G.R. No. 44104; August 23, 1935
TRINIDAD AQUINO, plaintiff-appellant, vs. CRISTINA TONGCO, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

Plaintiff Trinidad Aquino received notice of an adverse decision on March 30, 1935. On April 26, 1935 (27 days later), she filed a motion for a new trial. This motion was denied on April 30, 1935. On May 3, 1935, she filed a motion to reopen the trial based on the same grounds as her motion for a new trial. The motion to reopen was denied on May 22, 1935. Aquino then filed a motion for reconsideration of that denial, which was also denied on June 24, 1935. The trial court, in its June 24 order, granted Aquino 10 days to file her bill of exceptions. Defendant Cristina Tongco moved to dismiss the appeal, arguing the bill of exceptions was filed out of time and the trial court lost jurisdiction after its judgment became final.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court had jurisdiction to grant an extension to file the bill of exceptions and approve it after its judgment had become final due to the plaintiff’s failure to perfect her appeal on time.

RULING

No. The appeal is dismissed. The trial court acted without jurisdiction. The motion to reopen the trial, being based on the same grounds as the earlier motion for a new trial, was superfluous and did not suspend the running of the period to appeal. The period to file the notice of appeal began to run from May 22, 1935 (notice of the denial of the motion to reopen) and expired on May 27, 1935. Aquino failed to file her notice of appeal within this period, making the judgment final. Consequently, the trial court lost jurisdiction and its subsequent order granting an extension to file the bill of exceptions was void. The Court held that while multiple motions for a new trial may be filed within the 30-day period, each must be based on different legal grounds. A second motion on the same ground does not suspend the periods for appeal.

AI Generated by Armztrong.