Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Diaz Vs Republic

    Uploaded by

    Queenie
    13 views1 page
    1) Petitioner's late mother filed an application to register a vast tract of land that was initially ruled in her favor but later reversed by the Court of Appeals. 2) After multiple motions and appeals, the parties entered a compromise agreement that was approved by the appellate court but later annulled. 3) The Supreme Court denied petitioner's third motion for reconsideration through a minute resolution rather than a signed decision. The Court ruled that minute resolutions can be used to deny clearly meritless petitions and that due process was not violated.

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    Diaz vs Republic

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1) Petitioner's late mother filed an application to register a vast tract of land that was initially ruled in her favor but later reversed by the Court of Appeals. 2) After multiple motions and appeals, the parties entered a compromise agreement that was approved by the appellate court but later annulled. 3) The Supreme Court denied petitioner's third motion for reconsideration through a minute resolution rather than a signed decision. The Court ruled that minute resolutions can be used to deny clearly meritless petitions and that due process was not violated.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    13 views1 page

    Diaz Vs Republic

    Uploaded by

    Queenie
    1) Petitioner's late mother filed an application to register a vast tract of land that was initially ruled in her favor but later reversed by the Court of Appeals. 2) After multiple motions and appeals, the parties entered a compromise agreement that was approved by the appellate court but later annulled. 3) The Supreme Court denied petitioner's third motion for reconsideration through a minute resolution rather than a signed decision. The Court ruled that minute resolutions can be used to deny clearly meritless petitions and that due process was not violated.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Diaz vs.

    Republic (signed by the Clerk of Court upon orders of the Court) denies or dismisses a
    petition or motion for reconsideration for lack of merit, it is understood that the
    G.R. No. 181502, February 2, 2010 assailed decision or order, together with all its findings of fact and legal
    conclusions, are deemed sustained.
    FACTS:

    Petitioner’s late mother, Flora Garcia, filed an application for registration of a vast
    tract of land. The CFI ruled in Garcia’s favor which the CA reversed and set aside.
    Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration. Ultimately, the parties entered into a
    compromise agreement which the appellate court approved, in a resolution, and
    directed the LRA to issue the corresponding decree of registration in petitioner’s
    favor. However, the OSG filed a motion for reconsideration. Thereafter, CA issued
    an amended resolution annulling the compromise agreement. Petitioner moved for
    reconsideration but was denied. Petitioner filed a petition for review on certiorari
    which was also denied. She moved for reconsideration. This motion was denied
    with finality. Petitioner, however, insisted on filing a motion to lift entry of
    judgment and motion for leave to file a second motion for reconsideration and to
    refer the case to the SC en banc. The Court denied it considering that a second
    motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading. Furthermore, the motion to
    refer the case to the banc was likewise denied as the banc is not an appellate court
    to which decisions or resolutions of the divisions may be appealed. Not one to be
    easily deterred, petitioner wrote identical letters, first addressed to then Acting
    Chief Justice Quisumbing and then to Chief Justice Puno himself. This letter/third
    motion for reconsideration is denied.

    ISSUE:

    Whether the Court’s denial of petitioner’s complaint through a mere minute


    resolution deprived her of due process.

    HELD:

    No. The Court is not duty-bound to issue decisions or resolutions signed by the
    justices all the time. It has ample discretion to formulate ponencias, extended
    resolutions or even minute resolutions issued by or upon its authority, depending
    on its evaluation of a case, as long as a legal basis exists. When a minute resolution

    You might also like