Short answer. No. Rule 37, Section 2 ends with the warning: a pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal. A motion for reconsideration must point out specifically the findings or conclusions not supported by the evidence or contrary to law; a bare-bones rehash buys no time.
What the law says
A pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal.
Rule 37, Section 2 — Contents of motion for new trial or reconsideration and notice thereof. Read the full provision →
What the law says
A motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to law, making express reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to the provisions of law alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions.
Rule 37, Section 2 — Contents of motion for new trial or reconsideration and notice thereof. Read the full provision →
The stakes: a wasted motion costs the appeal
The last sentence of the section is the trap: A pro forma motion for new trial or reconsideration shall not toll the reglementary period of appeal. Tolling is the whole tactical point of moving for reconsideration — while a proper motion awaits resolution, the appeal period is not slipping away. Strip the motion of substance and that protection vanishes: the period keeps running as though nothing was filed, and by the time the court denies the motion, the judgment may already be final and the appeal lost. The motion did not merely fail; it consumed the appeal.
What the section demands of the motion
The standard is spelled out. A motion for reconsideration shall point out specifically the findings or conclusions of the judgment or final order which are not supported by the evidence or which are contrary to law — and it must do so making express reference to the testimonial or documentary evidence or to the provisions of law alleged to be contrary to such findings or conclusions. Two duties, then: name the precise findings or conclusions attacked, and cite the exact evidence or legal provisions that contradict them. General disappointment with the decision, however sincerely felt, satisfies neither.
How a pro forma motion identifies itself
Measure any draft against that text and the bare-bones motion identifies itself: it says the decision is contrary to law without saying which conclusion and which law; it invokes the evidence without pointing to any transcript or exhibit; it repeats the arguments the court already rejected and asks the court to feel differently. Whatever label the pleader gives it, a motion that does not do what the section commands is the motion the final sentence refuses to reward. The working test is simple: could the judge, reading the motion alone, locate every finding attacked and every piece of evidence or provision relied on?
The section's other requirements
The motion shall be made in writing stating the ground or grounds therefor, with written notice served on the adverse party; and motions for new trial carry their own proof — affidavits of merits for one ground, and for newly discovered evidence, affidavits of the witnesses by whom such evidence is expected to be given or duly authenticated documents proposed to be introduced. If a judgment has just gone against you, the practical rule is to draft as if the appeal depends on the motion's specificity — under this section, it does.