Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 262 views

    Tijing Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Repolyo Ket Cabbage
    Edgardo Tijing Jr. was taken by Angelita when he was four months old while under the care of his mother Bienvenida. Four years later, Bienvenida discovered Edgardo Jr., now named John Thomas Lopez, with Angelita after the death of Angelita's common-law husband Tomas Lopez. Bienvenida filed a petition for habeas corpus to regain custody of her son. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bienvenida, finding that the evidence showed John Thomas Lopez was indeed Edgardo Tijing Jr. based on Angelita's inability to have children, doubts about Tomas Lopez being the father, and similarities between Bienvenida and the child. The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Tijing Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Repolyo Ket Cabbage
    262 views1 page
    Edgardo Tijing Jr. was taken by Angelita when he was four months old while under the care of his mother Bienvenida. Four years later, Bienvenida discovered Edgardo Jr., now named John Thomas Lopez, with Angelita after the death of Angelita's common-law husband Tomas Lopez. Bienvenida filed a petition for habeas corpus to regain custody of her son. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bienvenida, finding that the evidence showed John Thomas Lopez was indeed Edgardo Tijing Jr. based on Angelita's inability to have children, doubts about Tomas Lopez being the father, and similarities between Bienvenida and the child. The

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    Tijing vs CA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Edgardo Tijing Jr. was taken by Angelita when he was four months old while under the care of his mother Bienvenida. Four years later, Bienvenida discovered Edgardo Jr., now named John Thomas Lopez, with Angelita after the death of Angelita's common-law husband Tomas Lopez. Bienvenida filed a petition for habeas corpus to regain custody of her son. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bienvenida, finding that the evidence showed John Thomas Lopez was indeed Edgardo Tijing Jr. based on Angelita's inability to have children, doubts about Tomas Lopez being the father, and similarities between Bienvenida and the child. The

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    262 views1 page

    Tijing Vs CA

    Uploaded by

    Repolyo Ket Cabbage
    Edgardo Tijing Jr. was taken by Angelita when he was four months old while under the care of his mother Bienvenida. Four years later, Bienvenida discovered Edgardo Jr., now named John Thomas Lopez, with Angelita after the death of Angelita's common-law husband Tomas Lopez. Bienvenida filed a petition for habeas corpus to regain custody of her son. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Bienvenida, finding that the evidence showed John Thomas Lopez was indeed Edgardo Tijing Jr. based on Angelita's inability to have children, doubts about Tomas Lopez being the father, and similarities between Bienvenida and the child. The

    Copyright:

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

    Tijing vs CA

    (GR No. 125901, March 8, 2001)

    Facts: The case is a petition for habeas corpus of Edgardo Tijing Jr, the child of
    petitioners, Edgardo Tijing and Bienvenida Tijing. In August 1989, Bienvenida left her
    four-month old son under the care of Angelita, whom Bienvenida serves as a
    laundrywoman, to do some marketing. Bienvenida returned from the market and found
    out that Angelita and Edgardo Jr. was gone. Bienvenida went to Angelita’s house and
    discovered that the latter moved to another place. Bienvenida complained to the
    barangay chairman and also to the police for assistance. Four years later, Bienvenida,
    upon knowing the death of the common-law husband, Tomas Lopez, lost no time and
    went to Hagonoy, Bulacan and that was the time she saw her son Edgardo Jr who was
    then named John Thomas Lopez. Angelita refused to return her boy. Petitioners filed
    their petition for habeas corpus.

    Issue: Whether Edgardo Tijing Jr. and John Thomas Lopez are one and the same
    person and is the son of the petitioners?

    Held: A close scrutiny of the records of this case reveals that the evidence presented by
    Bienvenida is sufficient to establish that John Thomas Lopez is actually the missing son,
    Edgardo Tijing Jr. First, there is evidence that Angelita could no longer bear children.
    Second, there is strong evidence that Tomas Lopez is no longer capable of siring a son.
    Third, we find unusual the fact that the birth certificate of John Thomas Lopez was filed
    by Tomas Lopez instead of the midwife, in which attending physician or midwife in
    attendance should cause the registration of such birth and in default of the latter, the
    parent register the birth of his child. This false entry puts to doubt the other data in said
    birth certificate. Fourth, the trial court observes that the child and Bienvenida had strong
    similarities in their faces, eyes, eyebrows and head shapes. Fifth, Lourdes Velasques
    testified that she assisted in Bienvenida’s giving birth to Edgardo Jr. at her clinic. Unlike
    respondent, she presented clinical records consisting of a logbook, discharge order and
    the signatures of petitioners.

    All these considered, we are constrained to rule that subject minor is indeed the son of
    petitioners. The writ of habeas corpus is proper to regain custody of said child.

    Parentage will still be resolved using conventional methods unless we adopt the modern
    and scientific ways available. Though it is not necessary in this case to resort DNA
    testing, in future it would be useful to all concerned in the prompt resolution of
    parentage and identity issues.

    Wherefore, the instant petition is GRANTED. The assailed decision of the Court of
    Appeals is REVERSED.

    You might also like