Short answer. No. Under Rule 44, Section 1, the title of the case remains as it was in the trial court; only the labels for the parties change, with the party who appealed called the appellant and the other party the appellee.
What the law says
In all cases appealed to the Court of Appeals under Rule 41, the title of the case shall remain as it was in the court of origin, but the party appealing the case shall be further referred to as the appellant and the adverse party as the appellee.
Rule 44, Section 1 — Title of cases. Read the full provision →
Same case name, new party labels
Moving from the trial court to the Court of Appeals under an ordinary appeal does not rename the case itself. Section 1 provides that in all cases appealed to the Court of Appeals under Rule 41, the title of the case shall remain as it was in the court of origin. The parties keep appearing under the same case caption they used below.
New roles: appellant and appellee
What does change is how the parties are described within that same case. The rule continues: the party appealing the case shall be further referred to as the appellant and the adverse party as the appellee. Whoever was the plaintiff or the defendant below now additionally carries the label of appellant or appellee, depending on who actually took the appeal in the case.
Why this differs from original CA petitions
This continuity contrasts with cases filed originally in the Court of Appeals, which get a fresh petitioner-and-respondent labeling instead. For an ordinary appeal under Rule 41, though, the case is simply continuing — carried up from the trial court — which is why the caption and underlying case identity stay intact even as the appellate roles are added on top of it.
Why the caption matters for filings and records
Keeping the same title lets the appellate court, the parties, and anyone reviewing the docket trace the case back to its trial court origins without confusion, since the case number and caption used in the record on appeal, the briefs, and the eventual decision all track the original designation. A brief or motion that mislabels the parties as petitioner and respondent, instead of appellant and appellee, does not change the case's identity, but using the correct labels helps keep the pleadings consistent with how the Court of Appeals will refer to the parties throughout the appeal.
Who this rule binds and what it does not cover
Section 1 governs how the clerk of court, the parties, and counsel must caption every filing made in the appeal — it binds anyone submitting a pleading, brief, or motion in the case, since a consistently correct caption is part of what keeps the appellate record usable. It only reaches cases appealed under Rule 41 from a court of origin; it does not govern the labeling used in special civil actions or original petitions filed directly with the Court of Appeals, which follow a petitioner-and-respondent convention instead. Because mislabeling the parties does not itself defeat the appeal, the more practical risk is confusion in the record rather than dismissal — but a party who repeatedly uses the wrong designation may still invite a court order to correct the caption before the case proceeds further.