Arangco vs.

Baloso 49 scra 296 Facts:

This is a petition to appeal. If there is a violation of the applicable legal norm, the appeal then cannot prosper.
Vicente Abao was married to Soledad Arangco. Vicente has (four) children with Soledad namely: Laurente, Jorge, Fatima and Gracita. Vicente has (three) children with Anacorita Andes namely: Calixto, Jocelyn and Soriano after his marriage to Soledad. In 1946, Soledad had been confine in National Mental Hospital. On May 1946, Vincente mortgaged a parcel of land to Gloria Baloso for P 800.00 which is Vicente and Soledad acquire after their marriage. On July 24, 1964, another mortgage was executed by Vicente where the consideration was raised to P1, 200.00; another mortgage was executed by Laurente Abao with the conformity of Leonor Abao for P1, 800.00. On June 16, 1966, Vicentes four children and his widow file an action to redeem the land from the defendant. Defendant insists that the total sum is P2, 600.00 because the plaintiffs took a total P800.00 from her through all the year of 1965. At that time, Leonor was not yet appointed guardian of the minor plaintiffs and that Jorge, Fatima and Gracita were then minors.

Issue/s: Whether or not litigants raise a question of law that is not applicable to legal norms Ruling:
No. If there is a violation of the applicable legal norm, the appeal then cannot prosper. Counsel, if faithful to the command of legal ethics insofar as their duty to the judiciary is concerned, would do well to temper such inclination on the part of clients.
As set forth at the outset, this appeal is doomed to futility.