Title
Dineros vs. Roque
Case
G.R. No. L-38837
Decision Date
Feb 27, 1979
Petitioners sought to annul a default judgment, but their motion for reconsideration was deemed pro forma, rendering their appeal untimely. The Supreme Court dismissed their petition for mandamus.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-38837)

Facts:

  • On December 2, 1959, the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch XVII rendered a default judgment in Civil Case No. 39827, ordering the La Paz Ice Plant and Cold Storage Co., Inc. to pay Marciano C. Roque P150,000.00 with interest and attorney’s fees.
  • On July 18, 1960, petitioners Jose S. Dineros (as receiver) and Ricardo Gurrea filed an action in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, Branch VI (Civil Case No. 5509) to annul the default judgment.
  • After a full trial, the respondent Judge rendered a decision on March 7, 1974, dismissing the complaint. Petitioners received a copy of this decision on March 13, 1974.
  • Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration on April 4, 1974. This motion, however, was denied on April 22, 1974, on the ground that it was pro forma.
  • Private respondents opposed the motion for reconsideration and argued that its mere filing did not suspend the running of the appeal period, noting that the decision had already become final on April 14, 1974.
  • Petitioners then filed their notice of appeal and deposited a cash appeal bond on April 24, 1974, and subsequently tendered the record on appeal on May 3, 1974, which was beyond the reglementary period.
  • On May 21, 1974, the respondent Judge ordered the dismissal of the record on appeal, entered judgment accordingly, and issued a writ of execution.
  • Petitioners subsequently sought a writ of mandamus from this higher court to compel the lower court to certify and approve their record on appeal.

Issues:

  • Whether the petitioners’ motion for reconsideration, filed on April 4, 1974, was a proper motion that could toll the running of the appeal period, or was merely pro forma.
  • Whether the trial court erred in dismissing the record on appeal due to the untimely filing, notwithstanding the motion for reconsideration.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.