G.R. No. L-5465
ANDRES SERRANO, ET AL., plaintiffs-appellees, vs. PONCIANO REYES, defendant-appellant.
October 5, 1910

FACTS:
On August 16, 1907, Andres Serrano, et al. (plaintiffs) initiated an action against Ponciano Reyes (defendant) to recover an amount due under a building contract. The lower court, after hearing the evidence, initially rendered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs. Subsequently, the plaintiffs moved for a new trial, which was granted on August 28, 1908. After the new trial, the court again rendered judgment on February 16, 1909, in favor of the plaintiffs, ordering the defendant to pay P2,000 and costs. The defendant appealed this second judgment, raising several assignments of error pertaining to both questions of law and questions of fact. However, the defendant did not file a motion for a new trial in the lower court after the rendition of the second judgment.

ISSUE:
Can the Supreme Court review the evidence and questions of fact raised by an appellant if no motion for a new trial was made in the lower court?

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court held that it could not examine the evidence adduced on the trial of the cause because the defendant-appellant failed to file a motion for a new trial in the lower court. In conformity with paragraph 3, Section 497 of the Code of Procedure in Civil Actions, and established jurisprudence, the Supreme Court is precluded from reviewing the evidence if no such motion was made and an exception to its denial taken. The Court proceeded to examine only the questions of law presented by the assignments of error and concluded that no error was committed by the lower court in that respect. Therefore, the judgment of the lower court, ordering the defendant to pay P2,000, was affirmed with costs.