Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2005 > July 2005 Decisions > G.R. No. 157329 - Genaro O. Arandilla, Jr., v. Maguindanao Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Magelco), et al. :




G.R. No. 157329 - Genaro O. Arandilla, Jr., v. Maguindanao Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Magelco), et al.

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. NO. 157329 July 28, 2005]

GENARO O. ARANDILLA, JR., Petitioners, v. MAGUINDANAO ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. (MAGELCO), ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS, represented by BAI LUCY C. SINSUAT, PERFECTO F. RAAGAS, JR., EMILIO A. ANDAMEN, SR., DATU KUSIN T. MAMA, JIMMY A. FULLECIDO, DATU AKMAD A. AMPATUAN, H. ABDULLAH M. LIDASAN, H. OMAR IBRAHIM, POSIDIO G. HISOLE, ATTY. GEORGE JABIDO and HERNANE D. GRAVINA, JR., and ENGR. LAURO L. BALTAZAR, also in his capacity as the Regional Electrification Director, Region XII of the NATIONAL ELECTRIFICATION ADMINISTRATION, Respondents.

D E C I S I O N

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.:

For resolution is the Petition for Review on Certiorariunder Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, assailing the Decision1 dated July 31, 2002 and the Resolution2 dated January 31, 2003 rendered by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 68717, entitled "Genaro O. Arandilla, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission, 5th Division, Cagayan de Oro City, represented by its Presiding Commissioner Salic B. Dumarpa, Commissioner Oscar N. Abella and Commissioner Leon G. Gonzaga, Jr., Maguindanao Electric Cooperative, Inc. (MAGELCO), its Board of Directors, represented by Bai Lucy C. Sinsuat, Perfecto F. Raagas, Jr., Emilio A. Andamen, Sr., Datu Kusin T. Mama, Jimmy A. Fullecido, Datu Akmad A. Ampatuan, H. Abdullah M. Lidasan, H. Omar Ibrahim, Posidio G. Hisole, Atty. George Jabido, and Hernane D. Gravina, Jr., and Engr. Lauro L. Baltazar, also in his capacity as the Regional Electrification Director, Region XII of the National Electrification Administration."

Records show that sometime in March, 1977, Genaro O. Arandilla, Jr., Petitioner, was employed by the Maguindanao Electric Cooperative, Inc. (MAGELCO), Respondent, as a construction worker groundman. Eventually, he was promoted as general manager with a monthly salary of P34,451.00.

Sometime in March, 1990, respondent MAGELCO received a complaint from its department managers, auditors and line supervisor reporting that petitioner, during the sale of respondent's industrial demand meter, accepted PP10,000.00 from Paraoan Rice Mill; that he disposed of, without approval by respondent's Board of Directors, eight (8) drums of used transformer oil; that he paid for poles which were not delivered; and that he did not comply with respondent's purchasing procedures.

Acting thereon, respondent, through an Ad Hoc Committee, conducted an investigation and thereafter recommended his suspension for 45 days. Later, the Committee, via Resolution No. 149, Series of 1990, endorsed its recommendation to the National Electrification Administration (NEA).

Initially, NEA's Administrative Committee issued Administrative Order No. 124, Series of 1994, recommending that petitioner be relieved of his duties as General Manager. When the case was elevated to the Board of Directors of NEA, it issued Resolution No. 36 dated May 21, 1996 merely suspending petitioner for three (3) months considering, among others, his length of service for more than 22 years.

Respondent's Board of Directors refused to comply with NEA's Resolution No. 36 because pursuant to NEA Bulletin No. 2, the suspension of the General Manager is not within the powers of the NEA. Respondent, as General Manager, is not its employee.

Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration of NEA's Resolution No. 36 but it was denied.

Meantime, NEA proceeded with its management and financial audit of respondent MAGELCO's finances and then submitted to respondent its initial report along with SGV's confidential report. The reports confirmed that the offenses committed by petitioner are inimical and prejudicial to the best interest and welfare of respondent MAGELCO considering that his acts endangered its funds and properties. This prompted respondent, through its president, to send petitioner a letter directing him to submit a written explanation within 72 hours. But he failed to comply.

Subsequently, 107 employees of respondent filed an administrative complaint against petitioner praying that he be dismissed from the service.

During the administrative proceeding against petitioner, or on July 30, 1999, respondent's Board of Directors issued Resolution No. 66 (a) terminating his services.

Aggrieved, petitioner filed with the Regional Arbitration Branch No. XII at Cotabato City a complaint against respondent for illegal dismissal and payment of wages, damages and attorney's fees, docketed as RAB Case No. 12-08-00082-99. Impleaded also as party respondents were Bai Lucy C. Sinsuat, Perfecto F. Raagas, Jr., Emilio A. Andamen, Sr., Datu Kusin T. Mama, Jimmy A. Fullecido, Datu Akmad A. Ampatuan, H. Abdullah M. Lidasan, H. Omar Ibrahim, Posidio G. Hisole, Atty. George Jabido, and Hernane D. Gravina, Jr., respondent's Board of Directors, and Engr. Lauro L. Baltazar, NEA's Regional Electrification Director.

On December 11, 1999, the Labor Arbiter rendered a Decision dismissing petitioner's complaint after finding that he was not illegally dismissed from the service.

Upon appeal, the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) rendered a Decision dated October 31, 2000 reversing the Arbiter's assailed Decision and finding that he was illegally dismissed. The NLRC directed respondents to reinstate petitioner to his former position and if reinstatement is not feasible, to pay him his termination pay, thus:

"WHEREFORE, in light of the foregoing, the decision of the Executive Labor Arbiter in question is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE. In lieu thereof, a new decision is hereby rendered directing the immediate REINSTATEMENT of the complainant to his former position, without loss of seniority rights and with full backwages from the time it is withheld from him up to the time of his reinstatement or the finality of this decision, as the case may be; and in the event reinstatement is not feasible, to pay complainant his termination pay equivalent to one (1) month salary for every year of service, a fraction of six months considered one year.

x x x x x x

SO ORDERED."

Upon receipt of a copy of the above Resolution on November 27, 2000, respondents filed with the NLRC a "Compliance" dated January 26, 2001 stating that they agreed with the Resolution giving them the "option to pay" petitioner his separation pay instead of reinstating him to his former position.

For his part, petitioner filed a motion for clarification and reconsideration. Respondents opposed the motion, alleging that reinstatement is no longer feasible due to the total loss of trust and confidence in him by a majority of the members of respondent's Board of Directors.

On February 9, 2001, the NLRC issued a Resolution clarifying its previous Resolution of October 31, 2000 and directing respondents to immediately reinstate petitioner to his former position. The NLRC found that no strained relation exists between the parties.

Respondents then filed a motion for reconsideration. Acting thereon, the NLRC issued its assailed Resolution dated April 26, 2001 reversing and setting aside its February 9, 2001 Resolution and directing respondents to pay petitioner his separation pay in lieu of reinstatement, thus:

"WHEREFORE, the above resolution dated February 9, 2001 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. In lieu thereof, a new judgment is rendered directing respondents to pay complainant his separation pay, in lieu of reinstatement, equivalent to one (1) month pay for every year of service with full backwages from the time he was dismissed until the issuance of such Board resolution, the date when the reinstatement of complainant was no longer feasible or impractical.

SO ORDERED."

On May 17, 2001, petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, but it was denied by the NLRC in a Resolution dated October 11, 2001. This prompted petitioner to file with the Court of Appeals a petition for certiorari , docketed as CA G.R. SP No. 68717. In the main, he alleged that the NLRC committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing Resolutions dated April 26 and October 11, 2001 directing respondents to pay him his separation pay instead of reinstatement, thus modifying its Resolution of October 31, 2000 which has become final.

On July 31, 2002, the Court of Appeals rendered a Decision affirming the assailed Resolutions of the NLRC, holding that the NLRC's Resolution dated October 31, 2000 giving respondents the option to reinstate petitioner as General Manager or pay him his separation pay has not become final. Consequently, it may still be modified by subsequent Resolutions, now being challenged by petitioner.

Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but it was denied.

Hence, the instant petition. Petitioner contends that the Court of Appeals erred: (1) in failing to consider that the NLRC can no longer issue the assailed Resolutions dated April 26 and October 11, 2001 because it has lost its jurisdiction over the case when its Resolution dated October 31, 2000 became final and executory; and (2) in sustaining the questioned NLRC Resolutions directing respondents to pay petitioner his separation pay instead of reinstating him to the service.

Actually, petitioner is insisting that he be reinstated as General Manager. Thus, when the NLRC issued its Resolution dated October 31, 2000 directing respondents to reinstate him and if reinstatement is not feasible, to pay him his separation pay, petitioner was aghast. He then filed a motion for clarification and reconsideration. When the NLRC, in its Resolution dated February 9, 2001, granted his motion and directed the respondents to reinstate him as there is no strained relation between them, he was obviously overwhelmed with satisfaction. But then came the NLRC's assailed Resolutions ordering respondents to pay him his separation pay as reinstatement is no longer feasible.

The issue for our resolution is whether the NLRC could still modify its Resolution of October 31, 2000 giving respondents the option to reinstate petitioner to the service or pay him his separation pay. It bears reiterating that both assailed Resolutions dated April 26 and October 11, 2001 modifying the Resolution of October 31, 2000, directed respondents to pay petitioner his separation pay, not to reinstate him.

We agree with the Court of Appeals that the NLRC Resolution dated October 31, 2000 was not yet final and executory when the NLRC issued the challenged Resolutions.

It bears stressing that as regards respondents, the NLRC's Resolution dated October 31, 2000 became final and executory when they did not file a motion for reconsideration within the ten-day reglementary period.3 However, as correctly ruled by the Appellate Court, insofar as petitioner is concerned, the said Resolution did not attain finality as he still had the right to file a motion for reconsideration. In fact, he seasonably filed his motion for clarification and reconsideration.

In fine, we hold that the Court of Appeals did not err in ruling that the NLRC did not gravely abuse its discretion in rendering the assailed Resolutions dated April 26 and October 11, 2001.

WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The assailed Decision dated July 31, 2002 and Resolution dated January 31, 2003 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 68717 are AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner.

SO ORDERED.

Panganiban, Corona, Carpio-Morales, and Garcia, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:


1 Penned by Justice Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., now a member of this Court, and concurred in by Justice Remedios Salazar-Fernando and Justice Danilo B. Pine. Annex "A", Petition for Review, Rollo at 30-42.

2 Annex "B", Ibid, Rollo at 43-44.

3 In Association of Trade Union v. Abella (323 SCRA 50 [2000]), we held that "without a motion for reconsideration seasonably filed within the ten-day reglementary period, the questioned decision of the public respondent becomes final and executory, after ten (10) days from receipt thereof."




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-2005 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. No. 122317 - Fernando Jaramillo, et al. v. Honorable Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 122213 - CDCP Mining Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, et al.

  • G.R. No. 130106 - People of the Philippines v. Hon. Perlita J. Tria-Tirona, et al.

  • G.R. No. 131667 - Heirs of Carlos Alcaraz v. Republic of the Philippines, et al.

  • G.R. No. 133545 - Renato S. Sanchez v. Rodolfo M. Quinio, et al.

  • G.R. No. 132527 - Coconut Oil Refiners Association, Inc., et al. v. Hon Ruben Torres, et al.

  • G.R. No. 136325 - Manuel M. Serrano v. Eugenio C. Delica.

  • G.R. NOS. 134587 - Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Benguet Corporation.

  • G.R. No. 137451 - Jose Rubiato v. The Heirs of Jovito Rubiato, et al.

  • G.R. No. 137772 - Amador Corpuz, et al. v. Edison Lugue, et al.

  • G.R. NOS. 138874-75 - People of the Philippines v. Francisco Juan Larra'aga, et al.

  • G.R. No. 139843 - Consuelo N. Vda. De Gualberto, et al. v. Francisco H. Go, et al.

  • G.R. No. 140555 - New Ever Marketing, Inc. v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 141256 - Estanislao Padilla, Jr. v. Philippine Producers' Cooperative Marketing Association, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 141805 - Genevieve C. Pobre v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 142001 - Melinda Madriaga, et al. v. The Honorable Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 142611 - Ligaya Novicio, et al. v. Jose C. Lee, et al.

  • G.R. No. 142612 - Oscar Angeles, et al. v. The Hon. Secretary of Justice, et al.

  • G.R. No. 142675 - Vicente Agote y Matol v. Hon. Manuel F. Lorenzo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 143044 - William Madarang, et al. v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 143338 - The Consolidated Bank and Trust Corporation v. Del Monte Motor Works, Inc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 143896 - Banco Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. NOS. 145156-57 - Solid Homes, Inc. v. Spouses Ancheta K. Tan, et al.

  • Solid Homes Inc v. Tan : 145156-57 : July 29, 2005 : J. Garcia : Third Division : Decision

  • G.R. No. 145271 - Manila Electric Company v. Rogelio Benamira, et al.

  • G.R. No. 145742 - The Philippine Ports Authority v. Cipres Stevedoring & Arrastre, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 145849 - Spouses Jose Bejoc, et al. v. Prima Calderon Cabreros, et al.

  • G.R. No. 146519 - Rural Bank of Calinog (Iloilo), Inc. v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 146706 - Tomas Salvador v. The People of the Philippines.

  • G.R. No. 146747 - Manila Electric Company v. Imperial Textile Mills, Inc.

  • G. R. No. 147074 and 147075 - Spouses Rodrigo Paderes, et al. v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 147146 - Jose, Julio and Federico, All Surnamed Junio v. Ernesto D. Garilao.

  • G.R. No. 147417 - Sps. Victor & Milagros Perez, et al. v. Antonio Hermano.

  • G.R. No. 148418 - PCL Shipping Philippines, Inc., et al. v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 148431 - SPO2 Ruperto Cabanlig v. Sandiganbayan, et al. Dissenting Opinion J. Ynares-Santiago

  • Cabanlig v. Sandiganbayan : 148431 : July 28, 2005 : J. Ynares-Santiago : First Division : Dissenting Opinion

  • G.R. No. 149179 - Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, Inc. v. City of Bacolod, et al.

  • G.R. No. 149837 - Department of Agrarian Reform v. Estate of Pureza Herrera.

  • G.R. No. 150197 - Prudential Bank v. Don A. Alviar, et al.

  • G.R. No. 150439 - Amelita Dela Cruz v. People of the Philippines.

  • G.R. No. 150646 - Rolando De Tumol v. Juliana De Tumol Esguerra, et al.

  • G.R. No. 151235 - Heirs of Juan and Ines Panganiban, et al. v. Angelina N. Dayrit.

  • G.R. No. 151438 - Jardine Davies, Inc. v. JRB Realty, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 151352 - Leticia T. Fideldia, et al. v. Spouses Ray and Gloria Songcuan.

  • G.R. No. 151452 - Sps. Antonio C. Santos, et al. v. Hon. Normandie B. Pizardo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 151966 - JPL Marketing Promotions v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 152514 - Limketkai Sons Milling Inc., et al. v. Edith C. Llamera.

  • G.R. No. 152188 - Florentino R. Brucal, et al. v. Hon. Aniano A. Desierto, et al.

  • G.R. No. 152658 - Lily Elizabeth Bravo-Guerrero, et al. v. Edward P. Bravo.

  • G.R. No. 152715 - Rogelio Soplente v. People of the Philippines.

  • G.R. No. 153148 - Shie Jie Corporation, et al. v. National Federation of Labor, et al.

  • G.R. No. 152992 - Leonardo David v. Nelson and Danny Cordova.

  • G.R. No. 153951 - Philippine National Bank v. Sanao Marketing Corporation, et al.

  • G.R. No. 153535 - SolidBank Corporation v. Mindanao Ferroalloy Corporation, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154028 - Philippine Geothermal, Inc. v. The Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

  • G.R. No. 154040 - Advance Textile Mills, Inc., v. Willy Tan, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154092 - Mobil Philippines, Inc. v. The City Treasurer of Makati, et al.

  • G.R. NO. 154098 - Jose C. Miranda v. Hon. Sandiganbayan, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154129 - Teresita Dio v. Spouses Virgilio and Luz Roces Japor, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154295 - Metromedia Times Corporation, et al. v. Johnny Pastorin.

  • G.R. No. 154415 - Gaspar Calacala, et al. v. Republic of the Philippines, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154514 - White Gold Marine Services, Inc., v. Pioneer Insurance and Surety Corporation, et al.

  • G.R. No. 155065 - National Power Corporation v. Hon. Sylvia G. Aguirre Paderanga, et al.

  • G.R. No. 154886 - Ludwig H. Adaza v. Sandiganbayan, et al.

  • G.R. No. 155236 - Dr. Teresito V. Orbeta, et al. v. Paul B. Sendiong.

  • G.R. No. 155316 - Porthos P. Alma Jose, et al. v. Intra Strata Insurance Corporation.

  • Rodriguez v. Ponferrada : 155531-34 : July 29, 2005 : J. Panganiban : Third Division : Decision

  • G.R. No. 155335 - People of the Philippines v. Jesus Macapal, Jr.

  • Rodriguez v. Ponferrada : 155531-34 : July 29, 2005 : J. Panganiban : Third Division : Decision

  • G.R. No. 155651 - Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc., Sales Force Union-Ptgwo-Balais v. Coca-Cola Bottlers Philippines, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 156262 - Maria Tuazon, et al. v. Heirs of Bartolome Ramos.

  • G.R. No. 157002 - Jose T. Abad v. Spouses Ceasar and Vivian Guimba.

  • G.R. No. 157314 - Far East Bank and Trust Company v. Themistocles Pacilan, Jr.

  • G.R. No. 157329 - Genaro O. Arandilla, Jr., v. Maguindanao Electric Cooperative, Inc. (Magelco), et al.

  • G.R. No. 157371 - Elmer G. Andaya v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 157391 - Limitless Potentials, Inc. v. The Hon. Reinato G. Quilala, et al.

  • G.R. No. 157498 - Filipino Metals Corporation, et al. v. Secretary of the Department of Trade and Industry, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158088 - Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., et al. v. Office of the Executive Secretary, et al.

  • G.R. No. 157616 - Isidro Perez, et al. v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158791 - Civil Service Commission v. Department of Budget and Management.

  • G.R. No. 158130 - Atty. Martin T. Suelto v. Nelson A. Sison, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158797 - People of the Philippines v. Elpidio Enriquez, Jr., et al.

  • G.R. No. 159571 - Delfina Vda. De Rigonan, et al. v. Zoroaster Derecho, et al.

  • G.R. No. 160420 - Daniel Aninao, et al. v. Asturias Chemical Industries, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 161629 - Atty. Ronaldo P. Ledesma v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 160560 - Department of Agrarian Reform v. Republic of the Philippines.

  • G.R. No. 161882 - Bukidnon Doctor's Hospital, Inc. v. Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co.

  • G.R. No. 161833 - Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation v. Unknown Owner of the Vessel MV "National Honor", et al.

  • G.R. No. 162472 - Kay Products, Inc., et al. v. Honorable Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 162704 - Memoria G. Encinas, et al. v. National Bookstore, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 162783 - Philippine Long Distance Telephone Co. Inc. v. Manggagawa ng Komunikasyon sa Pilipinas, et al.

  • G.R. No. 162788 - Spouses Julita Dela Cruz, et al. v. Pedro Joaquin.

  • G.R. No. 163573 - Leonora B. Ignacio v. Civil Service Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 163597 - Hyatt Industrial Manufacturing Corp. v. Asia Dynamic Electrix Corp., et al.

  • G.R. No. 163866 - Isidro Olivarez v. Court of Appeals, et al. Dissenting Opinion J. Carpio

  • Olivarez v. CA: 163866 : July 29, 2005 : J. Carpio : Dissenting Opinion

  • G.R. No. 164041 - Rosendo Alba v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 166302 - Lotte Phil. Co., Inc., v. Erlinda Dela Cruz, et al.

  • G.R. No. 164921 - Rosendo H. Escara v. People of the Philippines.

  • FFI Dagupan Lending Investors Inc v. Hortaleza : AM P-05-1952 : July 8, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Resolution

  • Rondina v. Bello Jr : AM CA-05-43 : July 8, 2005 : J. Callejo Sr : En Banc : Resolution

  • FFI Dagupan Lending Investors Inc v. Hortaleza : AM P-05-1952 : July 8,2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Resolution

  • A.M. No. 00-6-09-SC - RE: Imposition of Corresponding Penalties for Habitual Tardiness Committed During the Second Semester of 2004 by the following Employees: Rodolfo E. Cabral, et al.

  • Re: Letter Dated 21 February 2005 of Atty Sorreda : AM 05-3-04-SC : July 22, 2005 : J. Garcia : En Banc : Resolution

  • RE: Letter of Atty Sorreda : AM 05-3-04-SC : July 22, 2005 : J. Garcia : En Banc : Resolution

  • A.M. No. 05-3-04-SC - RE: Letter Dated 21 February 2005 of Atty. Noel S. Sorreda.

  • Admin Case of Dishonesty : AM 2001-7-SC : July 22, 2005 : J. Chico-Nazario : En Banc : Decision

  • Dumaua v. Ramirez : AM MTJ-04-1546 : July 29, 2005 : J. Quisumbing : First Division : Resolution

  • A.M. NO. CA-05-43 - Rafael Rondina, et al. v. Associate Justice Eloy R. Bello, Jr.,

  • Vidal v. Dojillo : Am MTJ-05-1591 : July 14, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Decision

  • Batic v. Galapon : AM MTJ-99-1239 : July 29, 2005 : J. Azcuna : First Division : Decision

  • A.M. No. MTJ-05-1591 - Rodrigo "Jing" N. Vidal v. Judge Jaime L. Dojillo, Jr.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-04-1546 - Sps. Angel and Felina Dumaua v. Judge Angerico B. Ramirez.

  • Rondina v. Bello : AM OCA IPI 004-72-CA-J : July 8, 2005 : J. Callejo Sr : En Banc : Resolution

  • A.M. No. MTJ-99-1239 - Vicente M. Batic v. Judge Victorio L. Galapon, Jr.

  • Bueviaje v. Anatalio : AM P-00-1361 : July 29, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Resolution

  • Reyes v. Cabusao : AM P-03-1676 : July 15, 2005 : J. Callejo Sr : Second Division : Decision

  • Tan v. Paredes : AM P-04-1789 : July 22, 2005 : Per Curiam : En Banc : Resolution

  • Apostol v. Ipac : AM P-04-1865 : July 28, 2005 : J. Carpio-Morales : Third Division : Decision

  • Dagupan Lending v. Hortaleza : AM P-05-1952 : July 8, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Resolution

  • Garcera v. Parrone : AM P-05-2030 : July 15, 2005 : J. Carpio-Morales : Third Division : Decision

  • OCA v. Villaflor : AM P-05-1991 : July 28, 2005 : J. Ynares-Santiago : First Division : Decision

  • Duque v. Aspiras : AM P-05-2036 : July 15, 2005 : J. Tinga : Second Division : Resolution

  • Bernal Jr v. Fernandez : AM P-05-2045 : July 29, 2005 : J. Carpio-Morales : Third Division : Decision

  • A.M. No. P-00-1361 - Jeanifer Buenviaje, et al. v. Arturo Anatalio.

  • A.M. No. P-03-1676 - Ramon Reyes v. Benjamin L. Cabusao.

  • A.M. No. P-04-1789 - Judge Jose Manuel P. Tan v. Henry G. Paredes.

  • A.M. No. P-04-1865 - Nelda Apostol v. Junie Jovencio Ipac, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court - Office of the Clerk of Court, Malolos City.

  • A.M. No. P-05-1991 - Office of the Court Administrator v. Dolores T. Villaflor, et al.

  • A.M. No. P-05-1952 - F.F.I. Dagupan Lending Investors, Inc., et al. v. Vinez A. Hortaleza.

  • A.M. No. P-05-2030 - Celestino A. Garcera II v. Othello A. Parrone.

  • A.M. No. P-05-2036 - Paul G. Duque v. Branch Clerk of Court Romeo B. Aspiras, et al.

  • A.M. No. P-05-2045 - Bienvenido Bernal, Jr. v. Jocelyn Fernandez.

  • De La Paz v. Adiong : AM RTJ-04-1857 : July 29, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : En Banc : Resolution

  • Anonymous Compalint against Acua : AM RTJ-04-1891 : July 28, 2005 : J. Callejo Sr : Second Division : Decision

  • Suarez-De Leon v. Estrella : AM RTJ-05-1935 : July 29, 2005 : J. Austria-Martinez : Second Division : Resolution

  • Elefant v. Inting : AM RTJ-05-1938 : July 15, 2005 : J. Ynares-Santiago : First Division : Decision

  • Opis v. Dimaano : AM RTJ-05-1942 : July 28, 2005 : J. Callejo Sr : Second Division : Decision

  • Dulay v. Lelina : AM RTJ-99-1516 : July 14, 2005 : J. Ynares-Santiago : First Division : Decision

  • A.M. No. RTJ-04-1857 - Gabriel De La Paz v. Judge Santos B. Adiong.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-04-1891 - Re: Anonymous complaint against Judge Edmundo T. Acu a, Regional Trial Court, Caloocan City, Branch 123.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-05-1935 - Evelyn Suarez-De Leon v. Judge Santiago G. Estrella.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-05-1938 - Rovinna De Jesus Elefant v. Judge Socorro B. Inting, et al.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-99-1516 - Onofre G. Dulay, et al. v. Judge Elias O. Lelina, Jr.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-05-1942 - Restituto L. Opis v. Judge Rodolfo B. Dimaano, et al.

  • OCA-IPI No. 04-7-358-RTC - Judicial Audit and Physical Inventory of Confiscated Cash, Surety and Property Bonds at the Regional Trial Court of Tarlac City, Branches 63, 64 and 65.