Practice question
The judgment’s record clearly establishes the correct party identity, but a typographical transposition appears in the written name. Correcting it changes no party, obligation or adjudicated right. Can finality categorically bar that clerical correction?
- No, a genuine clerical correction falls within a recognized exception
- Yes, every typographical mark becomes permanently uncorrectable
- No, because every correction automatically authorizes new damages
- Yes, unless the losing party is a corporation
- No, because finality has no legal significance
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/feb2025/gr_253218_2025.html — DOST Officials and Personnel v. COA, G.R. No. 253218, February 4, 2025, main decision on immutability, clerical errors, nonprejudicial nunc pro tunc entries, void judgments and post-finality circumstances.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 39, final-judgment enforcement and satisfaction framework, read with the recognized jurisprudential exceptions.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.