Case Digest (A.M. No. RTJ-00-1594)
Facts:
Pastor Salud v. Judge Florentino M. Alumbres, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1594 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 99-650-RTJ), June 20, 2003, Supreme Court Second Division, Quisumbing, J., writing for the Court.The administrative complaint arose from an unlawful detainer case titled Sps. Eduardo and Josefina Laurito v. Sps. Pastor and Marcosa Salud. The underlying property dispute began with a double sale: Ricardo Forneza, Jr. and Cynthia S. Forneza sold the same house and lot first by Deed of Sale to Ferdinand Jimenez (Feb. 8, 1990) and then, four days later, executed a Contract to Sell in favor of Maria Belen Salud and Laurina Salud (Feb. 12, 1990). Jimenez caused the transfer of title into his name (TCT No. T-14065) and later sold to the Lauritos (June 27, 1991), who obtained TCT No. T-24778.
When the Lauritos found the Salud spouses occupying the property, they filed an unlawful detainer action before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Las Piñas City. The MeTC rendered a decision against the Saluds on December 9, 1996, finding they failed to show ownership documents. The Saluds appealed to the Regional Trial Court (RTC), filing a memorandum under Section 7, Rule 40 on April 17, 1997; the appeal was docketed as Civil Case No. LP-96-300 and raffled to RTC Branch 255 presided by then-Judge Florentino M. Alumbres.
Despite the appeal’s pendency, Judge Alumbres issued an Alias Writ of Execution dated April 1, 1997, stating the judgment was "now final and executory." The Saluds sought relief from the Court of Appeals by a petition for certiorari (filed April 23, 1997) to restrain the RTC from executing its orders; the Lauritos separately moved in the Court of Appeals to lift any temporary restraining order and later sought issuance of an alias writ of execution pending appeal (Oct. 8, 1998).
On October 19, 1998, Pastor Salud filed a Letter Complaint with the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) alleging undue delay by Judge Alumbres in deciding Civil Case No. LP-96-300 and complained of other cases in the judge’s docket that were allegedly ripe for decision but unacted upon. Despite Salud’s opposition to acting because of the Court of Appeals’ status-quo order, the respondent issued an Alias Writ. After more than fifteen months from submission, the RTC finally rendered its judgment on November 20, 1998, affirming the MeTC decision.
In his Comment to the OCA, Judge Alumbres admitted the delay but attributed it to numerous filings and harassment by the complainant and to efforts to inhibit him from hearing the case; he also noted prior disciplinary actions and, lat...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Is respondent Judge Florentino M. Alumbres administratively liable for undue delay in rendering judgment in Civil Case No. LP-96-300?
- If administratively liable, what penalty is appropriate given the circumstances, including alleged harassment by litigants and the respondent’s prior disciplinary record?
- May an administrative sanction be imposed and collected after the respondent’s retirement, and may the fine be d...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)