Title
Inesin vs. Canonoy
Case
G.R. No. L-13231
Decision Date
Feb 29, 1960
The court ruled that a motion for reconsideration, even without a notice of hearing, suspends the appeal period and can justify setting aside an order of dismissal.
Font Size

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-13231)

Facts:

  • Alberto Inesin, Eulagio Torneto, and Felix Waga filed an action for certiorari and prohibition against Honorable Mateo Canonoy, District Judge of the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Sur, and Vicenta Benodin.
  • The case originated from Civil Case No. 194 of the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Sur, Pagadian.
  • Benodin filed a complaint against Inesin, Torneto, and Waga to recover damages for serious physical injuries she suffered after being thrown out of a tartanilla (horse-drawn carriage) that was struck from behind by a bus owned and operated by Inesin and Torneto, and driven recklessly by Waga.
  • The defendants moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that a final judgment had already been rendered between the same parties for the same cause of action and that Waga had no relation to his co-defendants.
  • The court granted the motion and dismissed the action, citing the previous prosecution of the bus driver in the justice of the peace court for negligence.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • The court denied the petition, upholding the decision of the lower court to set aside the order of dismissal.
  • The court ruled that the motion for reconsideration, d...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The court based its ruling on the fact that the Court of First Instance holds its sessions in Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur, only once a year on dates fixed by the district judge.
  • The court cited Section 161 of the Revised Administrative Code, which was su...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.