The Supreme Court ruled that when there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or conclusion of a decision and the opinion contained in the text, the dispositive portion prevails. An order of execution is based on the disposition of the decision, not the body of text. The case involved a conflict between the conclusion and text of a Court of Appeals decision regarding a petitioner's claim.
The Supreme Court ruled that when there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or conclusion of a decision and the opinion contained in the text, the dispositive portion prevails. An order of execution is based on the disposition of the decision, not the body of text. The case involved a conflict between the conclusion and text of a Court of Appeals decision regarding a petitioner's claim.
The Supreme Court ruled that when there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or conclusion of a decision and the opinion contained in the text, the dispositive portion prevails. An order of execution is based on the disposition of the decision, not the body of text. The case involved a conflict between the conclusion and text of a Court of Appeals decision regarding a petitioner's claim.
vs. COURT OF APPEALS and CARLOS M. FARRALES, respondents.
PANGANIBAN, J.:
When there is a conflict between the dispositive portion or fallo of a
decision and the opinion of the court contained in the text or body of the judgment, the former prevails over the latter. An order of execution is based on the disposition, not on the body, of the decision.
Herbert W. de Laney, JR., Trustee in Bankruptcy, Ralph Waldo Anderson, Bankrupt v. City Investment Company, in The Matter of Ralph Waldo Anderson, Bankrupt, 224 F.2d 808, 10th Cir. (1955)
Donald Stevenson v. Richard Thornburgh J. Michael Quinlan Gary L. Henman, Warden Robert P. Casey, Governor of Pennsylvania, 943 F.2d 1214, 10th Cir. (1991)