Case Digest (G.R. No. 77040)
Facts:
Alejandro Magtibay v. Honorable Court of Appeals, Spouses Maximo Porto and Rosario Andaya, G.R. No. 77040, November 29, 1988, Supreme Court Second Division, Paras, J., writing for the Court.Petition arises from Civil Case No. S-329 before the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 33, Siniloan, Laguna, where Spouses Maximo Porto and Rosario Andaya (plaintiffs, private respondents here) sued Alejandro Magtibay (defendant, petitioner here) for recovery and possession of land with damages. The RTC rendered judgment against Magtibay on September 24, 1985; his counsel received a copy on October 5, 1985.
On October 5, 1985, Magtibay filed a Notice of Appeal. On October 9, 1985 the RTC ordered the Clerk of Court to transmit the records to the Intermediate Appellate Court (now the Court of Appeals). Meanwhile, on October 11, 1985 the plaintiffs filed a Motion for Execution Pending Appeal and offered to post a bond, alleging the appeal was dilatory and pointing to Magtibay’s failure to comply with a prior order. After a supplemental argument by plaintiffs on October 23, 1985, the RTC on October 25, 1985 granted partial execution pending appeal conditioned on plaintiffs posting a P30,000 bond.
Magtiabay moved to set aside the October 25 order on November 12, 1985; the RTC denied the motion on November 18, 1985. A Writ of Partial Execution issued December 15, 1985, and the Provincial Sheriff delivered material possession to the plaintiffs on December 17, 1985. Magtibay sought relief from the Court of Appeals, which dismissed his petition and set aside a temporary restraining order, holding that under Section 19(a) and Section 23 of the Interim Rules (Batas Pambansa Blg. 129) an appeal is perfected only upon expiration of the last day to appeal by any party and therefore the RTC retained jurisdiction when it granted partial execution. The Court of Appeals denied reconsideration in a Resolution promulgated January 1, 1987.
Magtibay filed this petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court under Rule 65, raising the single issue whether the RTC still had jurisdiction to issu...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Before the appeal is perfected, does the filing of a notice of appeal alone divest the Regional Trial Court of jurisdiction so that it cannot issue an order for partial execution pendin...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)