This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2014-07-02 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| At the outset, it should be emphasized that the trial court has the discretion on whether to grant or deny a motion to postpone and/or reschedule the pre-trial conference in accordance with the circumstances obtaining in the case. This must be so as it is the trial court which is able to witness firsthand the events as they unfold during the trial of a case. Postponements, while permissible, must not be countenanced except for clearly meritorious grounds and in light of the attendant circumstances.[63] | |||||
|
2010-07-27 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| The disallowance of a motion for postponement is not sufficient to show arbitrariness and partiality of the trial court.[43] For one, the grant of such is not a matter of right for it is addressed to the sound discretion of the court.[44] Parties have absolutely no right to assume that their motion for deferment would be granted, hence, they should prepare for the hearing, lest they pass the blame to no one but themselves. | |||||