ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-1698-MTJ.� August 31, 2005]

ORONGAN vs. VILO

Sirs/Mesdames:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated AUG 31 2005.

A.M. OCA IPI No. 05-1698-MTJ (Zosima R. Orongan vs. Judge Perla C. Vilo.)

Considering the Report dated July 19, 2005 of the Office of the Court Administrator, to wit:

In a letter-complaint dated June 18, 2003, Zosima R. Orongan charged Judge Perla C. Vilo with Conduct Unbecoming a Judicial Officer.

Complainant alleges that she and her husband were contracted by the respondent judge to do a landscaping of her land in Matin-ao, Borbon, Cebu and convert it into a flower garden. They were then asked to stay in Matin-ao for the duration of their work. Complainant further alleges that respondent promised she would shoulder all their daily expenses and take care of their daily food consumption, and divide with them any profit that they would derive from their gardening venture. Respondent also promised to shoulder their financial obligations with one Inday Dy. Respondent made these promises before they transferred to Matin-ao to till her farm. Sometime in July 2002, respondent judge instructed the complainant and her husband to manage the people who would harvest the coconuts in her land. Complainant informed the respondent that those who harvested the coconuts cheated them, which made her angry, accusing the former of conniving with those who harvested the coconuts. On July 13, 2002, respondent judge came to their house in Brgy. Matin-ao bringing another person to replace them. That same day, respondent ordered them to move out of her land.

In her comment, respondent alleges that she offered the land of her son in Sitio Matin-ao, Sagay to the complainant where she and her husband could stay, thereby lessening her transportation expenses in rendering home services to her customers. Respondent judge then contracted complainant to work in her land and convert it into a flower garden. Respondent judge suggested that they would divide whatever profit to be derived from their venture. Respondent judge denied having promised complainant that she will shoulder her financial obligation to Inday Dy. Respondent judge explained that she wrote Inday Dy to guarantee the loan of the complainant to protect her from being sued for estafa, but not to shoulder her financial obligations with Inday Dy.

The charge should be dismissed.

The issue involved is civil in nature. The resolution thereof involves the exercise of judicial discretion, and therefore, outside the province of this Office to resolve. The problem should be threshed out in the courts of justice and not through the Office of the Court Administrator by way of an administrative complaint.

RECOMMENDATION: PREMISES CONSIDERED, we respectfully recommend that the case be DISMISSED.

and finding the evaluation and recommendation thereon to be in accord with law and the facts of the case, the Court hereby approves and adopts the same.

ACCORDINGLY, the administrative complaint against Judge Perla C. Vilo is DISMISSED.

Very truly yours,

LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA L. LAUREA

Asst. Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE