Motion for New Trial or Reconsideration (Rule 37)

Grounds for a motion for new trial

(1) Fraud (extrinsic), accident, mistake (of fact and not of law) or excusable
negligence which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against and by
reason of which such aggrieved party has probably been impaired in his rights;

(2) Newly discovered evidence (Berry Rule), which he could not, with
reasonable diligence, have discovered and produced at the trial, and which if
presented would probably alter the result; and

(3) Award of excessive damages, or insufficiency of the evidence to justify the

decision, or that the decision is against the law (Sec. 1, Rule 37).

Grounds for a motion for reconsideration

(1) The damages awarded are excessive;

(2) The evidence is insufficient to justify the decision or final order;

(3) The decision or final order is contrary to law (Sec. 1).

When to file

(1) A motion for new trial should be filed within the period for taking an
appeal. Hence, it must be filed before the finality of the judgment (Sec. 1). No
motion for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration shall be allowed.
In Distilleria Limtuaco vs. CA, 143 SCRA 92, it was said that the period for filing a
motion for new trial is within the period for taking an appeal.
(2) The period for appeal is within 15 days after notice to the appellant of the
judgment or final order appealed from. Where a record on appeal is required,
the appellant shall file a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within 30
days from notice of the judgment or final order (Sec. 3, Rule 41). A record on
appeal shall be required only in special proceedings and other cases of multiple
or separate appeals(Sec. 3, Rule 40).
Denial of the motion; effect

(1) If the motion is denied, the movants has a “fresh period” of fifteen days
from receipt or notice of the order denying or dismissing the motion for
reconsideration within which to file a notice of appeal.

(2) When the motion for new trial is denied on the ground of fraud, accident,
mistake of fact or law, or excusable negligence, the aggrieved party can no
longer avail of the remedy of petition for relief from judgment (Francisco vs.
Puno, 108 SCRA 427).

Grant of the motion; effect

(1) If a new trial be granted in accordance with the provisions of the rules, the
original judgment shall be vacated or set aside, and the action shall stand for
trial de novo; but the recorded evidence taken upon the former trial so far as
the same is material and competent to establish the issues, shall be used at the
new trial without retaking the same (Sec. 6). The filing of the motion for new trial
or reconsideration interrupts the period to appeal (Sec. 2, Rule 40; Sec. 3, Rule
41).
(2) If the court grants the motion (e.g., it finds that excessive damages have
been awarded or that the judgment or final order is contrary to the evidence or
law), it may amend such judgment or final order accordingly (Sec. 3). The
amended judgment is in the nature of a new judgment which supersedes the
original judgment. It is not a mere supplemental decision which does not
supplant the original but only serves to add something to it (Esquivel vs. Alegre,
172 SCRA 315). If the court finds that a motion affects the issues of the case as to
only a part, or less than all of the matters in controversy, or only one, or less that
all of the parties to it, the order may grant a reconsideration as to such issues if
severable without interfering with the judgment or final order upon the rest (Sec.
7).

Remedy when motion is denied

(1) The party aggrieved should appeal the judgment. This is so because a
second motion for reconsideration is expressly prohibited under the Interim
Rules (Sec. 5).
(2) An order denying a motion for reconsideration or new trial is not
appealable, the remedy being an appeal from the judgment or final order
under Rule 38. The remedy from an order denying a motion for new trial is not to
appeal from the order of denial. Again, the order is not appealable. The remedy
is to appeal from the judgment or final order itself subject of the motion for new
trial (Sec. 9, rule 37).

Fresh 15-day period rule

(1) If the motion is denied, the movants has a fresh period of 15 days from
receipt or notice of the order denying or dismissing the motion for
reconsideration within which to file a notice to appeal. This new period
becomes significant if either a motion for reconsideration or a motion for new
trial has been filed but was denied or dismissed. This fresh period rule applies only
to Rule 41 governing appeals from the RTC but also to Rule 40 governing
appeals from MTC to RTC, Rule 42 on petitions for review from the RTC to the CA,
Rule 43 on appeal from quasi-judicial agencies to the CA, and Rule 45
governing appeals by certiorari to the SC. Accordingly, this rule was adopted to
standardize the appeal periods provided in the Rules to afford fair opportunity
to review the case and, in the process, minimize errors of judgment. Obviously,
the new 15 day period may be availed of only if either motion is filed; otherwise,
the decision becomes final and executory after the lapse of the original appeal
period provided in Rule 41 (Neypes vs. CA, GR 141524, Sept. 14, 2005).
The Neypes ruling shall not be applied where no motion for new trial or motion
for reconsideration has been filed in which case the 15-day period shall run from
notice of the judgment.
(2) The fresh period rule does not refer to the period within which to appeal
from the order denying the motion for new trial because the order is not
appealable under Sec. 9, Rule 37. The non-appealability of the order of denial is
also confirmed by Sec. 1(a), Rule 41, which provides that no appeal may be
taken from an order denying a motion for new trial or a motion for
reconsideration.
 Appeals in General

(1) The right to appeal is not part of due process but a mere statutory privilege
that has to be exercised only in the manner and in accordance with the
provisions of law(Stolt-Nielsen vs. NLRC, GR 147623, Dec. 13, 2005). The general
rule is that the remedy to obtain reversal or modification of judgment on the
merits is appeal. This is true even if the error, or one of the errors, ascribed to the
court rendering the judgment is its lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, or
the exercise of power in excess thereof, or grave abuse of discretion in the
findings of facts or of law set out in the decision (Association of Integrated
Security Force of Bislig-ALU vs. CA, GR 140150, Aug. 22, 2005). An appeal may be
taken only from judgments or final orders that completely dispose of the
case (Sec. 1, Rule 41). An interlocutory order is not appealable until after the
rendition of the judgment on the merits.
(2) Certain rules on appeal:

(a) No trial de novo anymore. The appellate courts must decide the case on
the basis of the record, except when the proceedings were not duly recorded
as when there was absence of a qualified stenographer (Sec. 22[d], BO 129;
Rule 21[d], Interim RulesI);
(b) There can be no new parties;

(c) There can be no change of theory (Naval vs. CA, 483 SCRA 102);
(d) There can be no new matters (Ondap vs. Aubga, 88 SCRA 610);
(e) There can be amendments of pleadings to conform to the evidence
submitted before the trial court (Dayao vs. Shell, 97 SCRA 407);
(f) The liability of solidarity defendant who did not appeal is not affected by
appeal of solidarity debtor (Mun. of Orion vs. Concha, 50 Phil. 679);
(g) Appeal by guarantor does not inure to the principal (Luzon Metal vs.
Manila Underwriter, 29 SCRA 184);
(h) In ejectment cases, the RTC cannot award to the appellant on his
counterclaim more than the amount of damages beyond the jurisdiction of the
MTC (Agustin vs. Bataclan, 135 SCRA 342);
(i) The appellate court cannot dismiss the appealed case for failure to
prosecute because the case must be decided on the basis of the record (Rule
21, Interim Rules).
Judgments and final orders subject to appeal

(1) An appeal may be taken only from judgments or final orders that
completely dispose of the case (Sec. 1, Rule 41). An interlocutory order is not
appealable until after the rendition of the judgment on the merits.

Matters not appealable

(1) No appeal may be taken from:

(a) An order denying a motion for new trial or a motion for reconsideration;

(b) An order denying a petition for relief or any similar motion seeking relief
from judgment;

(c) An interlocutory order;

(d) An order disallowing or dismissing an appeal;

(e) An order denying a motion to set aside a judgment by consent, confession

or compromise on the ground of fraud, mistake or duress, or any other ground
vitiating consent;

(f) An order of execution;

(g) A judgment or final order for or against one or more of several parties or in
separate claims, counterclaims, cross-claims, and third-party complaints, while
the main case is pending, unless the court allows an appeal therefrom; and

(h) An order dismissing and action without prejudice (Sec. 1, Rule 41).
(2) A question that was never raised in the courts below cannot be allowed to
be raised for the first time on appeal without offending basic rules of fair play,
justice and due process (Bank of Commerce vs. Serrano, 451 SCRA 484). For an
appellate court to consider a legal question, it should have been raised in the
court below (PNOC vs. CA, 457 SCRA 32). It would be unfair to the adverse party
who would have no opportunity to present evidence in contra to the new
theory, which it could have done had it been aware of it at the time of the
hearing before the trial court. it is true that this rule admits of exceptions as in
cases of lack of jurisdiction, where the lower court committed plain error, where
there are jurisprudential developments affecting the issues, or when the issues
raised present a matter of public policy (Baluyot vs. Poblete, GR 144435, Feb. 6,
2007).
(3) The rule under (2) however is only the general rule because Sec. 8, Rule 51
precludes its absolute application allowing as it does certain errors which even if
not assigned may be ruled upon by the appellate court. hence, the court may
consider an error not raised on appeal provided the same falls within any of the
following categories:

(a) It is an error that affects the jurisdiction over the subject matter;

(b) It is an error that affects the validity of the judgment appealed from;

(c) It is an error which affects the proceedings;

(d) It is an error closely related to or dependent on an assigned error and

properly argued in the brief; or

(e) It is a plain and clerical error.

Remedy against judgments and orders which are not appealable

(1) In those instances where the judgment or final order is not appealable, the
aggrieved party may file the appropriate special civil action under Rule 65. Rule
65 refers to the special civil actions of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.
Practically, it would be the special civil action of certiorari that would be availed
of under most circumstances. The most potent remedy against those judgments
and orders from which appeal cannot be taken is to allege and prove that the
same were issued without jurisdiction, with grave abuse of discretion or in excess
of jurisdiction, all amounting to lack of jurisdiction.

Modes of appeal (Sec. 2, Rule 41)

(a) Ordinary appeal. The appeal to the CA in cases decided by the RTC in the
exercise of its original jurisdiction shall be taken by filing a notice of appeal with
the court which rendered the judgment or final order appealed from and
serving a copy thereof upon the adverse party. No record on appeal shall be
required except in special proceedings and other cases of multiple or separate
appeals where the law or the Rules so require. In such cases, the record on
appeal shall be filed and served in like manner.
(b) Petition for review. The appeal to the CA in cases decided by the RTC in
the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction shall be by petition for review in
accordance with Rule 42.
(c) Petition for review on certiorari. In all cases where only questions of law are
raised or involved, the appeal shall be to the SC by petition for review on
certiorari in accordance with Rule 45.

Issues to be raised on appeal

(1) Whether or not the appellant has filed a motion for new trial in the court
below, he may include in his assignment or errors any question of law or fact
that has been raised in the court below and which is within the issues framed by
the parties (Sec. 15, Rule 44).

Period of appeal

(1) Period of Ordinary Appeal under Rule 40. An appeal may be taken (from
MTC to RTC) within 15 days after notice to the appellant of the judgment or final
order appealed from. Where a record on appeal is required, the appellant shall
file a notice of appeal and a record on appeal within 30 days after notice of
the judgment or final order. The period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely
motion for new trial or reconsideration. No motion for extension of time to file a
motion for new trial or reconsideration shall be allowed (Sec. 2).
(2) Period of Ordinary Appeal under Rule 41). The appeal shall be taken within
15 days from notice of the judgment or final order appealed from. Where a
record on appeal is required, the appellants shall file a notice of appeal and a
record on appeal within 30 days from notice of the judgment or final order.
However, on appeal inhabeas corpus cases shall be taken within 48 hours from
notice of the judgment or final order appealed from (AM No. 01-1-03-SC, June
19, 2001). The period of appeal shall be interrupted by a timely motion for new
trial or reconsideration. No motion for extension of time to file a motion for new
trial or reconsideration shall be allowed(Sec. 3). If the record on appeal is not
transmitted to the CA within 30 days after the perfection of appeal, either party
may file a motion with the trial court, with notice to the other, for the transmittal
of such record or record on appeal (Sec. 3, Rule 44).
(3) Period of Petition for Review under Rule 42. The petition shall be filed and
served within 15 days from notice of the decision sought to be reviewed or of
the denial of petitioner’s motion for new trial or reconsideration filed in due time
after judgment. The court may grant and additional period of 15 days only
provided the extension is sought (a) upon proper motion, and (b) there is
payment of the full amount of the docket and other lawful fees and the deposit
for costs before the expiration of the reglementary period. No further extension
shall be granted except for the most compelling reason and in no case to
exceed 15 days (Sec. 1).
(4) Period of Appeal by Petition for Review under Rule 43. The appeal shall be
taken within 15 days from notice of the award, judgment, final order or
resolution, or from the date of its last publication, if publication is required by law
for its effectivity, or of the denial of petitioner’s motion for new trial or
reconsideration duly filed in accordance with the governing law of the court or
agency a quo. Only one (1) motion for reconsideration shall be allowed. Upon
proper motion and the payment of the full amount of the docket fee before the
expiration of the reglementary period, the CA may grant an additional period of
15 days only within which to file the petition for review. No further extension shall
be granted except for the most compelling reason and in no case to exceed 15
days (Sec. 4).
(5) Period of Appeal by Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45. The
appeal which shall be in the form of a verified petition shall be filed within 15
days from notice of the judgment, final order or resolution appealed from, or
within 15 days from notice of the denial of the petitioner’s motion for new trail or
motion for reconsideration filed in due time. The Supreme Court may, for
justifiable reasons, grant an extension of 30 days only within which to file the
petition provided, (a) there is a motion for extension of time duly filed and
served, (b) there is full payment of the docket and other lawful fees and the
deposit for costs, and (c) the motion is filed and served and the payment is
made before the expiration of the reglementary period (Sec. 2).