Professional Documents
Culture Documents
_______________
* FIRST DIVISION.
411
412
The Antecedents
_______________
413
414
414 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
San Juan, Jr. vs. Cruz
_______________
415
VOL. 497, JULY 31, 2006 415
San Juan, Jr. vs. Cruz
_______________
416
416 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
San Juan, Jr. vs. Cruz
_______________
417
_______________
418
_______________
419
(A)
WHETHER OR NOT THE SIXTY-DAY PERIOD FOR FILING A
PETITION FOR CERTIORARI UNDER RULE 65 OF THE
RULES OF COURT IS RECKONED FROM NOTICE OF
DENIAL OF THE FIRST MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
OF AN INTERLOCUTORY ORDER EVEN THOUGH A SECOND
AND THIRD MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (WHICH ARE
NOT PROHIBITED MOTIONS) OF THE SAME
INTERLOCUTORY ORDER HAD BEEN FILED AND WERE
LATER DENIED.
_______________
420
_______________
421
_______________
422
_______________
423
day period shall be counted from notice of the denial of the said
motion.
The petition shall be filed in the Supreme Court or, if it relates
to the acts or omissions of a lower court or of a corporation, board,
officer or person, in the Regional Trial Court exercising
jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined by the Supreme
Court. It may also be filed in the Court of Appeals whether or not
the same is in the aid of its appellate jurisdiction, or in the
Sandiganbayan if it is in aid of its appellate jurisdiction. If it
involves the acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial agency, unless
otherwise provided by law or these rules, the petition shall be
filed in and cognizable only by the Court of Appeals.
No extension of time to file the petition shall be granted except
for compelling reason and in no case exceeding fifteen (15) days.
_______________
34 Seastar Marine Services, Inc. v. Bul-an, Jr., G.R. No. 142609,
November 25, 2004, 444 SCRA 140, 152; Lapid v. Laurea, G.R. No.
139607, October 28, 2002, 391 SCRA 277, 284; Santos v. Court of Appeals,
413 Phil. 41, 53; 360 SCRA 521, 527 (2001).
424
_______________
35 State Bank & Trust Co. v. Nashville Trust Co., 202 S.W. 68.
425
_______________
426
_______________
37 Feria, 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, Annotated, Vol. 1, 2001 edition, p. 247.
38 Supra.
39 Herrera, REMEDIAL LAW, Vol. I (2000 ed.) 402.
40 G.R. No. 131889, March 12, 2001, 354 SCRA 207.
427
there is all the more reason to recognize the heirs as the proper
representatives of the deceased. Since the Rules do not specifically
prohibit them from representing the deceased, and since no
administrator had as yet been appointed at the time of the
institution of the Complaint with the SEC, we see nothing wrong
with the fact that it was the heirs of John D. Young, Sr. who
represented his estate in the case filed before the SEC. (Emphasis
supplied)”41
Petition denied.
_______________