Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

GRACIANO SITCHON v. PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF OCCIDENTAL NEGROS

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 173176 2008-08-26	JUDY ANNE L. SANTOS v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Another recognized reason of the law in permitting appeal only from a final order or judgment, and not from an interlocutory or incidental one, is to avoid multiplicity of appeals in a single action, which must necessarily suspend the hearing and decision on the merits of the case during the pendency of the appeal. If such appeal were allowed, the trial on the merits of the case would necessarily be delayed for a considerable length of time, and compel the adverse party to incur unnecessary expenses, for one of the parties may interpose as many appeals as incidental questions may be raised by him, and interlocutory orders rendered or issued by the lower court.[37]
	GR NO. 150798 2005-03-31	RUDECON MANAGEMENT CORPORATION v. SISENANDO S. SINGSON CALLEJO, SR., J.
The reason of the law in permitting appeal only from a final order or judgment, and not from interlocutory or incidental one, is to avoid multiplicity of appeals in a single action, which must necessarily suspend the hearing and decision on the merits of the case during the pendency of the appeal. If such appeal were allowed the trial on the merits of the case should necessarily be delayed for a considerable length of time, and compel the adverse party to incur unnecessary expenses; for one of the parties may interpose as many appeals as incidental questions may be raised by him and interlocutory orders rendered or issued by the lower court.[19]