Facts:
Petitioner took out a loan from the private respondent and secured the loan by issuing 4 checks worth Php 6,100,000. However, the checks were dishonored for being drawn against a closed account. Private Respondent personally delivered a demand letter to the petitioner which the petitioner’s secretary accepted. Private respondent charged petitioner of violation of 4 counts of BP 22 in the MeTC. The court found the petitioner guilty. Aggrieved, petitioner filed a petition for certiorari to the RTC assailing the decision of the MeTC and its presiding judge. RTC denied petitioner’s petition. Unconvinced, petitioner move for reconsideration which the RTC also denied. Hence the petition in the SC.
Issue:
Whether the petitioner failed to comply with the requirement of prior motion for reconsideration before seeking other remedies?
Held:
Yes, petitioner failed to comply with the requirement of a prior motion for reconsideration. As a general rule, a motion for reconsideration is a prerequisite for the availment of a petition for certiorari under Rule 65. The filing of a motion for reconsideration before resort to certiorari will lie is intended to afford the public respondent an opportunity to correct any actual or fancied error attributed to it by way of reexamination of the legal and factual aspects of the case.
adrianantazo.com 