Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Dela cruz told Mapagay to pay the loan or the former will sue her in court.
Mapagay promised to pay, but failed to do so. Thus, she filed a case for the
violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22, otherwise known as the Bouncing Check
law against Mapagay.
On June 1999, the Metropolitan Trial Curt (MeTC) provisionally dismissed the
case on the basis of amicable settlement between the parties. However the
case was revived because Mapagay failed to comply with the terms of their
agreement.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC) affirmed in toto the the MeTC Decision.
Mapagay filed a Motion for Reconsideration but this was denied by the RTC for
being the reglementary period. Mapagay alleges that she learned of the RTC
Decision only on 20 October 2004 when she asked a friend to check on the
status of the case and that her lawyer did not inform her of the RTC Decision.
The Court of Appeal (CA) held that the RTCs Decision had become final and
unalterable for filing the motion for reconsideration out of time.
Issue:
Whether or not the omission or negligence of Mapagays counsel binds her.
Ruling:
DENIED.
It was observed that there was no showing that Mapagay had constantly
followed up her case with the counsel of record. She did not even bother to
call or personally go to the court to verify the progress of her case.
Undeniably, Mapagay did not exercise diligence in pursuing her case.