This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2015-08-19 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| In Magsino v. de Ocampo,[23] the Court articulated the reason for requiring -through Section 2 of Rule 42 - that pleadings and other material portions of the record as would support the allegations must be attached to the Petition, in the following manner: It is worth mentioning that pursuant to the third guidepost recognized in Galvez the petitioner could still have submitted the omitted documents at the time he filed his motion for reconsideration vis-a-vis the first assailed resolution of the CA. Yet, he did not do so. Instead, he boldly proposed in his motion for reconsideration vis-a-vis the first assailed resolution that the CA should have bowed to the "greater imperative of doing substantial justice" by not hampering the appeal "sticking unflaggingly to such rules," to wit: | |||||