Case Digest (G.R. No. 146367)
Facts:
In a sworn complaint dated 28 February 1994, Spouses Romeo P. Nazareno and Elisa A. Nazareno charged Judge Enrique M. Almario, then presiding judge of RTC, Branch 15, Naic, Cavite, with soliciting and accepting money (P10,000 on two occasions, total P20,000), receiving P7,500 in cash for a salary check he failed to deliver, and accepting food contributions during 1990–1992. The Office of the Court Administrator referred the factual matters to Court of Appeals Associate Justice Conchita Carpio Morales for investigation; hearings produced testimony by the Nazarenos, court employees, and respondent, and an investigative report was submitted to the Court.Issues:
- Did Judge Enrique M. Almario commit gross misconduct and conduct unbecoming a judge by soliciting and accepting money and food from litigants?
- What penalt
Case Digest (G.R. No. 146367)
Facts:
- Complaint and parties
- Complainants: Spouses Romeo P. Nazareno and Elisa A. Nazareno filed a sworn complaint dated 28 February 1994 for gross misconduct or acts unbecoming a judge against Judge Enrique M. Almario, then Presiding Judge, RTC, Branch 15, Naic, Cavite.
- Complaint allegations summarized: respondent solicited and accepted money and food from the Nazarenos; threatened to remove Romeo as estate administrator; asked the Nazarenos to change counsel; denied motions and dismissed an appeal.
- Specific factual allegations by Elisa Nazareno
- Mid-1990, at respondent's court office in Trece Martires City, respondent invited Elisa to his chamber and said he needed "plenty of money" because he was near retirement, and asked her to help.
- At a later meeting in the Trece Martires City Hall office, respondent told Romeo he would replace him as estate administrator because of Romeo's conviction in a criminal case filed by his sister Natividad.
- In 1992 at Roschelle Restaurant in Naic, Elisa delivered P10,000 to respondent after he asked for money; respondent appeared not fully satisfied and Elisa promised to raise more.
- November 1992, respondent sent his employee "Joe" to ask the Nazarenos to bring food to Seaside Beach at the request of respondent; the Nazarenos ordered food costing not less than P2,500 and, while at the beach, Elisa silently handed respondent another P10,000.
- The morning after the Seaside Beach visit, a woman brought a cottage key intended for "Ate Naty" (Natividad P. Nazareno), whom the Nazarenos identified as their adversary in the estate case.
- December 1992, respondent's employee Roldan brought Elisa to respondent's office and respondent requested food for a staff gathering at Aroma Beach and asked Elisa to "change his salary check" because he needed cash that day; Elisa returned with P7,500 cash which she gave to respondent but did not receive the salary check in exchange.
- Respondent allegedly urged the Nazarenos to change their lawyer; after they refused, they alleged respondent began denying motions and exhibited bias, including dismissal of an appeal for timeliness which the municipal court had transmitted.
- Investigation, witnesses, and respondent's denials
- The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended assignment to an Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals for full investigation on 14 June 1994; the Court approved and designated Associate Justice Conchita Carpio Morales on 27 July 1994.
- Witnesses who testified before Justice Conchita Carpio Morales included:
- Elisa Nazareno — affirmed complaint, testified to giving two separate P10,000 payments, giving food on two occasions, and giving cash for respondent's salary check which respondent did not give a check for.
- Romeo Nazareno — confirmed at least four pending cases before respondent; corroborated Elisa regarding the P20,000 total, the food deliveries, and the P7,500 cash given for the salary check.
- Remedios Antipuesto — helper for Elisa; recalled preparing food picked up by respondent's employee "Joe."
- Roldan Alcantara — utility worker assigned to respondent's sala; testified he sometimes encashed respondent's salary checks and saw the Nazarenos at Seaside Beach and that they handed food to respondent's sister-in-law.
- Jose R. Salvadora, Jr. — legal researcher in respondent's sala; observed Elisa bringing a "casserola" of f...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary liability questions
- Whether Judge Enrique M. Almario committed gross misconduct and dishonesty by soliciting and accepting money and food from litigants, specifically the Nazarenos.
- Whether respondent engaged in conduct unbecoming a judge by exerting improper influence on matters involving the Nazarenos and by advising them to change counsel.
- Penalty and remedial questions
- If liable, whether the appropriate penalty is dismissal from the service.
- If respondent had alread...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)