Casintahan v. Revilla
This is a civil case, Marcelino Casintahan vs. Gilda Revilla, decided by the First Division of the Philippine Supreme Court on August 15, 2018. The Court denied the petition for review on certiorari filed by Casintahan for failure to pay docket and other legal fees on time, resulting in the late filing of the petition. The Court also noted several infirmities in the petition, including the lack of a verified statement on the date of receipt of the assailed decision and a defective affidavit of service. Therefore, the Court denied the petition for lack of merit.
ADVERTISEMENT
FIRST DIVISION
[UDK 16224. August 15, 2018.]
MARCELINO CASINTAHAN, petitioner,vs. GILDA REVILLA, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedAugust 15, 2018which reads as follows: HTcADC
"UDK 16224 — Marcelino Casintahan v. Gilda Revilla
The Court resolves to DENY the Motion for Extension of Time of twenty-five (25) days from the expiration of the reglementary period on May 9, 2018 within which to file the present Petition for Review on Certiorari for failure to pay docket and other legal fees as required by Section 2 of Rule 45 of the Rules; there was a remark of "RTS PMOs due to water stain." Consequently, the Petition for Review was filed late and the appeal not perfected. Moreover, it suffers from several infirmities, to wit: 1) lack of verified statement as to the date of receipt of the assailed decision; and 2) having a defective affidavit of service considering that the same did not indicate the date of notarization.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court resolves to DENY the Petition for Review on Certiorari.
SO ORDERED." Peralta, J., designated as Acting Chairperson of the First Division per Special Order No. 2582 (Revised) dated August 8, 2018; Gesmundo, J., designated as Acting Member per Special Order No. 2560 dated May 11, 2018.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENAActing Division Clerk of Court
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU