ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[ G.R. No. 117570. January 18, 1999]

SPS. BELLA C. ANGELES, et al. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 18, 1999.

G.R. No. 117570 (Spouses Bella C. Angeles and Jose Angeles, et al, vs. Court of Appeals and Bernardo Regacho, et al.)

The Court RESOLVES to:

(a) NOTE WITHOUT ACTION petitioners' [1] manifestation and motion dated November 13, 1998 praying that their motion for reconsideration of the resolution of June 29, 1998 dismissing the petition for review on certiorari be considered and given due course, [2] manifestation dated November 18, 1998 stating that they officially received the Court's resolution dated June 29, 1998 on October 19, 1998 and not October 6, 1998, [3] comment/opposition dated December 8, 1998 to the respondents' opposition to/motion to strike out their aforesaid motion for reconsideration, [4] and aforesaid motion for reconsideration of the resolution of June 29, 1998 which denied the petition for review on certiorari for failure to show any reversible error committed by the Court of Appeals in it questioned judgment, petitioners' urgent motion for an extension of twenty (20) days within which to file the aforesaid motion for reconsideration of the resolution of June 29, 1998 having been already denied in the resolution of November 18, 1998 in accordance with par. 5 of the April 7, 1998 resolution f the Court en banc prohibiting motions for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration;

(b) NOTE respondent's [1] motion dated December 18, 1998 for entry of judgment and [2] aforementioned opposition to/motion to strike out petitioner's motion dated November 10, 1998 for reconsideration f the resolution of June 19, 1998 as a nuisance pleading and

(c) DENY with FINALITY petitioner's urgent motion dated December 15, 1998 praying that the aforesaid resolution of November 18, 1998 be set aside and their motion for reconsideration dated November 10, 1998 considered, no compelling reason having been adduced to warrant the reconsideration sought.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA M. DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE