Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1946 > August 1946 Decisions > G.R. No. L-786 August 30, 1946 - BONIFACIO LOPEZ v. PABLO LOPEZ, ET AL.

077 Phil 136:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[G.R. No. L-786. August 30, 1946.]

BONIFACIO LOPEZ, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PABLO LOPEZ, ET AL., Defendants-Appellants.

Rodriguez, Fernan, Del Mar & Rodriguez for Appellants.

Hipolito Alo and Filiberto Leonardo for Appellee.

SYLLABUS


1. APPEAL; NOTICE OF; FILING IMPLIED BY PRESENTATION AND APPROVAL OF RECORD ON APPEAL. — The filing or presentation and approval of the record on appeal on time implies or involves, necessarily, the filing of notice of appeal.

2. ID.; APPEAL BOND; APPROVAL INFERRED FROM APPROVAL OF RECORD ON APPEAL. — In the absence of evidence to the contrary, from the approval of the record on appeal and transmittal thereof to the appellate court, it is to be inferred that the appeal bond has also been approved, for it is legally presumed that the official duty has been regularly performed, and that therefore the court would not have approved the record on appeal, and the later transmitted to this court, if no appeal bond had been previously filed and approved.

3. PLEADING AND PRACTICE; MOTIONS; WAIVER OF OBJECTION NOT INCLUDED THEREIN. — A motion attacking a pleading or a proceeding shall include all objections then available, and any objection not so included shall be deemed waived.


R E S O L U T I O N


FERIA, J.:


From the record on appeal filed with, and approved by, the Court of First Instance of Cebu, it appears that said court rendered judgment on November 4, 1941. It does not appear when was the appellant notified of the judgment . A motion for reconsideration was filed by the appellant, and denied by the court on May 2 1946. The record on appeal was filed by the defendants and appellants on May 24, 1946, and approved by the lower court in its order dated June 1, 1946, which reads as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"Habiendo manifestado el Sr. Filiberto Leonardo, abogado de la parte demandante, en corte abierta que ya esta debidamente corrigido el expediente de apelacion de los demandamos, el mismo queda approbado, y se ordena al Escribano que lo certifique y eleve a la Honorable Corte Suprema, juntamente con todas las pruebas orales o documentales presentadas en la vista de esta causa. Asi se ordena."cralaw virtua1aw library

A motion dated June 11, 1946, to dismiss the appeal on the ground that no notice of appeal was filed by the appellant and therefore the appeal has not been perfected, was filed with the Court of First Instance. It was denied by the latter on June 15 of the same year for lack of merits, and a motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion to dismiss was also denied.

The record on appeal having been appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, which is now pending before us, based on two grounds: (1) first, that no notice of appeal has been filed by the appellant on time, and (2) secondly, that the appeal bond has not been approved by the lower court.

(1) As to the first ground, it is true that it has been the practice to include in the bill of exceptions or the record on appeal the filing of the notice of appeal, and that such practice is advisable in order that, should a question as the one under consideration arise, it may be readily decided without necessity of requiring evidence or examination the record of the Court of First Instance; as section 6, Rule 41, of the Rules of Court, does not require such inclusion, the fact that the record on appeal in this case does not state the filing of the notice of appeal is no evidence that said notice has not been filed. Though there is no direct available to show that the notice of appeal has been filed on time, from the fact that the record on, after it had been corrected pursuant to appellees objection, was approved by the lower with the express consent of the attorney for the plaintiff and appellee (see the above quoted order of the court approving the record on appeal), it may be presumed that the notice of appeal has been on time.

Besides, the filing or presentation and approval of the record on appeal on time implies or involves, necessarily, the filing of notice of appeal. This conclusion is supported, by analogy, by the decision of this Court in the case of Luengo & Martinez v. Herrero (17 Phil., 29, 34), in which it was held that "the presentation of a bail of exceptions for approval in due time is equivalent to or involves the announcement of an intention to appeal."cralaw virtua1aw library

(2) As to the second ground, from the approval of record on appeal it is to be inferred that the appeal bond has also been approved. It is to presumed that the official duty has been regularly performed, and therefore the court would not have approved the record on appeal, and the latter would not have been transmitted to this Court, if no appeal bond had been previously filed and approved According to the above quoted order of the court below approving the record on appeal, the very attorney for appellee had invited the attention of that court that the said record was already corrected and might therefore be approved.

Furthermore, the only ground advanced by the appellee, in his motion to dismiss the appellant’s appeal and for reconsideration of the order denying said motion filed with the Court of First Instance, is that no notice of appeal has been filed. Had not the appeal bond been approved by the lower court the appellee should have known it before filing said motion to dismiss the appeal. And according to section 8, Rule 26, of the Rules of Court, "a motion attacking a pleading or a proceeding shall include all objections then available, and all objections not so included shall be deemed waived."cralaw virtua1aw library

Appellee’s motion to dismiss, is denied.

Moran, C.J., Bengzon, Briones and Tuason, 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






August-1946 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-363 August 5, 1946 - GREGORIO K. KALAW v. IÑIGO S. DAZA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 4

  • G.R. No. L-183 August 6, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. JOSE RAMOS

    077 Phil 6

  • G.R. No. L-186 August 6, 1946 - HORACIO A. GUANZON, ET AL. v. ANG BAN, ET AL.

    077 Phil 11

  • G.R. No. L-302 August 7, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDWIN DELGADO, ET AL.

    077 Phil 16

  • G.R. No. L-627 August 12, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONCEPCION FLORENDO

    077 Phil 18

  • G.R. No. L-402 August 14, 19461

    ESTER CRUZ, ET AL. v. FERNANDO JUGO, ET AL.

    077 Phil 28

  • G.R. No. L-177 August 16, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EPIFANIO E. ENOJO

    077 Phil 31

  • G.R. No. L-327 August 16, 1946 - MARIANO FLORES v. MARIANO NABLE, ET AL.

    077 Phil 34

  • G.R. No. L-700 August 16, 1946 - LUIS MENESES v. M. L. DE LA ROSA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 46

  • G.R. No. L-750 August 16, 1946 - JOAQUIN ZAMORA v. RAFAEL DINGLASAN

    077 Phil 55

  • G.R. No. L-439 August 20, 1946 - EDUARDO OCAMPO v. JOSE BERNABE, ET AL.

    077 Phil 67

  • G.R. No. L-533 August 20, 1946 - RAMON RUFFY ET AL. v. CHIEF OF STAFF

    075 Phil 875

  • G.R. No. L-49059 August 20, 1946 - ROQUE S. MONFORT v. EMILIO AGUINALDO, ET AL.

    077 Phil 70

  • G.R. No. L-235 August 21, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ESTELITO LUNGASA

    077 Phil 78

  • G.R. No. L-256 August 21, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FELIX MAGBANUA

    077 Phil 82

  • G.R. No. L-429 August 21, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. FELIX MARQUEZ

    077 Phil 87

  • C.A. No. L-562 August 23, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO DE GOROSTIZA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 92

  • G.R. No. L-288 August 29, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ISABELO NOBLE

    077 Phil 104

  • G.R. No. L-270 August 30, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. RESTITUTO BAUDEN

    077 Phil 120

  • G.R. No. L-277 August 30, 1946 - MANUEL BAGUIORO v. CONRADO BARRIOS, ET AL.

    077 Phil 130

  • G.R. No. L-697 August 30, 1946 - TOMAS MAPUA, ET AL. v. JOSE GUTIERREZ DAVID, ET AL.

    077 Phil 132

  • G.R. No. L-786 August 30, 1946 - BONIFACIO LOPEZ v. PABLO LOPEZ, ET AL.

    077 Phil 136

  • G.R. No. L-26 August 31, 1946 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MANUEL BAÑEZ, ET AL.

    077 Phil 151

  • G.R. No. L-353 August 31, 1946 - PACIENCIA DE JESUS v. IÑIGO S. DAZA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 170

  • G.R. No. L-362 August 31, 1946 - AMADO CALUAG DOMINGO v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF NUEVA ECIJA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 175

  • G.R. No. L-411 August 31, 1946 - EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS v. GENARO JAPITANA, ET AL.

    077 Phil 181

  • G.R. No. L-475 August 31, 1946 - ISAAC CAPAYAS v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF ALBAY, ET AL.

    077 Phil 186

  • G.R. No. L-491 August 31, 1946 - SIMON IBAÑEZ v. CONRADO BARRIOS

    077 Phil 191

  • G.R. No. L-543 August 31, 1946 - JOSE O. VERA, ET AL. v. JOSE A. AVELINO, ET AL.

    077 Phil 365

  • G.R. No. 48321 August 31, 1946 - OH CHO v. DIRECTOR OF LANDS

    075 Phil 890