Title
Vercide vs. Herdez
Case
A.M. No. MTJ-00-1265
Decision Date
Apr 6, 2000
In the case of Vercide v. Hernandez, the Supreme Court ruled that the requirement for barangay conciliation does not apply when the parties do not reside in the same municipality or city or in adjoining barangays, finding the respondent judge guilty of gross ignorance of the law and ordering her to pay a fine of P2,000.00.
Font Size

Case Digest (A.M. No. MTJ-00-1265)

Facts:

  • Valencides Vercide filed a complaint against Judge Priscilla T. Hernandez of the Fifth Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Clarin and Tudela, Misamis Occidental.
  • Vercide alleged grave abuse of authority and ignorance of the law by Judge Hernandez.
  • The issue stemmed from the dismissal of Civil Case No. 295, which Vercide and his wife filed against Daria Lagas Galleros for the recovery of possession of land in Upper Centro, Tudela, Misamis Occidental.
  • Galleros, the defendant, resided in the same municipality, while Vercide and his wife resided in Dipolog City.
  • The case was filed without prior referral to the Lupong Tagapamayapa, a requirement for barangay conciliation.
  • Galleros raised the lack of barangay conciliation as an affirmative defense.
  • Judge Hernandez dismissed the case on July 15, 1997, without prejudice to the defendant's counterclaim.
  • Hernandez initially cited P.D. No. 1508 but later referred to the Katarungang Pambarangay Rules under R.A. No. 7160.
  • Vercide's motion for reconsideration was denied, leading to the filing of this complaint.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  1. The Supreme Court found Judge Priscilla T. Hernandez guilty of gross ignorance of the law.
  2. The Court ruled that the requirement for barangay conciliation does not apply when the partie...(Unlock)

Ratio:

  • The Supreme Court emphasized that the requirement for barangay conciliation under the Katarungang Pambarangay Rules and R.A. No. 7160 does not apply when the parties involved do not reside in the same municipality or city or in adjoining barangays.
  • Judge Hernandez initially cited P.D. No. 1508, which had been repealed, and later misquoted the provisions of the Katarungang Pambarangay...continue reading

Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.

© 2024 Jur.ph. All rights reserved.