Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1993 > July 1993 Decisions > A.M. No. P-91-600 July 21, 1993 - EDILBERTO S. RAMOS v. DAMASO GREGORIO:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[A.M. No. P-91-600. July 21, 1993.]

JUDGE EDILBERTO S. RAMOS, Complainant, v. ATTY. DAMASO GREGORIO, Branch Clerk of Court, RTC, Branch 41, Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro, Respondent.


SYLLABUS


1. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW; SUPREME COURT; ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION OVER COURT PERSONNEL; ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT AGAINST BRANCH CLERK OF COURT; DISINTEREST OF COMPLAINANT IN PURSUING CASE, NOT A GROUND FOR DISMISSAL THEREOF. — The mere fact that Judge Ramos had expressed his desire not to pursue the complaint is not a ground for the dismissal of the instant complaint, where the basis thereof had been duly established. Besides, Judge Ramos’ desistance was only with regard to the charge of drunkenness, and not to the negligent acts of respondent, such as his failure to immediately transmit the records of cases on appeal.

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; FAILURE TO TRANSMIT RECORDS OF TWO (2) CASES ON APPEAL CONSTITUTES NEGLIGENCE; PENALTY; CASE AT BAR. — Inasmuch as no further evidence was adduced by respondent in his behalf, the Court adopts the findings and conclusions made by Deputy Court Administrator Suarez in his memorandum dated September 8, 1992, which are supported by the evidence, as follows: "From the facts on record, it is clear that respondent Clerk of Court was guilty of negligence for his failure to transmit to the Court of Appeals, as of May 8, 1991, the records of Criminal Case Nos. P-3276 and 3277 despite the fact that the notice of appeal was filed as early as February 12, 1990. Respondent’s explanation that the delay was caused by pressure of work and lack of office equipments cannot be considered a ground for exoneration, at best, it may be considered as a valid ground for mitigation of liability. Moreover, the records disclosed that respondent did not make any attempt whatsoever to request for an extension of time within which to transmit the records of the appeal cases upon the former’s failure to forward the same to the Court of Appeals during the prescribed period of time as provided for under the Rules of Court." WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Damaso Gregorio is hereby SUSPENDED for one (1) month without pay with a warning that repetition of the acts complained of and other administrative lapses will be dealt with more severely.


D E C I S I O N


NOCON, J.:


In a letter to the Court Administrator dated November 28, 1990, Judge Edilberto S. Ramos complained of several acts of his Branch Clerk of Court, Atty. Damaso Gregorio, such as failing to transmit the records of two (2) cases on appeal and for coming to work drunk on November 27, 1990 and on several other occasions. Aside from this letter, the Court has received other complaints regarding respondent’s inefficiency. The letter of Judge Ramos was considered an administrative complaint against respondent, who was directed to comment thereon.

In his comment, respondent averred that his failure to transmit the records of cases on appeal to the Court of Appeals was due to the heavy workload and the lack of office equipment. As to his alleged drunkenness on November 27, 1990, respondent contends that he had attended a wedding dance party the night before and that he had very little sleep. Respondent further contends that Judge Ramos may have mistaken his lack of sleep as a sign of drunkenness.

The Court referred the case to the Court Administrator for evaluation. In a memorandum dated September 8, 1992, Deputy Court Administrator Reynaldo L. Suarez found the excuses proffered by respondent as weak and lame, and recommended that the respondent be suspended for one (1) month without pay with a warning that repetition of this lapse and other administrative lapses would be dealt with more severely.

On September 30, 1992, the Court referred the case to the Executive Judge Manuel A. Roman of the Regional Trial Court of Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro for investigation, report and recommendation.

During the hearing of January 20, 1993, Judge Ramos manifested that respondent had apologized to him with regard to his act of drunkenness, and that because of said apology he was not interested in pursuing the administrative complaint, provided that respondent will improve his services to the court. As to his failure to transmit the records of cases on appeal, respondent manifested that he will submit the case on the basis of the records and did not submit any other evidence in his behalf.chanrobles.com : virtual law library

Judge Ramos formally manifested his disinterest in pursuing the case in a letter dated February 16, 1993.

On the other hand, Judge Roman informed the Court Administrator in his letter of January 16, 1993, that based on the records, respondent should be meted out the penalty recommended by the Court Administrator in his memorandum of September 8, 1992. However, in view of the lack of interest of Judge Ramos in pursuing the complaint, Judge Roman recommended that the instant complaint be dismissed to give respondent another chance.

The recommendation of Judge Roman is not well-taken. The mere fact that Judge Ramos had expressed his desire not to pursue the complaint is not a ground for the dismissal of the instant complaint, where the basis thereof had been duly established. Besides, Judge Ramos’ desistance was only with regard to the charge of drunkenness, and not to the negligent acts of respondent, such as his failure to immediately transmit the records of cases on appeal.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Inasmuch as no further evidence was adduced by respondent in his behalf, the Court adopts the findings and conclusions made by Deputy Court Administrator Suarez in his memorandum dated September 8, 1992, which are supported by the evidence, as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

"From the facts on record, it is clear that respondent Clerk of Court was guilty of negligence for his failure to transmit to the Court of Appeals, as of May 8, 1991, the records of Criminal Cases Nos. P-3276 and 3277 despite the fact that the notice of appeal was filed as early as February 12, 1990. Respondent’s explanation that the delay was caused by pressure of work and lack of office equipments cannot be considered a ground for exoneration, at best, it may be considered as a valid ground for mitigation of liability. Moreover, the records disclosed that respondent did not make any attempt whatsoever to request for an extension of time within which to transmit the records of the appeal cases upon the former’s failure to forward the same to the Court of Appeals during the prescribed period of time as provided for under the Rules of Court." 1

WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Damaso Gregorio is hereby SUSPENDED for one (1) month without pay with a warning that repetition of the acts complained of and other administrative lapses will be dealt with more severely.

SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, C.J., Padilla and Regalado, JJ., concur.

Puno, J., No part.

Endnotes:



1. Memorandum of Deputy Court Administrator Reynaldo L. Suarez, p. 2; Rollo, p. 20.




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






July-1993 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 92159 July 1, 1993 - LEDITA BURCE JACOB, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95863 July 1, 1993 - AUTOGRAPHICS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96505 July 1, 1993 - LEGASPI OIL CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101314 July 1, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOHN AMET G. BAELLO

  • G.R. No. 107921 July 1, 1993 - LEVY MACASIANO v. NATIONAL HOUSING AUTHORITY, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-89-270 July 5, 1993 - THELMA ARCENIO, ET AL. v. VIRGINIA PAGOROGON

  • A.M. No. P-91-549 July 5, 1993 - REYNALDO SEBASTIAN v. ALBERTO A. VALINO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-92-802 July 5, 1993 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. GENARO C. GINES

  • G.R. No. 74830 July 5, 1993 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 79642 July 5, 1993 - BROADWAY CENTRUM CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION v. TROPICAL HUT FOOD MARKET, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 83373-74 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYNALDO CORDOVA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 92000 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO LAGARIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 95358-59 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO MORATO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96765 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SERGIO M. CURARATON

  • G.R. No. 97032 July 5, 1993 - PROTAClO T. BACANI v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98270 July 5, 1993 - ALEJANDRO SY JUECO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 99390 July 5, 1993 - LYSANDER P. GARCIA v. MANILA TIMES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100521 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HUGO C. YLARDE

  • G.R. No. 100898 July 5, 1993 - ALEX FERRER, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101313 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CARLITO E. USON

  • G.R. No. 103543 July 5, 1993 - ASIA BREWERY, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 104277 July 5, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BOBBY G. DE PAZ

  • G.R. No. 105180 July 5, 1993 - PANTRANCO NORTH EXPRESS, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105540 July 5, 1993 - IRENEO G. GERONIMO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107809 July 5, 1993 - ERNESTO M. ABOITIZ, ET AL. v. TEODORO P. REGINO

  • G.R. Nos. 91865-66 & G.R. Nos. 92439-40 July 6, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CARLOS DE LA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. 95893 July 6, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEO PEREZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98398 July 6, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL S. ROLDAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101762 July 6, 1993 - VERMEN REALTY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105866 July 6, 1993 - VICTORIA D. BAYUBAY, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108065 July 6, 1993 - SPS. FELIX BAES AND RAFAELA BAES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106473 July 12, 1993 - ANTONIETTA O. DESCALLAR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96370 July 14, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CERVANDO V. PATONG

  • G.R. No. 91332 July 16, 1993 - PHILIP MORRIS, INC., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107854 July 16, 1993 - SUKARNO S. SAMAD v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 94863 July 19, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. REYNALDO S. NARIO

  • A.M. No. P-91-600 July 21, 1993 - EDILBERTO S. RAMOS v. DAMASO GREGORIO

  • G.R. Nos. L-48886-88 July 21, 1993 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 59771 July 21, 1993 - VICTORIO SANTOS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 92357 July 21, 1993 - PHILIPPINE SCOUT VETERANS SECURITY & INVESTIGATION AGENCY, ET AL. v. RUBEN D. TORRES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 98450 July 21, 1993 - PHILIPPINE MANPOWER SERVICES, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 96086 & 100777 July 21, 1993 - URSULA OCDAMIA JAVIER, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 97008-09 July 23, 1993 - VIRGINIA G. NERI, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101187 July 23, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WALTER ABORDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 102157 July 23, 1993 - GVM SECURITY AND PROTECTIVE AGENCY, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 106677 & 106696 July 23, 1993 - HERMOGENES P. POBRE v. MARIANO E. MENDIETA, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 103385-88 July 26, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ELMA C. ROMERO

  • G.R. No. 106537 July 27, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARNEL ORACOY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 85247 July 30, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDWIN MARCELINO

  • G.R. No. 92269 July 30, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LUCIO B. GARCIA

  • G.R. Nos. 97320-27 July 30, 1993 - VALLUM SECURITY SERVICES, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101083 July 30, 1993 - JUAN ANTONIO, ET AL. v. FULGENCIO S. FACTORAN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 101215 July 30, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO SALVADOR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 101374 July 30, 1993 - FORTUNE LIFE AND GENERAL INSURANCE CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 102705 July 30, 1993 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DOROTEO S. MEJORADA

  • G.R. No. 104166 July 30, 1993 - JULITA S. ZAMBO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106170 July 30, 1993 - PACIFIC TIMBER EXPORT CORPORATION, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.