July 2007 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > July 2007 Resolutions >
[G.R. No. 166750 : July 09, 2007] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY DR. HECTOR LOPEZ V. VIRGILIO I. DELA ROSA:
[G.R. No. 166750 : July 09, 2007]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, REPRESENTED BY DR. HECTOR LOPEZ V. VIRGILIO I. DELA ROSA
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 9 July 2007:
G.R. No. 166750 (People of the Philippines, represented by Dr. Hector Lopez v. Virgilio I. Dela Rosa)
The March 14, 2007 Resolution indicated that the Court resolves to deny the petition for lack of sufficient showing that the Court of Appeals (CA) had committed any reversible error in the questioned judgment to warrant the exercise by the Court of its discretionary appellate jurisdiction in this case. However, due to inadvertence, the CA was cited instead of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 101.
Thus, the March 14, 2007 Resolution should state that:
WHEREFORE, we DENY with FINALITY the Motion for Reconsideration for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 166750 (People of the Philippines, represented by Dr. Hector Lopez v. Virgilio I. Dela Rosa)
The March 14, 2007 Resolution indicated that the Court resolves to deny the petition for lack of sufficient showing that the Court of Appeals (CA) had committed any reversible error in the questioned judgment to warrant the exercise by the Court of its discretionary appellate jurisdiction in this case. However, due to inadvertence, the CA was cited instead of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 101.
Thus, the March 14, 2007 Resolution should state that:
G.R. No. 166750 (People of the Philippines, represented by Dr. Hector Lopez vs. Virgilio I. Dela Rosa) - Considering the allegations, issues and arguments adduced in the petition for review on certiorari, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for lack of sufficient showing that the Regional Trial Court, Quezon City, Branch 101 had committed any reversible error in the questioned judgment to warrant the exercise by the Court of its discretionary appellate jurisdiction in this case.With respect to the Motion for Reconsideration, the arguments raised in the said motion are mere rehash of those set forth in the petition and were already considered and passed upon. No new and/or compelling reason was adduced as would warrant the reconsideration of the Resolution.
WHEREFORE, we DENY with FINALITY the Motion for Reconsideration for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court