This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2006-03-31 |
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J. |
||||
| Technically, the Court of Appeals may dismiss an appeal for failure to file appellant's brief on time.[10] However, the dismissal is directory, not mandatory.[11] It is not the ministerial duty of the court to dismiss the appeal. The failure of an appellant to file his brief within the time prescribed does not have the effect of dismissing the appeal automatically.[12] The court has discretion to dismiss or not to dismiss an appellant's appeal. It is a power conferred on the court, not a duty.[13] The discretion must be a sound one, to be exercised in accordance with the tenets of justice and fair play, having in mind the circumstances obtaining in each case.[14] | |||||
|
2000-05-31 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| Technically, the Court of Appeals may dismiss an appeal for failure to file appellant's brief on time.[16] However, the dismissal is directory, not mandatory.[17] It is not the ministerial duty of the court to dismiss the appeal. "The failure of an appellant to file his brief within the time prescribed does not have the effect of dismissing the appeal automatically."[18] The court has discretion to dismiss or not to dismiss an appellant's appeal. It is a power conferred on the court, not a duty.[19] The "discretion must be a sound one, to be exercised in accordance with the tenets of justice and fair play, having in mind the circumstances obtaining in each case."[20] Technicalities, however, must be avoided. The law abhors technicalities that impede the cause of justice. The court's primary duty is to render or dispense justice.[21] "A litigation is not a game of technicalities."[22] "Law suits, unlike duels, are not to be won by a rapier's thrust. Technicality, when it deserts its proper office as an aid to justice and becomes its great hindrance and chief enemy, deserves scant consideration from courts."[23] Litigations must be decided on their merits and not on technicality.[24] Every party litigant must be afforded the amplest opportunity for the proper and just determination of his cause, free from the unacceptable plea of technicalities.[25] Thus, dismissal of appeals purely on technical grounds is frowned upon where the policy of the court is to encourage hearings of appeals on their merits and the rules of procedure ought not to be applied in a very rigid, technical sense; rules of procedure are used only to help secure, not override substantial justice.[26] It is a far better and more prudent course of action for the court to excuse a technical lapse and afford the parties a review of the case on appeal to attain the ends of justice rather than dispose of the case on technicality and cause a grave injustice to the parties, giving a false impression of speedy disposal of cases while actually resulting in more delay, if not a miscarriage of justice. | |||||