Title
Tan vs. Paredes
Case
A.M. No. P-04-1789, RTJ-04-1841
Decision Date
Jul 22, 2005
Judge Tan accused Sheriff Paredes of extorting money from litigants; Paredes denied but admitted improper handling of funds. Both found guilty: Paredes dismissed, Tan admonished for misconduct.

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-20895)

Facts:

  • Administrative Complaints and Consolidation of Cases
    • Two administrative complaints were consolidated into one case:
      • The first complaint (OCA IPI No. 02-1402-P, later A.M. No. P-04-1789) was filed by Judge Jose Manuel P. Tan, then presiding judge of RTC, Branch 29, Surigao City, against Sheriff IV Henry G. Paredes.
      • The second complaint (OCA IPI No. 02-1523-RTJ) was filed by Sheriff Paredes against Judge Tan.
    • The case arose out of alleged misconduct related to the execution of Civil Case No. 5147 (Sps. Lucio Mijares v. Nora Efren Miwa) regarding the collection and handling of fees and expenses.
  • Allegations by Judge Tan Against Sheriff Paredes
    • Judge Tan charged that Sheriff Paredes solicited money from the plaintiffs to defray expenses for the demolition of a fence and execution of a judgment:
      • It was alleged that the sheriff demanded P10,000 for demolition expenses.
      • Testimonies and affidavits, including that of Atty. Paulino Chua and Prosecutor Jesse Rey Silvosa, supported the claim that money was collected in amounts totaling P5,500.
    • Judge Tan, upon uncovering these allegations, convened a staff meeting during which:
      • Sheriff Paredes admitted to asking for P10,000 and receiving P3,000.
      • The judge placed the sheriff on preventive suspension and proceeded with administrative actions.
    • Judge Tan further complemented his administrative action by filing a criminal complaint with the Ombudsman for Mindanao, which was deferred pending the administrative case.
  • Counter-Allegations and Defense by Sheriff Paredes
    • Sheriff Paredes denied extortion, claiming that:
      • He merely advised Mrs. Mijares to deposit the money with the Clerk of Court to cover demolition and execution expenses.
      • The funds he received were for reimbursing expenses already incurred during the process.
      • The confrontation with Judge Tan was characterized by malice and intimidation on the part of the judge.
    • In his subsequent complaint, Sheriff Paredes charged Judge Tan with:
      • Gross ignorance of the law, oppression, and various forms of misconduct (including boxing him and alleged public improper behavior).
      • Claims that the judge acted unilaterally by calling the case in court and using radio stations to announce the incident, thereby exacerbating the controversy.
  • Investigation and Findings by the Executive Judge and Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)
    • Executive Judge Victor A. Tomaneng of Butuan City investigated and reported that:
      • There was insufficient clear and convincing evidence to support the charge that Sheriff Paredes extorted money.
      • Nonetheless, he noted procedural lapses, specifically that the sheriff did not follow Section 9, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court.
    • The OCA, upon further evaluation, found that:
      • Sheriff Paredes violated Section 9, Rule 141 by collecting money without the necessary prior court approval and not depositing the collected funds with the Clerk of Court.
      • Judge Tan also failed to observe due process by unilaterally suspending the sheriff, withholding his salaries and benefits, and inappropriately publicizing the incident.
      • The investigative report contained evidence of personal altercation (Judge Tan boxing Sheriff Paredes) which further complicated the matter.
  • Resulting Administrative Actions
    • Based on the evidence and the OCA’s recommendations:
      • Sheriff Paredes was found guilty of grave misconduct and gross dishonesty.
      • Judge Tan was held liable for violating judicial conduct rules and for simple misconduct.
    • Disciplinary measures were recommended and later imposed with specific sanctions detailed in the resolution.

Issues:

  • Whether Sheriff Paredes committed misconduct by:
    • Demanding P10,000 from the plaintiffs for demolition expenses without securing the court’s prior approval as mandated by Section 9, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court.
    • Failing to remit the amount received (P5,500) to the Clerk of Court and thus misappropriating funds entrusted to him for the execution of the court’s orders.
  • Whether Judge Tan improperly exercised his authority by:
    • Unilaterally suspending Sheriff Paredes and withholding his salaries and other benefits without affording him a fair opportunity to be heard.
    • Publicly announcing the suspension via radio stations, thereby potentially eroding public confidence in the judiciary.
  • Whether the actions of both parties, in light of their allegations and counter-allegations, warrant the disciplinary measures imposed:
    • Assessing if the procedural and ethical lapses committed by Sheriff Paredes constitute grave misconduct and gross dishonesty.
    • Determining if Judge Tan’s actions, despite being motivated by a desire to prevent further misconduct, breached the limitations imposed on judicial disciplinary powers.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.