Stork Cargo, et al. vs. Manuel B. Hernandez

[SEC CASE NO. 2265. November 2, 1987.] STORK CARGO, ET AL. , plaintiffs , vs . MANUEL B. HERNANDEZ , defendant . O R D E R For consideration is the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. Plaintiffs invoke as a ground, among others, that the dismissal of the case for lack of interest to prosecute is improper since the plaintiffs were waiting for the ruling on the defendant's motion for extension of time to file motion for reconsideration dated January 16, 1985. As indicated in the Order dated July 23, 1986, the order dated February 18, 1985 granted defendant through counsel an extension of twenty days from January 12, 1985 within which to file his motion for reconsideration. Neither did defendant file his motion nor did plaintiffs move for the setting of the case for hearing in their rebuttal evidence. EcHTDI In order, however, to give plaintiffs their last chance for a day in court and in the absence of any objection on the part of the defendant, through counsel, the said motion is hereby GRANTED. HCTaAS WHEREFORE, the Order dismissing this case is hereby reconsidered. Plaintiffs are given ten (10) days from receipt of a copy of this order to file their manifestation on whether or not they would proceed with the presentation of their rebuttal evidence. SO ORDERED. (SGD.) JOSEFINA L. PASAY-PAZ Hearing Officer