Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

VICTORIA L. TEH v. NATIVIDAD TEH TAN

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 197590 2014-11-24	BIR v. CA DEL CASTILLO, J.
Indeed, the remedy of a party aggrieved by a decision, final order, or resolution of the CA is to file a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, which is a continuation of the appellate process over the original case.[58] And as a rule, if the remedy of an appeal is available, an action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court, which is an original or independent action based on grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, will not prosper[59] because it is not a substitute for a lost appeal.[60]
	GR No. 193650 2014-10-08	GEORGE PHILIP P. PALILEO v. PLANTERS DEVELOPMENT BANK DEL CASTILLO, J.
Fourth, instead of properly pursuing its appeal to free itself from the unfavorable effects of the trial court's denial of its notice of appeal, PDB chose with disastrous results to gamble on its Omnibus Motion for Reconsideration and for New Trial by filing an original Petition for Certiorari to assail the trial court's denial thereof. Time and again, it has been said that certiorari is not a substitute for a lost appeal, especially if one's own negligence or error in one's choice of remedy occasioned such loss.[40]
	GR No. 172588 2013-03-18	ISABEL N. GUZMAN v. ANIANO N. GUZMAN BRION, J.
Apparently, to resurrect her lost appeal, the petitioner filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari, imputing grave abuse of discretion on the RTC for deciding the case against her. Certiorari, by its very nature, is proper only when appeal is not available to the aggrieved party; the remedies of appeal and certiorari are mutually exclusive, not alternative or successive.[31] It cannot substitute for a lost appeal, especially if one's own negligence or error in one's choice of remedy occasioned such loss or lapse.[32]
	GR No. 174937 2012-06-13	JOVINA DABON VDA. DE MENDEZ v. CA AND SPS. MINEO AND TRINIDAD B. DABON DEL CASTILLO, J.
Unlike a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45, which is a continuation of the appellate process over the original case, a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 is an original or independent action[44] based on grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.[45] It will lie only if there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.[46] As such, it cannot be a substitute for a lost appeal, especially if such loss or lapse was due to one's own negligence or error in the choice of remedies.[47]