Frivolous suits as understood by general jurisprudence

1) It has been held that a frivolous appeal is one presenting no

justiciable question, or one so readily recognizable as devoid of
merits on the face of the record that there is little, if any,
prospect that it can ever succeed. The instant case is one such
instance in which the appeal is evidently without merit, taken
manifestly for delay. (HUANG, ET AL. vs. ASSOCIATED REALTY
DEVELOPMENT CO., INC., G.R. No. L-26421, October 29, 1966,
citing De la Cruz, et al. vs. Blanco, et al., 73 Phil. 596);

2) In one case, the Supreme Court ruled that an administrative

complaint was baseless and frivolous because it was filed with no
other plain and clear purpose than to harass the respondents,
and exact vengeance on them for rendering adverse judgments
against him and his clients. The act of filing was decreed to run
counter to the explicit mandate of the Code of Professional
Responsibility in Canon 11 thereof. (Balaoing vs. Judge Calderon,
A.M. No. RTJ-90-58, April 27, 1993);

3) In a land registration case, the Supreme Court referred to the

term frivolous as similar to vexatious or merely intended to
harass.(ELISA D. GABRIEL vs. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF RIZAL,
G.R. No. L-17956, September 30, 1963);

4) In an agrarian case, the term frivolous was closely associated

by the Supreme Court with suits being intended merely for
delay. (REGIONAL AGRARIAN REFORM ADJUDICATION BOARD vs.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 165155);

5) In ruling on a petition for mandamus to set aside the order of

dismissal and to order court to give due course to an appeal, the
Supreme Court ruled that the appeal is frivolous, stating in the
same breath that the petition was no longer a justiciable
question and was merely interposed for purposes of delay.
(MANILA RAILROAD COMPANY vs. MACARIA BALLESTEROS, G.R.
No. L-19161, April 29, 1966);

6) In another case, the term frivolous was used interchangeably

with the word dilatory. (PILAR GREGORIO vs.THE HONORABLE
EULOGIO MENCIAS, G.R. No. L-16227, September 29, 1962).