GR L 1449; (November, 1903) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-1449, November 30, 1903
VICENTE GOMEZ GARCIA, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellants, vs. JACINTA HIPOLITO, ET AL., defendants-appellees.
FACTS:
Judgment was rendered in favor of the defendants on May 1, 1903. The plaintiffs were notified on May 21, 1903, and on May 23, they excepted to the judgment and filed a motion for a new trial. The motion for a new trial was denied on July 23, 1903. The plaintiffs presented their proposed bill of exceptions on July 28, 1903, which was allowed and signed by the court on August 5, 1903. The term of the court at which the case was tried expired on May 30, 1903. The defendants-appellees filed a motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions on two grounds: (1) that the bill of exceptions was not presented within the ten-day period prescribed by Section 143 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and (2) that the bill of exceptions did not contain all the evidence presented at the trial.
ISSUE:
1. Whether the period of ten days for presenting a proposed bill of exceptions under Section 143 of the Code of Civil Procedure is extendible.
2. Whether the bill of exceptions should be dismissed for failing to contain all the evidence from the trial.
RULING:
1. On the extendibility of the ten-day period: The Supreme Court held that the ten-day period for presenting a proposed bill of exceptions is extendible. The Court reasoned that this period pertains to the mechanical preparation of appeal papers after the right to appeal has been secured by giving notice of the intention to prosecute a bill of exceptions during the court term. Given the geographical and communication challenges in the Archipelago at the time, strict adherence to the ten-day period would often be a physical impossibility. Furthermore, no public policy is violated by allowing an extension, as only the parties are affected. The Court found that the trial judge, by signing the bill of exceptions on August 5, effectively consented to an extension, and the appellees waived any objection by not opposing its allowance when served on July 28.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
The motion to dismiss the bill of exceptions was denied.