SPOUSES ARTHUS V. GALICIA AND HELEN F. GALICIA, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLEES, VS. SPOUSES ROBERTO AND NORA CORNAL, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Galicia versus Cornal

The Case

This is the case of Galicia versus Cornal, in which the spouses Arthus and Helen Galicia sued the spouses Roberto and Nora Cornal. The Galicias were the plaintiffs and the Cornals were the defendants. The action was decided by the Supreme Court on a procedural ground rather than on the merits. The Court dismissed the appeal of the defendants because their counsel failed to file the appellants' brief within the period fixed by the Rules of Court. The case matters to a reviewee because it illustrates the strict consequence that follows when an appellant neglects a mandatory step in the appellate process: the appeal is dismissed, and the judgment below stands.

Procedural History

The case began in the trial court, where the spouses Galicia obtained a favorable judgment against the spouses Cornal. The Cornals, as defendants, appealed to the Court of Appeals. In that appellate court, the defendants were directed to file their appellants' brief. Their counsel of record, Attorney Harvy Brian H. Valencia, received by registered mail with return card the Notice to File Brief dated 04 June 2014. That notice gave him forty-five days from notice to file the appellants' brief. He received the notice on 18 June 2014, and the last day to file the brief expired on 04 August 2014. No appellants' brief was ever filed. A verification dated 15 October 2014 confirmed that no brief had been submitted. The Court of Appeals then dismissed the appeal, and the matter reached the Supreme Court, which resolved it in the decision now before us.

Facts

The spouses Arthus and Helen Galicia brought suit against the spouses Roberto and Nora Cornal. The trial court ruled in favor of the Galicias, and the Cornals appealed.

In the Court of Appeals, the Cornals were required to file their appellants' brief. Their counsel on record, Attorney Harvy Brian H. Valencia, received the Notice to File Brief dated 04 June 2014 by registered mail with return card on 18 June 2014. The notice gave him forty-five days from notice within which to file the brief. Counting from that notice, the last day to file fell on 04 August 2014.

No appellants' brief was filed. A verification dated 15 October 2014 confirmed this. With the period long expired and no brief on record, the Court proceeded to resolve the appeal on that basis.

Issues

• Whether or not the appeal should be dismissed for the failure of the defendants-appellants to file their appellants' brief within the period fixed by the Rules of Court.

Applicable Provisions

Section 1, paragraph (e) of Rule 50 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

Section 1. Grounds for dismissal of appeal. — An appeal may be dismissed by the Court of Appeals, on its own motion or on that of the appellee, on the following grounds: x x x (e) Failure of the appellant to file his brief within the time prescribed by these Rules.

This provision is the ground on which the Court dismissed the appeal, because the appellants failed to file their brief within the prescribed time.

Ruling

On the sole issue, the Court held that the appeal must be dismissed. It found that the Notice to File Brief dated 04 June 2014 was received by the defendants' counsel on 18 June 2014, giving him forty-five days from notice to file the appellants' brief. The last day to file expired on 04 August 2014. A verification dated 15 October 2014 confirmed that no appellants' brief was filed. Because the appellants failed to file their brief within the time prescribed, the Court applied the express ground for dismissal under the Rules:

Section 1. Grounds for dismissal of appeal. — An appeal may be dismissed by the Court of Appeals, on its own motion or on that of the appellee, on the following grounds: x x x (e) Failure of the appellant to file his brief within the time prescribed by these Rules.

The Court thus dismissed the case for failure to file the appellants' brief.

Doctrine

An appellant who fails to file the appellants' brief within the time prescribed by the Rules of Court exposes the appeal to dismissal. Under Section 1, paragraph (e) of Rule 50 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, the failure of the appellant to file the brief within the prescribed time is an express ground for the dismissal of the appeal. The period runs from the appellant's receipt of the notice to file brief, and once it lapses without a brief, the Court may dismiss the appeal. The dismissal is a procedural consequence that leaves the judgment of the trial court in favor of the appellee undisturbed.

Disposition

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal of the spouses Cornal for their failure to file the appellants' brief, and the judgment in favor of the spouses Galicia stands.

Remember This

The one line to memorize is that failure of the appellant to file the brief within the time prescribed is a ground for dismissal of the appeal under Section 1, paragraph (e) of Rule 50. Examiners use this case to test whether a reviewee knows the procedural grounds for dismissing an appeal and the consequence of an appellant's failure to perfect the appeal through the required brief.