G.R. No. 6517 , September 1, 1911
A. V. MANS, plaintiff-appellant, vs. C. F. GARRY, ET AL., defendants; THE PHILIPPINE TRADING CO., intervener-appellee.

FACTS

The plaintiff-appellant, A. V. Mans, appealed the judgment of the trial court and moved for a new trial on the ground that the judgment was contrary to the weight of the evidence. The motion was denied, and a bill of exceptions was filed, which included a prayer to incorporate the trial evidence. The trial judge approved and certified the bill of exceptions. However, the certified record was defective because it contained only the documentary evidence and omitted the certified transcript of the stenographer’s notes of the oral evidence. The appellant failed to perfect the record despite being notified and appeared to have abandoned his contention regarding the insufficiency of the evidence. The appellee, The Philippine Trading Co., argued that the appellant’s failure to include all evidence could lead to a reversal based solely on defective findings of fact by the trial judge, even though the actual evidence supported the judgment.

ISSUE

What is the proper procedure when an appellant fails to include all trial evidence in the record on appeal, and how should the appellee be protected from a potential reversal due to defective findings of fact by the trial court?

RULING

The Supreme Court established a rule of practice for cases where the appellant fails to bring all evidence on appeal. If the appellant’s failure is willful or negligent, the appeal will proceed as if no motion for a new trial based on the evidence had been filed. The Court will then review only errors of law, examining the pleadings and findings of fact to determine if the judgment aligns with the proven facts. However, to protect the appellee from unfair reversal due to defective findings of fact, the appellee may perfect the record by including the missing evidence within twenty days. If the appellee does so, the Court will not reverse the judgment solely on the insufficiency or incorrectness of the trial court’s findings of fact, provided the evidence itself discloses facts sufficient to sustain the judgment. The Court ordered the proceedings to continue under these guidelines.