This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2002-08-29 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| appellate court which set the deadline for the filing of the petition on April 2, 2001. When the designated date arrived, the petitioners did not file a Petition for Review, and instead filed an "Urgent Petition to Avail of the Petition for Certiorari Instead of Petition for Review." They prayed for the application of the docket fees and other legal charges previously paid for the Petition for Review, to the charges for the intended Petition for Certiorari (under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court). This Urgent Petition was treated as a motion, and denied by the Court of Appeals in a Resolution dated May 2, 2001.[7] However, the appellate court held that the petitioners may still file a Petition for Certiorari subject to the payment of new docket fees. CA-G.R. SP No. 63783 was declared abandoned and terminated. Again, the petitioners failed to file their proposed Petition for Certiorari. Instead, they filed on June 20, 2001, a "Petition for Declaration of Nullity of Decision and Order with Damages,"[8] under Rule 47 of the Rules of Court. On June 27, 2001, the | |||||