Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The respondent heirs filed a motion for reconsideration of the order denying
their motion to dismiss on the ground that the trial court could very well
resolve the issue of prescription from the bare allegations of the complaint
itself without waiting for the trial proper.
Later on, the trial court dismissed the complaint and the motion for
reconsideration. Neypes filed a notice of appeal and paid the appeal fees as
well. However, the court a quo denied the notice of appeal, holding that it
was filed eight days late. A motion for reconsideration was again filed, but
still denied.
Via a petition for certiorari and mandamus under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules
of Civil Procedure, Neypes assailed the dismissal of the notice of appeal
before the Court of Appeals, which was dismissed by the latter court.
ISSUE: Whether the order denying the parties’ motion for reconsideration
constitutes the final order which finally disposed of the issues involved in this
case?