{"id":"4","facts":"Jose Zulueta vs Francisca Zulueta\nApril 30, 1902\nLadd, J\n\nJose Zulueta and Francisca Zulueta are sole heirs under the will of their father clemente zulueta\nboth failed to agree in the division of the state\n\njune 5, 1901 \nno agreements has been reached\nFrancisca Zulueta petition the court to suspend the proceedings until the new code of procedure enacted by the civil commission was operative because it is more advantageous to her rights\n\nJune 15\nher peition was denied in \"auto rendered\"  due to expiration of filling of demand.  \n\nJune 22\nshe peitioned for a reform of the \"auto\"  but was denied on the same day by justice Mapa (recently consituted because the previous one has illness) because the reformed should by appealed under article 365 ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil\n\nJune 29\nshe filed an appeal on the auto of june 22 presided by a regular judge but was declined to admit because on the grounds that it was not presented within 3 days as prescribed in article 363 ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil but was approved\n\nJuly 16\nBy petition of Jose Zulueta partition proceedings were approved\n\nFracisca Zulueta filed another petition under Act No. 75 of the Civil Commission \n - allegging that the auto of june 22 was rendered in error because the judge had no jurisdiction\n - that she was prevented from entering an appeal because of the auto of june 22\n - that the auto of july 16 was void because the auto of june 22 was in error\n\nIssues:\n 1. wether or not Justice Mapa had no jurisdiction or defacto authority\n 2. wether or not francisca zulueta is still entilted to relief by being mistake in understanding the requirement prescribed in entering appeals\n 3. wethere or not fracisca zulueta peition for suspension till the new code went into effect has merit","subject":"Civil Law","provision":"Act no 75\n363 ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil\n365 ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil\nCivil Code article 3","type":null,"jurisprudence":"zulueta vs zulueta","supereme_court_judgement":"1. not necessary or no bearing on the auto of june 22.  If he was without jurisdiction, Francisca Zulueta cannot take advantage of Act no 75 as it provides a remedy against judgment obtained in courts by fraud, accident or mistake.  The \"mistake\" stated in the law refers to the finding of facts and conclusion which the judgment is based and does not extend to thejurisdiction of the judge\n\n2.No, she acted under ignorance or misconception.  ignorance of the law does not excuse from compliance therewith\n\n3. No, it has no merit, no reason was alleged why peition should be granted other than convenience\n\nFracisca Zulueta peition was denied"}