Practice question
A competent court arguably misreads a substantive statute in an appealable final judgment. The challenger establishes only an ordinary legal error and has an adequate appeal. Which characterization is ordinarily correct?
- The mistake necessarily abolishes the court’s original jurisdiction.
- The party may disregard every appeal requirement.
- The statute’s complexity automatically proves despotic conduct.
- An error of judgment for the appropriate appellate remedy.
- The decision is void solely because counsel has another reading.
Legal references
- Heirs of Barraquio v. Almeda Incorporated, G.R. Nos. 169649 and 185594, January 16, 2023, main decision, Rule 45 versus Rule 65 and errors of procedure: https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2023/jan2023/gr_169649_2023.html
- Rules of Court, Rule 9 Section 1 and Rule 65 Section 1, read with applicable amendments: https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.