ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 135322. February 8, 1999]

CAROLINA LAM, et al. vs. FELICISIMO MAPOY.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated FEB 8, 1999.

G.R. No. 135322 (Carolina Lam, et al. vs. Felicisimo Mapoy.)

Petitioners' second motion for an extension of three (3) days from October 25, 1998 within which to file the petition is DENIED, their first motion for such extension having been denied in the resolution of October 14, 1998.

Acting on the motions of petitioners for reconsideration of the resolution of October 14, 1998 which denied their motion for an extension of thirty (30) days from September 25, 1998 within which to file a petition for review on certiorari for failure to submit the proof of service of copies of the motion on respondent and of November 25, 1998 which denied the aforesaid petition for late filing, the Court RESOLVES to DENY both motions with FINALITY, no compelling reason having been adduced to warrant the reconsideration sought.

Considering the appearance of Atty. Eduardo S. Rodriguez of Teofilo F. Manalo and Associates Law Office as counsel for respondent, with request to be furnished with copies of Court processes in this case at 440 Rizal Avenue Extension, Caloocan City, the Court, before acting thereon, further RESOLVES to require Atty. Eduardo S. Rodriguez to COMPLY with Section 21, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court and SUBMIT to the Court, within ten (10) days from notice hereof, the written conformity of respondent to his appearance.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE