Most importantly, you can search for tires online safe and secure.
Sometimes the store sold 30 pieces to keep prices
low.

What host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host?
I wish my site loaded up as fast as yours lol

POSTED IN ONLINE COMMUNITY OF LAW
STUDENTS December 23, 2007

Hon. Isagani A. Cruz
Associate Justice (ret)
Supreme Court

Your Honor,

I read with great interest your December 16, 2007 column, “My Remembered Old Manila”, I felt somehow that the sequel will be entitled,my remembered Old Supreme Court. I read in your books the ratification cases, Salongga vs Pano, Ilagan vs Enrile;PDA PCA, ASSO,I was full of regret, not being a lawyer then, they were I thought missed opportunities. Be careful they say about what you wished for :

1. The Supreme Court has not taken definite action regarding my complaint against an OCAD employee (please see attached letters dated August 28, 2007 and November 9, 2007.

2. The Protest on the “Unsatisfactory” rating for the first rating period of 2006 remains unresolved (please see attached letter dated October 29, 2007)

3. A co-employee continuous to harass me despite the matter having been brought to the attention of the Honorable Chief Justice.

4. A moral issue needs to be resolved by the Supreme Court, whether or not the so called “November 9,2006 Decision” as a matter of fact exist?. The Supreme Court found meritorious reasons and reverses itself in the Maysilo estate case

If the “November 9, 2006 Decision”is finally found to be spurious, will its beneficiary, the present branch clerk of court/Protestee still have the right to hold to the position , will the present possessors of lot claimed under the spurious land titles , continue to enjoy the the fruits of what has been described in the news papers as a fraud or scam practiced upon the Supreme Court?

Our branch has the distinction of having one of its unresolved cases , the first of the Maysilo Estate cases, C-424, filed sometime in the 70s or was it in the 60s , two of our judges were dismissed from the service, and of course , the distinction shared by the whole of the judiciary, of having in its plantilla, ” the longest serving lawyer/Legal Researcher 2.

I am aware that there is no appeal from the decision of the Honorable Chairmen of the Divisions,even from one I suppose which simply says that judgment is rendered in favor of X against y , or one which is patently without basis in fact and in law.

Still I pray that I be furnished the “November 9, 2006 Decision”on the merits of my Protest .

It has been said that more than the purpose of appeal, a party needs to be assured that the judgment was reached through the process of legal reasoning.

Sincerely,

Had this been a hypothetical question in a subject in the law school,students might be tempted to think that,this is not as simple as it seems, Is the primary issue here “Is malicious intent an element of Plagiarism?…” is the absence of mal…icious intent established? is that a given fact? on the contrary, does malicious intent affect only the Gravity of the Plagiarism, to use ones work without attribution in a manner which is contrary to the obvious intent of the author demonstrates both Malicious Intent and Plagiarism. In administrative cases one maybe treated as qualifying the other, although strictly speaking it would be a multiple violation of any code of good conduct known to men, positivists might say, let the penalty for the graver offense instead be applied in its maximum period, this concept has also been applied in administrative cases, and because the penalties mostly allow it, in appropriate situations modifying circumstances are appreciated. So much for academic discussion.See More

SPONTANEOUS GENERATION (Posted in Online Community of Lawyers and Law Students) Affidavit of Loss That I am presently an employee of the Supreme Court stationed at Branch 120 of the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan as Court Legal Researcher . That as such employee,I am aware that I am entitled to an additional fringe benefit in the amount of 4,000 pesos,in addition to two other checks received by our office while I was on paternity leave.That this morning I was told by our Branch Clerk Atty. Shiela Cindy Masangque that she has already given me such check, Land Bank Check No# 95396 per available voucher. That contrary to the aforementioned declaration, I have not received, Land Bank Check No# 95396, and that the envelope supposedly containing three checks, which I tore and threw in the garbage can, contained only two checks. That since I am in dire need of money as my wife has given birth to our second child a couple of weeks back, I have resolved to shoulder the expense of reporting the loss of said check and working for its replacement. December 28,2006 HON. REYNATO S. PUNO Chief Justice Supreme Court Your Honor, In the morning of December 19, 2006, my additional fringe benefits represented by Land Bank Check Number 95396, in the amount of 4,000 pesos turned itself out in my “locked” drawer. Curiously, a volunteer witness, the by design, our almost Officer In Charge for life, recited repeatedly like a mantra , “Same envelop, same envelop…” shades of Ms. Mauritius, without the benefit of a prior examination. Oh I See!.Brings back to mind elementary science and the discredited theory of spontaneous generation, the example given was obviously for the purpose of easy recall, maggots turning out from a decomposing rat inside a locked cabinet. Mr. Benjamin Franklin on the other hand, made an astonishing discovery quite by accident, I made mine in the same fashion, my “locked” drawers are so only in a limited sense. there is a recognition in our statute books as early, I believe as the first day of January nineteen hundred and thirty two of “locked” drawers not being so, when mere possession of pick locks was criminalized.In my search for the once upon a time missing check, I carried the scientific method , one step further,before the lights went out , I diligently and methodically searched my 18 x 18 x 4 inches drawer; turning the same inside out, upside down, over and over.Your Honor, even as the check, Voila!!! materialized into existence, i was informed that the land Bank has been alarmed about its impaired negotiability. It is presently in my safekeeping pending instructions from the checks and disbursements office and the issuance of the replacement check, mind not the expense attendant to its recovery. The prompt action on the matter will be a great relief. The recovery of the missing check does not in anyway guarantee the non recurrence of the violation of the sanctity of the temples of justice, but an investigation of the incident might be enough to send a clear message to those who might be minded to impose upon us an ersatz system, that justice will be served somehow ,someway in its course.The infidelity may of course be dismissed as trivial , but such a view finds no jurisprudential support, on the contrary,such a check before its delivery to the proper payee, are considered public funds. Dishonesty perse is a grave offense, more so whenever public funds are involved.May I digress a bit to ask if I maybe furnish please, the Supreme Court’s most tightly guarded classified document, a copy of the November 9, 2006 Decision by the Honorable Chairmen of the Divisions , denying my Protest to the appointment of the branch clerk. I heard somebody mockingly said, ‘TATANDA NG LEGAL RESEARCHER YANG ABOGADO NA YAN” or words to that effect, in the English language,that would roughly be “THE LONGEST SERVING LAWYER/LEGAL RESEARCHER 2”, something I ignored, thinking that the thug was asked to get my goat, anticipating perhaps a reaction on my part that will have an adverse effect on my psycho-social attribute or personality trait, which they hope to utilize as a ground for the denial of my Protest. “THE LONGEST SERVING LAWYER/LEGAL RESEARCHER 2”, an indictment of the system, or a compliment?,time will tell , meanwhile another year is added to this personal milestone or a record breaking feat. Hoping for your prompt and favorable action. respectfully, Atty. Jose B. Flores Legal Researcher 2 RTC Br 120 Kalookan

LOOKING THE OTHER WAY (posted on ONLINE COMMUNITY OF LAWYERS AND LAW STUDENTS) August 28, 2007 Hon. Reynato S. Puno Chief Justice Supreme Court Your Honor, I received a copy of your Endorsement dated 10 August 2007, unfortunately, it is a case of too little too late, because in the afternoon of that fateful day, 7th of August 2007, the Supreme Court official concerned allowed me to photocopy the payroll for the latter part of July. IT WAS WITH HER ALL THE TIME this after she made me realized that the wages of loosing a pay slip, she had to tell me that the payroll is already in our office in Caloocan, that I have to photocopy the same. I braved the rain and went back to Caloocan to do exactly as she instructed me to do. The whether was uncooperative, the rain was punishing. I ran to the ATM five blocks away, to withdraw a little from my barely maintaining balance, for my fare. I did say Good Morning, to the said Supreme Court official, the conventional thinking was moods, are affected by the whether, global warming proves the opposite, the savants are right. Arriving at the Supreme Court, I presented the copy of the payroll. My loan application was again rejected, the reason she said was that payroll for the latter part of July is what I should have photocopied. I politely reasoned that she did not tell me so, she rationalized that I did not asked her so. I asked for forgiveness, I read her right, she pulled opened her drawer, then took out the payroll which I needed to photocopy, nonchalantly gave it to me, outside, the whether was uncooperative, the rain was punishing. The list of officials and employees of the Judiciary I had not so pleasant dealings with, grows longer. I swear I have nothing against them, nor should they have anything against me. Are we all victims of manipulation? Last August 22, somebody, GOD Bless his soul, again poured garbage on my table. I have brought in the past, this matter of vandalizing court properties and the fact that somebody places the remarks, “GAGO”, “BOBO TALAGA” across my name in the logbook, before the Honorable Judges, these acts to my mind are parts of a plan or scheme to persecute me and defeat my promotion. If I remember it right, it was ruled as a non-issue. The Court Administrator, also was a recipient of my numerous pleas, his action thereon was, too insignificant to remember. Ironically in one instance, the Honorable Judge only heard the Court Aide after the latter lowered his voice, exhausted and frustrated, having mouthed a litany of invectives against me even went into the motion of attacking me with a knife. Had the Branch Clerk arrived seconds earlier, she could have witnessed the pathetic sight. Incidentally, the Court Aide is about 60 years old, four feet something tall, and heavy around the waist, his Good Morning towel half tucked carefully in his back pocket like a police detective on a mini raid. Intuitive this Branch Clerk is, as if on cue she stepped in and asked, “MAY NAGBUGBUGAN BA? PAG MAY NAGBUGBUGAN BAYAAN NYO LANG WAG NYONG AAWATIN!” I think that she did not mean it. Maybe it has just her favorite expression, because she never fails to asked so, whenever somebody places wet toilet rug on my seat, or pours garbage on my table, if only she knows. This is not self serving nor I am being hypocritical, it is my position that victims of oppression or harassment should at least be given some kind of protection, similar to those given to the victims of political repression; enforced disappearance and like those two former CAFGUs under the protective orders of the Supreme Court. Lucky them. The Supreme Court is correct in thumbing down the improper exercise of executive privileges; like the continuous refusal to confront issues, or to answer questions, or the unjust curtailment of liberties, like the exercise of profession. I wish the Supreme Court comes up with a Resolution exempting lawyers who are Court Legal Researchers 2, from complying with MCLE (please see attached Letter to the Chief Justice) or finally confirm or deny the existence of the “November 9, 2006 Decision” denying my Protest to the Appointment of the Branch Clerk. Invitat culpam qui delictum praeterit. Respectfully, Atty. Jose B. Flores Court Legal Researcher 2 RTC Branch 120 Kalookan City.