Ca sample motion for reconsideration
![ca sample motion for reconsideration ca sample motion for reconsideration](https://cdn.uslegal.com/uslegal-preview/TX/TX-G0382A/1.png)
Santos at his registered address in Meycauayan, Bulacan through registered Letter No. In the case at bar, a copy of the SeptemResolution was sent to Atty. When a party summoned by publication has failed to appear in the action, judgments, final orders or resolutions against him shall be served upon him also by publication at the expense of the prevailing party. More importantly, it is best for the courts to deal only with one person in the interest of orderly procedure – either the lawyer retained by the party or the party him/herself if does not intend to hire a lawyer.”Īs to service of court resolutions, Section 9, Rule 13 of the Rules pertinently provides that judgments, final orders or resolutions shall be served either personally or by registered mail. “The reason is simple – the parties, generally, have no formal education or knowledge of the rules of procedure, specifically, the mechanics of an appeal or availment of legal remedies thus, they may also be unaware of the rights and duties of a litigant relative to the receipt of a decision. Thus, even if a party represented by counsel has been actually notified, said notice is not considered notice in law.
![ca sample motion for reconsideration ca sample motion for reconsideration](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DixBFjlVMAA8HNg.jpg)
The SC held that Section 2, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court (Rules) provides that “f any party has appeared by counsel, service upon him shall be made upon his counsel or one of them, unless service upon the party himself is ordered by the court.” Whether or not the filing of the motion for reconsideration should be reckoned from the date of receipt of counsel and not from the date of receipt of the party of personal notice Santos), received notice of the SeptemResolution on October 17, 2016, and as such, the motion for reconsideration was timely filed. Hence, the petition claiming that petitioner’s counsel, Atty. The CA denied the motion for reconsideration for having been belatedly filed. On October 26, 2016, he filed a motion for reconsideration claiming that: (a) he received (referring to his counsel’s receipt) notice of the SeptemResolution on Octoand (b) he had already remedied the procedural defects in his petition, attaching therewith an Amended Petition for Certiorari. The CA dismissed the petition for failure to comply with the required contents thereof, and the documents which should accompany it.Ĭalleon received his personal notice of the SeptemResolution on October 5, 2016. The NLRC dismissed the appeal of HZSC and petitioner,11 and thereafter, denied their motions for reconsideration.Ĭalleon filed a petition for certioraril before the CA, praying to be absolved from liability in the absence of any finding of malice and fraud on his part. Elvin’s HR Bundle Books at Discounted Rate
CA SAMPLE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION PLUS
The Labor Arbiter (LA) declared HZSC and petitioner guilty of illegal (constructive) dismissal for HZSC’s failure to comply with the procedural requirements under Article 283 (now Article 298) of the Labor Code, and ordered them to pay respondents their respective unpaid salary, separation pay, nominal damages, plus ten percent (10%) of the total monetary awards as attorney’s fees.Īggrieved, HZSC and Calleon appealed to the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC).Īcquire Mastery of HR/Labor Doctrines, Rules and Principles with Atty. Caling (Leanion, et al.) against respondent HZSC Realty Corporation (HZSC) and its President, herein petitioner Michael Calleon (Calleon), arising from HZSC’s failure to rehire them after more than six (6) months from the temporary shutdown of its business operation due to business losses on January 23, 2015. The instant controversy stemmed from complaints for illegal (constructive) dismissal, non-payment of salary, 13th month pay, and separation pay, as well as payment of moral and exemplary damages and attorney’s fees filed by respondents John Leanlon P.
![ca sample motion for reconsideration ca sample motion for reconsideration](https://0.academia-photos.com/attachment_thumbnails/56676811/mini_magick20190111-24831-1a5w9n.png)
receipt by party of personal notice Receipt by party represented by a counsel is not considered notice in law TRO issued by the Supreme Court Remand of the case Reckoning point for Motion for Reconsideration of the Court of Appeals Decision Fifteen (15) days to file motion for reconsideration Receipt of the Resolution Service of resolutions Receipt by counsel vs.
![ca sample motion for reconsideration ca sample motion for reconsideration](https://www.pdffiller.com/preview/100/113/100113822.png)
Thus, the Supreme Court held in the following case: Motion for reconsideration filed of the CA decision should be reckoned from the date which the counsel received the Decision and not from the date the party himself received his copy.