Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 19 views

    Supreme Court: R.N. Orozco, For Petitioner. Estanislao Yusay, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Iris Fabiaña Batiller
    1. The petitioner, Angel Gustilo, sought relief under Article 499 of the Code of Civil Procedure against Judge Estanislao Yusay for failing to sign Gustilo's bill of exceptions following a trial where judgment was entered against Gustilo. 2. The Supreme Court found that Gustilo did not properly except to the order overruling his demurrer in a timely manner as required and could not wait until after trial to include the exception. 3. The Court also found Gustilo's proposed bill of exceptions and petition to be vague and indefinite, unable to determine what questions he intended to present for review beyond those raised in his demurrer. The Court did

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Supreme Court: R.N. Orozco, For Petitioner. Estanislao Yusay, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Iris Fabiaña Batiller
    19 views1 page
    1. The petitioner, Angel Gustilo, sought relief under Article 499 of the Code of Civil Procedure against Judge Estanislao Yusay for failing to sign Gustilo's bill of exceptions following a trial where judgment was entered against Gustilo. 2. The Supreme Court found that Gustilo did not properly except to the order overruling his demurrer in a timely manner as required and could not wait until after trial to include the exception. 3. The Court also found Gustilo's proposed bill of exceptions and petition to be vague and indefinite, unable to determine what questions he intended to present for review beyond those raised in his demurrer. The Court did

    Original Description:

    1902

    Original Title

    Yusay

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The petitioner, Angel Gustilo, sought relief under Article 499 of the Code of Civil Procedure against Judge Estanislao Yusay for failing to sign Gustilo's bill of exceptions following a trial where judgment was entered against Gustilo. 2. The Supreme Court found that Gustilo did not properly except to the order overruling his demurrer in a timely manner as required and could not wait until after trial to include the exception. 3. The Court also found Gustilo's proposed bill of exceptions and petition to be vague and indefinite, unable to determine what questions he intended to present for review beyond those raised in his demurrer. The Court did

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    19 views1 page

    Supreme Court: R.N. Orozco, For Petitioner. Estanislao Yusay, Respondent

    Uploaded by

    Iris Fabiaña Batiller
    1. The petitioner, Angel Gustilo, sought relief under Article 499 of the Code of Civil Procedure against Judge Estanislao Yusay for failing to sign Gustilo's bill of exceptions following a trial where judgment was entered against Gustilo. 2. The Supreme Court found that Gustilo did not properly except to the order overruling his demurrer in a timely manner as required and could not wait until after trial to include the exception. 3. The Court also found Gustilo's proposed bill of exceptions and petition to be vague and indefinite, unable to determine what questions he intended to present for review beyond those raised in his demurrer. The Court did

    Copyright:

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

    Republic of the Philippines

    SUPREME COURT
    Manila

    EN BANC

    G.R. No. L-1089 October 31, 1902

    ANGEL GUSTILO, petitioner,


    vs.
    ESTANISLAO YUSAY, judge of the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental, respondent.

    R.N. Orozco, for petitioner.


    Estanislao Yusay, respondent.

    WILLARD, J.:

    It can be gathered from the petition that the defendant demurred to the complaint; that the demurrer
    was overruled; the case tried, and a judgment against the defendant entered on the 30th of August.
    The defendant presented a so-called bill of exceptions on the 5th of September. The judge has failed
    to sign this bill and the defendant seeks relief under article 499 of the Code of Civil Procedure. His
    petition states: "I base my exception upon the fact that our demurrer was overruled." Under article
    142 an exception to the order overruling the demurrer should have been taken "forthwith" upon
    receiving notice thereof. This does not appear to have been done. The defendant can not wait until
    after the trial and then for the first time except to such an order by including a statement to that effect
    in his proposed bill of exceptions.lawphil.net

    The petition also states that the defendant appealed from the judgment. The only way of presenting
    an exception to it, having that exception incorporated in a bill of exceptions signed by the judge and
    certified to this court. (Article 143.)

    The petition with the proposed bill of exceptions is very vague and indefinite, and we can not say
    that by his so-called appeal he intended to present for review any questions other than those raised
    by his demurrer.

    Arellano, C.J., Torres, Cooper, Smith, Mapa, and Ladd, JJ., concur.

    The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation

    You might also like