Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 212953 2014-08-05	JOSE TAPALES VILLAROSA v. ROMULO DE MESA FESTIN VELASCO JR., J.
The above doctrine further gained force when it was reiterated in Our recent ruling in Cagas v. COMELEC,[7] in which We held that a party aggrieved by an interlocutory order issued by a Division of the COMELEC in an election protest may not directly assail the said order in this Court through a special civil action for certiorari. The remedy is to seek the review of the interlocutory order during the appeal of the decision of the Division in due course.[8]
	GR No. 201796 2013-01-15	GOVERNOR SADIKUL A. SAHALI v. COMELEC REYES, J.
The petitioners' resort to the extraordinary remedy of certiorari to assail an interlocutory order issued by the COMELEC First Division is amiss. "A party aggrieved by an interlocutory order issued by a Division of the COMELEC in an election protest may not directly assail the order in this Court through a special civil action for certiorari. The remedy is to seek the review of the interlocutory order during the appeal of the decision of the Division in due course."[21]