ChanRobles Virtual law Library

chanrobles.com - PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT RESOLUTIONS - ON-LINE

cralaw_scresolutions_separator.NHAD

[A.M. No. MTJ-00-1277. January 24, 2001]

RBL FISHING CORP. vs. JUDGE JOSELITO SD. GENEROSO, et al.

FIRST DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JAN 24 2001.

A.M. No. MTJ-00-1277 (RBL Fishing Corporation vs. Judge Joselito SD. Generoso, MeTC, Branch 34, Quezon City [as then Acting Presiding Judge of MeTC, Branch 54, Navotas, Metro Manila] and Clerk of Court III Roman M. Gatbalite, MeTC, Branch 54, Navotas, Metro Manila.)

This Administrative complaint 1 Rollo, p. 1-6.stemmed from a complaint of Unlawful Detainer filed with the MeTC, Branch 54, Navotas, Metro Manila.

On July 20, 1990, respondent Judge Joselito SD. Generoso was appointed Metropolitan Trial Court, Quezon City, Branch 34. 2 Judicial Personal Record; Rollo, p. 90.On December 13, 1995, he was designated as Acting Presiding Judge of MeTC, Branch 54, Navotas, Metro Manila pursuant to Administrative Order No. 173-95. 3 Rollo, p. 91.

On January 25, 1996, shortly after his assumption as Acting Presiding Judge, complainant filed an action for unlawful detainer entitled "RBL Fishing Corporation versus Gualberto S. Flores, Jr.", docketed as Criminal Case No. 3630.

The case was submitted for decision on August 7, 1996, with the receipt by the court of the position paper of the defendant.

On December 23, 1997 or after the lapse of one (1) year, four (4) months and sixteen (16) days, respondent Judge was ordered by the Court Administrator to return to the MeTC, Branch 34, Quezon City. 4 Memorandu, of the Court Administrator, Rollo, p. 92.Judge Reynaldo Yaneza, the newly re-assigned Presiding Judge of Branch 54, MeTC, Navotas Metro Manila, issued an Order on January 27, 1998 directing respondent Judge Generoso to return the records of Civil Case No. 3630, within five (5) days from notice, with or without decision but the latter refused to comply. On February 23, 1998, complainant wrote the Court Administrator praying that respondent judge be directed to turn over the record of the subject case to Branch 54, MeTC, Navotas. However, despite receipt of the Court Administrator's directive dated March 5, 1998 for him to comment to complainant's letter, respondent ignored the same.

In addition to the delay, complainant also alleged that respondent judge "was asking and demanding for an advance 25% share out of the expected money award due the plaintiff in exchange for a favorable decision." 5 Rollo , p. 3.

Hence, this complaint.

Complainant RBL Fishing Corporation accused Judge Joselito SD. Generoso of Neglect of Duty, Gross Inefficiency and Acts Prejudicial to the Interests of Public Service when he failed to resolve complainant's case for unlawful detainer.

Indeed, it would appear that Judge Generoso failed to decide the subject case within the thirty (30) day period he had under the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure.

However, in view of the decisions of this Court in A.M. Nos. MTJ-95-1062 and MTJ-00-1260 jointly promulgated on July 31, 2000, dismissing Judge Joselito SD. Generoso from the service, this case has become moot and academic.

With respect to the complaint against Branch Clerk of Court III Roman M. Gatbalite, who is charged with gross inefficiency tantamount to dereliction of duty for permitting respondent judge to bring along with him the records of Civil Case No. 3630, we find the charge without merit.

As Clerk of Court, respondent Gatbalite could not refuse to give the record of the case to respondent judge. However, this fact alone should not totally excuse his failure to remind respondent judge that such case was due for resolution. He failed to exercise the necessary initiative in the performance of his duty. The unreturned record of the subject case should have been reported to the incoming judge of the branch or the Office of the Court Administrator.

Section A, Chapter V, Manual for Clerks of Court provides that the Clerk of Court, must keep track of, and remind the judges concerned about cases/incidents submitted for decision/resolution before the lapse of the period fixed by law. Aside from keeping track of, and reminding the judge concerned of the cases submitted for decision, he is also supposed to safeguard the integrity of the record kept by the court. In this case, respondent clerk of court was presumably well aware of the guidelines for him to follow when confronted with a case submitted for decision but the record was with the judge. Respondent Gatbalite was remiss in his duty when he failed to do what is his duty to do. However, this failure to attend to his duties is not serious in nature.

IN VIEW WHEREOF, we DISMISS the charges against respondent Judge Joselito SD. Generoso for being moot and academic and admonish respondent Clerk of Court III Roman M. Gatbalite, to be more careful in the discharge of his duties.

Very truly yours,

VIRGINIA ANCHETA-SORIANO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA ESGUERRA-VIDAL

Asst. Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

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