G.R. No. 82238-42 - Guerrero vs. Villamor

On February 18, 1987, five consolidated Criminal Cases (Nos. N-0989, N-0990, N-0991, N-0992, and N-0993) for Qualified Theft against Gloria Naval were dismissed by Judge Adriano R. Villamor of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 16, Naval, Subprovince of Biliran, Leyte.
Subsequently, the offended party, petitioner George D. Carlos, through his lawyer and co-petitioner Antonio T. Guerrero, initiated a civil action for damages (Civil Case No. CEB-6478) before the Regional Trial Court, Branch XXI, Cebu City, alleging that the dismissal was rendered without proper circumspection and was unjust.

The complaint in Civil Case No. CEB-6478 contained strongly worded allegations criticizing the dismissal of the criminal cases, characterizing it as a case of “knowingly rendering unjust judgment” and accusing Judge Villamor of willful bias and disregard of his duty.
Specific statements accused the judge of using “derogatory and contemptuous language” in describing his conduct, including allegations that his actions had humiliated and scorned the petitioner, which were seen as attacks on the respect and dignity of the judicial office.

On December 10, 1987, after service of the civil case’s complaint and summons on Judge Villamor, the same judge, on the following day (December 11, 1987), issued an Order of Direct Contempt in the already dismissed Criminal Cases Nos. N-0989 to N-0993.
The Order found petitioners guilty beyond reasonable doubt of direct contempt for allegedly degrading the court by their language, and it imposed a sentence of imprisonment for five (5) days along with a fine of P500.00.

In response to the Order of Contempt, petitioners filed a petition for certiorari seeking to halt the enforcement of the contempt order, arguing that the criticisms were not made “before” the judge in session but were part of a separate civil proceeding.
On March 22, 1988, the Court issued a temporary restraining order enjoining Judge Villamor from enforcing his contempt order in the aforementioned criminal cases.

No direct contempt was committed since the contentious statements were submitted in a civil case before a different court and judge, not in a judicial proceeding presided over by the respondent judge at the time of addressing criminal cases.
The expressions used in the civil complaint were merely descriptive of the petitioner’s cause of action and were protected as absolutely privileged communications made in judicial proceedings.

The language used in the civil complaint was disrespectful and could potentially diminish the authority and dignity of the court.
Even if the criminal cases had been closed, the integrity of the judicial office must be maintained by curtailing any verbal assaults that might undermine public confidence in the judicial system.

Whether Judge Villamor can lawfully issue an Order of Direct Contempt in the criminal cases (Nos. N-0989 to N-0993) based on the alleged contemptuous language contained in the separate civil complaint filed in Civil Case No. CEB-6478.
Whether the language used in the civil complaint is contemptuous, or if it qualifies as absolutely privileged communication given its context within a judicial proceeding and as part of a lawyer’s presentation of a cause of action.