G.R. No. 30892 , July 22, 1929
INES MELGAR and PEDRO NOEL, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. TOMAS DELGARDO and ALBERTA ALQUIZOLA, defendants-appellants.

Ponente: J. VILLAMOR

FACTS

The defendants-appellants (Delgado and Alquizola) filed a motion for reconsideration and a new trial after being notified of the judgment. The trial court heard and denied this motion on August 18, 1928, and the appellants were orally informed of the denial in open court. However, the written order of denial was only filed with the clerk of court and served on the appellants on September 13, 1928. On that same date, the appellants reiterated their exception, gave notice of their intention to appeal, and filed their bill of exceptions. The trial court approved the bill on November 7, 1928. The plaintiffs-appellees (Melgar and Noel) moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing that the bill of exceptions was filed out of time. They contended that the period to file should be counted from August 18, 1928 (the date of oral notification), which would make the September 13 filing late.

ISSUE

From which date does the period for filing a bill of exceptions in an ordinary civil case begin to runfrom the date of oral notification in open court of the order denying a motion for new trial, or from the date of written notification of the filed order?

RULING

The period begins to run from the date the appellants are notified in writing of the order denying their motion for a new trial. Consequently, the bill of exceptions filed on September 13, 1928, was timely.

The Supreme Court reasoned as follows:
1. Courts of First Instance are courts of record. Their proceedings must be recorded in writing as a perpetual memorial. Therefore, an order cannot be considered effective for notification purposes until it is reduced to writing and filed with the clerk’s office.
2. The Rules of the Courts of First Instance (specifically paragraph 2) require the clerk to give notice to the parties or their attorneys by registered mail or personally “as soon as an order, decree or decision is filed by a judge.” This formal written notice is distinct from an oral announcement in court.
3. Section 146 of the Code of Civil Procedure (as amended) allows an exception to be taken from an order overruling a motion for new trial based on insufficiency of evidence, which may be reviewed by the Supreme Court. For such review to be possible, the ruling must be in writing.

Since the written order was filed and the appellants were notified on September 13, 1928, and they filed their bill of exceptions on that same date, the filing was timely under the doctrine of Layda vs. Legazpi. The motion to dismiss the appeal was denied.