Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2007 > October 2007 Decisions > A.M. No. P-99-1348 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-696-P - JUDGE GLORIA B. AGLUGUB v. IMELDA S. PERLEZ:




A.M. No. P-99-1348 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-696-P - JUDGE GLORIA B. AGLUGUB v. IMELDA S. PERLEZ

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

EN BANC

[A.M. NO. P-99-1348 : October 15, 2007]
(Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-696-P)

JUDGE GLORIA B. AGLUGUB, Complainant, v. IMELDA S. PERLEZ, CLERK OF COURT I, Respondent.

D E C I S I O N

PER CURIAM:

In a letter-complaint dated August 12, 1999, Judge Gloria B. Aglugub (complainant) of the Municipal Trial Court, Branch 2 of San Pedro Laguna, charged Imelda S. Perlez (respondent), Clerk of Court I of the said branch, of infidelity in the custody of court records, insubordination, gross inefficiency, grave misconduct, falsification, misrepresentation, dishonesty and neglect of duty.1

Complainant claims that respondent, on several occasions, was unable to locate missing court records in her custody; she refused to comply with orders requiring her to submit transcripts of stenographic notes causing delays in the disposition of cases; she refused to transmit records of cases for review and copies of warrants of arrests to the proper agencies; she tells practitioners that she does not know how to prepare court processes; she caused the break-open of the the judge's chambers by means of picklocks to get records and caused their transfer to another branch without authority from the court; she has the propensity of putting the blame on complainant for missing records; she caused the typing of a case number in a commitment order, in addition to one already written, and certified it, making it appear that the same was intended for said case; she stated in her Personal Data Sheet (PDS) in her application with the judiciary that she graduated from college in 1981 but it was found out later that she was a candidate for graduation only in the summer of 1997; and she failed to submit monthly reports for May, June, July 1999 and report on the physical inventory of cases despite receipt of the court's memorandum dated July 13, 1999.2

In her Comment dated December 3, 1999, respondent explained that while there were instances when records were misplaced, they were however easily located or reconstituted without causing damage to litigants; the complaint did not specify which orders she refused to obey and which records she refused to transmit; while there was an instance when she asked a lawyer to provide her with a sample form of a writ of demolition, it was done in the presence of and with the acquiescence of complainant; while she did break into the complainant's chamber, she did so only to get records of a detention prisoner who was suffering from illness and who, under the law, was entitled to provisional liberty; she does not put the blame on complainant regarding missing records, she just tells litigants that some records are brought home by the judge for study; it was not respondent, but Marivic Gonzales, Staff Assistant II, who typed a criminal case number on the commitment order of another case; respondent placed in her PDS that she is a college graduate under the honest belief that she finished her Accounting Course; she finished her last semester in college not knowing that her grades in three subjects were incomplete; in any case, she was able to complete the said subjects in the summer of 1997; she always prepared her monthly reports on time until the months of May to July of 1999 when she and her staff could no longer cope with the work due to voluminous records.3

The case was referred to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) for its evaluation, report and recommendation.4

In the Report dated April 18, 2000, Court Administrator Alfredo L. Benipayo recommended that respondent be dismissed from the service for grave misconduct, gross inefficiency and misrepresentation and/or dishonesty.5

The Court required both parties to manifest within ten days from notice if they were willing to submit the case for decision on the basis of the pleadings filed.6 Respondent submitted her Manifestation dated July 13, 2001,7 expressing her willingness to undergo oral examination or further investigation if this Court would deem it necessary. Complainant filed a Manifestation with Motion dated June 17, 2002, informing the Court that respondent had left the country on February 14, 2002, for an unknown destination, and prayed that the position of Branch Clerk of Court left by respondent be declared vacant and thereafter opened to any qualified applicant.8

In a Memorandum dated October 15, 2002, Deputy Court Administrator Jose P. Perez recommended that respondent be considered absent without official leave (AWOL) and that she be dropped from the rolls without prejudice to the outcome of the administrative complaint against her. DCA Perez found that while respondent's initial application for vacation leave for February 1 to April 30, 2002 had been approved, the same had been withdrawn for her violation of Memorandum Order No. 14-2000 which prohibits any employee of the judiciary from leaving the country without obtaining permission from the Supreme Court.9

As recommended, the Court issued a Resolution dated December 4, 2002, dropping respondent from the service effective February 14, 2002 for being AWOL, and declaring vacant her position as Clerk of Court in said MTC, without prejudice to the outcome of the administrative case against her.10

Subsequently, in a Memorandum dated March 16, 2007, the OCA, through Court Administrator Christopher O. Lock, submitted its evaluation and recommendation in the instant case, as follows:

A careful review of the records indicates that respondent is administratively liable.

While not all the accusations against respondent were substantiated, one charge, however, remained incontrovertible. Respondent having made it appear in her personal data sheet that she is a college graduate although she is not. We do not subscribe to respondent's excuse that she did it under the honest belief that she had finished the Accounting Course at Arellano University so as to exonerate herself from liability. The records reveal that she failed to graduate because she got an incomplete grade in three (3) subjects, namely (1) Principle of Science; (2) PE 3 and (3) Accounting 8. It is a fact that an incomplete grade is given to a student who incurs deficiencies in a given subject, i.e., the student failed to take the final exam or failed to submit a required project. Since she got an incomplete grade in three (3) subjects, it is safe to assume that she must have incurred some deficiencies in those subjects. Any student in his or her right mind will not expect to pass a subject in which he or she has incurred a deficiency. Also, the records disclose that respondent completed the course in 1997, not for the purpose of meeting the qualification standard of the position she is holding, but rather to be able to study law. Respondent's flimsy excuse of good faith cannot be sustained in the light of the overwhelming facts to the contrary.

In the case of Court Administrator v. Judge Ricardo M. Magtibay, A.M. No. R-254-MTJ and 88-1-2807-MCTC, May 9, 1988, for Conduct Unbecoming of a Judge and Misrepresentation in Filling Up his Personal Data Sheet for Judges, the Court found respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt and ordered the latter's dismissal from the service with forfeiture of all salaries, benefits and leave credits to which he may be entitled.

Likewise, in A.M. No. 2003-9-SC, Re: Adm. Case for Dishonesty and Falsification of public document, Benjamin Katly, respondent, the Court dismissed respondent for having twice represented in his personal data sheet that he was a college graduate when in reality he was not. It was ruled therein that his making a false statement in his Personal Data Sheet constitutes an act of dishonesty.

Under the schedule of penalties adopted by the Civil Service, gross dishonesty is classified as a grave offense and the penalty imposable is dismissal even on its first offense.

In view of the foregoing, undersigned respectfully recommends that the resolution dated December 4, 2002 dropping respondent, Imelda Perlez, Clerk of Court, MTC, Branch 2, San Pedro, Laguna from the service for being absent without official leave be SET ASIDE and that she be DISMISSED from the service for gross dishonesty with consequent forfeiture of all retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits, and with prejudice to re-employment in any branch of the government including government-owned or controlled corporation.11

The recommendation of the OCA that the Resolution of the Court dated December 4, 2002 dropping respondent from the rolls be set aside is not well-taken. The Resolution itself expressly declared that the dropping of the name of respondent from service is without prejudice to the outcome of the present administrative case.

However, the Court adopts in full the findings and recommendation of the OCA that respondent is administratively liable for dishonesty.

Respondent cannot deny that she misrepresented herself as a college graduate in her PDS. Her only excuse is that when she applied as Court Interpreter and placed in her PDS that she was a college graduate, she did so under the honest belief that she had finished her degree. She claims that she was able to finish the last semester of her course; however she did not know that her grades in Principle's of Science, PE 3 and Accounting 8 were incomplete as she already got pregnant and was preparing for her marriage. It was only when she tried to enroll for college of law that she learned that her grades in the said three subjects were incomplete. She then enrolled the said subjects in Arellano and finished them by the summer of 1997. Thereafter, a certificate and a diploma were issued to her. She also claims that she refrained from stating in documents that she is a college graduate after she learned of her deficiencies in her subjects.12

Respondent's claim of good faith does not persuade the Court.

One who invokes good faith must show honesty of intention, free from knowledge of circumstances which ought to put one upon inquiry.13 As respondent admitted in her letter to the OCA, she had many absences in her three subjects because of her pregnancy and the preparations for her marriage; she was also not able to attend the commencement exercises. These, together with the lack of any diploma or transcript of records stating that she is a graduate, should have put her upon inquiry as to the fact of her having finished her degree. Her claim of good faith is clearly self-serving and does not absolve her from liability.

The importance of accomplishing a PDS with utmost honesty cannot be stressed enough.14 Its accomplishment is required under the Civil Service Rules and Regulations, and since it is a requirement in connection with employment in the government, the making of an untruthful statement therein is intimately connected with such employment.15

Respondent falsified an official document to gain unwarranted advantage over other more qualified applicants to the same position. She cannot be said, therefore, to have measured up to the standards required of a public servant.16 Indeed, respondent's act of stating in her PDS that she was a college graduate when the truth is otherwise amounts to dishonesty by misrepresentation and falsification of an official document that warrants dismissal from the service even for the first offense.17 As an accessory penalty, her retirement benefits are forfeited due to the falsehood and deceit that marked her assumption of office, traits that are undesirable and unbecoming a public officer or employee.18

The Court does not tolerate dishonesty. Persons involved in the dispensation of justice, from the highest official to the lowest clerk, must live up to the strictest standards of integrity, probity, uprightness and diligence in the public service.19 As the assumption of public office is impressed with paramount public interest, which requires the highest standards of ethical standards, persons aspiring for public office must observe honesty, candor and faithful compliance with the law.20

WHEREFORE, respondent Imelda S. Perlez, Clerk of Court I of the Municipal Trial Court, Branch 2 of San Pedro Laguna, is found GUILTY of dishonesty. She is DISMISSED from the service effective immediately, with prejudice to re-employment in any government agency and government-owned or controlled corporation, with forfeiture of retirement benefits, except accrued leave credits.

SO ORDERED.

Puno, C.J., Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales, Azcuna, Tinga, Chico-Nazario, Garcia, Velasco, Jr., Nachura, Reyes, JJ., concur.

Endnotes:


1 Rollo, pp. 1-3.

2 Id.

3 Id. at 212-215, 236.

4 Id. at 275.

5 Id. at 285.

6 Id. at 289.

7 Id. at 300-305.

8 Id. at 337.

9 Id. at 341-343.

10 Id. at 345.

11 Id. at 351-352.

12 Id. at 236.

13 De Guzman v. Delos Santos, 442 Phil. 428, 436 (2002).

14 Re:Anonymous Complaint Against Mr. Rodel M. Gabriel, A.M. No. 2005-18-SC, April 19, 2006, 487 SCRA 370, 376.

15 Administrative Case for Dishonesty and Falsification of Official Document Against Noel V. Luna, SC Chief Judicial Staff Officer, 463 Phil. 878, 890 (2003); De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 436; Re:Anonymous Complaint Against Mr. Rodel M. Gabriel, supra note 14, at 376.

16 De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 434, 440; Re:Anonymous Complaint Against Mr. Rodel M. Gabriel, supra note 14, at 378.

17 Administrative Case for Dishonesty and Falsification of Official Document Against Noel V. Luna, SC Chief Judicial Staff Officer, supra note 15, at 890; De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 436.

18 De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 441.

19 De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 439; Re:Anonymous Complaint Against Mr. Rodel M. Gabriel, supra note 14, at 377-378.

20 De Guzman v. Delos Santos, supra note 13, at 441.




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






October-2007 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.C. No. 7418 - ANDREA BALCE CELAJE v. ATTY. SANTIAGO C. SORIANO

  • ADM. CASE No. 7006 - RE : SUSPENSION OF ATTY. ROGELIO Z. BAGABUYO, FORMER SENIOR STATE PROSECUTOR

  • A. C. No. 7421 - Eliza V. Venterez, et al v. Atty. Rodrigo R. Cosme

  • A.M. No. 01-10-279-MCTC - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, GEN. M. NATIVIDAD-LLANERA, NUEVA ECIJA

  • A.M. No. 01-10-279-MCTC - REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, GEN. M. NATIVIDAD-LLANERA, NUEVA ECIJA

  • A.M. No. 05-3-83-MTC - RE: REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AND FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS OF BAYOMBONG AND SOLANO AND THE MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, ARITAO-STA. FE, ALL IN NUEVA VIZCAYA

  • A.M. NO. 06-11-5-SC : October 2, 2007 - RULE ON DNA EVIDENCE

  • A.M. No. 05-3-83-MTC - RE: REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AND FINANCIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS OF BAYOMBONG AND SOLANO AND THE MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, ARITAO-STA. FE, ALL IN NUEVA VIZCAYA

  • Adm. Matter No. 06-7-414-RTC - Re: Final report on the Judicial Audit conducted at the RTC Br. 67, Paniqui, Tarlac

  • A.M. No. 06-6-340-RTC - Re: Report on the Judicial audit conducted in the RTC Br 4, Dolores, Samar

  • A. M. No. 07-8-27-SC - Re: computation of longevity pay upon compulsory retirement

  • A.M. No. 2006-02-SC - ALEXANDER D.J. LORENZO v. ORLANDO and DOLORES LOPEZ

  • A.M. No. MTJ-03-1472 Formerly A.M. No. 02-10-271-MTC - OCA v. Judge Zenaida L. Galvez, et al.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-05-1616 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-1781-MTJ - Mary Jane V Allentos Jamin v. Judge Manuel A. De Castro, etc.

  • A.M. No. P-06-2197 Formerly A.M. No. OCA I.P.I. 05-2254-P - PAG-IBIG FUND v. MANUEL L. ARIMADO

  • A.M. No. P-99-1348 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-696-P - JUDGE GLORIA B. AGLUGUB v. IMELDA S. PERLEZ

  • A.M. No. P-04-1815 Formerly OCA IPI No. 04-1885-P - R.B. Filoteo v. Arturo C. Calago etc.

  • A.M. No. P-05-1977 - Lydia L. Faelden v. Carina Divinagracia Lagura

  • A.M. No. P-06-2197 Formerly A.M. No. OCA I.P.I. 05-2254-P - PAG-IBIG FUND v. MANUEL L. ARIMADO

  • A.M. No. P-99-1348 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-696-P - JUDGE GLORIA B. AGLUGUB v. IMELDA S. PERLEZ

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-2030 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2166-RTJ and A.M. NO. RTJ-07-2032 : October 5, 2007 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2167-RTJ- OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. JUDGE AUGUSTINE A. VESTIL

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-2018 Formerly Adm. Matter OCA-IPI No. 05-2360-RTJ - OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL v. JUDGE ANTONIO I. DE CASTRO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-07-2075 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07-2623-RTJ - ATTY. UBALDINO A. LACUROM v. .JUDGE JUANITA C. TIENZO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-1971 - QBE Insurance Phils., Jnc., et al. v. Judge Celso D. Lavina etc.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-2004 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 04-2145-RTJ - Doroteo M. Salazar v. Judge Antonio D. Marigomen.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-2018 Formerly Adm. Matter OCA-IPI No. 05-2360-RTJ - OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL v. JUDGE ANTONIO I. DE CASTRO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-06-2030 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2166-RTJ and A.M. NO. RTJ-07-2032 : October 5, 2007 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2167-RTJ - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. JUDGE AUGUSTINE A. VESTIL

  • A.M. No. RTJ-07-2038 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-2250-RTJ - Attys. Rowena V. Guanzon, et al. v. Judge Anastacio C. Rufon Br 52, Bacolod City

  • A.M. No. SCC-05-10-P Formerly OCA IPI No. 03-18-SCC - Andy Balalat v. KYD Abdulwahid I. Adil etc.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-07-2075 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07-2623-RTJ - ATTY. UBALDINO A. LACUROM vs.JUDGE JUANITA C. TIENZO

  • G.R. No. 121666 - Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Manila Electric Company

  • G.R. No. 110478, G.R. No. 116176 and G.R. NOS. 116491-503 - Fermin Manapat v. Court of Appeals, et al / Domingo Lim v. Court of Appeals, et al./ G.R. 116491-503 (National Housing Authority v. Maximo Loberanes, et al.).

  • G.R. No. 130864 - MARIA L. HAROLD v. AGAPITO T. ALIBA

  • G.R. NOS. 135688-89 - Ernesto B. Francisco, Jr. v. Uem-Mara Phil. Corp., et al.

  • G.R. No. 137321 - Phil. Asso. of Srock Transfer & Registry Agencies Inc. v. The Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 140240 - Rodolfo S. De Jesus, et al. v. Office of the Ombudsman, et al.

  • G.R. No. 141166-67 - Ronilo Olvido, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 141408 and G.R. NO. 141429 - Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. v. Phil Bank of Communications, et al/ Solid Bank Corp. v. Filipinas Orient Finance Corp., et al.

  • G.R. No. 143331 - FIVE STAR MARKETING CO., INC. v. JAMES L. BOOC

  • G.R. No. 145587 - EDI-STAFFBUILDERS INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 146296 - Eduardo Gulmatico Y Brigatay v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 146214 - RODOLFO M. CUENCA v. HON. ALBERTO P. ATAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148044 - ANTONIO MASAQUEL, ET AL. v. JAIME ORIAL

  • G.R. No. 147923, G.R. NO. 147962 and G.R. NO. 154035 - JIMMY T. GO v. ALBERTO T. LOOYUKO

  • G.R. No. 149136 - Juan Endozo, et al. v. The Heirs of Julia Buck

  • G.R. No. 148777 and G.R. NO. 157598 - Estate of the Late Encarnacion Vda De Panlilio etc. v. Gonzalo Dizon, et al/Reynaldo Villanueva, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 149508 - Sps. Ricardo Delos Santos, et al. v. Ma. Socorro V. Vda De Mangubat, et al.

  • G.R. No. 149640 - San Miguel Corp., et al. v. Numeriano La Yoc, Jr., et al.

  • G.R. No. 149681 - Rommel Monares Anilao v. The People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 149909 - TERESA GABRIEL, ET AL. v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 150134 - ERNESTO C. DEL ROSARIO, ET AL. v. FAR EAST BANK & TRUST COMPANY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 150301 - PHILIPPINE FISHERIES DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY v. THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 151797 - SPOUSES MANUEL MEJORADA, ET AL. v. GLORIFICACION VERTUDAZO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 151910 - Republic of the Phil. v. Ludolfo V. Munoz

  • G.R. No. 152572 - SPOUSES ABELARDO BORBE, ET AL. v. VIOLETA CALALO

  • G.R. No. 152672 - JIMMY T. GO v. HON. ZEUS ABROGAR, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 153051 - PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, et al.

  • G.R. No. 153898 - Mr. Wee Sion Ben, et al v. Semexco/Zest-O Marketing Corp. etc.

  • G.R. No. 154242 - Victorina A. Cruz v. Hon. Salvador Enriquez etc.

  • G.R. No. 154338 - UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION v. ALBERT LIM

  • G.R. No. 154339 - Romualdo Anselmo etc. v. Sps. William Hernandez & Rosemarie Hernandez

  • G.R. No. 155056-57 - The Heirs of the Late Panfilo v. Pajarillo

  • G.R. No. 155952 - JUANITO A. RUBIO v. PIO L. MUNAR, JR.

  • G.R. No. 156023 - GSIS v. Victoriousa B. Vallar

  • G.R. No. 156848 - PIONEER INTERNATIONAL, LTD. v. HON. TEOFILO GUADIZ, JR., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 157186 - Active Realty & Devt. Corp. v. Bienvenido Fernandez.

  • G.R. No. 157376 - CORAZON C. SIM v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 157610 - Orlando G. Tongol v. Filipinas M. Tongol

  • G.R. No. 157647 - GSIS v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 157658 - Phil. National Railways, et al. v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 157673 - Rolando Angeles, et al. v. Polytex Design Inc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 157833 - BPI v. Gregorio C. Roxas

  • G.R. No. 157775 - Leyte IV Electric Cooperative Inc. v. LEYTECO IV Employees Union-Alu

  • G.R. No. 158175 - PNB v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

  • G.R. No. 157903 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. FEDERICO C. SUNTAY

  • G.R. NOS. 159104-05 - RODOLFO M. CUENCA, ET AL. v. THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. NOS. 158786 and 158789 - Toyota Motor Phils. Corp. Workers Asso., et al. v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. - G.R. NOS. 158798-99 Toyota Motor Phil. Corp. v. Toyota Motor Phil. Corp. Workers Asso.

  • G.R. NOS. 159104-05 - RODOLFO M. CUENCA, ET AL. v. THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD GOVERNMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 159641 - Caltex (Phils.), Inc. etc v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 160325 - ROQUE S. DUTERTE v. KINGSWOOD TRADING CO., INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 161479 - Adoracion Redodo v. Angelina Jimenez

  • G.R. No. 161657 - Republic of the Phil. v. Hon. Vicente A. Hidalgo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 162124 - Polomolok Water District v. Polomolok General Consumers Asso., Inc.

  • G.R. No. 163775 - Oscar G. Sapitan, et al. v. Jb Linebicol Express Inc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 163147 - Linton Commercial Co. Inc., et al. v. Alex A. Hellera, et al.

  • G.R. No. 164036 - SPOUSES SANTIAGO and MA. CONSUELO CARLOS v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 164166 & 164173-80 - Rodolfo S. De Jesus v. Hon. Sandiganbayan, et al.

  • G.R. NOS. 164311-12 - Laarni N. Valerio v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 164904 - Jose Antonio U. Gonzalez v. Hongkong & Shanghail Banking Corp. etc.

  • G.R. No. 165855 - HARISH RAMNANI, ET AL. v. QBE INSURANCE PHILIPPINES, INC.

  • G.R. No. 166913 - SPS. MARIANO S. TANGLAO, ET AL. v. SPS. CORAZON S. PARUNGAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 168122 - ROMONAFE CORPORATION v. NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 168569 - SAN MIGUEL FOODS, INC. v. SAN MIGUEL CORPORATION EMPLOYEES UNION-PTWGO

  • G.R. No. 168584 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. v. HON. RAMON S. CAGUIOA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 168650 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOSE TUAZON

  • G.R. No. 168661 - Estate of the Late Jesus S. Yujuico etc. v. Republic of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 168747 - Victoria Regner v. Cynthia R. Logarta, et al.

  • G.R. No. 169656 - FELSAN REALTY & DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

  • G.R. No. 170075 - DYNO NOBEL PHILIPPINES, INC. v. DWPI SUPERVISORY UNION

  • G.R. No. 170785 - REPUBLIC PLANTERS BANK, ET AL. v. VIVENCIO T. SARMIENTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 170853 - Sps. Vilma Disquit Ado etc. v. Jesus Cornelia

  • G.R. No. 170633 - MCC INDUSTRIAL SALES CORPORATION v. SSANGYONG CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 171053 - Sehwani Inc. etc. v. In-N-Out Burger Inc.

  • G.R. No. 171304 - IN THE MATTER OF REVERSION/RECALL OF RECONSTITUTED OCT NO. 0-116 ETC., ET AL. v. REGISTRY OF DEEDS-TARLAC CITY, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 171336 - POLYSTYRENE MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC. v. PRIVATIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OFFICE

  • G.R. No. 171346 - Jaime Sanchez, Jr. v. Zenaida F. Marin, et al.

  • G.R. No. 171437 - HERMES E. FRIAS, SR. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 172142 - David B. Camp Anano Jr. v. Jose Antonio A. Da Tuin

  • G.R. No. 172268 - A & C MINIMART CORPORATION v. PATRICIA S. VILLAREAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 172406 - Concepcion Ilao-Oreta v. Sps. Eva Marie etc.

  • G.R. No. 172446 - ALEXANDER "ALEX" MACASAET v. R. TRANSPORT CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 172607 - People of the Philippines v. Rufino Umanito

  • G.R. No. 172651 - UNITED OVERSEAS BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROSEMOOR MINING AND DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 172760-61 - Karen & Krlsty Fishing Industry, et al. v. The Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 172925 - GSIS v. Jaime K. Ibarra

  • G.R. No. 173076 - MT. CARMEL COLLEGE v. JOCELYN RESUENA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 173127 - Dee Hua Liong Electronics Corp, et al. v. Emelinda Papiona

  • G.R. No. 173034 - PHARMACEUTICAL AND HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES v. HEALTH SECRETARY FRANCISCO T. DUQUE III, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 173256 - AFI International Trading Corp., et al v. Dennis G. Lorenzo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 173790 - People of the Phil. v. Russel Navarro Y Marmojada

  • G.R. No. 173551 - ARNALDO MENDOZA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 173942 - Fil-Estate Properties Inc., et al. v. Hon. Marietta J. Homena - Valencia, et al.

  • G.R. No. 174189 - ALBAY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INCORPORATED v. SECURITY PACIFIC ASSURANCE CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 174373 - Emelinda V. Abedes v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 174585 - Federico M. Ledesma, Jr. v. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.

  • G.R. No. 174689 - ROMMEL JACINTO DANTES SILVERIO v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 174773 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. MARILYN MIRANDA y RAMA

  • G.R. No. 174775 - People of the Phil. v. Mamerto Dulay

  • G.R. No. 174874 - GILBERT G. GUY v. ASIA UNITED BANK

  • G.R. No. 175020 - RURAL BANKERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. v. MA. ROSARIO TANGHAL-SALVAƑA

  • G.R. No. 175163 - LBP v. Ascot Holdings & Equities Inc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 175338 - Air Material Wing etc., et al. v. Manay, et al.

  • G.R. No. 175324 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EDISON MIRA

  • G.R. No. 175593 - The People of the Phil. v. Salvador Santos Jr Y Salvador

  • G.R. No. 175480 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CONRADO BARANGAN y GENERALAO

  • G.R. No. 176060 - People of the Phil. v. Arnulfo Fernandez

  • G.R. No. 176069 - People of the Phil. v. Mario Constantino

  • G.R. No. 176154 - People of the Phil. v. Marcelino Paredes Y Algara

  • G.R. No. 178920 - SP02 Geronimo Manalo, et al. v. Hon. PNP Chief Oscar Calderon, et al.