Eduardo P. Calinao v. Court of Appeals

Summary

Heirs of Antonio Calinao filed recovery of possession case against Fabiola Fianza-Boseman over 2,283-square meter portion of inherited land. Municipal Trial Court ruled for heirs based on tax documents, but Regional Trial Court and Court of Appeals found for Boseman due to her actual possession for over 30 years, prescription of action, and failure to implead indispensable party Benguet Corporation as lessor. Supreme Court dismissed petition for certiorari, ruling petitioner used wrong procedural remedy (should be Rule 45 petition for review, not Rule 65 certiorari), filed beyond the 15-day reglementary period, and Court of Appeals committed no grave abuse of discretion. Case demonstrates critical importance of proper procedural compliance and timely filing in Philippine courts, where technical defects can be fatal to substantive rights.