As respondent in an original petition before the Court of Appeals, what happens if I never file the comment the court required?

The case moves on without you

Ignoring an order to comment does not stall the proceeding in the respondent's favor. Section 7 states that when no comment is filed by any of the respondents, the case may be decided on the basis of the record, without prejudice to any disciplinary action which the court may take against the disobedient party. Silence, in other words, does not create a procedural delay that works to the respondent's advantage.

Deciding on the existing record

A respondent's silence does not force the Court of Appeals to wait indefinitely — it can proceed to resolve the petition using whatever record already exists, which typically means the petitioner's version of events and supporting documents go effectively unrebutted from the respondent's side. That is often a significant practical disadvantage, since the court has nothing from the respondent to weigh against the petitioner's account.

Disobedience carries its own separate risk

Beyond losing the chance to be heard on the merits, the failure to comment as ordered exposes the respondent to disciplinary action for disobeying the court's directive. That risk exists independently of however the underlying petition is ultimately decided — silence is not a cost-free option, and a respondent facing genuine difficulty meeting the deadline is better served asking the court for more time than simply not responding.

Why this rule applies with several respondents

Section 7 is phrased around 'any of the respondents,' which matters in a petition naming more than one. The case can move forward on the record even where only some respondents default while others file their comment, since the rule does not require universal compliance before the court may proceed. A respondent who assumes a co-respondent's comment will somehow cover their own silence takes on the same risk of a decision made without their side of the story ever being presented.

What Section 7 does not do

Deciding the case on the existing record is not the same as automatically ruling against the silent respondent — the petitioner still has to establish the grounds for the extraordinary remedy sought, and a petition that fails to do so on its own can still be denied even without a comment opposing it. Section 7 also does not spell out what disciplinary action the court may take; it leaves that to the court's own authority to sanction a party who disobeys its order, applied on the facts of the particular default. The section binds respondents specifically — it says nothing about a petitioner's own failure to comply with a court directive, which is addressed by other provisions rather than this one.

Related provisions

• Rule 46, Section 7 — Effect of failure to file comment
• Rule 46, Section 5 — Action by the court
• Rule 46, Section 3 — Contents and filing of petition; effect of non