Title
Reforma vs. De Luna
Case
G.R. No. L-13242
Decision Date
Jul 31, 1958
Election dispute over mayoralty in Catanauan, Quezon; contested ballots' validity decided by Supreme Court, favoring Reforma due to improper ballot placement.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-13242)

Procedural History

After the general elections, Reforma was proclaimed the winning candidate with 1,607 votes against De Luna's 1,580 votes. De Luna challenged the election result in the Quezon Court of First Instance, disputing the vote counts from various precincts. Reforma subsequently filed a counter-protest regarding certain precincts as well. The trial court ultimately declared Reforma the mayor-elect with a confirmed plurality. However, upon appeal, the Court of Appeals found in favor of De Luna, reversing the lower court's decision and declaring de Luna the winner with a plurality of 12 votes.

Main Issues on Appeal

Reforma filed a motion for reconsideration on two counts, arguing that the Court of Appeals improperly counted 33 ballots where De Luna's name was not placed in the correct position for the mayoral vote, thus should have been counted as stray votes. Additionally, Reforma contended that the appellate court disregarded three valid votes cast for him.

Court Proceedings and Conduct

During the proceedings, the court had appointed commissioners to review and count the ballots. The commissioners identified the 33 ballots where De Luna's name was improperly marked, yet these ballots were not claimed by his attorney as valid votes during the trial. The trial court ultimately pronounced its decision without considering these ballots, citing Reforma's absence on the trial date as the reason for the default ruling in favor of Reforma.

Legal Basis for Count Validity

The Revised Election Code provides that votes cast for candidates not contesting particular offices should be considered stray and thus invalid. It mandates that such illegal votes should not be counted towards a candidate's total. There exists a strict protocol for ballot examination, facilitating judicial counting upon request, which must abide by the principles of justice and election validity.

Court of Appeals’ Rationale

The Court of Appeals held that, due to the lack of formal objection from Reforma to the inclusion of the contested ballots, they should be counted in favor of De Luna. The appellate body relied on the reasoning that since these ballots were found in the ballot box and not claimed as invalid at the trial, they automatically benefitted the candidate they were cast for.

Supreme Court's Analysis

The Supreme Court scrutinized the legality of the ballots and focused on whether the lack of presentation

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.