MA. PAZ FERNANDEZ
KROHN vs. COURT OF APPEALS and EDGAR KROHN, JR., G.R. No. 108854 June 14, 1994.
“x x x.
The instant
appeal has taken its toll on the petition for annulment. Three years have
already lapsed and private respondent herein, as petitioner before the trial
court, has yet to conclude his testimony thereat. We thus enjoin the trial
judge and the parties’ respective counsel to act with deliberate speed in
resolving the main action, and avoid any and all stratagems that may further
delay this case. If all lawyers are
allowed to appeal every perceived indiscretion of a judge in the course of
trial and include in their appeals depthless issues, there will be no end to
litigations, and the docket of appellate courts will forever be clogged with
inconsequential cases. Hence, counsel should exercise prudence in appealing
lower court rulings and raise only legitimate issues so as not to retard the
resolution of cases. Indeed, there is no point in unreasonably delaying the
resolution of the petition and prolonging the agony of the wedded couple who
after coming out from a storm still have the right to a renewed blissful life
either alone or in the company of each other. (Salita v. Judge Magtolis, G.R. No. 106429, 16 May 1994).
X x x.”
