumb down 0

]]>