ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 136177. January 27, 1999]

PASTOR GONGORA vs. GERMAN RA�ADA

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 27, 1999.

G.R. No. 136177 (Pastor Gongora vs. German Ra�ada.)

In accordance with the provisions of Rule 45 governing appeals by certiorari to the Supreme Court, and Rule 65, in relation to Rule 46 and 56, governing petitions for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus, as amended and provided in the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure effective July 1, 1997, only petitions which are accompanied by or which comply strictly with the following requirements shall be entertained:

1. full payment upon the filing of the petition of the prescribed docket and other lawful fees, together with the deposit for costs, within the reglementary period, unless the petitioner has theretofore done so;

2. appropriate service of a copy of the petition upon the adverse party or parties and on the lower court, tribunal, agency or entity concerned, with the required proof of service thereof;

3. a clearly legible duplicate original or a certified true copy of the judgment, final order or resolution certified by the clerk of court of the court a quo or the official authorized to do so;

4. a verified statement indicating the material dates when notice of the judgment, final order or resolution was received, when a motion for new trial or reconsideration, if any, was filed, and when notice of the denial thereof was received; and

5. a certification under oath by petitioner that he has not theretofore commenced any other action involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or agency; if there is such other action or proceeding, he must state the status of the same; and if he should thereafter learn that a similar action has been filed or is pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or different divisions thereof, or any tribunal or agency, he undertakes to promptly inform the aforesaid courts and other tribunal or agency thereof within five (5) days therefrom.

ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolved to DENY the first motion of counsel for petitioner for extension of thirty (30) days from the expiration of the reglementary period within which to file a petition for review on certiorari for failure to comply with requirement no. four (4), as it lacks a verified statement as to the dates of receipt by counsel for petitioner of a copy of the assailed decision and of the filing of the motion for reconsideration thereof.

The manifestation/motion dated January 13, 1999, filed by petitioner himself, that he has terminated the services of his counsel and that he is pursuing the motion for reconsideration filed with the Court of Appeals and praying that the motion for extension be considered withdrawn, is NOTED WITHOUT ACTION.

Very truly yours,

JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE