SUPREME COURT G.R. No. 175116 Jerry Ong vs. Phil. Deposit Insurance Corp. DECISION PENNED BY JUSTICE DIOSDADO PERALTA CITES AS JURISPRUDENCE THE SC-G.R. No. 182645 December 4, 2009 HERMOGENES RODRIGUEZ ESTATE RULING

      The Honorable Supreme Court Justice Diosdado Peralta, who ruled on the June 22, 2011 Decision of SC-G.R. No. 182645: In The Matter of the Heirship (Intestate Estates) of the late Hermogenes Rodriguez / Rene Pascual vs. Jaime Robles, the Supreme Court Decision which dismissed the petition for certiorari of SC Petitioner Rene Pascual for being an original non-party to the case, uses the December 4, 2009 ruling (SCRA 607 Vol. pages 770-777) of the Intestate Estate in writing a Decision in the Supreme Court case G.R. No.175116: On vs. PDIC, specifically on pages 10 and 11 of the aforesaid Supreme Court Decision.  The said Supreme Court Decision of Justice Peralta had, in effect, together with the categorical declaration of immutability in the June 22, 2011 ruling, upheld the RTC Iriga City Branch 34 AMENDED DECISION in SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS No. IR-1110, when the Supreme Court ruling distinctly discussed thus: 

      xxx"Thus, WE (Supreme Court) find NO ERROR COMMITTED (by the CA) when it sustained the RTC's dismissal of petitioner's appeal for failure to comply with the rules.

               In In the Matter of the Heirship(Intestate Estates) of the late Hermogenes Rodriguez, et al. v. Jaime Robles, WE (The SUPREME COURT) NULLIFIED THE CA DECISION  FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION IN TAKING COGNIZANCE OF AN APPEAL FROM THE RTC DECISION WHICH HAD ALREADY LAPSED INTO FINALITY FOR FAILURE OF THE PARTY TO FILE A RECORD ON APPEAL WITHIN THE REGLEMENTARY PERIOD xxx"

  

     The latter SUPREME COURT DECISION which cites the ruling in the Intestate Estate proceedings case clearly establishes the fact that the RTC Iriga City Branch 34 COMMITED NO ERRORS in the issuance of a Certificate of Finality for the AMENDED DECISION of Special Proceedings No. IR-1110, and which was UNLIKE THE COURT OF APPEALS CA-G.R. SP No.57417 Decision dated April 16, 2002, an ERRONEOUS RULING, having no jurisdiction over the RTC Special Proceedings No. IR-1110 Amended Decision when the CA petitioner Jaime Robles did not file the requisite RECORD ON APPEAL which is mandatory and jurisdictional.  Thus the June 22, 2011 Decision of Justice Peralta DID NOT CONFLICT with the December 4, 2009 Decision of now retired Justice Chico-Nazario under the DOCTRINE OF STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION, both rulings having gained finality: the December 4, 2009 SC Decision of the Regular Third Division having lapsed into finality and used as jurisprudence more than a year later by SC Justice Peralta and even SC Justice Mendoza in another SC Case: Commissioner of the Bureau of Internal Revenue v. Fort Bonifacio Development Authority both in the year 2010; on the other hand, the SC June 22, 2011 Decision may have dismissed the petition for certiorari of Rene Pascual, but also separately and distinctly discussed that the AMENDED DECISION of the Honorable Intestate Court RTC Branch 34 of Iriga City DID NOT FALL ON ANY OF THE THREE CATEGORIES which classifies the said RTC Amended Decision not falling into any of the three exemptions in the rule of immutability of judgments.  This clearly fortifies and solidly cements the "res judicata" status of the RTC IRIGA CITY AMENDED DECISION.