G.R. No. L-5637
FRANCISCO GONZALEZ QUIROS, judgment-creditor and appellant, vs. CARLOS PALANCA TAN-GUINLAY, judgment-debtor and appellee.
November 23, 1910

FACTS:
Francisco Gonzalez Quiros (judgment-creditor) had obtained a judgment against Carlos Palanca Tan-Guinlay (judgment-debtor) for P7,981.80 plus 6% interest from January 1, 1894, in a previous Supreme Court decision (March 3, 1906, 5 Phil. Rep. 675). Execution proceedings were initiated but yielded no results as no property of Tan-Guinlay was found.

Quiros later learned that Tan-Guinlay owned a portion of the capital and a 40% interest in the profits of the partnership Song Fo & Co., which Quiros alleged was being concealed by the other partners. On November 13, 1908, the Court of First Instance ordered the partners of Song Fo & Co., including Tan-Guinlay, to appear before a referee, Thomas Aitken, to testify and produce company books, inventories, and balance sheets from 1903-1908, to ascertain Tan-Guinlay’s interest. The order also affected all property of Tan-Guinlay in the partners’ possession, prohibiting its sale or transfer.

After the referee submitted his report, Quiros moved on January 19, 1909, for Song Fo & Co. to pay the judgment, asserting that the referee’s findings showed sufficient funds. The court issued an order on March 12, 1909, and confirmed it on March 22, 1909, which Quiros excepted to. However, Quiros failed to file the required bill of exceptions within the ten-day period specified by Section 143 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

Quiros also excepted to an order dated April 29, 1909, disallowing further supplementary proceedings, but again failed to file the necessary bill of exceptions within the statutory period. On August 6, 1909, Quiros filed a general appeal from all judicial orders issued since March 4, 1909, encompassing the March 12, March 22, and April 29 orders. This general appeal was filed over four months after the March orders and over three months after the April order. Subsequently, Quiros filed motions in May and July 1909 to set aside, rectify the referee’s report, or review proceedings, which were denied.

ISSUE:
Whether the appeals taken by Francisco Gonzalez Quiros from the orders of March 12, 1909, March 22, 1909, and April 29, 1909, were proper and timely, given his failure to file a bill of exceptions within the prescribed ten-day period following these final orders.

RULING:
The Supreme Court declared the appeals filed by Francisco Gonzalez Quiros to be improper.

The Court held that Quiros failed to comply with Section 143 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which requires an excepting party to present a bill of exceptions within ten days after the entry of the memorandum of exception. Quiros did not file the necessary bill of exceptions within this period for the final orders of March 12 and March 22, 1909. His general appeal on August 6, 1909, came “four months and twenty-four days” after the March orders, rendering it untimely. Similarly, the appeal from the April 29, 1909, order was made after “three months and six days,” also making it untimely.

Furthermore, the Court ruled that the subsequent orders of May 8, July 26, and July 31, 1909 (denying Quiros’s petitions to set aside or rectify the referee’s report, or to review proceedings), were not appealable. These petitions sought to weaken or destroy the final and irrevocable character of the earlier orders of March 12, March 22, and April 29, which had already acquired the status of res adjudicata.

Therefore, the appeals entered by Quiros were declared improper, and the bill of exceptions should not have been prosecuted. Costs were taxed against the appellant.