ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 97556. August 30, 1999]

DAMASO FLORES vs. CA.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 30, 1999.

G.R. No. 97556 (Damaso Flores vs. CA); and G.R. No. 101152 (Damaso Flores vs. CA, et al.)

As early as August 11, 1997, the Court has already expressly declared that the instant case is "DEFINITELY CLOSED AND TERMINATED. NO FUTHER PLEADINGS SHALL BE FILED." Notwithstanding, however, the Court evidently notes the many pleadings filed by petitioner praying for reconsideration of his case which were all ordered expunged from the records. As stated in the case of Ortigas & Company Limited Partnership v. Velasco, 254 SCRA 234 [1996]:

It is clear that petitioner was bent on pursuing her claims despite the Court's unequivocal declarations that her claims were lacking of merit, that the proceedings were terminated, and that not further pleadings, motions or papers should be filed. Her persistence constitutes a deliberate disregard, even defiance, of these Court's plain orders, and an abuse of the rules of procedure to delay the termination of these cases.

Here reiteration of her rejected arguments cannot obliterate their essential and egregious speciousness; and under no circumstances may she or any other litigant or counsel be allowed to engaged the Court in interminable squabbling about the correctness of its orders and dispositions.

x x x The Court cannot countenance defiance of its authority on repetitious assertions of the meritoriousness of a party's cause, no matter how sincerely or genuinely entertained. There has been a final determination of the issues in these cases and petitioner has been repeatedly directed to abide thereby. Her deliberate violations of the orders of the Court are unjustified and inexcusable. The refusal of petitioner Molina to concede defeat, manifested by her unceasing attempt to prolong the final dispositions of this case, obstructs the administration of justice and, therefore, constitutes contempt of Court.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court Resolved to EXPUNGE FROM THE RECORDS THE Motion for Early Resolution with Alternative Motion to Lift the Entry of Judgment and Refer the Case to the Court En banc. The Court further Resolved to GIVE a WARNING to the petitioner not to file further pleadings with this Court lest he shall be held in contempt of court."

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO
Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE