Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1902 > December 1902 Decisions > G.R. No. 21 December 8, 1902 - SIMONA BRILLANTES v. MANUEL BRILLANTES ET AL.

001 Phil 533:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 21. December 8, 1902. ]

SIMONA BRILLANTES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANUEL BRILLANTES ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Manuel Brillantes, for Appellants.

Simona Brillantes, for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. CIVIL PROCEDURE; APPEAL; DISMISSAL FOR LACHES. — Where appellant seeks to excuse his laches and restore a dismissed appeal on the ground of force majeure, it was necessary under former procedure to prove that such force majeure prevented the prosecution of the appeal before the expiration of two years.


D E C I S I O N


TORRES, J. :


By an order of July 30 of this year the appeal was declared to have been abandoned, and the appellants’ rights to have lapsed by the expiration of more than two years. In consequence the judgment appealed was declared a finality. The appellant, Manuel Brillantes, upon the day following the service upon him in his residence of notice of the order, service having been made by the judge of Abra, filed a petition asking for the vacation of the said order, and that he be allowed the term of twenty days or more provided for by article 370 of the old Code of Civil Procedure, for the purpose of coming to an understanding with Solicitor Santos, or some other solicitor, to represent him before this court. Among other grounds he alleged that he was prevented from prosecuting the appeal by force majeure, to wit, by war, and that the term prescribed by article 394 of the law cited had not expired when the force majeure ceased, and that therefore he considered himself entitled to avail himself of the remedy prescribed by article 399 of the same law.

The petitioner has not proven, nor has he even offered to prove, that he was prevented from prosecuting his appeal before the expiration of the term of two years by force majeure, or by any cause independent of his own will. For this reason his application, brought conformably to the provisions of articles 395, 399, and 400 of the Code of Civil Procedure, must be overruled, and consequently the vacation of the order prayed for by Manuel Brillantes in his petition of September 20 last is denied, with the costs. The directions contained in the order referred to will be carried into effect. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Cooper, Smith, Willard, Mapa and Ladd, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






December-1902 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 970 December 1, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. TEODORO REYES

    001 Phil 517

  • G.R. No. 571 December 3, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. THOMAS E. KEPNER

    001 Phil 519

  • G.R. No. 1005 December 3, 1902 - JOSE V. L. GONZAGA v. W.F. NORRIS

    001 Phil 529

  • G.R. No. 1035 December 4, 1902 - MARIA DEL CARMEN VIUDA DE BUSTILLOS v. ROQUE GARBANZOS

    001 Phil 532

  • G.R. No. 21 December 8, 1902 - SIMONA BRILLANTES v. MANUEL BRILLANTES ET AL.

    001 Phil 533

  • G.R. No. 1120 December 8, 1902 - DY CHUAN LENG, ET AL. v. BYRON S. AMBLER

    001 Phil 535

  • G.R. No. 926 December 9, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. PAULO CATEQUISTA

    001 Phil 537

  • G.R. No. 593 December 10, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. JOAQUIN FERNANDEZ Y HERRERIAS ET AL.

    001 Phil 539

  • G.R. No. 891 December 11, 1902 - JUANA DOMINGO v. WARDEN OF BILIBID PRISON

    001 Phil 542

  • G.R. No. 919 December 11, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. VICENTE SOTELO

    001 Phil 544

  • G.R. No. 868 December 15, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. JUAN SANTIAGO

    001 Phil 545

  • G.R. No. 1026 December 15, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. VICTORINO CORREA ET AL.

    001 Phil 549

  • G.R. No. 1078 December 15, 1902 - JOHN W. HOEY v. R. S. BALDWIN

    001 Phil 551

  • G.R. No. 574 December 17, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. BONIFACIO MODAMA

    001 Phil 559

  • G.R. No. 513 December 19, 1902 - BENITO LEGARDA Y TUASON v. VICENTE GARCIA VALDEZ

    001 Phil 562

  • G.R. No. 944 December 19, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. UBALDO BORNALES

    001 Phil 567

  • G.R. No. 945 December 19, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. MELCHOR ABELINDE ET AL

    001 Phil 568

  • G.R. No. 960 December 19, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. BIBIANO CAPISONDA

    001 Phil 575

  • G.R. No. 991 December 19, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. FRANCISCO NAVA

    001 Phil 580

  • G.R. No. 861 December 20, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. DOMINGO VIERA

    001 Phil 584

  • G.R. No. 850 December 23, 1902 - LOS HIJOS DE I. DE LA RAMA v. ERIBERTO MIJARES

    001 Phil 585

  • G.R. No. 1003 December 23, 1902 - PIO LABAYEN v. ROSENDO HERNAEZ

    001 Phil 587

  • G.R. No. 551 December 24, 1902 - MARIANO DEVEZA v. SIMEON GUINOO

    001 Phil 589

  • G.R. No. 81 December 27, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. RAMON GOMEZ RICOY

    001 Phil 595

  • G.R. No. 34 December 31, 1902 - PABLO PALMA v. JUAN CAÑIZARES

    001 Phil 602

  • G.R. No. 483 December 31, 1902 - DAMIAN HERMITAÑO v. MARCELINO CLARITO

    001 Phil 609

  • G.R. No. 496 December 31, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. WILLIAM FOWLER ET AL.

    001 Phil 614

  • G.R. No. 899 December 31, 1902 - UNITED STATES v. FELICITAS ORTIZ

    001 Phil 616

  • G.R. No. 932 December 31, 1902 - PEDRO REGALADO v. LUCHSINGER & CO.

    001 Phil 619