GOYENA V. LEDESMA-GUSTILO (REMEDIAL)

Although the general rule is that the SC is not a trier of facts, its jurisdiction being limited to reviewing and revising only errors of law, it is nonetheless subject to the following exceptions which have been laid down in a number of decision of this court:

1. When the conclusion is a finding grounded entirely on speculation, surmises, and conjectures;
2. When the inference made is manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible;
3. When there is grave abuse of discretion;
4. When the judgment is based on a misapprehension of facts;
5. When the findings of facts are conflicting;
6. When the CA, in making its findings, went beyond the issues of the case and the same is contrary to those of the trial court;
7. When the findings of the CA are contrary to those of the trial court;
8. When the findings of facts are conclusions without citation of specific evidence on which they are based;
9. When the facts set forth in the petition as well as in the petitioners' main and reply briefs are not disputed by the respondents; and
10. When the findings of fact of the CA is premised on the supposed absence of evidence ans id contradicted by the evidence on record.