Supreme Court decision · Civil Law

Romualdo et al. v. Nolasco

G.R. No. 34978 · Promulgated April 5, 1932

In brief

This case is about the sufficiency of evidence in a real action where the judgment was affirmed but damages were omitted.

Sufficiency of Evidence, Judgment Affirmed, Damages Omitted

Related cases

G.R. No. 35276 Coloma v. De Guzman (Previous decision in Civil Law)
G.R. No. L-34301 Silorio v. Montenegro (Next decision in Civil Law)

Full text

[ G.R. No. 34978. April 05, 1932 ]

ROMUALDO ET AL. VS. NOLASCO, ADMINISTRATOR

D E C I S I O N

Real actions. Sufficiency of evidence; judgment affirmed; damages omitted.