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
 

   
September-2003 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.M. No. P-03-1705 September 2, 2003 - BALDOMERO DE VERA SOLIMAN, JR. v. PRINCESITO D. SORIANO

  • G.R. No. 138238 September 2, 2003 - EDUARDO BALITAOSAN v. SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, CULTURE AND SPORTS

  • G.R. No. 146980 September 2, 2003 - LUZ E. TAGANAS, ET AL. v. MELITON G. EMUSLAN, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 3967 September 3, 2003 - ARTEMIO ENDAYA v. WILFREDO OCA

  • A.C. No. 6084 September 3, 2003 - FELICITAS BERBANO v. WENCESLAO BARCELONA

  • A.M. No. 02-10-614-RTC September 3, 2003 - RE: EDITORIAL OF THE NEGROS CHRONICLE AND OTHER CHARGES OF A CONCERNED CITIZEN AGAINST JUDGE ROGELIO CARAMPATAN

  • A.M. No. OCA-01-6 September 3, 2003 - DOMINADOR V. ASPIRAS v. ESMERALDA ABALOS

  • A.M. No. P-01-1466 September 3, 2003 - EDUARDO F. BAGO v. JOEL FERAREN

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1501 September 3, 2003 - ROMEO E. EJERCITO v. ILDEFONSO B. SUERTE

  • G.R. No. 131915 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDDIE LACHICA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136274 September 3, 2003 - SUNFLOWER NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 139400 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAURICIO WATIWAT

  • G.R. No. 140652 September 3, 2003 - OLIVERIO LAPERAL v. PABLO V. OCAMPO

  • G.R. No. 144312 September 3, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. CHUA TAN LEE

  • G.R. No. 145737 September 3, 2003 - CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION v. EVELYN P. CAYOBIT

  • G.R. No. 149617 September 3, 2003 - MARIANO JOAQUIN S. MACIAS v. MARGIE CORPUS MACIAS

  • G.R. No. 141527 September 4, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RANDY G. BOCALAN

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1788 September 5, 2003 - JORGE F. ABELLA v. FRANCISCO L. CALINGIN

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1430 September 8, 2003 - ROMEO B. SENSON v. HERIBERTO M. PANGILINAN

  • G.R. No. 128296 September 8, 2003 - NASIPIT LUMBER CO., ET AL. v. NATIONAL WAGES AND PRODUCTIVITY COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 152957 September 8, 2003 - FAUSTINO ESQUIVEL v. EDUARDO REYES

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1480 September 10, 2003 - TRINIDAD CABAHUG v. JASPER JESSE G. DACANAY

  • G.R. No. 91486 September 10, 2003 - ALBERTO G. PINLAC, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 107271 September 10, 2003 - CITY OF CALOOCAN, ET AL. v. MAURO T. ALLARDE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 125329 September 10, 2003 - ANN BRIGITT LEONARDO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140762 September 10, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROGER C. ROXAS

  • G.R. No. 148912 September 10, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. TIMOTEO ESCARLOS

  • G.R. No. 151212 September 10, 2003 - TEN FORTY REALTY AND DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. MARINA CRUZ

  • A.M. No. P-02-1562 September 11, 2003 - ROMULO SG. VILLANUEVA v. CHARLIE C. LARCENA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-02-1742 September 11, 2003 - AVELINA MADULA v. RUTH CRUZ SANTOS

  • G.R. Nos. 136286-89 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EFREN G. DE TAZA

  • G.R. No. 138366 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RUBEN CAÑETE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 138569 September 11, 2003 - CONSOLIDATED BANK and TRUST CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144785 September 11, 2003 - YOLANDA GARCIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 145407 September 11, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONITO HEREVESE

  • G.R. No. 151081 September 11, 2003 - TOP RATE CONSTRUCTION & GENERAL SERVICES v. PAXTON DEV’T. CORP., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 153126 September 11, 2003 - MONTEREY FOODS CORP., ET AL. v. VICTORINO E. ESERJOSE

  • G.R. No. 153845 September 11, 2003 - EFREN P. SALVAN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1799 September 12, 2003 - MARIA CRISTINA OLONDRIZ PERTIERRA v. ALBERTO L. LERMA

  • G.R. No. 127206 September 12, 2003 - PERLA PALMA GIL v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135029 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NESTOR CARRIAGA

  • G.R. No. 141600 September 12, 2003 - ROBERTO FULGENCIO, ET AL. v. NLRC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 144639 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BENNY GO

  • G.R. Nos. 144972-73 September 12, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODOLFO JUNAS

  • G.R. No. 133365 September 16, 2003 - PLATINUM TOURS AND TRAVEL, INC. v. JOSE M. PANLILIO

  • G.R. Nos. 147814-15 September 16, 2003 - RAUL ZAPATOS v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 155278 September 16, 2003 - PRUDENCIO J. TANJUAN v. PHIL. POSTAL SAVINGS BANK

  • A.M. No. P-03-1740 September 17, 2003 - FRANKLIN Q. SUSA v. TEOFILA A. PEÑA

  • A.M. No. RTJ-01-1656 September 17, 2003 - EDGARDO D. BALSAMO v. PEDRO L. SUAN

  • G.R. No. 141120 September 17, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FERNANDO BUENAVIDEZ

  • G.R. No. 146125 September 17, 2003 - NOVELTY PHIL., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-01-1347 September 18, 2003 - BENJAMIN TUDTUD v. MAMERTO Y. COLIFLORES

  • A.M. No. P-00-1370 September 18, 2003 - ALEJANDRO PAREDES, ET AL. v. JERRY MARCELINO

  • A.M. No. P-01-1510 September 18, 2003 - MARY ANN PADUGANAN-PEÑARANDA v. GRACE L. SONGCUYA

  • A.M. No. P-03-1691 September 18, 2003 - JOSE S. SAÑEZ v. CARLOS B. RABINA

  • A.M. No. P-03-1703 September 18, 2003 - EDNA FE F. AQUINO v. JOSE R. MARTIN

  • A.M. No. P-03-1724 September 18, 2003 - VICENTE ALVAREZ, Jr. v. JOSE R. MARTIN

  • A.M. No. P-03-1742 September 18, 2003 - SALVADOR L. BERNABE v. WINSTON T. EGUIA

  • G.R. No. 135559 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MORENO OCUMEN

  • G.R. No. 135563 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BOBBY P. SANCHEZ

  • G.R. No. 144913 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF PHIL. v. GERONIMO C. CENIZA

  • G.R. No. 149627 September 18, 2003 - KENNETH O. NADELA v. CITY OF CEBU, ET AL..

  • G.R. No. 152351 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JAMIL MALA

  • G.R. No. 152604 September 18, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. LEONCIO S.PEDRIGAL

  • G.R. No. 153571 September 18, 2003 - BENGUET MANAGEMENT CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 156259 September 18, 2003 - GROGUN, INC. v. NAPOCOR

  • G.R. No. 157957 September 18, 2003 - CHARITO NAVAROSA v. COMELEC, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 142974 September 22, 2003 - SPS. SHEM G. ALFARERO and AURELIA TAGALOG v. SPS. PETRA and SANCHO SEVILLA

  • G.R. No. 152529 September 22, 2003 - SPS. HENDRIK and ALICIA S. BIESTERBOS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-02-1450 September 23, 2003 - RAMIRO S. DE JOYA v. AUGUSTUS C. DIAZ

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1509 September 23, 2003 - HELEN GAMBOA-MIJARES v. MANUEL Q. LIMSIACO, JR., ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-03-1732 September 23, 2003 - ROSENINA O. UY, ET AL. v. LOLITA R. EDILO

  • G.R. No. 123140 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. BERNARDO CORTEZANO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 135446 September 23, 2003 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. BPI

  • G.R. No. 136729 September 23, 2003 - ASTRO ELECTRONICS CORP., ET AL. v. PHIL. EXPORT AND FOREIGN LOAN GUARANTEE CORP.

  • G.R. Nos. 138716-19 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSE PILLAS

  • G.R. No. 138725 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALBERTO OLIVAR

  • G.R. No. 139360 September 23, 2003 - HLC CONSTRUCTION AND DEV’T. CORP., ET AL. v. EHSHA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 140982 September 23, 2003 - MARIO GUTIERREZ v. SINGER SEWING MACHINE COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 141434 September 23, 2003 - ANTONIO LO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143132 September 23, 2003 - VAN MELLE PHILS. ET AL. v. VICTOR M. ENDAYA

  • G.R. No. 144533 September 23, 2003 - JIMMY L. BARNES v. TERESITA C. REYES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 146786-88 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ANDRES T. DAÑO

  • G.R. No. 149295 September 23, 2003 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK v. GENEROSO DE JESUS

  • G.R. No. 149370 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARTIN ALEJO

  • G.R. No. 150905 September 23, 2003 - CITIBANK v. EFREN S. TEODORO

  • G.R. No. 151072 September 23, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELIPE NATIVIDAD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 151931 September 23, 2003 - ANAMER SALAZAR v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 152823-24 September 23, 2003 - RUFINA CHUA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 152998 September 23, 2003 - SIMON Q. AÑONUEVO, JR., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 156295 September 23, 2003 - MARCELO R. SORIANO v. SPS. RICARDO and ROSALINA GALIT

  • G.R. No. 156983 September 23, 2003 - In the Matter of the Application for the Habeas Corpus of JOSE VICTOR RIGOR y DANAO v. The Superintendent

  • A.M. No. P-00-1418 September 24, 2003 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. CELESTINA B. CORPUZ

  • G.R. No. 124293 September 24, 2003 - JG SUMMIT HOLDINGS v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 130087 September 24, 2003 - DIANA M. BARCELONA v. CA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 136726 September 24, 2003 - PANFILO V. VILLARUEL v. REYNALDO D. FERNANDO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148924 September 24, 2003 - TOYOTA MOTOR PHILS. v. CA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 153781 September 24, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MATEO GREGORIO, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 153885 & 156214 September 24, 2003 - LEPANTO CONSOLIDATED MINING CO. v. WMC RESOURCES INTERNATIONAL PTY. LTD.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1746 September 26, 2003 - ROGER F. BORJA v. ZORAYDA H. SALCEDO

  • G.R. No. 130330 September 26, 2003 - FERNANDO GO v. MICHAEL TAN and LOLITA TAN

  • G.R. No. 141217 September 26, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EUSEBIO DUBAN

  • G.R. No. 144037 September 26, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NOEL P. TUDTUD, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 5480 September 29, 2003 - LEILANI OCAMPO-INGCOCO, ET AL. v. ALEJANDRO G. YRREVERRE, JR.

  • G.R. Nos. 137370-71 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL OCO

  • G.R. No. 139185 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO RIVERA

  • G.R. No. 148902 September 29, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO ANDRADE

  • G.R. No. 149718 September 29, 2003 - MARIO VALEROSO v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 152057 September 29, 2003 - PT & T CORP. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • A.C. No. 5854 September 30, 2003 - NORA E. MIWA v. RENE O. MEDINA

  • G.R. No. 127593 September 30, 2003 - CLARA C. DE LA CRUZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 136742-43 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DANILO Y. ALFARO

  • G.R. Nos. 140514-15 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUNE IGNAS

  • G.R. No. 142751 September 30, 2003 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RODRIGO OPELIÑA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 143010 September 30, 2003 - MIGUEL DANOFRATA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.

  • G.R. No. 144230 September 30, 2003 - ARTURO G. MACKAY v. ADORACION G. ANGELES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148332 September 30, 2003 - NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY v. MADRIGAL WAN HAI LINES CORP.

  •  





     
     

    A.M. No. P-00-1370   September 18, 2003 - ALEJANDRO PAREDES, ET AL. v. JERRY MARCELINO

     
    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    FIRST DIVISION

    [A.M. No. P-00-1370. September 18, 2003.]

    ALEJANDRO PAREDES, and EDWIN PADILLA, Complainants, v. JERRY MARCELINO, Respondent.

    R E S O L U T I O N


    AZCUNA, J.:


    The present administrative case stemmed from a sworn letter-complaint 1 filed on December 19, 1997 by Alejandro Paredes and Edwin Padilla charging Branch Clerk of Court Elisabess R. Luarca-Domingo and Sheriff III Jerry 2 Marcelino, both of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Pasig City, Branch 71, with grave misconduct, gross inefficiency, and grave abuse of discretion in connection with Criminal Case No. 23663 entitled "People of the Philippines v. Alejandro Paredes and Edwin Pinlac y Padilla," for Attempted Qualified Theft.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    The two complainants, who were the accused in the aforecited criminal case, alleged that on August 9, 1997, the trial court ordered the issuance of a warrant of arrest against prosecution witness Larry Lazaro to compel his attendance for cross-examination in a hearing scheduled on October 9, 1997. On the fixed date of the hearing, however, complainants came for trial only to find out that their case was not included in the day’s trial calendar. Upon inquiry with respondent Marcelino, the then acting clerk-in-charge of criminal cases, they learned that their case was excluded because there was no return yet of the warrant issued against witness Lazaro. Even if the hearing did not push through that day, they were compelled to pay their counsel an appearance fee of P2,000.

    Complainants further allege that in an order dated December 2, 1997, the trial court required the Public Prosecutor to submit a formal offer of evidence in writing within five days from said date and set the next hearing on December 10, 1997. On the scheduled hearing, they were dismayed to discover that, again, their case was not included in the court calendar. Upon verification with respondent Marcelino, the latter replied, "Hindi namin isinama talaga ito dahil sa wala pang formal offer of evidence ang piskal." Complainants’ counsel countered that this notwithstanding, the case should be included in the calendar as it is not within the authority of respondent Marcelino to cancel the scheduled hearing. Respondent Marcelino replied, "Ayaw ni Judge ang may additional sa calendar." Again complainants were compelled to pay their counsel his appearance fee even without any court hearing.

    For the foregoing, the present administrative complaint was filed against respondent Marcelino and respondent Luarca-Domingo, as the former’s immediate supervisor, praying that both respondents be penalized with suspension.

    Respondent Marcelino, by way of Comment, 3 admitted the allegations with justification. He alleged that in 1997, he was the acting criminal case officer-in-charge and explained that he was still then in the process of familiarizing himself with the procedure in criminal cases. He admitted not having included the complainants’ case in the court calendar on the two alleged dates. With respect to the October 9, 1997 hearing, he concluded that there was no need to include the case for calendar as he assumed that the prosecution witness scheduled to be cross-examined that day was not duly notified, given that there was yet no return of the warrant issued against the latter. As to the December 10, 1997 hearing, he decided not to include the case as the prosecution’s formal offer of evidence had yet to be resolved. He maintained that the foregoing acts were done in good faith, without any intention of causing harm to the complainants.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    Respondent Luarca-Domingo, for her part, denied the charges against her. In her Comment, 4 she claimed that she was not aware of the present complaint until she was furnished a copy thereof. She stressed that neither the complainants nor respondent Marcelino called her attention regarding the incident. She maintained that had she been promptly informed thereof, she could have acted on it at the soonest possible time, or referred it to the Presiding Judge.

    In a resolution dated March 1, 2000, 5 this Court cleared respondent Luarca-Domingo from any administrative responsibility. The case proceeded against respondent Marcelino alone.

    Subsequently, the complainants filed a motion to dismiss and an Affidavit of Desistance. 6 This Court, however, on August 21, 2000, denied the same. 7 Respondent Marcelino filed a Motion for Reconsideration 8 of said denial resolution, which this Court, on September 27, 2000, denied for lack of merit. 9

    On October 23, 2000, respondent Marcelino manifested his willingness to submit the case for resolution on the basis of the records submitted. 10 As recommended by the OCA, the case was referred to Executive Judge Edwin Villasor of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City, for investigation.

    On April 25, 2000, Judge Villasor submitted his Report, 11 recommending that respondent Marcelino be fined P1,000. The OCA thereafter filed its Report, dated May 7, 2002, 12 subscribing to the Investigating judge’s finding and recommending that respondent Marcelino be fined in the amount of P1,000 and sternly warned that a repetition of the same or similar infraction will be dealt with more severely.

    The recommendation is well taken. This Court finds no merit in the explanation of respondent Marcelino in excluding the complainant’s case from the court calendar. As correctly found by the OCA:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

    In this particular case, the records bear that no hearing took place in Criminal Case No. 23663 on its scheduled hearing dates on 09 October 1997 and 10 December 1997. Admittedly, he took it upon himself to exclude said case in the court trial calendar for the reason that there was no return on the warrant of arrest issued against the prosecution witness and that the formal offer of evidence of the prosecution has yet to be resolved. If respondent was not sure if he should include complainant’s case in the trial calendar, he should have informed the judge about the problem or for that matter, he could have asked his immediate supervisor, the branch clerk of court. This is the prudent course of action. Yet, he arrogated unto himself in the absence of any authority from the judge to exclude Criminal Case No. 23663 in the court calendar. Clearly, respondent overstepped the boundaries of his assigned task. He indubitably failed to perform his assigned duty with efficiency and utmost responsibility, ideals which men and women in public service ought to dutifully observe. Thus, even if no bad faith can be attributed to him, he is still administratively liable for he clearly acted beyond his authority. 13

    This Court has not been wanting in its warnings that all court employees should endeavor to maintain at all times the confidence and high respect accorded to those who wield the gavel of justice. The image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and women who work thereat. 14

    As acting clerk-in-charge of criminal cases, respondent Marcelino was then tasked to assist in the management of the calendar of the court and in all other matters not involving the exercise of discretion or judgment of the judge. 15 The exclusion of the complainants’ case from the court calendar is beyond respondent Marcelino’s authority. It is, therefore, clear that he was remiss in his duties when he twice deliberately omitted to calendar the complainant’s case without justifiable reason. Good faith on his part, or lack of it, would be of no moment, for he is chargeable with the knowledge that being the officer of the court, it behooves him to make due compliances. 16 His actions show a lack of familiarity with laws, rules and regulations that undermines public confidence in the integrity of our courts. 17 He should thus be held administratively liable for his failure to exercise utmost prudence in the performance of his functions. In the absence of evidence that the offenses were deliberately committed to mislead the court or prejudice the complainants, a fine of P1,000 is appropriate.

    WHEREFORE, respondent Sheriff III Jerry Marcelino is found GUILTY of abuse of authority, and FINED in the amount of One Thousand Pesos (P1,000), with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar acts in the future will be dealt with more severely.chanrob1es virtua1 1aw 1ibrary

    SO ORDERED.

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

    Endnotes:



    1. Rollo, pp. 1–3.

    2. Spelled as "Gerry" in the Letter-Complaint.

    3. Rollo, pp. 9–10.

    4. Id., at 14–15.

    5. Id., at 19.

    6. Id., at 21.

    7. Id., at 31.

    8. Id., at 33–34.

    9. Id., at 35–36.

    10. Id., at 37.

    11. Id., at 65–72.

    12. Id., at 95–99.

    13. Id., at 98–99.

    14. Mutia-Hagad v. Denila, 341 SCRA 682 (2000).

    15. Lazo v. Tiong, 300 SCRA 173 (1998).

    16. Vda. De Enriquez v. Bautista, 331 SCRA 521 (2000).

    17. Malaggan v. Mabazza, A.M. No. P-01-1493, December 27, 2002.

    A.M. No. P-00-1370   September 18, 2003 - ALEJANDRO PAREDES, ET AL. v. JERRY MARCELINO


    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