Edu v Ericta Digest
Facts: 1. Assailed is the validity of the Reflector Law and Admin Order No. 2 which implements it. Under the law, a vehicle has to comply with the requirements of having reflective device prior to being registered at the LTO. 2. The respondent Galo on his behalf and that of other motorists, filed a suit for certiorari and prohibition with preliminary injunction assailing the validity of the challenged Act as an invalid exercise of the police power for being violative of the due process clause. This he followed on May 28, 1970 with a manifestation wherein he sought as an alternative remedy that, in the event that respondent Judge would hold said statute constitutional, Administrative Order No. 2 of the Land Transportation Commissioner, now petitioner, implementing such legislation be nullified as an undue exercise of legislative power. Issue: W/N Reflector Law is unconstitutional, and w/n AO2 is valid YES, both the law and AO 2 are valid. It is thus o...