Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

YOLANDA R. BALAYAN v. MIGUEL ACORDA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 183027 2010-07-26	SPS. EDMUNDO AND LOURDES SARROSA v. WILLY O. DIZON PERALTA, J.
In their petition, petitioners prayed for the annulment of the Order dated June 29, 2007 and the Decision dated August 22, 2007 of the RTC of Para×¡aque City, Branch 257 in LRC Case No. 05-0047. However, the petition failed to state when petitioners received the RTC Order dated June 29, 2007. Hence, the Court of Appeals could not determine whether the petition for certiorari was filed on time. Under Section 3, Rule 46 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, failure to comply with the requirements stated therein, such as the statement of material dates, is sufficient ground to dismiss the petition.[23] Being an extraordinary remedy, the party who seeks to avail of the special civil action of certiorari must strictly observe the rule laid down by law.[24]
	GR No. 169498 2008-12-11	OSCAR DELOS SANTOS v. CA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Although the court has absolute discretion to reject and dismiss a petition for certiorari, in general, it does so only (1) when the petition fails to demonstrate grave abuse of discretion by any court, agency, or branch of the government; or (2) when there are procedural errors, like violations of the Rules of Court or Supreme Court Circulars. One of the procedural errors for which the court could dismiss a petition for certiorari is the failure of the petitioner to file a motion for reconsideration of the assailed order or decision.[24] A motion for reconsideration must first be filed with the lower court prior to resorting to the extraordinary writ of certiorari since a motion for reconsideration is still considered an adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. The rationale for the filing of a motion for reconsideration is to give an opportunity to the lower court to correct its imputed errors.[25]
	GR No. 131903 2008-06-26	RAGASA v. CA CARPIO, J.
As held in Balayan v. Acorda,[34] "the special civil action for certiorari is a limited form of review and is a remedy of last recourse." It lies only where there is no appeal or plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
	GR No. 171098 2008-02-26	JUAN G. GARCIA v. CA and GARCIA PASION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The acceptance of a petition for certiorari, as well as the grant of due course thereto is, in general, addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[13] It must be stressed that certiorari, being an extraordinary remedy,[14] the party who seeks to avail of the same must strictly observe the rules laid down by the law[15] and non-observance thereof may not be brushed aside as mere technicality.[16]