ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 139902. August 8, 2001]

FERNANDO LACAMBRA AYALA, vs. SIONOCO AND CADUAYA

THIRD DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 8, 2001.

G.R. No. 139902(Fernando Lacambra Ayala, petitioner vs. Marietta F. Siongco and Editha Caduaya, respondents.)

This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari of the Resolution ¹ Rollo, 23. of the Court of Appeals ² Fourth Division composed of the ponente, J. Eloy R. Bello, and the members: J. Salome A. Montoya (Chairman) and J. Ruben t. Reyes concurring. dated March 24, 1999 in CA-G.R. CV No. 59345 which dismissed herein petitioner's appeal from the civil aspect ³ The Information filed against the co-accused was dismissed. of the Decision rendered by the Regional Trial Court 11^th Judicial Region, Branch 8 of Davao City in Criminal Case No. 32-437-93 entitled The People of the Philippines vs. Marietta F. Siongco and Editha Z. Caduaya. ⁴ Penned by Judge Salvador M. Ibarreta, Jr.

Petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeals on the ground that the petitioner failed to file his appellant's brief within the appropriate reglementary period.

After a careful review, we find that the Court of Appeals committed no reversible error in dismissing petitioner's appeal.

Records reveal that the petitioner filed four motions for extension of time within which to file his appellant's brief ⁵ See Records of the Court of Appeals, 46, 52, 56 and 60. In the petitioner's last motion, he prayed that he be given an additional ten (10) days within which to file the same or until February 11, 1999. ⁶ Urgent Motion dated February 1, 1999; Record of the Court of Appeals, 60. However, as of the date of the Resolution of the Court of Appeals dismissing the petitioner's appeal or March 24, 1999, the petitioner had yet to file his appellant's brief. In fact, the petitioner admitted that the same was only filed on March 29, 1999 or more than a month after the expiration of the period within which he should have filed the same. ⁷ See Motion for Reconsideration; Records of the Court of Appeals, 127. The failure of an appellant to file an appellant's brief is ground for the dismissal of the appeal. ⁸ � 1 (e), rule 50, Rules of Court; See also Aquino vs. Court of Appeals, 309 SCRA 578, 585.

WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) JULIETA Y. CARREON

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE