Frivaldo v.

COMELEC
G.R. No. 120295, June 28, 1996.
Facts:
Juan G. Frivaldo unquestionably obtained the highest number of votes in
three successive elections but he was twice declared to be disqualified to
hold such office due to his alien citizenship, and he now claims to have reassumed his lost Philippine citizenship thru repatriation.
Issues:
1. Was the repatriation of Frivaldo valid?
(Secondary Issues
)Who should be declared the rightful governor of Sorsogon? Should
it be Frivaldo who is said to be an alien, Lee who got the second mostnumber
of votes or Vice- Governor Deri as the rules on political succession states?
Held:
Frivaldos repatriation is valid and it was
given a retroactiveeffect. He is also allowed to take office for he got the
popular supportas is shown in the ballots.

Gregorio v. C.A.
G.R. No. L 22802, Nov. 29, 1968
Facts:
The petitioners father, then the appellant, was denied to
elevate to the CA the evidence presented in the two cases he was
appealing. His counsels next motion for reconsideration was then
denied.
Issues:
Can a procedural law have a retroactive effect? Are there solutions made by
the CA valid?
Held:
The writ of certiorari is granted annulling the resolutions of CA denying
the motion for reconsideration. The writ of mandamus is granted to compel
CA to elevate to it the evidence presented at the trial before the Court of
First Instance in Bulacan.
Notes:
Penal laws shall be applied retroactively if such application is favorable to the
accused even if he is already serving a sentence unless she is a habitual
deliveryman
Aruego v. CA254 SCRA 711
Facts:
The late Jose M. Aruego Sr., a married man, had an amorous relationship with
Luz M. Fabian for 23 years. They had two children out of it, Antonia and
Evelyn.
Issues:
Can the two be called illegitimate children?
Held:
Antonia was proclaimed an illegitimate child and Evelyn wassaid not to be an
illegitimate child.

Cang v. CA
296 SCRA128
Facts:
Herbert Cang and Anna Marie Clavano were married in 73 and

begot 3 children. Later on Anna Marie found out that her husband
hadextramarital affair with Wilma Soco. Because of this, she filed forlegal
separation. They agreed that their children should receive amonthly support
of P1,000 and that Anna Marie can enter into anycontract or agreement
without the written consent of her husband.After this, Mr. Cang went abroad
filed a divorce case from her wifeand married an American woman. (Anna
Marie got custody of thechildren.) Eventually, they also divorced. While in the
US, he remitsmoney to his children in the Philippines.On 1987, the brother
and sister-in-law of Anna Marie filed foradoption of the 3 children. Anna Marie
consented this because shewas leaving the country and her brothers and
sisters have been helpingher raise the children since her husband already
lost his parental rightsfor not supporting their children.Upon learning about
this, Cang went back to the Philippines and filedan opposition and a
petition to reacquire custody of his children. Sincethe mother is already in
the US, the court ruled that the custody should be passed to whom she
relinquished it.
Issues:
Can minor children be legally adopted without the writtenconsent of a
natural parent on the ground that the latter has abandonedthem?
Held:
The petition for reconsideration of the father was granted andthe ruling of
the lower courts has been set aside. Thereby denying theadoption since the
court believes that who, by law and under the facts of the case, has not
abandoned them.

Francisco v. CA
299 SCRA 188
Facts:
Eusebio Francisco was married to Arte Guevarra, his secondwife, when they
acquired a sari-sari store and two houses and lots.Eventually, Eusebio got too
sick to administer these properties.During this time, his children in his first
marriage were able to find away on having him authorize Conchita, one of his
children, toadminister the two houses and lot.
Issues:
Arte petitioned that the administration of such properties be passed to her
but the lower courts denied this for the reason of lack ofevidence that these
properties were acquired during their marriage.The trial court ruled that the
properties were exclusively owned byEusebio.
Held:
The petition is denied and the administration of the property inquestion is
still given to the daughter of Eusebio