Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1964 > September 1964 Decisions > G.R. No. L-20150 September 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOAQUIN DOCTOR y DIZON:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. L-20150. September 30, 1964.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOAQUIN DOCTOR y DIZON, Accused; CAPITAL INSURANCE & SURETY CO., INC., bondsmen-appellant.

Solicitor General for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Achacoso, Nera & Ocampo for bondsman-appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. BAIL BOND; APPEAL FROM ORDER OF FORFEITURE WHEN PREMATURE. — An appeal from an order of forfeiture of a bail bond is premature where said order merely requires appellant "to for the amount of the bond" and there is as yet no such judgment against appellant nor has the amount for which appellant shall be held liable been fixed.


D E C I S I O N


CONCEPCION, J.:


Appeal from an order of the Court of First Instance of Manila in Criminal Case No. 64358 of said court, which in turn, involved an appeal from an order of the Municipal Court of Manila in Criminal Case No. E-100968-64358 thereof, entitled "People of the Philippines v. Joaquin Doctor", for serious physical injuries through reckless negligence.

The record shows that when the latter case was called for arraignment on April 30, 1962, the accused failed to appear despite the notice duly served upon his bondsmen, herein appellant, Capital Insurance & Surety Co., Inc. Accordingly, on May 10, 1962, the municipal court issued an order directing the forfeiture of the P1,000 bond posted by said appellant for the provisional liberty of the accused, as well as his immediate arrest and giving appellant thirty (30) days within which to produce the accused and show cause why judgment should not be rendered for the amount of said bond. Soon thereafter, or on May 21, 1962, appellant surrendered the accused to the municipal court. At the same time, appellant moved to cancel the warrant of arrest and lift the order of confiscation of the bond and continue the latter in force, upon the ground that the failure of the accused to appear before said Court on April 30, 1962 was due to the fact that appellant had not had sufficient time to notify the accused before said date, the corresponding notice having been served upon appellant only three (3) days prior thereto, or on April 27, 1962. This motion was denied on May 22, 1962, whereupon appellant moved for a reconsideration, which was denied on May 23, 1962. Forthwith, appellant appealed to the Court of First Instance of Manila, which, on July 3, 1962, dismissed the appeal, upon the ground that it was premature, no judgment having as yet been rendered on the aforementioned bond. A reconsideration of this order of dismissal having been denied on July 20, 1962, appellant interposed the present appeal, alleging that said orders of the Municipal Court of Manila of May 22 and 23, 1962 are tantamount to a judgment against appellant for the amount of said bond.

This pretense is clearly untenable. It is obvious from the record and from the orders appealed from that there is as yet no official determination or declaration of appellant’s liability under the bond above mentioned. On the contrary, the order of the municipal court of May 10, 1962, requires appellant "to show cause why judgment should not be rendered against it for the amount of the bond." There is no such judgment against appellant herein. Neither has the amount for which appellant shall be held liable been fixed. Said orders of May 20 and 23, 1962, are thus obviously interlocutory, and cannot be appealed before the rendition of said judgment.

WHEREFORE, the appealed orders of the Court of First Instance of Manila are hereby affirmed, with costs against appellant, Capital Insurance & Surety Co., Inc. It is so ordered.

Bengzon, C.J., Bautista Angelo, Reyes, J.B.L., Paredes, Dizon, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, J.P. and Zaldivar, JJ., concur.

Barrera, J., took no part.




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






September-1964 Jurisprudence                 

  • Adm. Case No. 190 September 26, 1964 - MARCOS MEDINA v. LORETO U. BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. L-17405 September 26, 1964 - JOSE AGUDO, JR. v. JOSE R. VILLANUEVA

  • G.R. No. L-19132 September 26, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO CAÑADA

  • G.R. No. L-17069 September 28, 1964 - LIANGA BAY LOGGING CO., INC. v. ANDRES REYES

  • G.R. No. L-18421 September 28, 1964 - TOMAS BESA v. JOSE CASTELLVI

  • G.R. No. L-18817 September 28, 1964 - ANTONIO G. TADY-Y v. PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK

  • G.R. No. L-18865 September 28, 1964 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN S. ALANO

  • G.R. No. L-20219 September 28, 1964 - A. L. AMMEN TRANSPORTATION CO., INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. L-22626 September 28, 1964 - ALICE FOLEY VDA. DE MARCELO v. RAFAEL S. SISON

  • G.R. No. L-16252 September 29, 1964 - ROSARIO MAS v. ELISA DUMARA-OG

  • G.R. No. L-17097 September 29, 1964 - PHILIPPINE ACETYLENE COMPANY v. CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. L-19159 September 29, 1964 - GLICERIA C. LIWANAG v. LUIS B. REYES

  • G.R. No. L-19391 September 29, 1964 - CECILIO DE LA CRUZ v. MANUEL JESUS DE LA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. L-19776 September 29, 1964 - BENJAMIN CHUA v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-19957 September 29, 1964 - ELIAS AGUSTIN v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION and PANIQUI SUGAR MILLS, INC.

  • G.R. No. L-20111 September 29, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO E. VARGAS

  • G.R. No. L-14888 September 30, 1964 - MERCEDES CLEMENTE v. JOVITO BONIFACIO

  • G.R. No. L-15418 September 30, 1964 - WEST LEYTE TRANSPORTATION CO., INC. v. ADELAIDO SALAZAR

  • G.R. No. L-17029 September 30, 1964 - SAMUEL S. SHARRUF v. FRANK BUBLA

  • G.R. No. L-17194 September 30, 1964 - PRIMITIVO SATO v. SIMEON RALLOS

  • G.R. No. L-17960 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: SY CHHUT v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-18596 September 30, 1964 - ALVAREZ MALAGUIT v. FELIX ALIPIO

  • G.R. No. L-18674 September 30, 1964 - FLORENTINA CALMA v. JOSE MONTUYA

  • G.R. No. L-19107-09 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: LAO YAP HAN DIOK v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-19419 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: GAW CHING v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-19583 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: ONG BON KOK v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL

  • G.R. No. L-19709 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: ANDRES ONG KHAN v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-19778 September 30, 1964 - CROMWELL COMMERCIAL EMPLOYEES AND LABORERS UNION (PTUC) v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

  • G.R. No. L-19830 September 30, 1964 - IN RE: PAUL TEH v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. L-20077 September 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO PACOMIO

  • G.R. No. L-20103 September 30, 1964 - MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY v. CONCHITA VDA. DE CHAVEZ

  • G.R. No. L-20146 September 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VIRGILIO OPLADO

  • G.R. No. L-20150 September 30, 1964 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOAQUIN DOCTOR y DIZON

  • G.R. No. L-20232 September 30, 1964 - MUNICIPALITY OF LA CARLOTA v. NATIONAL WATERWORKS and SEWERAGE AUTHORITY

  • G.R. No. L-20219 September 28, 1964 - A. L. AMMEN TRANSPORTATION CO., INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION