Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
The SC will no longer remand the petition in case of improper appeal, SC will just dismiss the case.
And the dismissal is fatal. Wrong mode of appeal would mean that the decision becomes final and
executory.
Withdrawal of an Appeal
- as a matter of right- anytime before the filing of the appellee’s brief. But once the appellee’s brief
has been filed, then it becomes by way of motion
If it is a wrong remedy, it is not for the RTC to say it. It’s for the appellate court to say it. So kunware
ang desisyon ng RTC, adverse, nag-file ngayon si defendant ng notice of appeal and the defendant says
that the decision of RTC is being appealed to the CA on pure questions of law.
The judgment shall be rendered by the members of the court who participated in the deliberation of
the merits of the case before it’s assigned to a member for the writing of the decision. The unanimous
vote of 3 justices shall be required for the promulgation of the judgment. If there is no unanimity, the
clerk should enter the vote for the dissenting justices. ‘Pag hindi unanimous ‘yan, ang mangyayari,
kukuha ng 2 justices that will temporarily sit in the division. Then, majority wins. So to be a binding
judgment, the judgment should be duly signed and promulgated during the incumbency of the justice
or judge who signed it. The CA in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, may reverse, affirm, modify
and may even direct a new trial.
Q: When can you say that the judgment has been duly promulgated?
A: It is when the judge or the justice already submitted the decision to the clerk of court for
dissemination to the parties. So prior to the submission to the clerk of court, it is just a draft, it does
not have any juridical existence. And because it is a draft, it can be changed.
The date when the judgment becomes executory is likewise the date of entry of judgment. The date
of entry is very important because the date of entry is the date when you can execute the judgment.
Because when you have date of entry, that means the decision is already final and executory. It is not
a matter of entering it in the book of entries.
In original actions before the CA, its way (??) [17:48] of execution shall be accompanied by a certified
true copy of the entry of judgment or final resolution and addressed to the appropriate officer for its
enforcement. In appealed case, where the motion for execution is pending appeal before the CA, the
CA can only act on it if the records area already elevated to the court. Remember Rule 39 section 1,
when the CA has already decided the case in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, and there’s an
entry of judgment, you don’t have to wait for the records to be returned to the lower court. All you
have to do is get a certified true copy of the judgment and an entry of judgment coming from the CA
and attach it to your motion for execution when you file it before the lower court. And the lower court
can act on it even if the records have not yet been returned to the court of origin.
Go vs CA
It is the appeal taken by one of the parties against the other that gives the court jurisdiction over said
parties. Therefore, the appellate court cannot acquire jurisdiction over persons who are neither
appellants nor appellees. Ano’ng nangyari sa kaso na’to? Plaintiff v Defendant, defendant became a
third party plaintiff and then sued a third party defendant. Ang natalo, si Plaintiff, so si Plaintiff ang
nag-appeal. Meanwhile, defendant did not appeal his third party complaint. Eh nung appeal nanalo si
Plaintiff.
Q: Can the court now issue an order that would affect the third party defendant?
A: No. Because of the failure of the defendant to even appeal the decision and bring in the third party
defendant as an appellee, then the decision becomes binding only to the appellant and the appellee
because the court did not acquire jurisdiction over the third party defendant below. And therefore it
cannot render a judgment that would affect the third party defendant because it would be violative
of due process.
Natalia Realty vs CA
Q: Before we can move for execution of a final judgment rendered by an appellate court, do you need
to wait for an entry of judgment?
A: As a general rule, yes. You have to wait for the judgment to attain finality. You have to wait for the
court to issue an entry of judgment so that you can have the same executed but the exception to the
rule is provided by Rule 51, Section 11. So if the judgment of the appellate court says that it is
immediately executory, you don’t even have to wait for the court to issue an entry of judgment.
The appellate court, as a general rule, can only resolve matters that were assigned as errors. If a part
of the decision was not assigned by the appellate court as an error committed by the trial court, then
the appellate court does not have jurisdiction to change the ruling of the lower court. But there are
situations when even if it’s not an assigned error, the CA or SC can rule on unassigned errors,
example:
(1) Jurisdiction over the subject matter
(2) Those unassigned errors that are closely related from the assigned errors may be ruled
upon by the court
The appellate court is clothed with ample authority to review matters even if they are not assigned
as errors in the appeal if it finds in their consideration that it is necessary in arriving at a just decision
of the case.
Q: Can you file a Motion for Reconsideration (MR) before the CA?
A: Yes. And the period of time is 15 days from your receipt of the adverse judgment. You cannot file
a second motion for reconsideration before the CA.
Q: But can you file a second motion for reconsideration before the SC?
A: It is not a matter of right. So as held in one of the cases, there was a decision rendered by the SC.
And then when it was decided by the SC, there was MR filed- denied. And then there was a motion to
admit second MR that was filed. Before the SC could even resolve the motion to admit second MR, the
SC already issued an entry of judgment. The other party wanted to recall the entry of judgment
because there is a pending motion to admit second MR. The motion to admit second MR was granted.
But what did the SC say? The entry of judgment will run as a matter of course when there is no appeal.
What then is the remedy? File a motion to recall the entry of judgment. Or ask SC to issue a writ of
preliminary injunction to stay the execution.
So what is clear is this; only one MR, but the SC may grant and allow a second MR to be filed. “May”
it’s not a demandable right.
Q: Why does the SC allow that?
A: Because it is the court of last resort
The pendency of an MR, as a rule, shall stay the execution of the judgment unless the court directs
otherwise. The motion should not contain a notice of hearing if you file an MR before the CA and SC.
Q: Can you file a Motion for New Trial (MNT) before the CA?
A: Yes. You can file an MNT before the CA at any time after the appeal from the lower court has been
perfected and before the CA loses jurisdiction over the case. But your ground should be newly
discovered evidence which could not have been discovered prior to the trial with the court below
despite due diligence, and which would probably change the result. Because if your evidence is
merely cumulative (same type of evidence) or corroborative (of different nature but proves the same
point) it will not alter the decision. It has to be evidence that is newly discovered that would probably
change the result. And the evidence (??) [44:03] should be accompanied by affidavits showing the
facts constituting the grounds therefor and the newly discovered evidence.
The CA shall consider the new evidence together with that adduced to the trial below and may grant
a new trial. This is one instance where the CA may receive evidence even in appealed cases.
Remember that the CA in the exercise of its appellate or original jurisdiction can receive evidence
because the CA is also a court that can try facts. It is only SC that cannot try facts.
Heirs of Montinola vs CA
The MNT here is not substantial compliance with Rule 53. The affidavit of the witness was already
presented during the hearing is hardly sufficient to justify the MNT.
(1) Because the evidence was already present at the time he presented the case
(2) Because the alleged new witnesses were all unnamed
(3) And the allegations in the affidavit are merely conclusions of law and not statement of
facts
(4) The new evidence presented is merely corroborative / cumulative hence it will not alter
the decision of the case
Navarra vs CA
There are only two situations where the court can grant MNT: (1) before the trial court (Rule 47) (2)
before the CA (Rule 53). You do not file MNT before the SC.
Internal publication of judgments and final resolutions, decisions of the CA and SC have to be
published.
A.M. No. 11-9-4-SC (Re: Rule for the efficient use of paper)
-there are measurements: single-space, 14
Q: With respect to Rule 56, what are the original cases cognizable by the SC?
A: Petitions for Certiorari, Prohibition, Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Habeas Corpus, even RTC and CA
have concurrent jurisdiction with these cases. But please do not forget your Hierarchy of Courts rule.
The appeal should be governed by and disposed of in accordance with the applicable provisions of
the constitution, laws. The appeal before the SC may be dismissed motu proprio or on a motion by
the respondent for the following grounds:
(1) failure to take an appeal within the reglementary period
(2) lack of merit
(3) failure to pay the requisite docket fees and other lawful fees
(4) failure to comply with the requirements of proof of service
(5) error on the choice or mode of appeal
Except as provided therefor in section 3, rule 122, regarding appeals in criminal cases where the
penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment, an appeal taken to the SC by
notice of appeal shall be dismissed. Because the proper mode is Rule 45 and there are no factual
issues.
If the original action commenced in the SC, if the opinion is equally divided, the petition will be
dismissed. If the opinion of the court is equally divided, the decision on appeal is affirmed. On all
incidental matters, the petition or motion shall be denied.
Q: You have an adverse decision from the SC, can you file a motion for reconsideration with the prayer
that it should be heard by the SC en banc?
A: No. The SC will decided whether that case will be heard by the en banc or not.
(01:06:25)