COMPREHENSIVE DISCUSSION ON MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION UNDER RULE 37 OF THE PHILIPPINE RULES OF COURT

I. INTRODUCTION

A Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 37 of the Rules of Court is a post-judgment remedy available to a party aggrieved by a judgment or final order of the trial court. It is a procedural mechanism allowing the same court that rendered judgment to correct any errors—whether of law or fact—without elevating the case to an appellate court. As one of the remedies available after judgment but before the judgment attains finality, it is an important step in ensuring due process and allowing the court to rectify any mistakes promptly.

II. STATUTORY BASIS

The governing provisions for a Motion for Reconsideration are mainly found in Rule 37 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (as amended). The pertinent sections are:

Section 1: Grounds of and period for filing a motion for new trial or reconsideration
Section 2: Contents of motion for new trial or reconsideration and notice thereof
Section 3: Action upon motion for new trial or reconsideration
Section 4: Resolution of motion
Section 5: Second motion for new trial
Section 6: Effect of granting of motion for new trial
Section 7: Partial new trial or reconsideration
Section 8: Effect of order for partial new trial
Section 9: Remedy after order denying motion for new trial or reconsideration

While Sections 1, 2, and 3 focus on both new trial and reconsideration, the rules make distinctions in the grounds and form for each. A motion for reconsideration specifically challenges the propriety of the decision or final order on errors of fact and/or law, not the discovery of new evidence or an alleged irregularity in the proceedings (which are grounds for a new trial).

III. NATURE AND PURPOSE

Nature: A Motion for Reconsideration is intra-court—it is addressed to the same court that rendered the assailed judgment.
Purpose:
- To afford the court an opportunity to correct its own errors;
- To prevent unnecessary appeals;
- To expedite final disposition of cases by resolving errors while the trial court still has jurisdiction.

IV. GROUNDS FOR MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Under Section 1, Rule 37, a motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or the law. Common grounds include:

Errors of fact: Findings of facts that are clearly contradicted by the evidence on record, or misappreciation of facts.
Errors of law: Misapplication of jurisprudence, statutory provisions, or constitutional provisions.
Errors of judgment: Instances where the conclusion or application of legal principles is patently erroneous.

There is no strict enumeration for grounds for reconsideration, unlike a motion for new trial which is confined to fraud, accident, mistake, excusable negligence (FAME) or newly discovered evidence. Instead, the motion for reconsideration is anchored on the notion that the decision is contrary to evidence or the applicable law.

V. PERIOD FOR FILING

Reglementary period: A motion for reconsideration must be filed within 15 calendar days from receipt of the judgment or final order being assailed.
Non-extendible: As a rule, this 15-day period is non-extendible; a late motion for reconsideration will not toll the running of the period to appeal, resulting in finality of the judgment.
Effect on appeal period: If a timely and proper motion for reconsideration is filed, it tolls (suspends) the period to appeal. Once the motion is resolved (i.e., denied), the movant has the fresh 15-day period (or the balance of the statutory period, whichever is longer) to file an appeal from receipt of notice of such denial.

VI. FORM AND CONTENTS

Under Section 2, Rule 37:

Caption and Title: Must properly identify the case number and the parties.
Concise statement of grounds: Must state the specific grounds relied upon for reconsideration.
Arguments: Must refer specifically to findings of fact, conclusions of law, or both, which the movant believes the court overlooked or erred in. General averments like “the decision is contrary to law” are insufficient.
Supporting affidavits or evidence: If necessary (or if new factual matters are discovered—but usually, that is for new trial rather than reconsideration).
Notice of Hearing: Must be set for hearing in compliance with the requirement of notice to the adverse party, unless the court rules otherwise.
Proof of Service: Must show that the adverse parties were duly served with a copy of the motion.

Failure to comply with mandatory requirements (e.g., a “pro forma” motion that merely reiterates previous arguments or fails to specify errors) will not toll the running of the period to appeal.

VII. ACTION BY THE COURT

1. Court’s Options

Upon receipt of a motion for reconsideration, the court has several options:

Grant the motion: If meritorious, the court may reverse or modify the judgment or final order accordingly.
Deny the motion: If unmeritorious, the court issues an order denying the same.
Partial grant: The court may grant a reconsideration only as to certain issues or findings, leaving the rest of the judgment intact (see Section 7, Rule 37).

2. When the Motion is Deemed Submitted

After the lapse of the period for the opposition (usually within the timeframe set by the court or local rules), or upon the hearing on the motion, the motion is deemed submitted for resolution.
The court must resolve it promptly. In practice, the trial court should act on the motion within 30 days from the date it is deemed submitted for resolution (mandated by the Speedy Disposition of Cases rule, but not strictly penal in civil cases the same way as in criminal cases).

3. Requirement of Resolution in Writing

The resolution granting or denying the motion for reconsideration must be in writing, stating clearly the reasons for the action taken by the court.

VIII. PROHIBITION ON SECOND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Under the general rule, the Rules of Court do not allow the filing of a second motion for reconsideration of a final judgment or order. Specifically:

Section 5, Rule 37: Prohibits the filing of a second motion for new trial. By analogy and consistent practice, a second motion for reconsideration is likewise prohibited as it effectively extends litigation and finality indefinitely.
Once a motion for reconsideration is resolved, the remedy is to appeal the denial of that motion along with the original judgment, rather than filing serial motions for reconsideration.

Exceptionally, the Supreme Court in some cases (especially in its own level of review) may entertain a second motion for reconsideration for extraordinarily persuasive reasons or in the interest of justice. However, at the trial court level, repeated reconsiderations are not permitted as a general rule.

IX. EFFECTS OF GRANT OR DENIAL

If Granted:
- The assailed judgment is set aside or modified accordingly.
- The court may issue a new judgment, or re-open the case if the motion is granted to correct errors of fact or law.
- If the reconsideration leads to modification of the decision, the modified decision becomes the new final judgment subject to another potential motion for reconsideration within 15 days, or direct appeal.
If Denied:
- The judgment stands as rendered.
- The movant’s recourse is to appeal within the balance of the period, which is typically another 15 days from receipt of the order of denial (or the remainder of the original period if there was any left, whichever is longer).
- If no appeal is taken, the judgment or final order becomes final and executory.

X. PRO FORMA MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION

A pro forma motion for reconsideration is one that fails to comply substantially with the requirements of the Rules (e.g., it rehashes previous arguments without pinpointing specific factual or legal errors). The Supreme Court has consistently held that a pro forma motion does not suspend the running of the period to appeal. Hence, parties should draft the motion carefully, identifying each error clearly and explaining why such error warrants reversal or modification.

XI. RELATIONSHIP TO APPEAL

Concurrent Remedies: A party cannot pursue a motion for reconsideration and an appeal simultaneously from the same judgment or final order in the same court. The correct sequence is:
- File a motion for reconsideration if you want the trial court to re-examine its decision.
- If denied (in full or part), proceed to appeal within the reglementary period.
Tolling the Period of Appeal: A timely and proper motion for reconsideration interrupts the running of the period for appeal. Once denied, the fresh period to appeal begins from notice of denial.
Choice of Remedy: If one immediately appeals and does not first move for reconsideration, that moots the possibility of an MR in the lower court. Some issues (particularly factual matters or new evidentiary contentions) may be better raised first with a motion for reconsideration if they revolve around misappreciation of evidence.

XII. RELEVANT JURISPRUDENCE

Philippine jurisprudence abounds with rulings on motions for reconsideration under Rule 37. Some key points gleaned from decided cases:

Pro forma motions do not suspend the period to appeal (e.g., Galuda v. Mangrobang, G.R. No. [example citation]).
A motion for reconsideration should not be used to merely re-argue issues decided by the court (Lazaro v. CA, G.R. No. [example citation]).
The court must act within a reasonable time on such motions, ensuring parties’ due process rights (Tijam v. Sibonghanoy, iconic for laches but also referencing timely resolution).
No second motion for reconsideration at the trial court level, as a rule (Francisco v. Puno, G.R. No. [example citation]).

XIII. SAMPLE OUTLINE OF A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Below is a simplified outline (not an official form) reflecting key sections recommended by the Rules of Court:

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[Branch Number], [City/Province]

[C A S E    T I T L E]

CIVIL CASE NO. ______________

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

COMES NOW the [party], through counsel, and respectfully states:

1. That on [date of receipt], [party] received a copy of the [Decision/Order] dated [date].
2. The said [Decision/Order] is contrary to law and to the evidence on record, specifically:
   a) The Court erred in its factual finding that...
   b) The Court misapplied [legal principle/statutory provision] in concluding that...

3. Arguments:
   3.1 The Court’s conclusion overlooked the testimony of [witness]...
   3.2 The applicable jurisprudence, specifically [case citation], states that...
   (Include clear and concise discussion)

4. Prayer:
   WHEREFORE, premises considered, [party] respectfully prays that this Honorable Court reconsider and set aside the [Decision/Order], and render a new one dismissing the complaint / or granting the relief sought / or modifying the dispositive portion as follows: [specify desired modification].

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this [date] at [place].

[Signature]
[Name of Counsel]
[PTR No., IBP No., Roll No., MCLE Compliance]
[Law Firm/Address]
[Contact Details]

Copy furnished:
[Opposing Counsel’s Name/Address]
[Party if unrepresented]

XIV. KEY TAKEAWAYS

Timeliness is crucial. File the motion within 15 days from receipt of the decision or final order.
Specificity is mandatory. Articulate the errors of fact or law clearly; avoid pro forma submissions.
Single Motion Rule: Only one motion for reconsideration is generally allowed in the trial court.
Tolling of Appeal Period: A properly filed motion for reconsideration suspends the running of the period for appeal.
Remedy After Denial: If denied, the recourse is to timely file an appeal.
Drafting: Adhere to the Rules of Court requirements for notices, proof of service, hearing, and statements of grounds.

XV. CONCLUSION

A Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 37 is a critical, often final, chance for a litigant to seek rectification of any perceived errors by the trial court before the judgment becomes final and executory. Mastery of its requisites—especially in terms of timing, substance, and form—can spell the difference between protecting one’s right to appeal and losing it to a technicality. By carefully and clearly stating the factual and legal issues the court allegedly overlooked or misapplied, a litigant maximizes the chance of obtaining a favorable resolution without resorting immediately to the appellate process.