April 2012 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[A.M. No. 12-2-02-CA : April 24, 2012]
RE: LETTER-COMPLAINT OF ANTONIO D. ROSAROSO AGAINST JUSTICES OF COURT OF APPEALS, CEBU CITY
"A.M. No. 12-2-02-CA (Re: Letter-Complaint of Antonio D. Rosaroso against Justices of Court of Appeals, Cebu City). � Before this Court is the undated Letter Complaint by Antonio D. Rosaroso against the justices of the Court of Appeals (CA) in Cebu City. The one-page Letter Complaint reads in full:
We Plaintiffs of Civil Case # 16957 and, petitioners in C.A. Case # 00351 of Cebu City, Cebu province are gravely saddened by the Law-defying injustice [sic] done by the CA Judges assigned at Cebu City. C.A. Region 7 building offices:
For over (6) six years without calling a single clarificatory hearing, resolved the case of very DOUBTFUL [sic] circumstances. [sic]
Please hear us petitioners of C.A. Case # 00351 in Cebu City, Cebu, to justice.
Rosaroso, who appears to be a petitioner in CA Case No. 00351, declared that the CA justices in Cebu City committed injustice. Without naming one justice in particular, he stated that for over six years and without calling a single clarificatory hearing, the CA resolved the case under very doubtful circumstances. Apart from the allegations in the above Letter Complaint, Rosaroso did not substantiate his claims of injustice. Rosaroso cannot expect that this Court will entertain a general and unspecified imputation of injustice allegedly committed by the unnamed justices in the performance of their functions. If there was error in the proceedings of the case, the proper course of action is to avail of judicial remedies such as an appeal or an original action for certiorari. It is an established rule that an administrative, civil or criminal action against a judge cannot be a substitute for appeal.[1]cralaw
WHEREFORE, the instant Letter Complaint against unnamed Justices of the Court of Appeals is DISMISSED for utter lack of merit."
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Cortes v. Chico-Nazario, A.M. No. SB-04-11-J, 13 February 2004, 422 SCRA 541., citing In Re: Joaquin T. Borromeo, 311 Phil. 441 (1995).