Motion for reconsideration RULE 37

Fresh period rule | Motion for reconsideration (RULE 37) | Post-judgment Remedies | CIVIL PROCEDURE

THE FRESH PERIOD RULE UNDER RULE 37
(Motion for Reconsideration in Philippine Civil Procedure)

1. OVERVIEW

The “Fresh Period Rule” is a jurisprudential innovation in Philippine procedural law, most prominently associated with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Neypes v. Court of Appeals (G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 2005). Under this rule, a litigant who files a timely motion for reconsideration (or new trial) under Rule 37 of the Rules of Court is afforded a new (“fresh”) 15-day period to appeal, counted from receipt of the order denying the motion.

The rule was adopted to harmonize the periods for appeal and to avoid confusion (and undue loss of the right to appeal) in situations where the losing party files a post-judgment motion, but is left with only the unexpired portion of the original appeal period once that motion is denied.

Although initially articulated in civil cases, the Supreme Court has extended the Fresh Period Rule to criminal cases and other proceedings by analogy and by explicit doctrinal pronouncements, emphasizing uniformity and fairness in procedural rules.

2. LEGAL BASIS AND EVOLUTION

  1. Rule 37 of the Rules of Court (Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration)

    • Section 1, Rule 37 governs motions for new trial.
    • Section 2, Rule 37 governs motions for reconsideration.
    • Section 9, Rule 37 clarifies that an order denying a motion for new trial or reconsideration is not appealable by itself, but such denial can be assigned as an error in the appeal of the judgment.

  2. Neypes v. Court of Appeals (2005)

    • In Neypes, the Supreme Court promulgated the Fresh Period Rule:

      “...a party-litigant has a fresh period of fifteen (15) days counted from receipt of the order denying or dismissing a motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration to file a notice of appeal.”

    • Neypes reasoned that the rule aimed to standardize appeal periods and to prevent the inadvertent forfeiture of the right to appeal by parties who relied on the old interpretation that the appeal period continued to run while a post-judgment motion was pending.

  3. Subsequent Jurisprudence

    • The Supreme Court clarified and affirmed Neypes in various decisions, stating that the new (fresh) 15-day appeal period arises only when the motion for new trial or reconsideration was timely filed.
    • The rule was also explicitly made applicable to criminal proceedings, as stated in later decisions. The Court has consistently invoked equity and the “liberal application of the rules” to ensure a full opportunity for parties to appeal.

  4. 2019 Amendments to the Rules of Court

    • The 2019 Amendments to the Rules of Court did not negate the Fresh Period Rule; rather, the established jurisprudence remains fully effective and is read in conjunction with the revised Rules.
    • The essence of the Fresh Period Rule remains: A denial of a timely filed post-judgment motion resets the 15-day period to appeal, ensuring uniform protection of the right to appeal.

3. RATIONALE OF THE FRESH PERIOD RULE

  1. Uniformity and Simplicity

    • Before Neypes, a party who filed a motion for reconsideration had to watch carefully the remaining portion of the original 15-day appeal period that began with the receipt of the decision. If, for instance, 10 days had elapsed before filing the motion, then upon denial of the motion, the party only had 5 days left to file the notice of appeal. This led to confusion and frequent loss of the right to appeal by mere inadvertence.
    • By granting a fresh 15-day period, the Supreme Court simplified the counting of the appeal period, eliminating scenarios of partial or unexpired periods remaining.

  2. Promotion of Substantial Justice

    • The rule is consistent with the principle that rules of procedure should not be applied so rigidly as to override substantial justice. As long as a party has acted within the rules and in good faith, the Court prefers to maintain avenues for meritorious appeals rather than foreclose them on technicalities.

  3. Equity and Liberal Interpretation of Rules

    • Filipino jurisprudence is replete with reminders that while procedural rules are important, they must be liberally construed to promote fairness and ensure that litigants are not unduly prejudiced by technicalities when genuine issues warrant review.

4. REQUIREMENTS FOR AVAILING THE FRESH PERIOD RULE

  1. Timely Filing of the Motion for Reconsideration / New Trial

    • The movant must file the motion within the 15-day period from receipt of the judgment or final order.
    • An untimely motion for reconsideration or new trial does not toll the period to appeal; in such a scenario, the appeal period continues to run and may expire.

  2. Proper Service and Form of the Motion

    • Under Rule 15 and Rule 37 of the Rules of Court, the motion must strictly comply with the formal requirements, such as the non-forum shopping certification (as required in some cases), notice of hearing, and proof of service.
    • A defective or pro forma motion for reconsideration will not toll the running of the appeal period.

  3. Receipt of the Denial Order

    • The new 15-day period to appeal begins upon receipt (not mailing, not issuance) of the denial order or resolution.
    • This date of receipt must be clearly shown in the records (e.g., by registry return card, personal service, or other acceptable proof of service) to avoid controversies.

5. APPLICATION TO CRIMINAL CASES

  • Although the Fresh Period Rule originated in the context of civil procedure, the Supreme Court extended its application to criminal proceedings.
  • In Yap v. CA and other rulings, the Court recognized that the rationale applies equally to criminal cases, affording the accused or even the prosecution (when appropriate) a fresh 15-day period to appeal after the denial of a timely post-judgment motion.

6. COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS

  1. “Pro forma” Motion for Reconsideration

    • A motion lacking substantive ground or merely repeating previous arguments without genuine effort to discuss perceived errors is deemed “pro forma.” A pro forma motion does not toll the period to appeal. Hence, the Fresh Period Rule does not operate if the motion is pro forma.

  2. Application Only to Notices of Appeal

    • The Supreme Court has stated that the Fresh Period Rule applies to all modes of appeal (whether notice of appeal, record on appeal, or petition for review) so long as the motion is seasonably filed and other requirements are satisfied.

  3. Extending the Period Beyond 15 Days

    • The Fresh Period Rule grants exactly a new 15-day period. It does not automatically justify repeated motions for extension. Courts can still deny undue or repeated requests for additional time if not warranted by the rules.

7. PROCEDURAL OUTLINE

To illustrate how the Fresh Period Rule works in practice:

  1. Decision/Final Order is Served

    • The 15-day period to appeal commences from the date of receipt.

  2. Timely File a Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration

    • Within that same 15-day period, the aggrieved party files a motion under Rule 37.
    • The pendency of this motion tolls the running of the original 15-day period.

  3. Court Issues an Order Denying the Motion

    • Once the denial order is received, the full and fresh 15-day period to appeal starts anew.

  4. Notice of Appeal or Other Mode of Appeal

    • The aggrieved party has 15 days from receipt of the denial order to file the appropriate pleading (e.g., Notice of Appeal, Petition for Review, etc.).

  5. Court of Appeals or Appropriate Appellate Court

    • The case then proceeds to the appellate court if the notice or petition is filed within the fresh 15-day period.

8. EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE

Failure to comply with the requirements to invoke the Fresh Period Rule (e.g., filing an out-of-time motion for reconsideration, filing a pro forma motion, or neglecting to file an appeal within the fresh 15-day period) results in the judgment attaining finality. Once a judgment becomes final and executory, courts generally lose jurisdiction to alter or modify it, barring exceptional remedies (such as a petition for relief from judgment under Rule 38, or other extraordinary remedies under the Rules).

9. PRACTICAL TIPS FOR COUNSEL

  1. Track All Deadlines

    • Maintain clear records of the dates of receipt of decisions and denial orders.
    • Enter these critical dates in a docket or calendar system to avoid missing deadlines.

  2. Ensure Motion Is Substantive

    • If filing a motion for reconsideration, state clearly the factual and legal bases, and avoid mere repetition of allegations.
    • Attach necessary supporting documents, and observe the required format and notice of hearing.

  3. Double-Check the Date of Receipt of the Denial Order

    • The fresh 15-day period is counted strictly from the date of receipt. Keep documentary proof of that receipt (registry return card, personal service record, etc.).

  4. File the Appeal Promptly

    • While the rule grants a fresh 15-day period, do not wait until the last minute to file your notice of appeal or petition for review. Delays increase the risk of technical errors or unforeseen problems.

  5. Verify the Specific Mode of Appeal

    • Depending on the case (civil, criminal, special proceedings, quasi-judicial agency appeals, etc.), confirm whether the fresh period applies and the appropriate form of the appeal. Ensure alignment with the controlling provisions of the Rules of Court or special laws.

10. CONCLUSION

The Fresh Period Rule under Philippine procedural law is a significant safeguard of the right to appeal. Enshrined in Neypes v. Court of Appeals and consistently upheld in subsequent rulings, it provides a full 15-day period to appeal following the denial of a timely filed motion for reconsideration or new trial. The rule exemplifies the Supreme Court’s commitment to a more liberal and equitable application of procedural rules, balancing the imperatives of finality of judgments with the fundamental right to a fair opportunity to appeal.

For practitioners, absolute clarity about deadlines, proper motion practice, and timely filings are critical in invoking the Fresh Period Rule. When properly observed, the rule ensures that technicalities do not unduly deprive parties of their day in court on appeal, thus promoting substantial justice.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Remedy when motion for new trial or reconsideration is denied | Motion for reconsideration (RULE 37) | Post-judgment Remedies | CIVIL PROCEDURE

All There is to Know about the Remedy When a Motion for New Trial or Motion for Reconsideration is Denied (Rule 37, Rules of Court, Philippines)

Below is a meticulous, step-by-step discussion of the applicable rules, doctrines, and considerations under Philippine Civil Procedure regarding the remedy when the trial court denies a motion for new trial or motion for reconsideration under Rule 37.

1. Overview of Rule 37

Rule 37 of the Rules of Court governs motions for new trial and motions for reconsideration in civil cases. These motions are filed to challenge the judgment or final order of a trial court based on specific grounds. Once a motion for new trial or reconsideration is denied, the judgment or final order becomes ripe for the next level of review or challenge.

1.1 Grounds for a Motion for New Trial (Rule 37, Sec. 1)

A motion for new trial is typically founded on:

  1. Fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence (FAME) that prevented the movant from having a fair trial; or
  2. Newly discovered evidence that could not have been discovered and produced at the trial despite the exercise of due diligence, and would likely alter the outcome of the case.

1.2 Grounds for a Motion for Reconsideration (Rule 37, Sec. 1)

A motion for reconsideration is usually based on:

  1. Errors of law or errors in the judgment’s findings of fact that require the trial court to reverse or modify its decision; or
  2. Any sufficient reason materially affecting the order or judgment that justifies a reconsideration (though typically the first ground covers these errors).

1.3 Effect of Denial of Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration

Upon denial of these post-judgment motions, the judgment or final order originally rendered by the court stands. It becomes final and executory if no further remedy is timely pursued.

2. Primary Remedy When the Motion is Denied: Appeal

When a motion for new trial or reconsideration is denied by the trial court, the general and most common remedy is to appeal the original judgment to the appropriate appellate court. This remedy is governed by the rules on appeal found in:

  • Rule 41 (Appeal from the Regional Trial Courts to the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court)
  • Rule 40 (Appeal from the Municipal Trial Courts to the RTC)
  • Other pertinent provisions, depending on the case’s nature and the court of origin.

2.1 Period to Appeal

Under Rule 41, Section 3, a party has 15 days from notice of the denial of the motion for new trial or reconsideration to perfect an appeal, unless a different period is provided by law or special rule. Specifically:

  • If a party files a motion for new trial or reconsideration, the 15-day period to appeal is counted from receipt of the order denying that motion (Rule 41, Section 3).
  • Failure to appeal within this reglementary period generally renders the judgment final and executory.

2.2 How to Perfect the Appeal

  • The appellant must file a Notice of Appeal (or the appropriate mode of appeal, such as a record on appeal if required by the Rules or by law) with the court that rendered the judgment.
  • Conform to the relevant rules on payment of docket and other lawful fees within the required period.

2.3 Effect of a Perfected Appeal

Upon perfection of the appeal, jurisdiction over the case is vested in the appellate court (i.e., the Court of Appeals or directly the Supreme Court in exceptional cases), and the trial court generally loses jurisdiction over the case except for instances specifically provided by the Rules (e.g., to issue orders for the protection and preservation of the rights of the parties, approval of bonds, etc.).

3. Alternative or Extraordinary Remedies

In certain circumstances, a party may consider remedies other than a direct appeal, especially if the denial of the motion for new trial or reconsideration is tainted by jurisdictional errors or grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.

3.1 Petition for Certiorari (Rule 65)

A special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 is available if the trial court acts without jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in denying the motion for new trial or reconsideration. This is not a substitute for a lost appeal. The petitioner must show:

  1. That the trial court’s denial was rendered with grave abuse of discretion; and
  2. That there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy (i.e., appeal would not be adequate or is no longer available due to extraordinary circumstances).

Key Points on Rule 65:

  • The petition must be filed within 60 days from receipt of the denial of the motion for new trial or reconsideration (under the current rules and jurisprudence).
  • Certiorari under Rule 65 does not review errors of judgment (i.e., misappreciation of facts or mere errors of law) but addresses jurisdictional issues or decisions rendered with grave abuse of discretion.

3.2 Petition for Relief from Judgment (Rule 38)

If a party was prevented from filing a motion for new trial, reconsideration, or an appeal due to fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence (FAME), and no other remedy is available, that party may file a Petition for Relief under Rule 38. It should be filed within 60 days after the petitioner learns of the judgment, order, or proceeding to be set aside and within 6 months after such judgment or order was entered.

3.3 Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47)

If the denial of the motion for new trial or reconsideration is subsumed under a judgment that is already final and executory, and it is discovered that the judgment itself is void due to lack of jurisdiction or extrinsic fraud, a party may seek annulment of judgment under Rule 47 before the Court of Appeals. This is, however, an extraordinary remedy used only when the ordinary remedies of new trial, appeal, petition for relief, or other appropriate remedies are no longer available through no fault of the party seeking annulment.

4. Practical Considerations

  1. Timeliness is crucial. Failing to observe the reglementary periods (15 days for appeal, 60 days for certiorari, 60 days/6 months for relief from judgment) usually results in the finality of the judgment.
  2. Grounds and nature of the error: A party must carefully examine whether the alleged errors in the denial of the motion for reconsideration or new trial pertain to mere errors of judgment (appealable errors) or errors of jurisdiction (proper for certiorari).
  3. Exhaustion of Remedies: If an appeal is adequate, certiorari will generally be disallowed. The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that certiorari cannot be used as a substitute for a lost appeal.
  4. One final judgment rule: Once the motion for new trial or reconsideration is denied and no timely appeal or other remedy is pursued, the judgment attains finality, foreclosing further challenges (subject to certain narrow exceptions like annulment of judgment).

5. Step-by-Step Summary When a Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration is Denied

  1. Receive the Order of Denial:

    • Note the date of receipt to accurately count periods for appeal or other remedies.

  2. Decide on the Remedy:

    • Appeal (Rule 41, or Rule 40 from lower courts): File a notice of appeal within 15 days.
    • Certiorari (Rule 65): If there is grave abuse of discretion in the denial, file within 60 days.
    • Petition for Relief (Rule 38): If reasons for not appealing (fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence) exist, file within 60 days from discovery and no more than 6 months from judgment entry.
    • Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47): If the judgment is final and executory and is void for lack of jurisdiction or extrinsic fraud, file an annulment petition in the Court of Appeals.

  3. Perfect the Chosen Remedy:

    • Comply with formal requirements: notice, payment of docket fees, verification, certification against forum shopping (for special actions), etc.

  4. Monitor:

    • Keep track of the progress in the appellate court or other appropriate forum.

  5. Observe Finality:

    • If none of the remedies are properly and timely pursued, the judgment (and order denying the motion for new trial or reconsideration) becomes final and executory.

6. Key Doctrines from Supreme Court Jurisprudence

  1. Go v. Court of Appeals: Reiterates that once a motion for reconsideration or new trial is denied, the aggrieved party’s recourse is appeal, unless it falls under exceptions allowing certiorari.
  2. Salazar v. Court of Appeals: Emphasizes the difference between errors of judgment (correctible by appeal) and errors of jurisdiction (correctible by certiorari).
  3. AP v. NLRC (though a labor case, the principle is analogous): Reiterates that certiorari is not available if the remedy of appeal can adequately address the alleged errors.

These doctrines confirm that appeal is the principal remedy, and certiorari is a restricted avenue meant only for jurisdictional defects.

7. Conclusion

When a motion for new trial or reconsideration under Rule 37 of the Rules of Court is denied, the standard, most straightforward remedy is to appeal the original judgment or final order within the reglementary period. Failure to appeal results in finality of the judgment.

If the denial of the motion involves jurisdictional errors or grave abuse of discretion, a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 may be appropriate—provided that no appeal or other adequate remedy exists. In extraordinary scenarios where the movant was prevented by fraud, accident, mistake, or excusable negligence from asserting his or her rights, a Petition for Relief from Judgment (Rule 38) or even an Annulment of Judgment (Rule 47) may be the last resort.

Ultimately, the choice of remedy depends on the nature of the alleged error, timeliness, and the specific procedural context. Ensuring strict compliance with technical rules and deadlines is critical to avoid the dreaded situation where judgment becomes final and executory, foreclosing all further avenues of review.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Motion for reconsideration (RULE 37) | Post-judgment Remedies | CIVIL PROCEDURE

COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER RULE 37 OF THE PHILIPPINE RULES OF COURT

I. INTRODUCTION

A Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 37 of the Rules of Court is a post-judgment remedy available to a party aggrieved by a judgment or final order of the trial court. It is a procedural mechanism allowing the same court that rendered judgment to correct any errors—whether of law or fact—without elevating the case to an appellate court. As one of the remedies available after judgment but before the judgment attains finality, it is an important step in ensuring due process and allowing the court to rectify any mistakes promptly.

II. STATUTORY BASIS

The governing provisions for a Motion for Reconsideration are mainly found in Rule 37 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (as amended). The pertinent sections are:

  • Section 1: Grounds of and period for filing a motion for new trial or reconsideration
  • Section 2: Contents of motion for new trial or reconsideration and notice thereof
  • Section 3: Action upon motion for new trial or reconsideration
  • Section 4: Resolution of motion
  • Section 5: Second motion for new trial
  • Section 6: Effect of granting of motion for new trial
  • Section 7: Partial new trial or reconsideration
  • Section 8: Effect of order for partial new trial
  • Section 9: Remedy after order denying motion for new trial or reconsideration

While Sections 1, 2, and 3 focus on both new trial and reconsideration, the rules make distinctions in the grounds and form for each. A motion for reconsideration specifically challenges the propriety of the decision or final order on errors of fact and/or law, not the discovery of new evidence or an alleged irregularity in the proceedings (which are grounds for a new trial).

III. NATURE AND PURPOSE

  1. Nature: A Motion for Reconsideration is intra-court—it is addressed to the same court that rendered the assailed judgment.
  2. Purpose:
    • To afford the court an opportunity to correct its own errors;
    • To prevent unnecessary appeals;
    • To expedite final disposition of cases by resolving errors while the trial court still has jurisdiction.

IV. GROUNDS FOR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Under Section 1, Rule 37, a motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or the law. Common grounds include:

  1. Errors of fact: Findings of facts that are clearly contradicted by the evidence on record, or misappreciation of facts.
  2. Errors of law: Misapplication of jurisprudence, statutory provisions, or constitutional provisions.
  3. Errors of judgment: Instances where the conclusion or application of legal principles is patently erroneous.

There is no strict enumeration for grounds for reconsideration, unlike a motion for new trial which is confined to fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence (FAME) or newly discovered evidence. Instead, the motion for reconsideration is anchored on the notion that the decision is contrary to evidence or the applicable law.

V. PERIOD FOR FILING

  1. Reglementary period: A motion for reconsideration must be filed within 15 calendar days from receipt of the judgment or final order being assailed.
  2. Non-extendible: As a rule, this 15-day period is non-extendible; a late motion for reconsideration will not toll the running of the period to appeal, resulting in finality of the judgment.
  3. Effect on appeal period: If a timely and proper motion for reconsideration is filed, it tolls (suspends) the period to appeal. Once the motion is resolved (i.e., denied), the movant has the fresh 15-day period (or the balance of the statutory period, whichever is longer) to file an appeal from receipt of notice of such denial.

VI. FORM AND CONTENTS

Under Section 2, Rule 37:

  1. Caption and Title: Must properly identify the case number and the parties.
  2. Concise statement of grounds: Must state the specific grounds relied upon for reconsideration.
  3. Arguments: Must refer specifically to findings of fact, conclusions of law, or both, which the movant believes the court overlooked or erred in. General averments like “the decision is contrary to law” are insufficient.
  4. Supporting affidavits or evidence: If necessary (or if new factual matters are discovered—but usually, that is for new trial rather than reconsideration).
  5. Notice of Hearing: Must be set for hearing in compliance with the requirement of notice to the adverse party, unless the court rules otherwise.
  6. Proof of Service: Must show that the adverse parties were duly served with a copy of the motion.

Failure to comply with mandatory requirements (e.g., a “pro forma” motion that merely reiterates previous arguments or fails to specify errors) will not toll the running of the period to appeal.

VII. ACTION BY THE COURT

1. Court’s Options

Upon receipt of a motion for reconsideration, the court has several options:

  1. Grant the motion: If meritorious, the court may reverse or modify the judgment or final order accordingly.
  2. Deny the motion: If unmeritorious, the court issues an order denying the same.
  3. Partial grant: The court may grant a reconsideration only as to certain issues or findings, leaving the rest of the judgment intact (see Section 7, Rule 37).

2. When the Motion is Deemed Submitted

  • After the lapse of the period for the opposition (usually within the timeframe set by the court or local rules), or upon the hearing on the motion, the motion is deemed submitted for resolution.
  • The court must resolve it promptly. In practice, the trial court should act on the motion within 30 days from the date it is deemed submitted for resolution (mandated by the Speedy Disposition of Cases rule, but not strictly penal in civil cases the same way as in criminal cases).

3. Requirement of Resolution in Writing

The resolution granting or denying the motion for reconsideration must be in writing, stating clearly the reasons for the action taken by the court.

VIII. PROHIBITION ON SECOND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Under the general rule, the Rules of Court do not allow the filing of a second motion for reconsideration of a final judgment or order. Specifically:

  • Section 5, Rule 37: Prohibits the filing of a second motion for new trial. By analogy and consistent practice, a second motion for reconsideration is likewise prohibited as it effectively extends litigation and finality indefinitely.
  • Once a motion for reconsideration is resolved, the remedy is to appeal the denial of that motion along with the original judgment, rather than filing serial motions for reconsideration.

Exceptionally, the Supreme Court in some cases (especially in its own level of review) may entertain a second motion for reconsideration for extraordinarily persuasive reasons or in the interest of justice. However, at the trial court level, repeated reconsiderations are not permitted as a general rule.

IX. EFFECTS OF GRANT OR DENIAL

  1. If Granted:

    • The assailed judgment is set aside or modified accordingly.
    • The court may issue a new judgment, or re-open the case if the motion is granted to correct errors of fact or law.
    • If the reconsideration leads to modification of the decision, the modified decision becomes the new final judgment subject to another potential motion for reconsideration within 15 days, or direct appeal.

  2. If Denied:

    • The judgment stands as rendered.
    • The movant’s recourse is to appeal within the balance of the period, which is typically another 15 days from receipt of the order of denial (or the remainder of the original period if there was any left, whichever is longer).
    • If no appeal is taken, the judgment or final order becomes final and executory.

X. PRO FORMA MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION

A pro forma motion for reconsideration is one that fails to comply substantially with the requirements of the Rules (e.g., it rehashes previous arguments without pinpointing specific factual or legal errors). The Supreme Court has consistently held that a pro forma motion does not suspend the running of the period to appeal. Hence, parties should draft the motion carefully, identifying each error clearly and explaining why such error warrants reversal or modification.

XI. RELATIONSHIP TO APPEAL

  1. Concurrent Remedies: A party cannot pursue a motion for reconsideration and an appeal simultaneously from the same judgment or final order in the same court. The correct sequence is:

    • File a motion for reconsideration if you want the trial court to re-examine its decision.
    • If denied (in full or part), proceed to appeal within the reglementary period.

  2. Tolling the Period of Appeal: A timely and proper motion for reconsideration interrupts the running of the period for appeal. Once denied, the fresh period to appeal begins from notice of denial.

  3. Choice of Remedy: If one immediately appeals and does not first move for reconsideration, that moots the possibility of an MR in the lower court. Some issues (particularly factual matters or new evidentiary contentions) may be better raised first with a motion for reconsideration if they revolve around misappreciation of evidence.

XII. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE

Philippine jurisprudence abounds with rulings on motions for reconsideration under Rule 37. Some key points gleaned from decided cases:

  • Pro forma motions do not suspend the period to appeal (e.g., Galuda v. Mangrobang, G.R. No. [example citation]).
  • A motion for reconsideration should not be used to merely re-argue issues decided by the court (Lazaro v. CA, G.R. No. [example citation]).
  • The court must act within a reasonable time on such motions, ensuring parties’ due process rights (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, iconic for laches but also referencing timely resolution).
  • No second motion for reconsideration at the trial court level, as a rule (Francisco v. Puno, G.R. No. [example citation]).

XIII. SAMPLE OUTLINE OF A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Below is a simplified outline (not an official form) reflecting key sections recommended by the Rules of Court:

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[Branch Number], [City/Province]

[C A S E    T I T L E]

CIVIL CASE NO. ______________

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

COMES NOW the [party], through counsel, and respectfully states:

1. That on [date of receipt], [party] received a copy of the [Decision/Order] dated [date].
2. The said [Decision/Order] is contrary to law and to the evidence on record, specifically:
   a) The Court erred in its factual finding that...
   b) The Court misapplied [legal principle/statutory provision] in concluding that...

3. Arguments:
   3.1 The Court’s conclusion overlooked the testimony of [witness]...
   3.2 The applicable jurisprudence, specifically [case citation], states that...
   (Include clear and concise discussion)

4. Prayer:
   WHEREFORE, premises considered, [party] respectfully prays that this Honorable Court reconsider and set aside the [Decision/Order], and render a new one dismissing the complaint / or granting the relief sought / or modifying the dispositive portion as follows: [specify desired modification].

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this [date] at [place].

[Signature]
[Name of Counsel]
[PTR No., IBP No., Roll No., MCLE Compliance]
[Law Firm/Address]
[Contact Details]

Copy furnished:
[Opposing Counsel’s Name/Address]
[Party if unrepresented]

XIV. KEY TAKEAWAYS

  1. Timeliness is crucial. File the motion within 15 days from receipt of the decision or final order.
  2. Specificity is mandatory. Articulate the errors of fact or law clearly; avoid pro forma submissions.
  3. Single Motion Rule: Only one motion for reconsideration is generally allowed in the trial court.
  4. Tolling of Appeal Period: A properly filed motion for reconsideration suspends the running of the period for appeal.
  5. Remedy After Denial: If denied, the recourse is to timely file an appeal.
  6. Drafting: Adhere to the Rules of Court requirements for notices, proof of service, hearing, and statements of grounds.

XV. CONCLUSION

A Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 37 is a critical, often final, chance for a litigant to seek rectification of any perceived errors by the trial court before the judgment becomes final and executory. Mastery of its requisites—especially in terms of timing, substance, and form—can spell the difference between protecting one’s right to appeal and losing it to a technicality. By carefully and clearly stating the factual and legal issues the court allegedly overlooked or misapplied, a litigant maximizes the chance of obtaining a favorable resolution without resorting immediately to the appellate process.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login