9. SYLVIA SANTOS, vs. JUDGE EVELYN S. ARCAYA-CHUA, Regional Trial Court, Branch 144, Makati City, Respondent. (A.M. No.RTJ-07-2093/February 13, 2009)[Formerly OCA IPI No. 05-2312-RTJ] Facts Complainant, alleges: that in the first week of September 2002, she asked respondent's help, who was then the Presiding Judge of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Branch 63 of Makati City, regarding the cases of complainant's friend, Emerita Muñoz, pending before the Supreme Court. Respondent, a former employee of the Court, said that she could help as she had connections with some Justices of the Court; she just needed P100,000.00 which she would give to an employee of the Court for the speedy resolution of said cases. In the first week of October 2002, complainant gave respondent P100,000.00 in the privacy of the latter's chamber. When complainant followed up the cases in February 2003, respondent told her that there was a problem, as the other party was offering P10 million to the Justices. Complainant asked respondent to return the P100,000.00; however respondent could no longer be contacted. In her Comment dated August 19, 2005, respondent denies the charges against her Complainant and respondent filed several pleadings reiterating their respective claims. The Court in its Resolution dated July 4, 2007, referred the instant case to Associate Justice Marina L. Buzon of the CA for investigation. Issue: Whether or not, respondent is liable for gross misconduct. Held: Judge Evelyn S. Arcaya-Chua is found GUILTY of gross misconduct and is hereby SUSPENDED from office for six (6) months without salary and other benefits. She is WARNED that the commission of the same or a similar act in the future shall merit a more severe penalty. The office of a judge is sacred and imbued with public interest. The need to maintain the public’s confidence in the judiciary cannot be made to depend solely on the whims and caprices of complainants who are, in a real sense, only witnesses therein. Thus, withdrawal of a complaint or desistance from a complaint will not deprive this Court of its power under the Constitution to ferret out the truth and discipline its members accordingly. Misconduct is a transgression of some established and definite rule of action, a forbidden act, a dereliction of duty, unlawful behavior, willful in character, improper or wrong behavior; while "gross," has been defined as "out of all measure; beyond allowance; flagrant; shameful; such conduct as is not to be excused. and ensure a favorable decision in the ejectment case. the parties were summoned for a formal investigation before Investigating Judge Frances V. FLORENDA V. For the sum of P30. the Court issued a Resolution. . 2008. 07-1933-MTJ] January 19.000. complainant alleged that respondent Judge offers “package deals” for cases filed in the court where he presides. 2007.000. Held: Respondent Judge Manuel Q. No. Jr. which noted the Report of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) on the complaint against respondent.00. the OCA opined that a formal investigation was necessary to afford the parties opportunity to substantiate their respective claims.10. respondent would provide the lawyer. On May 20. Valladolid-San EnriquePulupandan.. Issue: Whether or not.00). Due to the conflicting allegations of the parties. In his Comment. LIMSIACO. Complainant.000.M. the respondent Judge violated the New Code of Judicial Conduct. MTJ-09-1734 [Formerly OCA I. Jr. On February 20. baseless and a lie.000. Respondent. JR. Presiding Judge. Fegidero allegedly required them to pay the initial amount of P10. prepare the necessary pleadings. respondent denounced the allegation that he offers “package deals” to prospective litigants as malicious. 2011) Facts: On June 6. The Office of the Court Administrator is DIRECTED to deduct the fine of P25.I. Limsiaco. No. Guanzon. 2008. Municipal Circuit Trial Court.00 from the retirement benefits due to Judge Limsiaco. is found GUILTY of gross misconduct for which he is FINED in the amount of Twenty-five Thousand Pesos (P25. TOBIAS..00 and the remaining balance would be paid in the course of the proceedings. Negros Occidental. ( A.P. v JUDGE MANUEL Q. He denied that he demanded from complainant and alleged that he does not know complainant and she is a total stranger to him. as the most he could do on their behalf was to have such accused indemnify them. the aforementioned acts of respondent constitute gross misconduct. Briefly. and respondent Judge is ordered to desist from further conducting the trial of the two prosecutions for rape. 11. L-39516-17 January 28. In so doing. 1975 Facts: In this certiorari proceedings. This move. G. the manner and attitude of a trial judge are crucial to everyone concerned. vs. beyond allowance. Issue: Whether or not the Petitioners are entitled to the remedy sought and Respondent Judge must be disqualified from further hearing the cases. Held: This Court grants the petitions for certiorari. respondent exhibited improper conduct that tarnished the integrity and impartiality of his court. no less than the accused. according to him. in the secrecy of his chambers he informed petitioners of the weakness of their cases. the likelihood of a verdict of acquittal in favor of the accused.The Court agrees with the findings of Investigating Judge Guanzon that complainant failed to prove by substantial evidence her allegation that respondent offers “package deals” to prospective litigants in his court. respondent. petitioners. “Gross” has been defined as “out of all measure.R. However. clearly prejudicial to their future. flagrant. perhaps much more so in criminal cases. petitioners. 1974.” Respondent’s act of preparing the Motion to Withdraw the Appearance of Atty. He is to refrain from reaching hasty conclusions or prejudging . “Misconduct” means a transgression of some established and definite rule of action. ROSARIO CASTILLO and SONIA VILLASANTA. Nos. and impressed upon them that it would be to their advantage to settle. on two separate occasions on August 15 and 27. THE HONORABLE JUDGE CELESTINO JUAN. shameful. willful in character. In every litigation. considering that the said motion was filed in his own sala and was acted upon by him. such conduct as is not to be excused. improper or wrong behavior. would assure their being spared from the embarrassment occasioned by suits of this character. assail the actuation of respondent Judge and seek his disqualification on the ground of bias and prejudice. Juanillo as counsel of complainant is inexcusable. two young maidens who are the offended parties in two rape cases. the offended party. It is not for him to indulge or even to give the appearance of catering to the at times human failing of yielding to first impressions. respondent. Ilocos Sur. entitled "Pablo Festejo et al. they could no longer be expected to have faith in his impartiality. What cannot be denied. CONSTANTE PIMENTEL. petitioners. the ponente. Romeo Pimentel. plaintiff. vs. A judge. entitled "People of the Philippines.. inefficiency in office. vs." a special civil action for mandamus to compel payment of salaries of elective and appointive municipal officials. protestee. is that after such conferences. Marciano Cabildo et al."1 Petitioner seeks in the complaint therein to have respondent judge immediately suspended." for frustrated homicide.. disinterested. viz: (1) Civil Case 21-C. of being imprisoned in the net of his own sympathies and predilections. SALANGA. 1967) Facts: Petitioner is counsel of record in cases pending before respondent judge. Petitioner's misgivings stem from the fact that he is complainant in an administrative case he himself lodged in this Court on May 12. 12. accused. . entitled "People of the Philippines. No. should strive to be at all times "wholly free. plaintiff. that his final decision would be dependent on the evidence that could be presented by petitioners. A judge has both the duty of rendering a just decision and the duty of doing it in a manner completely free from suspicion as to its fairness and as to his integrity." This is not to discount in its entirety the submission of respondent Judge. partiality. impartial and independent. vs. according to Justice Castro. (G. THE HONORABLE JUDGE ANGELINO C." for frustrated murder. respondents. L-27934/September 18. protestant. It would be deplorable if he lays himself open to the suspicion of reacting to feelings rather than to facts. however. Clemente Abaya. vs. (2) Criminal Case 4898 and C-5. What is equally important is that he should avoid any conduct that casts doubt on his impartially. 1967.R. ignorance of the law and incompetence. (4) Election Case 2470. against respondent judge upon averments of "serious misconduct." an election protest involving the office of mayor of Candon. vs.matters. petitioner. What has been said is not merely a matter of judicial ethics. accused. Elementary due process requires a hearing before an impartial and disinterested tribunal. entitled "Avelino Balbin. who argued on his own behalf. Constante Anies. (3) Criminal Case C-93. 1967. and Election Case 2470 aforesaid. On August 1. petitioner moved in the court below to have respondent judge disqualify himself from sitting in Civil Case 21-C. administrator. 1967 to August 22 and 23. guardian. respondent judge rejected the foregoing motion. or in which be has been executor. .On July 31. the present petition. A move to reconsider the foregoing resolution failed of its purpose. disqualify himself from sitting in a case. Rules of Court. 1967. in the exercise of his sound discretion. — No judge or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he. Issue: Whether or not the judge disqualified from acting in litigations in which counsel of record for one of the parties is his adversary in an administrative case said counsel lodged against him? Held: The petition herein for certiorari and prohibition is denied. or in which he has presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject of review. respondent judge is not legally under obligation to disqualify himself Section 1. which reads in full: Sec. without the written consent of all parties in interest. legatee. 1967. Disqualification of judges. or his wife or child. for just or valid reasons other than those mentioned above. computed according to the rules of the civil law. creditor or otherwise. signed by them and entered upon the record. Hence. Rule 137. or in which he is related to either party within the sixth degree of consaguinity or affinity. Criminal Cases 4898 and C-5. trustee or counsel. 1. or to counsel within the fourth degree. A judge may. is pecuniarily interested as heir. Civil Case 21-C was rescheduled for hearing from August 10 and 11.