ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[A.M. No. MTJ-93-881. June 10, 2003]

GREFALDO vs. LACSON

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder for your information a resolution of this Court dated JUN 10 2003.

A.M. No. MTJ-93-881(Jocelyn Grefaldo vs. Judge Rica H. Lacson.)

In our Decision of 3 August 1998, Rica H. Lacson, Presiding Judge, MTC-Sorsogon, Sorsogon, was dismissed from the service for Gross Inefficiency, Falsification of Official Document, and for her defiant and contumacious refusal for three (3) years to heed repeated directives from this Court to answer the complaint against her. Concomitant with the penalty of dismissal, respondent's accrued retirement benefits and other privileges were ordered forfeited and her dismissal was with prejudice to re-employment in any branch, agency or instrumentality of the government, including any government-owned or controlled corporation.Her First and Second Motions for Reconsideration were denied on 22 September 1998 and 27 April 1999 respectively.

In her Letter of 30 October 2002 respondent requests that our Decision be modified by restoring to her all her accrued retirement benefits and other privileges.

In appealing for "compassionate understanding" respondent cites her financial woes and other difficulties she suffered since her dismissal from the service: foreclosure of her residential house, hospitalizations for nervous breakdown, and an operation for retinal detachment of the left eye which rendered her physically incapacitated to work for her daily sustenance and educational support of her children. Respondent likewise cites her thirty-five (35) years of government service in appealing for' a favorable' response from this Court.

Respondent claims she is now almost sixty-five (65) years old.

Even before accrued leave credits were explicitly excluded from those benefits liable for forfeiture, in whole or in part, concomitant to a penalty of dismissal, [1] cralaw this Court had already demonstrated compassion in a number of cases involving judges and court personnel by removing such penalty of forfeiture. To cite a few, we allowed the respondent judges in Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd. v. Romillo, Jr., [2] cralaw and Prudential Bank v. Castro, [3] cralaw to enjoy all vacation and sick leave benefits earned' during the period of their government service upon letters seeking the Court's compassion and out of humanitarian considerations. Again we granted the same benefit in' Sabitsana, Jr. v. Villamor [4] cralaw upon respondent's plea for compassion and mercy, allowing him to enjoy all vacation and sick leave benefits earned by him during the period of his government service.

Out of humanitarian consideration, we extend the same benevolence to respondent in the instant case. Moreover, we take note of the "Manifesto" dated 31 August 1998 signed by three (3) judges in Sorsogon, several law practitioners, and number of court employees who commiserated with the, plight of respondent, acclaimed her, as "conscientious, honest, approachable and compassionate to everyone regardless of status in life," and pleaded for mercy and temperance on her behalf.

ACCORDINGLY, the Court Resolves to GRANT, as it hereby grants respondent Rica H. Lacson, former' presiding judge, Municipal Trial Court, Sorsogon, Sorsogon, the money equivalent of all her accrued sick and vacation leaves. To this extent, the dispositive portion of our Decision of 5 August 1998 is MODIFIED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.)LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

^[1] cralaw See Sec. 11, par. (1), Rule 140, Rules of Court, as amended, which took effect 1 October 2001.

^[2] cralaw G.R. No. 64276, 12 August 1986, 143 SCRA 396.

^[3] cralaw Adm. Case No. 2756, 27 June 1988, 162 SCRA 554.

^[4] cralaw A.M. Nos. RTJ No. 90-4 74 & RTJ No. 90-606, 7 February 1992, 206 SCRA 1.

Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

1901	1902	1903	1904	1905	1906	1907	1908
1909	1910	1911	1912	1913	1914	1915	1916
1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923	1924
1925	1926	1927	1928	1929	1930	1931	1932
1933	1934	1935	1936	1937	1938	1939	1940
1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948
1949	1950	1951	1952	1953	1954	1955	1956
1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963	1964
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971	1972
1973	1974	1975	1976	1977	1978	1979	1980
1981	1982	1983	1984	1985	1986	1987	1988
1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996
1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012
2013

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

1901	1902	1903	1904	1905	1906	1907	1908
1909	1910	1911	1912	1913	1914	1915	1916
1917	1918	1919	1920	1921	1922	1923	1924
1925	1926	1927	1928	1929	1930	1931	1932
1933	1934	1935	1936	1937	1938	1939	1940
1941	1942	1943	1944	1945	1946	1947	1948
1949	1950	1951	1952	1953	1954	1955	1956
1957	1958	1959	1960	1961	1962	1963	1964
1965	1966	1967	1968	1969	1970	1971	1972
1973	1974	1975	1976	1977	1978	1979	1980
1981	1982	1983	1984	1985	1986	1987	1988
1989	1990	1991	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996
1997	1998	1999	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004
2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011