FACTS:

The petitioner, Conrado Cuyugan, filed a Complaint for Sum of Money with Attachment against the respondent, Rodolfo Siasoco, alleging that the respondent ordered various election campaign materials from the petitioner amounting to P212,890.00 but failed to settle his obligations. The respondent admitted to ordering campaign materials but claimed that his obligations have been settled and that the remaining unpaid obligations were for other candidates for which he is not responsible. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rendered a decision holding the respondent liable for his monetary obligations, but the Court of Appeals (CA) modified the decision and reduced the respondent's liability. The key issue was whether the respondent is liable for the campaign materials of the other candidates belonging to his party. The petitioner argued that the respondent is liable based on the stipulations made during the pre-trial conference. However, the Court found that the petitioner failed to substantiate his claims and upheld the CA's findings that the evidence presented did not prove that the respondent ordered and received the materials for his fellow candidates.

ISSUES:

1. • Whether the respondent is liable for the campaign materials of the other candidates belonging to his party.
2. • Whether the petitioner presented sufficient evidence to establish his claim against the respondent with regard to the other candidates' materials.

RULING:

1. The Supreme Court held that the respondent is not liable for the campaign materials of the other candidates belonging to his party. The Court found that the petitioner failed to present sufficient evidence to establish his claim against the respondent with regard to the other candidates' materials. The basis of the petitioner's claim, consisting of an unsigned Sales Invoice and delivery receipts, was insufficient to prove that the respondent ordered and received the materials. Only two out of twenty-two delivery receipts were duly acknowledged, and the rest were unsigned and did not show that they were received by the respondent or his authorized representative.

PRINCIPLES:

• In an appeal by certiorari, the Court does not resolve controversies involving factual questions, as the Court is empowered only to resolve purely questions of law. However, exceptions to this rule include when the findings of the trial court and the appellate court are in conflict and when the trial court has overlooked, ignored or disregarded some facts or circumstances of weight or significance which, if considered, would have altered the case.