5 Phil. 157
[ G.R. No. 2536. October 23, 1905 ]
SILVINA LEGASPI, PETITIONER, VS. JOHN C. SWEENEY, JUDGE OF THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF MANILA, RESPONDENT.
D E C I S I O N
CARSON, J.:
that it does not set out facts sufficient to constitute a cause of
action.
The complaint is an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the
defendant, the Hon. John C. Sweeney,judge of the Court of First
Instance of Manila, to allow an appeal from a judgment and sentence of
said court in a criminal case which was heard therein, on appeal from
the municipal court of the city of Manila.
This court has held in the case of the United States vs. Bian Jeng[1]
(1 Off. Gaz., 433) that the judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Manila in a criminal case appealed to that court from the municipal
court of the city of Manila is final unless the validity or
constitutionality of a statute or ordinance is drawn in question.
The application does not allege that the validity or
constitutionality of any statute or ordinance is drawn in question in
this case, and we are therefore of opinion that the demurrer should he
sustained.
The plaintiff is allowed ten days from the date of this order in
which to serve and file an amended complaint previously notifying the
other party, and if no amended complaint is filed within that time, the
clerk, without further order, will enter a final judgment in accordance
herewith. So ordered.
Arellano, C. J., Torres, Mapa, Johnson, and Willard, JJ., concur.
[1] 2 Phil. Rep., 179.
Date created: April 28, 2014
Leave a Reply