[G.R. No. 150153. March 4, 2002]

UNIV. OF THE EAST vs. CA, et al.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 04 MAR 2002.

G.R. No. 150153 (University of the East vs. Court of Appeals, UE Employees’ Association (FFW), Ernesto C. Verceles, Diosdado Trinidad, Eliseo Serrano, Miguel Teano, Lina Manebo and Salvador Blancia.)

On January 16, 2002, the Court resolved to deny the instant petition on the following grounds, viz: (a) for late filing as the petition was filed beyond the reglementary period of fifteen (15) days fixed in Section 2, Rule 45 in relation to Section 5(a), Rule 56 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure; and (b) the petitioner failed to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in the challenged decision and resolution as to warrant the exercise by the Court of its discretionary appellate jurisdiction.

On February 7, 2002, herein petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of the said resolution reasoning (a) that the petition was filed within the extended period sought for and (b) that the award of P500,000.00 by way of damages and attorney’s fees in favor of the respondent union is without factual and legal basis.

Records show that petitioner received a copy of the resolution of the Court of Appeals denying its motion for reconsideration on October 3, 2001. On October 18, 2001, it timely filed a motion for extension of time to file a petition for review on certiorari before this Court. On November 19, 2001, the Court granted the motion for an extension of thirty (30) days, counted from the expiration of the reglementary period to file the petition which was on November 17, 2001, a Saturday. On November 19, 2001, the petitioner filed its petition. The petition was timely filed considering that November 17, 2001 fell on a Saturday, hence, the time did not run until the next working day which was November 19, 2001, a Monday. The second sentence of Section 1, Rule 22 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure clearly provides that if the last day to file a pleading falls on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the place where the court sits, the time shall not run until the next working day.

Notwithstanding the timely filing of the petition, the same must still fail considering that the petitioner, as found by this Court, failed to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals committed any reversible error in the challenged decision to warrant the Court’s exercise of this Court’s discretionary appellate jurisdiction.

ACCORDINGLY, the Resolution of the Court dated January 16, 2002 is hereby MODIFIED and that part of the resolution with respect to the denial of the petition on the ground of late filing is hereby DELETED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court