ChanRobles Virtual law Library

A.C. No. 3393. December 2, 2002

OZOA vs. BARRAMEDA, et al.

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen :

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of t hi s Court dated 2 DECEMBER 2002 :

A. C. No. 3393. (Julia P. Ozoa vs. Atty. Ramon Barrameda , et al.)

Before the Court is the Urgent Motion for Early Resolution, dated June 27, 2002 , filed by respondent Atty. Nilo M. Sarsaba seeking the dismissal of the instant administrative complaint insofar as he is concerned. Atty. Sarsaba avers that the complaint was filed way back in 1992 or 1993; that he is now a Third Assistant City Prosecutor of Dumaguete City and wishes to apply for a position in the Judiciary; that the case is a stumbling block to his application; and that the pendency of the case for more than ten (10) years without complainants lifting a finger to prosecute the same is a clear indication of their lack of interest. Atty. Sarsaba thus prays that the case as to him be dismissed outright in the interest of justice.

A perusal of the Amended Complaint reveals that, except for cursorily including the name of Atty. Nilo Sarsaba as one of the respondents therein, there is no allegation of any specific act committed by Atty. Sarsaba that would warrant the imposition of any disciplinary sanction against him. The allegations of improper conduct mostly pertained to one Atty. Ramon Barrameda who, however, already passed away. Hence, in the Resolution of September 9, 1991 , the Court dismissed the case insofar as Atty. Barrameda is concerned.

Considering that this case had already been pending since 1989 and there is really no specific allegation of improper conduct committed by Atty. Sarsaba, the dismissal of this case insofar as he is concerned is indeed warranted.

ACCORDINGLY , the Court Resolved to DISMISS the case insofar as Atty. Nilo M. Sarsaba is concerned.

Very truly yours,

TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE