Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1975 > May 1975 Decisions > A.M. No. 852-MJ May 30, 1975 - FELISBERTO ALEGRE v. RHODIE A. NIDEA:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[A.M. No. 852-MJ. May 30, 1975.]

FELISBERTO ALEGRE, Complainant, v. MUNICIPAL JUDGE RHODIE A. NIDEA of Sipocot, Camarines Sur, Respondent.

SYNOPSIS


Respondent was charged for partiality, leniency, and favoritism. The district judge, to whom the matter was referred, recommended the dismissal of the case in view of the complainant’s failure to appear at the investigation to substantiate his charges and a motion to dismiss on the ground among others, that the administrative charge against a respondent "arose and due to a misunderstanding which has already been patched up." The Office of the Judicial Consultant also recommended the dismissal of the case.

The Supreme Court adopted the recommendation. Administrative charge dismissed.


SYLLABUS


1. ADMINISTRATIVE CHARGE AGAINST JUDGES; DISMISSAL OF COMPLAINT IN INSTANT CASE. — Where the complainant failed to appear at the investigation to substantiate his charges of partiality and favoritism against respondent Judge and he filed a motion to dismiss the same stating that the complaint was a result of misunderstanding and that the same has been patched up, a dismissal of the charge is called for.


R E S O L U T I O N


FERNANDO, J.:


The complaint against respondent Judge Rhodie A. Nidea of Sipocot, Camarines Sur for partiality and favoritism by a certain Felisberto Alegre has the appearance of a losing party being dissatisfied with the actuation of respondent Judge. When required to answer, respondent denied that his conduct could be characterized as manifesting either partiality or favoritism. The matter was referred to the then Executive Judge Ulpiano Sarmiento of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur by the Department of Justice, which then had administrative supervision over inferior courts, to inquire into the veracity of the factual allegations to indicate bias and leniency as well as undue severity and strictness where complainant and his counsel were involved. Thereafter, on November 27, 1969, the then District Judge Sarmiento issued the following order: "When this case was called for the scheduled investigation this afternoon, complainant Felisberto Alegre and his lawyer failed to appear; respondent Rhodie Nidea, appeared. Upon examination of the records of this case, there appears a motion to dismiss filed with this Court at 11:30 A.M. today (November 27, 1969), based on an affidavit attached as Annex A and made an integral part of the said motion to dismiss, wherein complainant stated among others, that his having filed this administrative charge against respondent Rhodie Nidea ‘arose and was due simply to a misunderstanding which has already been patched up . . .’ It will be noted that this administrative case has been set for investigation for two (2) times already and in both instances it was the complainant who asked for the postponement, and now, as we have said above, when this case was called, complainant and his lawyer did not care anymore to appear but instead filed the said motion to dismiss. This administrative case cannot he successfully presented without the active cooperation of the complainant himself; for this reason this Court believes that it has no other alternative than to accede to the desire of the complainant to have this case dismissed. [In view of the foregoing], let the records of this case be returned to the Department of Justice with the recommendation that the same be dismissed. [So ordered]." 1

This is one of the administrative complaints which, by virtue of the present Constitution, was transferred to this Court in view of the express grant of authority to supervise inferior courts. The Office of the Judicial Consultant looked into the matter and submitted this memorandum: ‘Considering that complainant not only failed to appear at the investigation to substantiate his charges, but even filed thereat an affidavit of desistance, wherein he stated that his complaint was just the result of a misunderstanding, the dismissal thereof is now in order and the same is hereby recommended." 2 Under the circumstances, that such recommendation is fitting and proper cannot be denied.

WHEREFORE, this administrative complaint for partiality and leniency against respondent Judge is dismissed.

Makalintal, C.J., Barredo, Aquino and Concepcion, Jr., JJ., concur.

Antonio, J., did not take part.

Endnotes:



1. Order of District Judge Sarmiento dated November 27, 1969.

2. Memorandum of Judicial Consultant Manuel P. Barcelona dated February 10, 1975.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






May-1975 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. L-29129 May 8, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOMINGO MABUYO

  • G.R. No. L-33516 May 8, 1975 - MARIANO RODRIGUEZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-37364 May 9, 1975 - BENIGNO S. AQUINO, JR. v. MILITARY COMMISSION NO. 2, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 547 January 29, 1975 - EMERENCIANA V. REYES v. FELIPE C. WONG

  • G.R. No. L-27674 May 12, 1975 - SOLEDAD T. CONSING, ET AL. v. JOSE T. JAMANDRE

  • G.R. No. L-40143 May 12, 1975 - MARIANO G. HIQUIANA v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

  • A.M. No. 487-CAR May 13, 1975 - ROMULO G. LOPEZ v. GETULIO Z. GUEVARA

  • G.R. No. L-25048 May 13, 1975 - PHOENIX ASSURANCE COMPANY v. MACONDRAY & CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-34314 May 13, 1975 - SOFIA PASTOR DE MIDGELY v. PIO B. FERANDOS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-38096 May 14, 1975 - CONCEPCION T. UY v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 77-MJ May 16, 1975 - JUAN B. CASTILLO v. TEOFILO A. BARSANA

  • A.M. No. P-124 May 16, 1975 - SOLEDAD V. GANADEN v. GREGORIO N. BOLASCO

  • G.R. No. L-39195 May 16, 1975 - SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION, ET AL. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39569 May 16, 1975 - CROMWEL DENILA, ET AL. v. JOSUE BELLOSILLO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 804-CJ May 19, 1975 - SATURNINO SELANOVA v. ALEJANDRO E. MENDOZA

  • A.C. No. 1081 May 19, 1975 - ABUNDIO BALDOMAN v. ROQUE LUSPO

  • G.R. No. L-20203 May 19, 1975 - LA CARLOTA SUGAR CENTRAL v. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-26191 May 19, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO BESANA, JR.

  • G.R. No. L-39993 May 19, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CONSTANTE A. ANCHETA

  • A.M. No. 534-CFI May 20, 1975 - LYDIA S. NOCUM v. WILLELMO C. FORTUN

  • G.R. No. L-28649 May 21, 1975 - FRANCISCO J. NICOLAS v. REPARATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. L-33720-21 May 21, 1975 - PHILIPPINE BRITISH CO., INC., ET AL. v. WALFRIDO DE LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 411-MJ May 22, 1975 - ERNESTO R. GONZALES v. VICENTE DE RODA OF BOGO, CEBU

  • G.R. No. L-32080 May 22, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. AGUSTIN ALQUISAR, ET. AL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-36022 May 22, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. IGNACIO JOVEN

  • G.R. No. L-39115 May 26, 1975 - SEGIFREDO L. ACLARACION v. MAGNO S. GATMAITAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40010 May 26, 1975 - RUSSEL R. ENERIO, ET AL. v. NESTOR B. ALAMPAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-25921 May 27, 1975 - VANGUARD ASSURANCE CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 41-MJ May 28, 1975 - ALFREDO ARPON v. ARISTIDES B. DE LA PAZ, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. P-242 May 28, 1975 - PEDRO PINEDA v. MARIO A. HIZALAN

  • A.M. No. 429-MJ May 28, 1975 - GASPAR PARENTE v. FERNANDO DE LOS SANTOS

  • G.R. No. L-29128 May 28, 1975 - DOMINGA JAVIER, ET AL. v. SABAS MARFIL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-36560 May 28, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PAULINO ILAGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39764 May 28, 1975 - ONG TIAO SENG v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40491 May 28, 1975 - SEGUNDO AMANTE v. DELFIN VIR. SUÑGA

  • A.C. No. 203-CJ May 29, 1975 - PABLO MARCOS v. ANDRES DOMINGO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 253-MJ May 29, 1975 - ALFONSO S. AUSEJO, ET AL. v. GAUDENCIO P. PAJUNAR

  • G.R. No. L-24522 May 29, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NUMERIANO G. ESTENZO

  • G.R. No. L-27534 May 29, 1975 - ATLAS TIMBER COMPANY, ET AL. v. FIRST WESTERN BANK AND TRUST CO.

  • G.R. No. L-31041 May 20, 1975 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUANITO C. ALDE

  • G.R. No. L-39863 May 29, 1975 - MANUEL GARCIA, ET AL. v. TOMAS R. LEONIDAS, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 111-MJ May 30, 1975 - FELIX CARREON v. BRUNO R. FLORES

  • A.M. No. 810-CJ May 30, 1975 - JOSE KUAN SING v. ROSENDO BALTAZAR

  • A.M. No. 852-MJ May 30, 1975 - FELISBERTO ALEGRE v. RHODIE A. NIDEA

  • A.C. No. 905 May 30, 1975 - HERMOGENES G. MENDOZA v. ARSENIO R. REYES

  • G.R. No. L-25779 May 30, 1975 - SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM v. VALDERRAMA LUMBER MANUFACTURERS CO., INC.

  • G.R. No. L-26507 May 30, 1975 - LAKAS NG MANGGAGAWANG MAKABAYAN v. WALFRIDO DELOS ANGELES

  • G.R. No. L-37378 May 30, 1975 - HIDELIZA C. CAMOMOT, ET AL. v. ROMULO SENINING, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-38502 May 30, 1975 - PIO B. FERANDOS v. JUAN Y. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-39741 May 30, 1975 - NATION MULTI SERVICE LABOR UNION, ET AL. v. MARIANO V. AGCAOILI, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40187 May 30, 1975 - GENERAL TEXTILES, INC. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.