" 8. ID.; ID.;ID.; A FINDING THAT A COMPLAINT STATES A CAUSE OF ACTION DOES NOT IMPLY THAT THE COMPLAINANT IS ASSURED OF A RULING IN HIS FAVOR.— However, a finding that a complaint states a cause of actin does not imply that the complainant is assured of a ruling in his favor. While a motion to dismiss based on failure of the complainant to state a cause of action necessarily carries with it the adminission, for purposes of the motion, of the truth of all material facts pleaded in the complaint, what is submitted for determination therein is the sufficiency of the allegations in the complaint. Corrolarily, the denial of a motion to dismiss does not necessarily resolve the issues raised in the complaint in favor of the complainant inasmuch as, after the trial, the defendant might prove to have a better right to the subject matter in litigation."
Source -
[G.R. No. 96921. January 29, 1993.]
DEVELOPMENT BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES, NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY and NATIONAL STEEL CORPORATION, Petitioners, v. JUDGE AMIR PUNDOGAR, in his capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Iligan City, 12th Judicial Region, Branch III, FERNANDO JACINTO, JACINTO STEEL, INC., and ILIGAN INTEGRATED STEEL MILLS, INC., Respondents.
Office of the Government Corporate Counsel for petitioners.
Link - chanrobles.com.
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1993januarydecisions.php?id=68
