GR 45274; (August, 1936) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 45274 and 45275; August 21, 1936
EDUARDO C. GUICO, petitioner, vs. ESTANISLAO MAYUGA and HEIRS OF NARCISO MAYUGA, respondents.
FACTS
Petitioner Eduardo C. Guico filed two petitions for a writ of mandamus with the Court of Appeals, seeking to compel the Court of First Instance of Rizal to approve his bills of exceptions in two land registration cases. The Court of Appeals denied the petitions, finding that Guico’s bill of exceptions was filed out of time. It ruled that his motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion for new trial did not suspend the running of the period to perfect his appeal, as both motions were based on identical grounds already decided by the trial court. Guico then filed this petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court to review the proceedings of the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE
Whether the Supreme Court can review the proceedings and factual findings of the Court of Appeals in this case.
RULING
No. The petition is dismissed. The Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction in this case, under the applicable law, is limited to reviewing errors of law. The findings of fact by the Court of Appeals are conclusive. The determination of whether Guico’s motions were identical—a factual finding—was made by the Court of Appeals, and no question of law is presented. Consequently, the Supreme Court is without jurisdiction to review the proceedings.
AI Generated by Armztrong.