UNITED STATES v.

PIERRE III
932 F2d 377 (1991)
Space with reasonable and legitimate expectation of privacy
Border patrol agent inserted his head through the window of the car.
By doing so, he was able to smell the burning marijuana. He, then,
directed the driver to pull over for an inspection. Held: The reasonable
and legitimate expectation of privacy in the interior of the vehicle by
its passenger, which is protected under the Fourth Amendment, was
violated by the officers act. The physical intrusion into a space in
which the suspect had a reasonable expectation of privacy allowed the
officer to see and smell things he could not see or smell from outside
the vehicle. In doing so, the inspection went beyond that portion of the
vehicle which may be viewed from the outside by either inquisitive
passersby or diligent police officers.
ABS-CBN BROADCASTING CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS
301 SCRA 572 (1999)
Viva granted ABS-CBN the right of first refusal to acquire the exclusive
rights to air some of Vivas films. Viva subsequently sold the rights to
broadcast its films to RBS. Before RBS can show the films, ABS-CBN
filed an action for specific performance with prayer for a writ of
preliminary injunction or TRO on the grounds that the right of first
refusal was exercised and that a contract was subsequently perfected
between it and Viva. The writ and the TRO were issued. However, the
RTC held that no contract was perfected between ABS-CBN and Viva,
and, as such, it granted actual, moral, and exemplary damages and
attorneys fees to RBS. Held: There is no perfected contract between
ABS-CBN and Viva. Despite such, the award of damages in favor of RBS
must also be reversed. RBSs claim for damages did not arise from
contract, quasi-contract, delict or quasi-delict but from the fact that
ABS-CBN filed the complaint despite, allegedly, its knowledge of its
lack of cause of action. Because the claim for actual, compensatory,
moral and exemplary damages did not arise from contract, quasicontract, delict or quasi-delict, the claims may only be based on Art.s
19, 20 and 21 of the Civil Code. Common to Arts. 19, 20 and 21 is the
essential element of malice or bad faith. However, there was no proof
that ABS-CBN was inspired by malice or bad faith in instituting the
action. It was honestly convinced of the merits of its cause. The
adverse result of an action does not per se make the action wrongful
and subject the actor to damages, for the law could not have meant to

impose a penalty on the right to litigate. If damages result from a

persons exercise of a right, it is damnum absque injuria.