Case Digest (A.M. No. R-254-MTJ and 88-1-2807-MCTC)
Facts:
The Court Administrator v. Hon. Ricardo M. Magtibay, Adm. Matter Nos. R-254-MTJ and 88-1-2807-MCTC, May 9, 1988, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam.The complainant is the Court Administrator; the respondent is Hon. Ricardo M. Magtibay, a lawyer who was later appointed and served as judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Maragondon-Ternate, Cavite. An earlier administrative complaint by Magdalena G. Udarbe against Magtibay (docketed as Administrative Case No. 2489 before the BAR Office) charged him, while still a practicing lawyer, with gross negligence in defending a client, misappropriation of client funds, and charging fees for services not rendered.
Magtibay took his oath as judge on December 16, 1983 and began service December 22, 1983. On August 1, 1984, the First Division of this Court issued a resolution in AC No. 2489 referring the case to the Office of the Solicitor General for investigation, report and recommendation and suspending Magtibay from the practice of law effective from notice—a preventive suspension without a fixed period. Following inquiries by local officials whether that suspension barred him from performing judicial duties, the Court en banc, by resolution dated February 5, 1985 (Administrative Matter No. 84-11-4789-MTC), “considered” Magtibay suspended from office for the duration of his suspension from the practice of law and directed the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to institute administrative charges for conduct unbecoming and misrepresentation in his Personal Data Sheet.
Acting on that directive, the then Acting Court Administrator filed the present administrative complaint. Despite the en banc resolution and subsequent OCA directives (including a June 16, 1987 directive ordering him to desist), reports and OCA records showed that Magtibay re-assumed and performed judicial duties: he allegedly assumed his post on February 23, 1987, was designated by the Executive Judge to try cases at Indang-Mendez twice weekly, and decided numerous cases between February and December 1987 (36 in his Maragondon-Ternate sala and 16 at Indang-Mendez, some after the OCA reminder).
In his answer Magtibay explained he acted in good faith on advice from a former assemblyman and believed the suspension concerned acts as counsel predating his judgeship; he also claimed a “grievous mental lapse” in marking “N.A.” to the question on Form P-401 asking whether he had ever been administratively charged. He sought guidance about resigning but was told to await termination of the BAR and OCA investigations. The OCA report (submitted March 8, 1988) found that Magtibay deliberately concealed the pending administrative charge by answering “N.A.”, that he failed to report his suspension, and that he willfully continued to exercise judicial functions despite court orders and OCA directives—constituting lack of candor, conduct unbecoming, and usurpation of authority.
After evaluating the records and the OCA report, ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does a preventive suspension from the practice of law, as ordered in Administrative Case No. 2489, suspend the respondent from exercising his duties as judge?
- Did respondent Magtibay’s failure to report the administrative charge, his misrepresentation in the Personal Data Sheet, and his continued performance of judicial duties despite Court directives constitute gross misconduct and conduct unbecoming of a judge?
- If guilty, wha...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)