Ask AI quickly gives answers based only on the current context to avoid mistakes. Always verify with the original text.
New Chat Started
Ask AI
Title
Source:
Supreme Court
Full-text jurisprudence and laws exclusively from the Supreme Court's Official E-Library
Note: Direct links are not available for cases before 1996. Try a more recent case.elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph
Atienza vs. Perez
Case
A.M. No. P-216
Decision Date
Jan 22, 1975
Public altercation between Atienza and Perez on court premises; Atienza admonished for lack of restraint, no provocation found, decorum emphasized.
ILUMINADA P. ATIENZA, COMPLAINANT VS. ANGELITA L. PEREZ, RESPONDENT.
R E S O L U T I O N
TEEHANKEE, J.:
In the Court's decision of October 31, 1974, respondent personnel officer was administered a reprimand "for having lost her head and having participated in a public altercation with complainant which turned her office premises into an arena and made a public spectable of themselves in violation of the rules of proper decorum and behavior."
The Court further required of complainant since the investigating judge found her to have provoked the incident that she show cause why no disciplinary action should be also taken against her for her participation in the same deplorable incident.
In her compliance of November 21, 1974, complainant maintained that "she did not provoke nor intend to provoke the incident" and that when she met respondent at the stairway of the City Court's mezzanine leading to respondent's office she "approached the respondent with tempered civility and asked permission to talk to her with the end in view of disabusing her mind from the thought that the undersigned or her sister (who is presently in the United States) authored an anonymous letter addressed to her," thus making a "manifest gesture of respect" and recognition of respondent's position as a superior.
Withal, complainant commendably assured the Court "that she graciously accepts its verdict without mental reservation, believing, in all sincerity, in its wisdom and impartiality. This Honorable Court does not hold in its hands the conscience of the respondent."
Under the circumstances and considering that respondent did not file any counter-charge against complainant, the Court believes that an admonition is sufficient, without any further disciplinary action.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court admonishes complainant to act with self-restraint and civility at all times in accordance with the rules of proper and decorous behavior in the office premises in the higher interests of the public service and to avoid a repetition of the same or similar incidents. Let a copy hereof be entered in complainant's personal record.
Castro, (Chairman), Makasiar, Esguerra, and Munoz Palma, JJ., concur.