ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™  
Main Index Law Library Philippine Laws, Statutes & Codes Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Jurisprudence
Prof. Joselito Guianan Chan's The Labor Code of the Philippines, Annotated Labor Standards & Social Legislation Volume I of a 3-Volume Series 2019 Edition (3rd Revised Edition)
 

 
Chan Robles Virtual Law Library
 









 

 
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

 
PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE
 

   
August-2003 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. P-02-1651 August 4, 2003 - ALEJANDRO ESTRADA v. SOLEDAD S. ESCRITOR

  • G.R. No. 138924 August 5, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISANTO D. MANAHAN

  • G.R. No. 139767 August 5, 2003 - FELIPE SY DUNGOG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 140868-69 August 5, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NAZARIO B. BUATES

  • G.R. No. 142691 August 5, 2003 - HEIRS OF AMADO CELESTIAL v. HEIRS OF EDITHA G. CELESTIAL

  • G.R. No. 144317 August 5, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MICHAEL A. MONTE

  • G.R. No. 148848 August 5, 2003 - JACINTO RETUYA, ET. AL. v. SALIC B. DUMARPA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 152611 August 5, 2003 - LAND BANK OF THE PHIL. v. SEVERINO LISTANA, SR.

  • G.R. No. 152845 August 5, 2003 - DRIANITA BAGAOISAN, ET AL. v. NATIONAL TOBACCO ADMINISTRATION

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1502 August 6, 2003 - ANASTACIO E. GAUDENCIO v. EDWARD D. PACIS

  • A.M. No. P-03-1675 August 6, 2003 - ELENA F. PACE v. RENO M. LEONARDO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-00-1545 August 6, 2003 - ANTONIO J. FINEZA v. BAYANI S. RIVERA

  • G.R. No. 133926 August 6, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN H. DALISAY

  • G.R. Nos. 137256-58 August 6, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUFINO V. ERNAS

  • G.R. No. 142740 August 6, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO A. TAMPOS

  • G.R. No. 142843 August 6, 2003 - OCTAVIO ALVAREZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144428 August 6, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN M. ROSARIO

  • G.R. No. 144595 August 6, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANTE ILAGAN

  • G.R. Nos. 145383-84 August 6, 2003 - RUDY M. VILLAREÑA v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT

  • A.M. No. P-02-1627 August 7, 2003 - CARIDAD RACCA, ET AL. v. MARIO C. BACULI, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127210 August 7, 2003 - ALVIN TAN v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138956 August 7, 2003 - LOADSTAR SHIPPING CO., ET AL. v. ROMEO MESANO

  • G.R. No. 146341 August 7, 2003 - AQUILA LARENA v. FRUCTUOSA MAPILI, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 146382 August 7, 2003 - SYSTEMS PLUS COMPUTER COLLEGE OF CALOOCAN CITY v. LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF CALOOCAN CITY

  • G.R. No. 148557 August 7, 2003 - FELICITO ABARQUEZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149075 August 7, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODRIGO P. BALLENO

  • G.R. No. 151833 August 7, 2003 - ANTONIO M. SERRANO v. GALANT MARITIME SERVICES

  • G.R. No. 153087 August 7, 2003 - BERNARD R. NALA v. JESUS M. BARROSO

  • G.R. No. 154183 August 7, 2003 - SPS. VICKY TAN TOH and LUIS TOH v. SOLID BANK CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 134241 August 11, 2003 - DAVID REYES v. JOSE LIM, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139177 August 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALVIN VILLANUEVA

  • A.M. No. 00-3-48-MeTC August 12, 2003 - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT AND PHYSICAL INVENTORY OF CASES IN THE MTC OF MANILA, BR. 2

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1388 August 12, 2003 - FELISA TABORITE, ET AL. v. MANUEL S. SOLLESTA, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-02-1588 August 12, 2003 - RUBY M. GONZALES v. ALMA G. MARTILLANA

  • G.R. No. 120474 August 12, 2003 - ANICETO W. NAGUIT, JR. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 133796-97 August 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BERNANDINO M. ALAJAY

  • G.R. No. 133858 August 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. HERMINIANO SATORRE

  • G.R. No. 133892 August 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOVITO B. LLAVORE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137792 August 12, 2003 - SPS RICARDO ROSALES, ET AL. v. SPS ALFONSO and LOURDES SUBA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 145951 August 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 151908 & 152063 August 12, 2003 - SMART COMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. NATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 152807 August 12, 2003 - HEIRS OF LOURDES SAEZ SABANPAN, ET AL. v. ALBERTO C. COMORPOSA, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 4650 August 14, 2003 - ROSALINA BIASCAN v. MARCIAL F. LOPEZ

  • A.M. No. 00-6-09-SC August 14, 2003 - RE: IMPOSITION OF CORRESPONDING PENALTIES FOR HABITUAL TARDINESS, ETC.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1631 August 14, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. JAIME F. BAUTISTA

  • G.R. No. 126627 August 14, 2003 - SMITH KLINE BECKMAN CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140023 August 14, 2003 - RUDY LAO v. STANDARD INSURANCE CO.

  • G.R. Nos. 140034-35 August 14, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO B. ZABALA

  • G.R. No. 144402 August 14, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO ECLERA, SR.

  • G.R. No. 156039 August 14, 2003 - KARINA CONSTANTINO-DAVID, ET AL. v. ZENAIDA D. PANGANDAMAN-GANIA

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1401 August 15, 2003 - ARSENIA LARIOSA v. CONRADO B. BANDALA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115925 August 15, 2003 - SPS. RICARDO PASCUAL, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 127128 August 15, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROEL C. MENDIGURIN

  • G.R. No. 133841 August 15, 2003 - CAROLINA P. RAMIREZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 135697-98 August 15, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. PEDRITO C. ANDRES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 137520-22 August 15, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFREDO BAROY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138074 August 15, 2003 - CELY YANG v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138862 August 15, 2003 - MANUEL CAMACHO v. RICARDO GLORIA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139895 August 15, 2003 - CIPRIANO M. LAZARO v. RURAL BANK OF FRANCISCO BALAGTAS (BULACAN), INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143258 August 15, 2003 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES v. JOSELITO PASCUA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144618 August 15, 2003 - JORGE CHIN, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 147662-63 August 15, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FREDDIE FONTANILLA

  • G.R. No. 148222 August 15, 2003 - PEARL & DEAN (PHIL.) v. SHOEMART, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 151941 August 15, 2003 - CHAILEASE FINANCE CORP. v. SPS. ROMEO and MARIAFE MA

  • G.R. Nos. 153714-20 August 15, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARIO K. ESPINOSA

  • G.R. No. 154448 August 15, 2003 - PEDRITO F. REYES v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 154920 August 15, 2003 - RODNEY HEGERTY v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1744 August 18, 2003 - ROBERT M. VISBAL v. ROGELIO C. SESCON

  • A.C. No. 5299 August 19, 2003 - ISMAEL G. KHAN v. RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO

  • G.R. No. 138945 August 19, 2003 - FELIX GOCHAN AND SONS REALTY CORP., ET AL. v. HEIRS OF RAYMUNDO BABA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144331 August 19, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISTITO LATASA

  • G.R. No. 145930 August 19, 2003 - C-E CONSTRUCTION CORP. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 147246 August 19, 2003 - ASIA LIGHTERAGE AND SHIPPING, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148877 August 19, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANGELITO B. BAGSIT

  • G.R. No. 149724 August 19, 2003 - DENR v. DENR REGION 12 EMPLOYEES

  • G.R. No. 150060 August 19, 2003 - PRIMARY STRUCTURES CORP. v. SPS. ANTHONY and SUSAN T. VALENCIA

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1437 August 20, 2003 - JAIME E. CONTRERAS v. EDDIE P. MONSERATE

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1473 August 20, 2003 - MYRA M. ALINTANA DE PACETE v. JOSEFINO A. GARILLO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1745 August 20, 2003 - UNITRUST DEVELOPMENT BANK v. JOSE F. CAOIBES, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125799 August 21, 2003 - DANILO CANSINO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148864 August 21, 2003 - SPS EDUARDO and EPIFANIA EVANGELISTA v. MERCATOR FINANCE CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149495 August 21, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 150590 August 21, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. WILLIE A. ALMEDILLA

  • A.M. No. P-03-1673 August 25, 2003 - LOUIE TRINIDAD v. SOTERO S. PACLIBAR

  • G.R. No. 114172 August 25, 2003 - JUANITA P. PINEDA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 129368 August 25, 2003 - LAND BANK OF THE PHIL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 129961-62 August 25, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. VIRGILIO CAABAY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 137326 August 25, 2003 - ROSARIO TEXTILE MILLS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138334 August 25, 2003 - ESTELA L. CRISOSTOMO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 142856-57 August 25, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROBERTO NEGOSA

  • G.R. No. 151026 August 25, 2003 - SOLIDBANK CORP. v. CA, ET. AL.

  • G.R. No. 152221 August 25, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. JACINTO B. ALVAREZ, JR.

  • A.M. No. 01-4-133-MTC August 26, 2003 - RE: ELSIE C. REMOROZA

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1492 August 26, 2003 - DOMINGO B. MANAOIS v. LAVEZARES C. LEOMO

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1504 August 26, 2003 - FELICITAS M. HIMALIN v. ISAURO M. BALDERIAN

  • G.R. Nos. 146097-98 August 26, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN CARIÑAGA

  • A.C. No. 5474 August 28, 2003 - REDENTOR S. JARDIN v. DEOGRACIAS VILLAR

  • A.C. No. 5535 August 28, 2003 - SPS. STEVEN and NORA WHITSON v. JUANITO C. ATIENZA

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1506 August 28, 2003 - PABLO B. MABINI v. LORINDA B. TOLEDO-MUPAS

  • A.M. No. P-01-1507 August 28, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. ROLANDO SAA

  • A.M. No. P-02-1579 August 28, 2003 - LETICIA L. NICOLAS v. PRISCO L. RICAFORT

  • A.M. No. P-02-1631 August 28, 2003 - RENATO C. BALIBAG v. HERMITO C. MONICA

  • A.M. No. P-02-1659 August 28, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. LIZA MARIA E. SIRIOS

  • A.M. No. P-03-1710 August 28, 2003 - EDGARDO ANGELES v. BALTAZAR P. EDUARTE

  • A.M. No. RTJ-02-1676 August 28, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. GUILLERMO R. ANDAYA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1786 August 28, 2003 - ALFREDO Y. CHU v. CAMILO E. TAMIN

  • G.R. No. 134604 August 28, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO HUGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138295 August 28, 2003 - PILIPINO TELEPHONE CORP. v. NTC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143826 August 28, 2003 - IGNACIA AGUILAR-REYES v. SPS. CIPRIANO and FLORENTINA MIJARES

  • G.R. No. 146501 August 28, 2003 - FLORDELIZA RIVERA v. GREGORIA SANTIAGO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149810 August 28, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CRISPIN T. RUALES

  • G.R. No. 154049 August 28, 2003 - RAMON P. JACINTO, ET AL. v. FIRST WOMEN’S CREDIT CORP.

  • G.R. No. 133733 August 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAXIMO AQUINDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136299 August 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ZOILO MAGALLANES

  • G.R. No. 137010 August 29, 2003 - ARK TRAVEL EXPRESS v. Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Makati, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142383 August 29, 2003 - ASIAN TRANSMISSION CORP. v. CANLUBANG SUGAR ESTATES

  •  





     
     

    A.M. No. P-02-1627   August 7, 2003 - CARIDAD RACCA, ET AL. v. MARIO C. BACULI, ET AL.

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [A.M. No. P-02-1627. August 7, 2003.]

    (Formerly OCA IPI No. 00-815-P)

    CARIDAD RACCA and CONSOLACION GALINATO, Complainants, v. MARIO C. BACULI, Clerk II and EDMAR CADANO, Process Server; Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur, Respondents.

    R E S O L U T I O N


    VITUG, J.:


    In a sworn complaint, dated 02 February 2000, Clerk II Mario C. Baculi of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Narvacan-Nagbukel-Santa, Ilocos Sur, was charged with gross dishonesty, conduct unbecoming a court employee and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service relative to Civil Case No. 563, entitled "Caridad Racca v. Consolacion Galinato." The complaint averred that, in the aforementioned civil case, Consolacion Galinato and Caridad Racca entered into a compromise agreement. On 30 May 1995, respondent Baculi went to the house of Galinato and told her that he was authorized by Racca to collect her monthly obligation pursuant to the compromise agreement. She thus gave him the sum of P1,500.00, evidenced by a receipt bearing an even date. About two months later, Racca demanded from Galinato the payment of her obligation. It was then that Galinato allegedly learned that Baculi did not turn over the money to Racca.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    Caridad Racca also complained that when she went to the house of Galinato to demand payment of the latter’s obligation, the latter informed her that the amount of P1,500.00 was already paid through Baculi. Racca maintained that she did not authorize Baculi to collect the sum from Galinato and that, in any case, the money was not given to her. She claimed that she went to the office of Baculi a number of times to demand that the sum be turned over to her but Baculi denied having received it from Galinato.

    Baculi, in his counter-affidavit, denied that he went to the house of Galinato but that the latter went to his (Baculi’s) office to deliver the amount due Racca after Galinato was unable to see Edmar Cadano, the process server authorized to receive the money, who was then absent. Galinato prevailed upon Baculi to receive the money as Galinato could no longer wait for Cadano. Baculi claimed that he gave the money to Cadano a few days later but he did not bother to ask for any receipt from Cadano. Baculi, in corroboration, submitted an affidavit of desistance, dated 06 April 2000, executed by Galinato, to the effect that Baculi merely affixed her signature on the complaint because Judge Juan C. Cabusora had asked her to do so; that she could not understand the contents of the complaint and merely relied on Judge Cabusora’s words that it was only about the money she gave to Baculi; and that the latter never went to her house but, just to the contrary, she went to the office of Baculi and asked him to receive the money due Racca only because the one authorized to receive it was not around. In a subsequent affidavit (dated 28 April 2000), however, Galinato averred that Baculi misled her into signing the affidavit of desistance.

    Edmar Cadano, for his part, executed an affidavit, dated 28 April 2000, stating that Baculi did not turn over to him the amount of P1,500.00 supposedly received from Galinato.

    The Court, in its resolution of 09 May 2001, referred the matter to Judge Ulpiano I. Campos of the Regional Trial Court, Narvacan, Ilocos Sur, Branch 22, for investigation, report and recommendation.

    In his report of 28 December 2001, Judge Campos found Baculi administratively liable for violating Republic Act No. 6713, otherwise also known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees. The Investigating Judge recommended that Baculi be suspended, without pay, for fifteen (15) days and that he be ordered to pay and deliver to complainant Racca the amount of P1,500.00 with legal interest of 12% per annum from 30 May 1995 until fully paid.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), tasked to evaluate the report of Judge Campos, found respondent Baculi to have committed an act prejudicial to the interest of the service when he, not being a court-deputized collector, accepted the money from Galinato although he might not have had any dishonest motive. The OCA found the recommended penalty by the Investigating Judge to be harsh considering that there was no convincing evidence that Baculi misappropriated or failed to turn over the money to Cadano. The OCA said:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph

    "The undersigned, after carefully perusing the records of this case, concurs with the findings made by the Investigating Judge that respondent Baculi committed a conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service when he accepted the subject money from Mrs. Galinato. That he was motivated by an honest intention not to cause unnecessary delay to Mrs. Galinato is of no moment. The fact is that he had no business accepting the P1,500.00 tendered by Galinato because he was not the collector deputized by the court to do so. His actuations only compromised the integrity and corroded the dignity and honor of the courts and served to shake the people’s faith and trust in the judiciary.

    "However, the undersigned believes that the penalty recommended by the Investigating Judge is simply too harsh considering the circumstances of the case. This is so because of the fact that it was never established by clear and convincing evidence that respondent Baculi indeed failed to remit the money to Cadano or that he really misappropriated the same. Even Judge Campos recognized this fact in his Report when he mentioned therein that ‘it could then be safely concluded that either the money in question remained in the hands of the respondent or it reached the possession of Edmar Cadano, whichever, whose testimony should be believed and to hold water at that’ (Rollo, pp. 106–107) which means he is in doubt whether Baculi delivered the money or not to Cadano. In the face of this circumstance, the doubt must be resolved in favor of the Respondent. Also, the undersigned, just like the Investigating Judge, cannot help but question the manner by which the instant case was filed. It appears that this case was the handiwork of Judge Juan C. Cabusora who had an ax to grind against the herein respondent due to the filing by the latter’s wife and late mother of an administrative case (OCA IPI No. 99-823-MTJ) against the retired judge. This was bolstered by the testimony of Consolacion Galinato (Rollo, pp. 186–192) who declared during the hearing that she would not have signed and executed the Affidavit-Complaint (Exhibit ‘2’) and the Affidavit dated 28 April 2002 (Exhibit ‘4’) wherein she declared that Baculi misled her into signing the Affidavit of Desistance dated 6 April 2000, much less charged the respondent had she understood the contents of these affidavits which were presented to her by Judge Cabusora for signature. It was very clear therefore that Galinato did not fully understand the imports of these affidavits and that she only signed and executed the same upon the behest of Judge Cabusora. Likewise, the delay in the filing of the instant complaint against the respondent is quite suspicious. The charge came almost five (5) years after the accrual of the cause complained of.

    "On the part of Cadano, the undersigned shares the observation made by Judge Campos that the process server was negligent in the discharge of his duty and function as the collector duly deputized by the court in connection with Civil Case No. 563. Also, the instant case would not have came about if only he did not absent himself on the day Galinato went to their office to hand the subject money. He should be reminded that the Constitution mandates all public officers and employees to serve with responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency.

    "WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the undersigned respectfully recommends to this Honorable Court that respondent Mario C. Baculi, Clerk II, Narvacan-Nagbukel-Santa, Ilocos Sur, be FINED in the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) for Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service with a WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar offenses in the future shall be dealt with more severely. Further, it is also recommended that Process Server Edmar Cadano be FOUND GUILTY of Negligence and that he be FINED also in the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000.00) with a WARNING that a repetition of the same offense in the future shall be dealt with more severely."cralaw virtua1aw library

    In its report, the OCA found no sufficient evidence to show that Baculi misappropriated the money or failed to turn it over to Cadano. Galinato reiterated during the investigation that she would not have signed the affidavit-complaint, as well as her 06 April 2000 affidavit, had she understood the full import thereof. The OCA itself noted that it took complainants five years to charge Baculi. In the case of Cadano, the OCA would hold him accountable just because he was not in his post when Galinato went to the court to hand over the money. The OCA opined that the instant case would not have come about had Cadano not absented himself on that day. There is nothing, however, in the records that would show that Cadano’s absence from his post was inexcusable or unjustified. More importantly, Cadano was not even included in the administrative charge.

    Given the circumstances, the Court finds it difficult to accept the recommended imposition of fine on respondents. It should be enough to simply admonish or remind them, just like everyone else in the judiciary, to be always mindful of the fact that the image of the court is dependent on the conduct of the men and women, from the judge to the last of its employees, who work thereat. 1 Each of us is called upon to act with utmost circumspection for any misbehavior, whether true or only perceived, on the part of court personnel would most certainly reflect never too kindly on the judiciary.

    WHEREFORE, Clerk Mario C. Baculi and Process Server Edmar Cadano are ADMONISHED and REMINDED to always be circumspect in their actuations.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    SO ORDERED.

    Davide, Jr., C.J., Ynares-Santiago, Carpio and Azcuna, JJ., concur.

    Endnotes:



    1. See Bicbic v. Borromeo, A.M. No. P-01-1506, 10 September 2001, 364 SCRA 762.

    A.M. No. P-02-1627   August 7, 2003 - CARIDAD RACCA, ET AL. v. MARIO C. BACULI, ET AL.


    Back to Home | Back to Main

     

    QUICK SEARCH

    cralaw

       

    cralaw



     
      Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
    ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
     
    RED