January 2008 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2008 > January 2008 Resolutions >
[A.M. No. OCA-I.P.I. No. 00-1002-P : January 28, 2008] JOY CASUPANAN-ARANAS V. AURORA T. LARANANG, COURT STENOGRAPHER II, MTCC, BRANCH 1, ANGELES CITY:
[A.M. No. OCA-I.P.I. No. 00-1002-P : January 28, 2008]
JOY CASUPANAN-ARANAS V. AURORA T. LARANANG, COURT STENOGRAPHER II, MTCC, BRANCH 1, ANGELES CITY
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of the Court En Banc dated 28 January 2008:
"A.M. No. OCA-I.P.I. No. 00-1002-P (Joy Casupanan-Aranas v. Aurora T. Laranang, Court Stenographer II, MTCC, Branch 1, Angeles City). � This refers to the administrative Complaint filed by complainant Joy Casupanan-Aranas, Clerk of Court of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 1, Angeles City (MTCC) dated 12 October 2000 charging respondent Aurora T. Laranang, Court Stenographer II of the same court, for gross insubordination and conduct prejudicial to the service.
The factual antecedents giving rise to the complaint are as follows:
On 25 September 2000, respondent reported for work after observing her penalty of six-month suspension in A.M. No. P-00-1368.[1] On the same day, then Acting Presiding Judge of the MTCC Herminio Z. Canlas and complainant sent a letter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) in compliance with the Court's order in A.M. No. P-00-1368 requiring the presiding judge and the clerk of court to submit the stenographic notes specified in the aforementioned administrative matter.
On 4 October 2000, respondent presented to complainant a copy of stenographic notes to be submitted pursuant to the Court order. The following day, while complainant was preparing a supplemental report for submission to the OCA pursuant to the Court order, respondent allegedly, at the top of her voice, uttered defamatory words and phrases with intent to bring complainant into discredit, ridicule and contempt.
On 11 October 2000, complainant filed a criminal charge against respondent for grave slander before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Angeles City.
An initial investigation into the matter now subject of the present administrative complaint was conducted by then executive Judge Aida E. Layug. Thereafter, respondent filed a motion to inhibit Judge Layug. The Court granted the motion per Resolution dated 31 May 2004. The case was referred to Judge Irene Zenaida Sanchez-Buan. However, in view of the promotion of Judge Sanchez-Buan, the administrative case was referred to Executive Judge Gemma Theresa Hilario-Logronio.
At the hearing before Judge Hilario-Logronio, complainant and respondent appeared where the latter manifested that the criminal case for grave oral defamation filed against her by complainant was dismissed on account of the execution of an Affidavit of Desistance dated 3 January 2002 by complainant. On the ground that the administrative case involves exactly the same issues as the criminal case, respondent moved for the dismissal of the administrative case. Respondent also manifested that she already resigned from service. Complaint did not file any opposition thereto.
In her Recommendation dated 5 July 2007, Investigating Judge Hilario-Logronio took into consideration the stipulation in complaint's affidavit of desistance that the incident which gave rise to the instant administrative complaint was only due to a misunderstanding. In view of this statement, Judge Hilario-Logronio thus doubted the veracity and accuracy of the accusations against respondent. Moreover, the investigating judge also took into consideration the dismissal of the criminal case against respondent which was based on the same facts giving rise to the case. Most importantly, the investigating judge noted that complainant failed to prove by substantial evidence the allegations in her complaint. For the foregoing reasons, she recommend the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit.
An examination of the records of this case discloses that Investigating Judge Hilario-Logronio's recommendation is justified and well-supported by the records of the case. The Court also adopts said recommendation.
WHREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the case against respondent Aurora T. Laranang is hereby DISMISSED.
"A.M. No. OCA-I.P.I. No. 00-1002-P (Joy Casupanan-Aranas v. Aurora T. Laranang, Court Stenographer II, MTCC, Branch 1, Angeles City). � This refers to the administrative Complaint filed by complainant Joy Casupanan-Aranas, Clerk of Court of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 1, Angeles City (MTCC) dated 12 October 2000 charging respondent Aurora T. Laranang, Court Stenographer II of the same court, for gross insubordination and conduct prejudicial to the service.
The factual antecedents giving rise to the complaint are as follows:
On 25 September 2000, respondent reported for work after observing her penalty of six-month suspension in A.M. No. P-00-1368.[1] On the same day, then Acting Presiding Judge of the MTCC Herminio Z. Canlas and complainant sent a letter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) in compliance with the Court's order in A.M. No. P-00-1368 requiring the presiding judge and the clerk of court to submit the stenographic notes specified in the aforementioned administrative matter.
On 4 October 2000, respondent presented to complainant a copy of stenographic notes to be submitted pursuant to the Court order. The following day, while complainant was preparing a supplemental report for submission to the OCA pursuant to the Court order, respondent allegedly, at the top of her voice, uttered defamatory words and phrases with intent to bring complainant into discredit, ridicule and contempt.
On 11 October 2000, complainant filed a criminal charge against respondent for grave slander before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Angeles City.
An initial investigation into the matter now subject of the present administrative complaint was conducted by then executive Judge Aida E. Layug. Thereafter, respondent filed a motion to inhibit Judge Layug. The Court granted the motion per Resolution dated 31 May 2004. The case was referred to Judge Irene Zenaida Sanchez-Buan. However, in view of the promotion of Judge Sanchez-Buan, the administrative case was referred to Executive Judge Gemma Theresa Hilario-Logronio.
At the hearing before Judge Hilario-Logronio, complainant and respondent appeared where the latter manifested that the criminal case for grave oral defamation filed against her by complainant was dismissed on account of the execution of an Affidavit of Desistance dated 3 January 2002 by complainant. On the ground that the administrative case involves exactly the same issues as the criminal case, respondent moved for the dismissal of the administrative case. Respondent also manifested that she already resigned from service. Complaint did not file any opposition thereto.
In her Recommendation dated 5 July 2007, Investigating Judge Hilario-Logronio took into consideration the stipulation in complaint's affidavit of desistance that the incident which gave rise to the instant administrative complaint was only due to a misunderstanding. In view of this statement, Judge Hilario-Logronio thus doubted the veracity and accuracy of the accusations against respondent. Moreover, the investigating judge also took into consideration the dismissal of the criminal case against respondent which was based on the same facts giving rise to the case. Most importantly, the investigating judge noted that complainant failed to prove by substantial evidence the allegations in her complaint. For the foregoing reasons, she recommend the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit.
An examination of the records of this case discloses that Investigating Judge Hilario-Logronio's recommendation is justified and well-supported by the records of the case. The Court also adopts said recommendation.
WHREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the case against respondent Aurora T. Laranang is hereby DISMISSED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Santos v. Larangan, 28 February 2000.
