Case Digest (A.M. No. MTJ-02-1443)
Facts:
Josie Berin and Merly Alorro v. Judge Felixberto P. Barte, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1443, July 31, 2002, Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court.Complainants Josie Berin and Merly Alorro, both real estate agents, filed an administrative complaint with the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) against Judge Felixberto P. Barte, Presiding Judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Hamtic, Tobias Fornier and Anini-y, Antique, accusing him of grave and serious misconduct for acting as broker in the sale of a parcel of land and shortchanging them on an agreed commission.
According to the complainants, in late January 2001 Judge Barte invited them to his office and asked them to find a vendor for a lot that the Manila Mission of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Inc. wanted to purchase. They located the vendor, Eleanor M. Checa-Santos, and told Judge Barte about the lot (Lot 5555-B). The complainants claim the Church agreed to pay P2.3 million and that Judge Barte promised each complainant P100,000 as commission, to be collected by him from the vendee and later delivered to them. The complainants said they asked for a written agreement but Judge Barte refused; the sale was later consummated, and the judge allegedly gave them only P10,000 each despite demands for full payment.
In his Comment and Supplemental Comment, respondent Judge Barte denied the January 2001 invitation and denied promising the P100,000 commissions. He asserted the Church had already purchased the land on January 25, 2001 (supported by a Closing Certificate) and that the Deed of Sale was notarized February 12, 2001. He acknowledged learning of the lot through acquaintances in 1999 and claimed he facilitated the sale after two years; he admitted giving complainant Berin P7,000 and Alorro P12,000 as tokens. He argued the transaction was private and unrelated to his official duties, and therefore not subject to administrative liability, distinguishing it from Teofilo Gil v. Eufronio Son (the loan-and-favor case).
The OCA concluded respondent could not be held administratively liable for refusing to honor an alleged private contract but recommended a finding of violation of Canon 5, Rule 5.02 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and a fine of P5,000. The matter was docketed before the Court; the Court found the OCA recommendation well taken and proceeded to determine whether respondent’s conduct—acting as agent/broker and receiving a commission—violate...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Can respondent Judge Felixberto P. Barte be held administratively liable for his private involvement as agent/broker in the sale of real property to the Manila Mission Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, Inc.?
- Did respondent’s conduct in acting as agent/broker and receiving a commission violate Canon 5.02 of the Code of Judicial Conduct?
- If liable, what is th...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)