Flashcards Studio

Facts: A private practitioner, Maria Cruz, files a petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus directly in the Supreme Court under Rule 65, challenging a Court of Appeals ruling that denied her petition for certiorari against a Regional Trial Court order in a civil case. The CA dismissed Cruz’s petition on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to review the RTC order. Cruz contends that the CA committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction by misapplying the standard for reviewing lower court acts. The Supreme Court is asked to decide: (a) Identify the controlling doctrine governing the Supreme Court’s review of Court of Appeals decisions via certiorari and the standard applied; (b) Distinguish between grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction and ordinary errors of law or fact in the CA’s decision; (c) Apply the doctrine to Cruz’s case and determine whether the petition for certiorari should be granted.