Case Digest (A.M. No. P-93-799)
Facts:
Nelia B. Esmeralda-Baroy v. Juvy N. Cosca, A.M. No. P-93-799, June 21, 1995, Supreme Court Second Division, Mendoza, J., writing for the Court.The complainant, Nelia B. Esmeralda-Baroy, was the clerk of court of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Tinambac, Camarines Sur; the respondent, Juvy N. Cosca, was a court stenographer of the same court. The administrative complaint charged respondent with violating Rule 136, Sections 14 and 17, of the Rules of Court by bringing home stenographic notes taken during sessions of the MTC and failing to submit the corresponding transcripts and notes despite demands by the presiding judge and the clerk. The complaint alleged that respondent had submitted only one transcript.
Respondent admitted taking the notes home but explained she did so to transcribe them there because she lived far from the court; she also asserted she feared the notes might be tampered with if left in the clerk’s office. Respondent further alleged that the complaint was retaliatory — filed by the clerk and the judge after she and other court employees had filed an administrative complaint against them (the latter administrative case resulted in disciplinary measures: dismissal of the clerk and a fine against Judge Lucio P. Palaypayon, Jr.).
The judge initially faulted respondent for failing to transcribe certain notes and, on October 28, 1992, revoked a clearance previously issued to respondent for transfer because notes had not been transcribed. Respondent later submitted a transcript in Criminal Case No. 5682 (People v. Crisostomo Maynog); following that, the clerk demanded the original notes. Complainant later pressed the present administrative charge for failure to deliver the stenographic notes and for taking them out of the clerk’s office in violation of Rule 136, Secs. 14 and 17.
The Court considered the interaction between Rule 136, Sec. 17 (which requires stenographers to deliver notes immediately at the close of each session to the clerk of court to be attached to the record) and Administrative Circular No. 24‑90 (promulgated July 12, 1990), which directed all stenographers to transcribe all stenographic notes and attach transcripts to the record not later than twenty (20) days from the time the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did respondent violate Rule 136, Sections 14 and 17, of the Rules of Court by taking stenographic notes home and failing to deliver them immediately to the clerk of court?
- If a violation occurred, what disciplinary measure, if any, should be impos...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)