cases and articles

Surprisingly, I am starting to get the hang of reading my law books. It gets a little frustrating at times, but they are tolerable. I sure do hope my patience will improve after indulging myself into honing my reading skill. Speaking of reading, I took the liberty of downloading case files from the class yahoo group page for our constitutional 1 assignment, and boy, were those cases lengthy. I read about the Guingona vs. Carague case, it was about questioning the unconstitutionality of a certain general appropriations act provision, and how there was a political question that was proper for the congress and senate to address. Whether a certain sum be appropriated for national debt services or that an appropriation should only be alloted for the principal fees and other bank charges excluding the debt services. So far, that was what i understood.

Next up, was the Luna vs Court of Appeals case. This case is somewhat similar to the Daoang case or any child custody case for that matter. Clearly this case had that Renvoi/referring back principle going on, because it was tossed up from the lower court then elevated to the higher court, then eventually the SC would refer it back to the lower court ordering the latter to issue a writ of execution. Now this is where it gets really interesting. The child in question vented out on a private hearing when asked by the appointed psychologist about whether she likes to stay with her biological parents, wherein, the child desisted and told the doctor that her real parents are hurting her and pretending that they love here only because they want her[child] on their side. She insisted further that she would kill herself if she will be in custody with her biological parents. The judge addressed this issue like any mother or parent would have. The custody went to the guardian/grandparents. The SC initially contested that the lower court should have pushed through executing the order, but due to the child's statement it was a valid supervening cause sufficient to amending the ruling,I think it is also worthy of noting that the state may have acted upon the doctrine of parens patriae.