G.R. No. L-2608; October 23, 1950
ALFONSO RILI and TRINIDAD VDA. DE MIRAFLORES, plaintiffs-appellees, vs. CIRIACO CHUNACO, ET AL., defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Defendant Ciriaco Chunaco appealed from a judgment rendered against him upon the pleadings. After the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, Chunaco’s answer contained only a general denial, which the court deemed insufficient to raise any issue of fact, leading to a judgment on the pleadings. Chunaco was notified of the judgment on April 6, 1948. He filed a motion to set aside the judgment on April 20, 1948, which was denied. He filed a second motion to set aside on May 27, 1948, which was also denied. His notice of appeal, record of appeal, and appeal bond were filed on June 18, 1948. Subsequently, he filed a motion for relief under Rule 38 on grounds of mistake and fraud.

ISSUE

Whether the appeal was filed within the reglementary period and whether the motion for relief under Rule 38 was proper.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower court’s judgment and orders. The appeal was filed out of time. The 30-day period to appeal began on April 6, 1948, upon notice of judgment. The first motion to set aside did not suspend the period; it resumed on May 24, 1948, upon notice of the denial. The second motion was a mere reiteration and did not suspend the period anew. The appeal filed on June 18, 1948, was 25 days after the resumption and 39 days after the original notice, thus late. The motion for relief under Rule 38 was also properly denied, as the alleged mistake was one of law and the alleged fraud pertained to the merits, both grounds being available earlier and deemed waived under Rule 26, section 8 for not being included in the first motion to set aside.

AI Generated by Armztrong.