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
 

   
November-2008 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.C. No. 5851 - GRACE DELA CRUZ-SILLANO v. ATTY. WILFREDO PAUL D. PANGAN

  • A.M. No. 03-9-02-SC - RE: ENTITLEMENT TO HAZARD PAY OF SC MEDICAL AND DENTAL CLINIC PERSONNEL

  • A.M. No. 2008-13-SC - RE: VEHICULAR ACCIDENT INVOLVING SC SHUTTLE BUS NO. 3 WITH PLATE NO. SEG-357 DRIVEN BY GERRY B. MORAL, DRIVER II-CASUAL

  • A.M. No. MTJ-07-1680 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 07-1876-MTJ - KATIPUNAN NG TINIG SA ADHIKAIN, INC. (KATIHAN) v. JUDGE LUIS ZENON O. MACEREN, ETC.

  • A.M. No. MTJ-08-1720 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 02-1267-MTJ - LOLITA ANDRADA v. HON. EMMANUEL G. BANZON

  • A.M. No. P-08-2494 Formerly OCA IPI No. 06-2399-P - RE: REPORT ON THE IRREGULARITY IN THE USE OF BUNDY CLOCK BY ALBERTO SALAMAT, SHERIFF IV, RTC-BR.80, MALOLOS CITY

  • A.M. No. P-08-2519 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-2155-P and A.M. NO. P-08-2520 : November 19, 2008 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-2156-P - ANONYMOUS LETTER-COMPLAINT AGAINST ATTY. MIGUEL MORALES, CLERK OF COURT, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT OF MANILA

  • A.M. No. P-08-2542 Formerly A.M. No. 08-1-09-RTC - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. CYRIL JOTIC, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. P-08-2572 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2950-P - JUDGE ILUMINADA P. CABATO v. FELIX S. CENTINO

  • A.M. No. RTJ-07-2053 Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2171-RTJ - LILIA RAGA v. JUDGE SIBANAH E. USMAN, RTC BR 28, CATBALOGAN, SAMAR

  • A.M. No. RTJ-08-2108 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2-93-RTC - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. JUDGE ORLANDO P. DOYON, ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-08-2144 - ATTY. RAUL H. SESBREƑO v. JUDGE IRENEO L. GAKO, JR., ET AL.

  • A.M. No. RTJ-08-2146 Formerly OCA-I.P.I. No. 07-2742-RTJ - MELY HANSOR MAGPALI v. JUDGE MOISES M. PARDO

  • G.R. No. 138437 - RAMON J. QUISUMBING v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 148435 - ROGELIO GUEVARRA, ET AL. v. SPOUSES ENGRACIO AND CLAUDIA BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149017 - VALENTE RAYMUNDO v. TEOFISTA ISAGON VDA DE SUAREZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149322 - JAIME L. YANEZA v. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 149984 and G.R. NO. 154991 - SPS ROLANDO M. ZOSA AND LUISA Y. ZOSA v. HON. SANTIAGO ESTRELLA ETC. ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 150270 - CITY ENGINEER OF BAGUIO ET AL. v. ROLANDO BANIQUED

  • G.R. No. 154491 - COCA-COLA BOTTLERS PHILS. INC. v. QUINTIN J. GOMEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 155407 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL OIL COMPANY v. LEONILO A. MAGLASANG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 155635 and G.R. NO. 163979 - MARIA REBECCA MAKAPUGAY BAYOT v. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 156029 - SANTOSA B. DATUMAN v. FIRST COSMOPOLITAN MANPOWER AND PROMOTION SERVICES, INC.

  • G.R. No. 156654 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC. v. VICENTE LOPEZ, JR.

  • G.R. No. 157870, G.R. NO. 158633 and G.R. NO. 161658 - SOCIAL JUSTICE SOCIETY (SJS) v. DANGEROUS DRUGS BOARD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 158312 - JOHN DY v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 158996 - SPS FREDELICTO FLORES (DECEASED) & FELICISIMA FLORES v. SPS DOMINADOR PINEDA ETC. ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 160127 - RAFAEL P. LUNARIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 161946 - MEDARDO AG. CADIENTE v. BITHUEL MACAS

  • G.R. No. 163443 and G.R. NO. 163568 - LIZA M. QUIROG, ET AL. v. GOV. ERICO B. AUMENTADO

  • G.R. No. 163609 - SPS. BUENA VENTURA JAYME AND ROSARIO JAYME v. RODRIGO APOSTOL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 163794 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ETC. v. HON. NORMELITO J. BALLOCANAG ETC. ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 163942 and G.R. NO. 166295 - NUWHRAIN-APL-IUF DUSIT HOTEL NIKKO CHAPTER v. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 164242 - DESTILERIA LIMTUACO & CO. INC., ET AL. v. ADVERTISING BOARD OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 164340 - OTILIA STA. ANA v. SPOUSES LEON G. CARPO and AURORA CARPO

  • G.R. No. 164510 - SPS SANTIAGO J. TANCHAN, JR & RUFINA C. TANCHAN v. ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 165060 - ALBINO JOSEF v. OTELIO SANTOS

  • G.R. No. 165969 - NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION v. HEIRS OF NOBLE CASIONAN

  • G.R. NOS. 166309-10 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ETC. v. UNIMEX MICRO-ELECTRONICS GMBH

  • G.R. No. 166377 - MA. ISABEL T. SANTOS v. SERVIER PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 166554 - JULITO SAGALES v. RUSTAN'S COMNMERCIAL CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 167357 - 88 MART DUTY FREE, INC. v. FERNANDO U. JUAN

  • G.R. No. 167571 - LUIS PANAGUITON, JR. v. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 167622 - GREGORIO V. TONGKO v. THE MANUFACTURERS LIFE INSURANCE CO. (PHILS.), INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 167755 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NESTOR VELUZ

  • G.R. No. 167805 - ARNOLD STA. CATALINA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 167809 - LAND BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOSEFINA R. DUMLAO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 168819 - ALFREDO, PRECIOSA, ANGELITA & CRISOSTOMO ALL SURNAMED BUENA VETURA v. AMPARO PASCUAL & REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 169047 - EVA FLOYD, ET AL. v. BENJAMIN GONZALES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 169365 and G.R No. 169669 - SPS PEDRO SANTIAGO AND LIWANAG SANTIAGO v. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 169888 - RAMON Y. TALAGA v. HON. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 168923 - BIENVENIDO M. CADALIN, ET AL. v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 170567 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CONRADO DIOCADO

  • G.R. No. 170596 - NGO SIN SING and TICIA DY NGO v. LI SENG GIAP & SONS, INC., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 171164 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NASARIO CASTEL

  • G.R. No. 171348 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LARRY ERGUIZA

  • G.R. NOS. 171383 & 172379 - SILKAIR (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE

  • G.R. No. 171961 - FERDINAND A. DELA CRUZ, ET AL. v. AMELIA G. QUIAZON

  • G.R. No. 172241 - PUREFOODS CORPORATION (NOW SAN MIGUEL PUREFOODS COMPANY, INC.) v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 172428 - HERMAN C. CRYSTAL, ET AL. v. BANK OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS

  • G.R. No. 172584 - EDMUNDO Y. TORRES, JR., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 172910 - SPS LORETO LEYBA AND MATEA LEYBA v. RURAL BANK OF CABUYAO, INC. ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 173248 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. DANTE NUEVA Y SAMARO

  • G.R. No. 173608 - JESUS GERALDO, ET AL. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 173856 - DAO HENG BANK INC. NOW BANCO DE ORO UNIVERSAL BANK v. SPS LILIA & REYNALDO LAIGO

  • G.R. No. 174012 - MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY v. BENJAMIN TUDTUD, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 174641 - NATIONAL MINES AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION v. MARCOPPER MINING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 175006 - BELEN A. SALVACION v. SANDIGANBAYAN & LEO H. MANLAPAS

  • G.R. No. 175049 - HEIRS OF SOFIA NANAMAN LONOY, ET AL. v. CITY OF ILIGAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 175894 - NYK-FIL SHIP MANAGEMENT, INC., ET AL. v. ALFONSO T. TALAVERA

  • G.R. No. 176152 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NIDO GARTE

  • G.R. No. 176169 - ROSARIO NASI-VILLAR v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 176276 - PHILIPPINE HEALTH INSURANCE CORPORATION v. THE COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 176474 - HEIRS OF ARTURO REYES REP BY EVELYN R. SAN BUENA VENTURA v. ELENA SOCCO-BELTRAN

  • G.R. No. 176484 - CALAMBA MEDICAL CENTER, INC. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 176951 - LEAGUE OF CITIES OF THE PHILIPPINES, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 177353 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. PANCHO ENTRIALGO

  • G.R. No. 176951 - G.R. No. 176951, G.R. No. 177499, G.R. No. 178056 - REYES - DISSENTING OPINION

  • G.R. No. 177354 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. RICARDO TALAN Y DOE @ CARDING

  • G.R. No. 177356 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOHBERT AMODIA Y BABA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 177414 - NOEL E. MORA v. AVESCO MARKETING CORPORATION

  • G.R. No. 177505 - HEIRS OF GORGONIO MEDINA, ET AL. v. BONIFACIO NATIVIDAD REP BY PHILIP M. NATIVIDAD

  • G.R. No. 177886 - SPOUSES LEOPOLDO AND MERCEDITA VIOLA v. EQUITABLE PCI BANK, INC.

  • G.R. No. 177947 - SPS GABRIEL LLANES AND MARIA LLANES v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R. No. 178923 - OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN v. ROLANDO L. MAGNO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 179413 - PRISCILA R. JUSTIMBASTE v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 179802 - MAGSAYSAY MARITIME CORP., ET AL. v. JAIME M. VELASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 179848 - NESTOR A. JACOT v. ROGEN T. DAL ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 180507 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. NESTOR BAJADA Y BAUTISTA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 180597 - RAUL BASILIO D. BOAC, ET AL. v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  • G.R No. 181441 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. LARRY LOPEZ

  • G.R. No. 181899 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ROLLY MONTESA y LUMIRAN

  • G.R. No. 181901 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. EMILIO MANCHU, ET AL.

  • G.R. NOS. 182136-37 - BON-MAR REALTY AND SPORT CORPORATION v. SPS NICANOR AND ESTHER DE GUZMAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 182193 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. FIDEL CANETE

  • G.R. No. 182348 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. CARLOS DELA CRUZ

  • G.R. No. 182374 - JEMIAS V. ESTEVES v. RENE V. SARMIENTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 182867 - ROBERTO LACEDA, SR. v. RANDY L. LIMENA, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 184098 - AMADO TAOPA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

  •  





     
     

    A.M. No. P-08-2572 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2950-P - JUDGE ILUMINADA P. CABATO v. FELIX S. CENTINO

      A.M. No. P-08-2572 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2950-P - JUDGE ILUMINADA P. CABATO v. FELIX S. CENTINO

    PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

    SECOND DIVISION

    [A.M. NO. P-08-2572 : November 19, 2008]
    (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2950-P)

    JUDGE ILUMINADA P. CABATO, Complainant, v. FELIX S. CENTINO, Process Server, Regional Trial Court, Branch 59, Baguio City, Respondent.

    R E S O L U T I O N

    QUISUMBING, J.:

    Before the Court is the complaint1 of Judge Iluminada P. Cabato of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 59, Baguio City, charging Felix S. Centino, Process Server detailed at Branch 59, with gross misconduct and serious misbehavior.

    It appears that Centino was absent for 10.5 days in May 2006, 6 days in April 2006, 8.5 days in March 2006, 8.5 days in February 2006, and 31.5 days in 2005. On June 9, 2006, Judge Cabato issued a memorandum requiring Centino to explain his 65 absences without approved leave and failure to submit his Daily Time Records (DTR) within 72 hours from receipt of the memorandum.2 Centino failed to submit his answer within the time allowed. Judge Cabato issued another memorandum directing Centino to show cause why he should not be charged administratively, and also to explain why he was likewise absent without approved leave from June 1 to 27, 2006.3 Again, Centino failed to submit the required explanation. Thus, Judge Cabato filed the instant complaint.

    Judge Cabato alleged that Centino's indifference to her memoranda and failure to submit the required applications for leave and DTRs constitute gross misconduct and serious misbehavior.4 Attached to her complaint were copies of the attendance log sheets5 of the RTC, Branch 59, and a certification6 issued by the RTC Clerk of Court that Centino submitted his last DTR in October 2005 and last applications for leave on September 9 and 16, 2005.

    In his comment, Centino averred that he tried to reconstruct his DTR and leave application forms, but could not locate his records anymore. He sought forgiveness for his failure to apply for leave of absence and submit his DTR from February to May 2006, citing serious domestic problems with his wife and children as reason for noncompliance with Civil Service rules. He vowed not to repeat his violation and stressed that he has, in fact, reported back to work since November 2006 and has regularly complied with the rules. He likewise pleaded for compassion in view of his 22 years of service.7

    It likewise appears on record that on January 19, 2007, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) indorsed to Judge Cabato for signature and/or comment Centino's Bundy Cards and leave applications for the period February to September 2006. Judge Cabato commented that said Bundy Cards and leave applications were never submitted to her for signature and that Centino's failure to file them was the reason for the instant complaint. Judge Cabato also confirmed Centino's return and regular submission of DTR.8

    Acting on this information, the OCA, Leave Division, informed Centino that his leave applications were acted upon as follows: his absence for 21 days from June 1 to 30, 2006 were credited to his available sick leave credits, while his absence for 167.5 days from February 1 to May 31 and from July 1 to October 31, 2006 were treated as vacation leave without pay.9 The OCA, Leave Division, also issued a certification that Centino incurred 22 unauthorized absences in August 2006, 21 in September 2006 and 7 in November 2006.10

    On September 11, 2008, the OCA submitted a memorandum11 to this Court finding Centino guilty of habitual absenteeism and recommending that he be suspended for three months without pay.

    We adopt the recommendation.

    Centino incurred more than 2.5 days of unauthorized absences per month for four months in the first semester of 2006. As borne by the records and detailed in Judge Cabato's first memorandum, Centino was absent for 8.5 days in February 2006, 8.5 days in March 2006, 6 days in April 2006 and 10.5 days in May 2006. Centino admitted he did not seek approval for these absences. The RTC Clerk of Court also certified that Centino filed his last application for leave in September 2005.

    Under Section 23(q)12 of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations,13 an officer or employee in the civil service shall be considered habitually absent if he incurs unauthorized absences exceeding the allowable 2.5 days monthly leave credit under the Leave Law for at least three months in a semester or at least three consecutive months during the year.

    Administrative Circular No. 14-200214 reiterates the said Civil Service rule on habitual absenteeism. Worth stressing, by reason of the nature and functions of their office, officials and employees of the judiciary must faithfully observe the constitutional canon that public office is a public trust. This duty calls for the observance of prescribed office hours and the efficient use of official time for public service, if only to recompense the government, and ultimately, the people who shoulder the cost of maintaining the judiciary. Thus, to inspire public respect for the justice system, court officials and employees should at all times strictly observe official time. As punctuality is a virtue, absenteeism and tardiness are impermissible.15

    Under Administrative Circular No. 14-2002 and Section 23(q) of the Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations, habitual absenteeism is penalized by suspension for six months and one day to one year for the first offense. Nonetheless, we agree with the lower penalty proposed by the OCA. The OCA aptly considered Centino's act to reform as a mitigating circumstance. As confirmed by Judge Cabato, Centino has returned to work, reports regularly, and submits his DTR and leave applications.

    This is not the first time that we imposed a lower penalty. We have mitigated the imposable penalty for humanitarian reasons. We have also considered length of service in the judiciary, acknowledgment of infraction, remorse, and family circumstances in determining the penalty.16 Here, we considered Centino's length of service, acknowledgment of his infraction, and apology to determine the appropriate penalty. However, these additional mitigating circumstances cannot further affect the penalty recommended by the OCA because they are offset by Centino's disobedience to Judge Cabato's orders and the sheer number of his absences which could have resulted in his separation from the service. Centino's vacation leave without pay totaled 167.5 days from February 1 to May 31 and from July 1 to October 31, 2006. Section 5717 of the Omnibus Rules on Leave18 provides that leave without pay in excess of one month shall require the clearance of the proper head of department or agency. Centino, however, did not even submit his leave applications from February to September 2006 for approval or signature by his superior, Judge Cabato. Worse, Centino continuously incurred 43 unauthorized absences: 22 unauthorized absences in 22 working days19 in August 2006 and 21 in 21 working days in September 2006. Under Section 6320 of the Omnibus Rules on Leave, an official or employee who is continuously absent without approved leave for at least 30 working days shall be considered on absence without official leave and shall be separated from the service or dropped from the rolls.

    WHEREFORE, we find Felix S. Centino, Process Server, Regional Trial Court, Branch 59, Baguio City, GUILTY of habitual absenteeism, and SUSPEND him for three months without pay effective upon notice hereof. He is STERNLY WARNED that the same or similar act or acts of disobedience in the future will be dealt with more severely.

    To enable us to determine the effectivity of the penalty imposed, Centino is DIRECTED to report the date of his receipt of this Resolution to this Court.

    ORDERED.

    Endnotes:


    1 Rollo, pp. 5-7.

    2 Id. at 9-11.

    3 Id. at 13.

    4 Id. at 7.

    5 Id. at 36-124.

    6 Id. at 17.

    7 Id. at 34.

    8 Id at 134.

    9 Id. at 133.

    10 Id. at 132.

    11 Id. at 1-4.

    12 SEC 23. Administrative offenses with its (sic) corresponding penalties are classified into grave, less grave, and light, depending on the gravity of its (sic) nature and effects of said acts on the government service.

    The following are grave offenses with its corresponding penalties:

    x x x

    (q) Frequent unauthorized absences or tardiness in reporting for duty, loafing or frequent unauthorized absences from duty during regular office hours

    1st Offense - Suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day to one (1) year

    2nd Offense - Dismissal

    An officer or employee in the civil service shall be considered habitually absent if he incurs unauthorized absences exceeding the allowable 2.5 days monthly leave credit under the Leave Law for at least three (3) months in a semester or at least three (3) consecutive months during the year.

    x x x

    13 Implementing Book V of Executive Order No. 292 and Other Pertinent Civil Service Laws. Effective February 14, 1992.

    14 Reiterating the Civil Service Commission's Policy on Habitual Absenteeism, issued by former Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. Effective April 1, 2002.

    15 Re: Habitual Absenteeism of Mr. Fernando P. Pascual, A.M. No. 2005-16-SC, September 22, 2005, 470 SCRA 569, 572; Re: Habitual Absenteeism of Mr. Erwin A. Abdon, Utility Worker II, A.M. No. 2007-13-SC, April 14, 2008, 551 SCRA 130, 132-133.

    16 Re: Habitual Absenteeism of Mr. Fernando P. Pascual, id. at 573.

    17 Sec. 57. Limit of leave without pay. - Leave without pay not exceeding one year may be granted, in addition to the vacation and/or sick leave earned. Leave without pay in excess of one month shall require the clearance of the proper head of department or agency.

    18 Rule XVI of the Omnibus Rules Implementing Book V of EO 292.

    19 As reduced by one day. August 21, 2006, Monday, was declared non-working holiday (Ninoy Aquino Day), see www.gov.ph/faqs/holidays.asp., visited November 4, 2008 at 3:10 p.m.

    20 Sec. 63. Effect of absences without approved leave. - An official or an employee who is continuously absent without approved leave for at least thirty (30) working days shall be considered on absence without official leave (AWOL) and shall be separated from the service or dropped from the rolls'

    x x x

    A.M. No. P-08-2572 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2950-P - JUDGE ILUMINADA P. CABATO v. FELIX S. CENTINO


    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