Case Digest (G.R. No. L-18940)
Facts:
S. Shioji v. Honorable Geo. R. Harvey, Judge of First Instance of Manila, Pacific Mail Steamship Co. and Toyo Kisen Kaisha, G.R. No. 18940, April 27, 1922, Supreme Court En Banc, Malcolm, J., writing for the Court.In an action tried in the Court of First Instance of Manila (cause No. 19471), S. Shioji obtained judgment on October 31, 1920, against Toyo Kisen Kaisha and Pacific Mail Steamship Co. for P19,533.49 with interest and costs. The defendants appealed by bill of exceptions to the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands (docketed R. G. No. 18592); the bill of exceptions was filed with the clerk on February 16, 1922, and counsel received copies on February 17, 1922.
Under the Supreme Court Rules (Rule 21), appellants had thirty days from receipt of the printed bill to serve and file their brief—this period expired March 19, 1922, without any brief or timely motion for extension. On March 22 appellants filed a motion for additional time; on March 24, 1922 the Supreme Court denied that motion as tardy and, invoking Rule 24(a), dismissed the appeal. Subsequent motions for reconsideration were denied and the dismissal reaffirmed.
The Supreme Court transmitted the record back to the Court of First Instance on April 12, 1922, and execution issued on the trial court judgment. Before levy, the defendants filed a separate action (docket No. 21905) in the Court of First Instance of Manila seeking a preliminary injunction to restrain enforcement on the ground that the Supreme Court's judgment was unconscionable, the appellant had been denied due process, and Rule 24(a) was unconstitutional. Judge Harvey (after transfer orders) granted the preliminary injunction enjoining levy of execution.
In response, the successful plaintiff filed an original complaint in prohibition in the Supreme Court seeking to compel Judge Harvey to desist from interfering with enforcement and to revoke his injunction. The Supreme Court issued the preliminary injunction prayed for in the prohibition proceeding and directed the parties to answer; a publi...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Judge of the Court of First Instance have jurisdiction to interpret, review, or enjoin enforcement of a judgment rendered by the Supreme Court?
- Is Rule 24(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands valid and not in conflict with the laws (i.e., constitutional or statu...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)