HERNANDO, J.:[**]
In view of the foregoing, the instant appeal is DISMISSED.Undaunted, respondents filed their omnibus motion for reconsideration and admit records on appeal.[21] They reasoned that their failure to submit a record on appeal together with their notice of appeal was due to inadvertence and excusable negligence. It was their belief that the submission of a record on appeal would only come after the filing of the notice of appeal and payment of docket fees. Thus, respondents sought the probate court's leniency. Further, in an attempt to cure the defect, respondents submitted their record on appeal and prayed that the omnibus motion be granted.[22] Elizabeth vehemently opposed the omnibus motion.[23]
SO ORDERED.[20]
WHEREFORE, the Omnibus Motion To Reconsideration to Admit Records on Appeal is hereby DENIED.The RTC held that respondents' and that of their counsels' failure to file a record on appeal cannot be considered as mere excusable negligence and that they would have to bear the consequences thereof.[26] Undeterred by the ruling of the RTC, respondents filed a petition for certiorari before the CA ascribing grave abuse of discretion on the part of the RTC in denying their appeal.[27]
SO ORDERED.[25]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is GRANTED. The Resolution/Order dated July 27, 2011 and the Order of the Regional Trial Court dated April 27, 2011 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE.Elizabeth filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied by the CA in its January 16, 2013 Resolution.[31] Hence, this instant petition.
SO ORDERED.[30]
FIRST REASON
THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT REVERSED AND SET ASIDE THE RULINGS OF THE PROBATE COURT AND LIBERALLY INTERPRETED THE MANDATORY RULES OF PROCEDURE ON APPEALS DESPITE THE INEXCUSABLE FAILURE ON THE PART OF THE RESPONDENTS TO COMPLY THEREWITH.SECOND REASON
THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT GAVE DUE COURSE TO THE PETITION OF THE RESPONDENTS DESPITE KNOWING THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT PERFECTED AND HAD LAPSED IN FINALITY.THIRD REASON
THE COURT OF APPEALS ERRED WHEN IT GAVE DUE COURSE TO THE PETITION OF THE RESPONDENTS DESPITE IT BEING THE WRONG MODE OF APPEAL.[32]
SEC. 3. Signature and address. – Every pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him, stating in either case his address which should not be a post office box.A review of the pleadings filed by the respondents in this Court reveals that they were duly signed by the named partner, Atty. Walter T. Young, who, applying the presumption of regularity, should be regarded as a bona-fide member of the Bar.[35] This complies the requirements of the rules.
The signature of the counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading, that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief there is good ground to support it and that it is not interposed for delay.
An unsigned pleading produces no legal effect. However, the court may, in its discretion, allow such deficiency to be remedied if it shall appear that the same was due to mere inadvertence and not intended for delay. Counsel who deliberately files an unsigned pleading, or signs a pleading in violation of this Rule, or alleges scandalous or indecent matter therein, or fails to promptly report to the court a change of his address, shall be subject to appropriate disciplinary action. (Emphasis Ours)
To stress, the right to appeal is statutory and one who seeks to avail of it must comply with the statute or rules. The requirements for perfecting an appeal within the reglementary period specified in the law must be strictly followed as they are considered indispensable interdictions against needless delays. Moreover, the perfection of an appeal in the manner and within the period set by law is not only mandatory but jurisdictional as well, hence failure to perfect the same renders the judgment final and executory. And, just as a losing party has the privilege to file an appeal within the prescribed period, so also does the prevailing party have the correlative right to enjoy the finality of a decision in his favor.[38] [Emphasis Ours]Section 1 of Rule 41 of the Rules of Court enunciates that an appeal may be taken from a judgment or final order that completely disposes of the case, or of a particular matter therein when declared by these Rules to be appealable.[39] Parenthetically, in special proceedings, Section 1 of Rule 109 enumerates orders and judgments from which appeals may be taken, to wit:
Section 1. Orders or judgments from which appeals may be taken. — An interested person may appeal in special proceedings from an order or judgment rendered by a Court of First Instance or a Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, where such order or judgment:Prescinding from the above, the remedy of appeal in special proceedings is not limited to appealable orders and judgments rendered in the main case, but extends to other orders or dispositions that completely determine a particular matter in the case.37 This includes the denial of a motion for intervention as in the case at bar.[40]
(a) Allows or disallows a will;
(b) Determines who are the lawful heirs of a deceased person, or the distributive share of the estate to which such person is entitled;
(c) Allows or disallows, in whole or in part, any claim against the estate of a deceased person, or any claim presented on behalf of the estate in offset to a claim against it;
(d) Settles the account of an executor, administrator, trustee or guardian;
(e) Constitutes, in proceedings relating to the settlement of the estate of a deceased person, or the administration of a trustee or guardian, a final determination in the lower court of the rights of the party appealing, except that no appeal shall be allowed from the appointment of a special administrator; and
(f) Is the final order or judgment rendered in the case, and affects the substantial rights of the person appealing unless it be an order granting or denying a motion for a new trial or for reconsideration.
Section 2. Modes of appeal. —Meanwhile, under Section 3 of Rule 41, a party who wants to appeal a judgment or final order in special proceedings has 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order within which to perfect an appeal because he will be filing not only a notice of appeal but also a record on appeal that will require the approval of the trial court with notice to the adverse party,[41] to wit:
(a) Ordinary appeal. — The appeal to the Court of Appeals in cases decided by the Regional Trial Court in the exercise of its original jurisdiction shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party. No record on appeal shall be required except in special proceedings and other cases of multiple or separate appeals where law on these Rules so require, tn such cases, the record on appeal shall be filed and served in like manner.
Section 3. Period of ordinary appeal. — The appeal shall be taken within fifteen (15) days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. Where a record on appeal is required, the appellant shall file a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within thirty (30) days from notice of judgment or final order. However, an appeal in habeas corpus cases shall be taken within forty-eight (48) hours from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from.Thus, the rules are clear. While it is not necessary that a notice of appeal and a record on appeal be filed simultaneously, the rule is unequivocal that the notice of appeal and record of appeal shall be filed within 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order.
The period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely motion for new trial or reconsideration. No motion for extension of time to file a motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be allowed. (n) [Emphasis Ours]
In Lebin v. Mirasol, the Court has discussed the justification for requiring the record on appeal in appeals in special proceedings, viz.:Hence, this Court finds no error when the RTC denied respondents' notice of appeal and the subsequent omnibus motion for reconsideration. While this Court is aware that limited exceptions may be considered in the strict application of the rules, mere inadvertence and honest belief that the record on appeal is not yet due are simply unacceptable. An attorney seeking a review or reversal of a judgment or order against his client must fully observe scrupulously the requisites for appeal prescribed by law, with keen awareness that any error or imprecision in compliance therewith may well be fatal to his client's cause.[52]The changes and clarifications recognize that appeal is neither a natural nor a constitutional right, but merely statutory, and the implication of its statutory character is that the party who intends to appeal must always comply with the procedures and rules governing appeals, or else the right of appeal may be lost or squandered.
As the foregoing rules further indicate, a judgment or final order in special proceedings is appealed by record on appeal. A judgment or final order determining and terminating a particular part is usually appealable, because it completely disposes of a particular matter in the proceeding, unless otherwise declared by the Rules of Court. The ostensible reason for requiring a record on appeal instead of only a notice of appeal is the multi-part nature of nearly all special proceedings, with each part susceptible of being finally determined and terminated independently of the other parts. An appeal by notice of appeal is a mode that envisions the elevation of the original records to the appellate court as to thereby obstruct the trial court in its further proceedings regarding the other parts of the case. In contrast, the record on appeal enables the trial court to continue with the rest of the case because the original records remain with the trial court even as it affords to the appellate court the full opportunity to review and decide the appealed matter.x x x x x x x x x x x x
The elimination of the record on appeal under Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 made feasible the shortening of the period of appeal from the original 30 days to only 15 days from notice of the judgment or final order. Section 3, Rule 41 of the Rules of Court, retains the original 30 days as the period for perfecting the appeal by record on appeal to take into consideration the need for the trial court to approve the record on appeal. Within that 30-day period a party aggrieved by a judgment or final order issued in special proceedings should perfect an appeal by filing both a notice of appeal and a record on appeal in the trial court, serving a copy of the notice of appeal and a record on appeal upon the adverse party within the period; in addition, the appealing party shall pay within the period for taking an appeal to the clerk of court that rendered the appealed judgment or final order the full amount of the appellate court docket and other lawful fees. A violation of these requirements for the timely perfection of an appeal by record on appeal, or the non-payment of the full amount of the appellate court docket and other lawful fees to the clerk of the trial court may be a ground for the dismissal of the appeal.
Considering that the petitioner did not submit a record on appeal in accordance with Section 3 of Rule 41, he did not perfect his appeal of the judgment dismissing his intervention. As a result, the dismissal became final and immutable. He now has no one to blame but himself. The right to appeal, being statutory in nature, required strict compliance with the rules regulating the exercise of the right. As such, his perfection of his appeal within the prescribed period was mandatory and jurisdictional, and his failure to perfect the appeal within the prescribed time rendered the judgment final and beyond review on appeal. Indeed, we have fittingly pronounced in Lebin v. Mirasol:In like manner, the perfection of an appeal within the period laid down by law is mandatory and jurisdictional, because the failure to perfect the appeal within the time prescribed by the Rules of Court causes the judgment or final order to become final as to preclude the appellate court from acquiring the jurisdiction to review the judgment or final order. The failure of the petitioners and their counsel to file the record on appeal on time rendered the orders of the RTC final and unappealable. Thereby, the appellate court lost the jurisdiction to review the challenged orders, and the petitioners were precluded from assailing the orders. [Emphasis Ours; citations omitted]
(1) It is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass, cause unnecessary delay, or needlessly increase the cost of litigation;(c) If the court determines, on motion or motu proprio and after notice and hearing, that this rule has been violated, it may impose an appropriate sanction or refer such violation to the proper office for disciplinary action, on any attorney, law firm, or party that violated the rule, or is responsible for the violation. Absent exceptional circumstances, a law firm shall be held jointly and severally liable for a violation committed by its partner, associate, or employee. The sanction may include, but shall not be limited to, non-monetary directive or sanction; an order to pay a penalty in court; or, if imposed on motion and warranted for effective deterrence, an order directing payment to the movant of part or all of the reasonable attorney's fees and other expenses directly resulting from the violation, including attorney's fees for the filing of the motion for sanction. The lawyer or law firm cannot pass on the monetary penalty to the client. (3a)
(2) The claims, defenses, and other legal contentions are warranted by existing law or jurisprudence, or by a non-frivolous argument for extending, modifying, or reversing existing jurisprudence;
(3) The factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after availment of the modes of discovery under these rules; and
(4) The denials of factual contentions are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on belief or a lack of information.