Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1977 > January 1977 Decisions > A.M. No. 1106-CFI January 24, 1977 - ARMANDO B. CLEDERA v. DELFIN VIR. SUNGA:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[A.M. No. 1106-CFI. January 24, 1977.]

ARMANDO B. CLEDERA, Complainant, v. DELFIN VIR. SUNGA, DISTRICT JUDGE, BRANCH I CFI, CAMARINES SUR, Respondent.


R E S O L U T I O N


MUÑOZ PALMA, J.:


Respondent Judge Delfin Vir. Sunga of the Court of First Instance of Camarines Sur, Branch I, was charged in a complaint filed by Atty. Armando B. Cledera with "dishonesty, partiality, abuse of authority, insubordination and falsification of official documents." We required respondent to comment on the complaint and upon receipt of the same (pp. 41-45, rollo) the matter was referred to Justice Vicente Santiago, Jr. of the Court of Appeals for investigation, report and recommendation. (p. 118, rollo)

The Report of Justice Vicente Santiago, Jr. dated August 9, 1976 shows the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

The case was set for hearing on several dates with notices to both complainant and respondent but the hearing could not proceed due to motions for postponement of Atty. Cledera on the ground of ill health, he having suffered mild strokes which resulted in paralysis of half of his body and confinement in a hospital. Sometime on August 6, 1976, respondent Judge filed with the Honorable Investigator a motion to dismiss the complaint for the reason that the complainant had died and was interred on July 10, 1976, thereby rendering the charges moot and academic. A certification on the death of Armando B. Cledera was submitted by Respondent.

In view of the death of the complainant and there being no testimonial or documentary evidence submitted to substantiate the charges, the investigating Justice recommends the dismissal of this complaint.cralawnad

PREMISES CONSIDERED, this administrative complaint is dismissed without prejudice however to its reinstatement by any other interested party.

So Ordered.

Teehankee, Barredo, Makasiar, Antonio, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr. and Martin, JJ., concur.

Separate Opinions


FERNANDO, J., concurring and dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

To my mind, there is no question about the correctness of the result reached. The case must be dismissed. This brief opinion therefore is primarily a concurrence. That would be in line with the well-settled principle first announced by Justice Malcolm in the leading case of In re Horrilleno, 1 decided as far back as 1922, to the effect that the guilt of a judge against whom an administrative complaint is lodged "must be proved beyond reasonable doubt." 2 Here there is no proof at all. To repeat, concurrence is more than indicated. The dissenting part then is certainly minimal. It is induced by caution, ex abundante cautela, to repeat a well-worn phrase. As far as the opinion of the Court goes, it can be truly said that Justice Muñoz Palma has lived up to the usual care with which she handles her assignments as ponente for the Court. If I add a few words of dissent then, it is only to express my conviction that with the administrative supervision over inferior courts now vested in this Tribunal, I would not rule out the power of this Court in appropriate cases to look into an administrative complaint through an investigator, whether from its staff or from the judiciary, even if the complainant is no longer available. There may be reliable witnesses, and the liability of respondent, if any, ascertained. That to me is to assure effectiveness of the competence now vested in this Court. Hence this observation by way of a dissent.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

However, to repeat, as to this particular case, I am in agreement with the result reached.

Castro, C.J., concurs.

Endnotes:



FERNANDO, J., concurring and dissenting:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. 43 Phil. 212.

2. Ibid, 215. Cf. Enriquez v. Araula, Adm. Case No. 270-J, Dec. 18, 1973, 54 SCRA 232; Tombo v. Medina, Adm. Case No. 929, Jan. 17, 1974, 55 SCRA 13; Lampauog v. Villarojo, Adm. Case No. 381-MJ, Jan. 28, 1974, 55 SCRA 304; Bartolome v. de Borja, Adm. Case No. 1096, May 31, 1976, 71 SCRA 153; De Guzman v. De Leon, Adm. Case No. 1328; MJ, July 30, 1976; Meimban v. Balite, Adm. Case No. 131-MJ, Aug. 21, 1976; Tolentino v. Tiong, Adm. Case No. 535-MJ, Aug. 21, 1976; Amosco v. Magro, Adm. Case No. 439-MJ, Sept. 30, 1976.




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






January-1977 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. Nos. L-23026-27 January 6, 1976

    JOAQUIN SO v. GAUDENCIO CLORIBEL, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 1393-CTJ January 20, 1977 - RODRIGO CORTEZ v. AVELINO CONSTANTINO

  • G.R. No. L-30103 January 20, 1977 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN CUNANAN

  • G.R. No. L-41333 January 20, 1977 - RESTITUTO VILLAPANDO v. ELVIRO Q. QUITAIN

  • G.R. No. L-43257 January 20, 1977 - RESTITUTA GINDOY v. LAURO L. TAPUCAR

  • G.R. No. L-44740 January 20, 1977 - DOJOSE TRADING, ET AL. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28521 January 21, 1977 - ALFREDO ABERIN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-29313 January 21, 1977 - LUZON SURETY COMPANY, INC. v. ROMAN MIRASOL, JR.

  • A.M. No. 1106-CFI January 24, 1977 - ARMANDO B. CLEDERA v. DELFIN VIR. SUNGA

  • G.R. No. L-45018 January 24, 1977 - ALEJANDRO V. RATILLA v. LAURO L. TAPUCAR, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. 88-MJ January 25, 1977 - ALEJANDRO B. SUERTE v. MARCIAL G. UGBINAR

  • G.R. No. L-36545 January 26, 1977 - ESSO PHILIPPINES, INC. v. MALAYANG MANGGAGAWA SA ESSO, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-16 January 31, 1977 - SECRETARY OF JUSTICE v. ANTOLIANO R. PACIS

  • A.M. No. P-274 January 31, 1977 - ROSENDO LADORES v. ISAURO TUAZON

  • A.C. No. 1352 January 31, 1977 - CALIXTO BALLOS v. PAQUITO G. BALASABAS

  • A.C. No. 1601 January 31, 1977 - DIONISIO C. REQUIO v. WILLIAM DY-LIACO

  • G.R. No. L-22795 January 31, 1977 - DANGWA TRANSPORTATION CO., INC., ET AL. v. MALCOLM G. SARMIENTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-28506 January 31, 1977 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANATALIO LINGAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32256 January 31, 1977 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROTILLO JAMERO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32441 January 31, 1977 - SAN VICENTE SHIPPING, INC. v. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-32752-3 January 31, 1977 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MIGUEL D. BALUYOT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-40817 January 31, 1977 - SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION v. SECRETARY OF LABOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41288 January 31, 1977 - PHILIPPINE LABOR ALLIANCE COUNCIL v. BUREAU OF LABOR RELATIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-41886 January 31, 1977 - RAMON CASTRO v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42255 January 31, 1977 - WILFREDO D. BAEL, ET AL. v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42390 January 31, 1977 - EUNILA MARAPO, ET AL. v. PHILIPPINE PACKING CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-42925 January 31, 1977 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RICARDO D. GALANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-43089 January 31, 1977 - CIRILA LEGASON v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. L-43681 January 31, 1977 - ANTONIO B. JUSTO v. WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION COMMISSION, ET AL.