View full case

DOMINGO NEYPES v. DEL MUNDO

FACTS:

Petitioners filed an action for annulment of judgment and titles of land and/or reconveyance and/or reversion with preliminary injunction against various respondents. In the course of the proceedings, the trial court resolved various motions filed by the parties. The trial court granted the motion of the petitioners to declare certain respondents in default for their failure to file an answer, but denied the motion as against other respondents. The trial court also denied the motions to dismiss filed by certain respondents based on lack of cause of action and prescription, respectively. The respondent heirs filed a motion for reconsideration, arguing that the trial court could resolve the issue of prescription from the allegations in the complaint itself. The trial court dismissed the petitioners' complaint on the ground that the action had already prescribed. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, which was also denied. They filed a notice of appeal, but it was denied as being filed out of time. Petitioners then filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus before the Court of Appeals, which was dismissed. Petitioners filed a motion for reconsideration, which was likewise denied. They now appeal to the Supreme Court.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the Court of Appeals erred in dismissing the petition for certiorari and mandamus, which challenged the trial court's order dismissing the appeal in Civil Case No. C-36.

  2. Whether the notice of appeal was filed out of time, and if the final order referred to in Section 3, Rule 41 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure should be the trial court's order dated February 12, 1998 or the order dated July 1, 1998.

RULING:

The Supreme Court ruled that the "final order," as referred to in Section 3, Rule 41 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, was the order dated July 1, 1998, which denied the motion for reconsideration. The Court allowed a "fresh period rule," giving petitioners a new 15-day period to file their notice of appeal from the receipt of the order denying the motion for reconsideration. Thus, the notice of appeal filed on July 27, 1998, five days after receiving the final order on July 22, 1998, was timely.

PRINCIPLES:

  1. Fresh Period Rule The 15-day reglementary period to appeal is counted from the receipt of the order denying the motion for new trial or reconsideration, providing a "fresh period" for the appellant to file an appeal.

  2. Final Order A final order, for the purpose of counting the appeal period, includes the order denying a motion for reconsideration or new trial, and not the original order/judgment dismissing the case.

  3. Mandatory and Jurisdictional Nature of the Appeal Period The period to appeal is both mandatory and jurisdictional, and failure to comply results in the finality of the judgment.

  4. Liberal Construction of Rules The rules of procedure should be liberally construed to promote substantial justice, especially in preventing grave injustices, even if it means occasionally setting aside technicalities.