G.R. No. L-9515 February 20, 1957
MARIA B. CASTRO, petitioner, vs. HON. BIENVENIDO A. TAN, judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch XIII and WILLIAM L. BURR, respondents.

FACTS

In a detainer suit, the Manila municipal court ordered William L. Burr to pay Maria B. Castro accrued rents and attorney’s fees. Burr appealed to the Court of First Instance (CFI) and filed a supersedeas bond subscribed by himself and the Associated Insurance & Surety Co., Inc. to secure payment of the amounts adjudged if the decision were affirmed. After trial, CFI Judge Bienvenido A. Tan reversed the municipal court’s decision and awarded Burr attorney’s fees. Burr then moved to cancel the supersedeas bond, arguing it had become functus officio due to the favorable decision. Castro objected, contending the bond should remain until final judgment. Judge Tan granted the motion to cancel. Castro’s motion for reconsideration was denied. She then filed this special civil action to vacate the cancellation order. Meanwhile, Castro appealed the main case to the Court of Appeals, which later rendered judgment in her favor for the rents. The surety company is not a party in this proceeding.

ISSUE

Whether the Supreme Court should resolve the petition to vacate the order cancelling the supersedeas bond.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the case as moot and academic. The Court held that the issues had become purely speculative and of no practical effect. A judgment against Burr would provide no material advantage to Castro, as she was already entitled to recover rents from him under the Court of Appeals’ decision. Furthermore, the surety company was not a party, and any judgment against it would be impossible as the cancellation order had long become final as to the surety. Citing the general rule that courts will not determine moot questions or abstract propositions where no practical relief can be granted, the Court dismissed the petition without costs.