This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2008-12-08 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| The rule is well-settled that points of law, theories, issues, and arguments not adequately brought to the attention of the lower court (or in this case, the appropriate quasi-judicial administrative body) need not be considered by the reviewing court as they cannot be raised for the first time on appeal, much more in a motion for reconsideration as in this case, because this would be offensive to the basic rules of fair play, justice and due process.[19] This last ditch effort to shift to a new theory and raise a new matter in the hope of a favorable result is a pernicious practice that has been consistently rejected.[20] We are not prepared to make a conclusion of law herein that may have far-reaching consequences based on an argument that was belatedly raised and evidently a mere after-thought. | |||||