Case Digest (A.M. No. P-131)
Facts:
Francisco Valencia v. Gregorio Pamisaran; Estrella Borlongan v. Gregorio Pamisaran, A.M. No. P-131; A.M. No. P-154, March 29, 1974, Supreme Court First Division, Teehankee, J., writing for the Court.
Petitioners Francisco Valencia and Estrella A. Borlongan filed separate administrative complaints against respondent Gregorio Pamisaran, a deputy sheriff of Branch IV (Calauag) of the Court of First Instance of Quezon Province, accusing him of converting monies entrusted to him in the performance of his official duties. Valencia charged that Pamisaran collected P1,000.00 as proceeds of a money judgment in December 1969 and failed to turn it over promptly, delivering it only on July 15, 1970 after repeated demands and after complaint was filed with the fiscal's office. Borlongan charged that she delivered P4,600.00 to Pamisaran on July 29, 1972 to be remitted as redemption money to the purchaser of her foreclosed lot, but Pamisaran failed to transmit the funds and could not produce them at the administrative hearing nearly a year later.
Both complaints were investigated by Judge Leodegario L. Mogol, Executive Judge of the Quezon Court of First Instance. In his May 9, 1973 report in A.M. No. P-131 Judge Mogol found the negligence charge "not clear" but held the misappropriation charge duly substantiated for the P1,000.00 collection, noting similar delays in other matters. In his July 10, 1973 report in A.M. No. P-154 he likewise found Borlongan's complaint of conversion of the P4,600.00 established, and observed a pattern of failure to act promptly on funds connected with court cases.
Judge Mogol's reports also recited a separate instance in Civil Case No. C-418 (Dinglasan v. Camama) where Pamisaran delayed turning over P2,910.00, later returning only P2,210.00 after direct court order and leaving a balance of P700.00 unpaid for unknown reasons. The administrative records, including respondent's own certificate (exhibit C) acknowledging...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was respondent Gregorio Pamisaran’s withholding and delayed turning over of funds entrusted to him by parties litigant properly characterized as misappropriation/conversion and/or negligence?
- If the charges were established, is dismissal from the service the appropriate ad...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)