FACTS:

I'm sorry, but you have not provided the title and citation of the case. Please provide the complete information so that I can accurately summarize the excerpts for you.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in granting the petition for certiorari considering that the remedy of appeal was available and the petition was filed out of time.

2. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the trial court abused its discretion by admitting the deposition into evidence.

3. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding that the private respondent did not waive her right to cross-examine the petitioner's witness and to present rebuttal evidence.

RULING:

1. The Court found that the remedy of certiorari was proper under the circumstances and timely objections were raised against the deposition.

2. The Court ruled that the trial court acted with grave abuse of discretion in admitting the oral deposition without properly addressing the private respondent's objections.

3. The Court upheld the private respondent's right to cross-examine the petitioner's witness and present rebuttal evidence, noting that this right had been explicitly reserved and timely asserted.

PRINCIPLES:

• Certiorari vs. Appeal Certiorari may be employed to correct a discretionary action of a lower court when there is grave abuse of discretion that cannot be adequately addressed by appeal.

• Deposition Rules and safeguards must be strictly followed in the taking of depositions to ensure fairness and avoid prejudice, especially concerning the rights of the adverse party to cross-examine and present rebuttal evidence.

• Right to Cross-Examine The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental, and any deposition admitted without allowing cross-examination can be set aside.