Case Summary (A.M. No. P-08-2472, RTJ-08-2106, P-08-2420)
Allegations Against Abellanosa
Judge Delorino accused Abellanosa of soliciting money from litigants. Specific instances included: (1) soliciting ₱8,000.00 from Mrs. Amapola Sapitula to influence Prosecutor George V. De Hoya regarding a motion for reconsideration; (2) receiving ₱20,000.00 from Atty. Gaudencio A. Palafox for facilitating an ex parte issuance of a writ of preliminary attachment; (3) asking accused Beatrice PeAa to pay ₱9,000.00 for assistance with bail bond renewal; (4) collecting ₱9,500.00 from petitioners for publication of court orders without following proper procedures mandated by Presidential Decree No. 1079; and (5) demanding similar amounts from Eddie M. Fernandez for another publication, without adhering to legal requirements.
Defense of Abellanosa
Abellanosa denied all accusations, attributing them to retaliation for her complaints against Delorino. She contended that any money received was for legitimate purposes such as paying for stenographic transcripts. She claimed that any alleged solicitation was misconstrued or falsely represented by disgruntled parties seeking favor with Judge Delorino.
Counter-claims Against Delorino
In her complaint against Delorino, Abellanosa alleged several instances of abuse of authority. She claimed Delorino improperly engaged Socrates Manarang to draft judicial decisions while permitting him access to court records without proper authorization. She also contended that Delorino coerced court employees to resign or transfer, and she expressed concerns about favoritism shown towards Rowena Ramos, another court employee implicated in Abellanosa's grievances.
Ruling on Complaints Against Delorino
The Investigating Justice found insufficient evidence to support the claims against Delorino. Allegations of Manarang's involvement in facilitating judicial drafts were unsubstantiated, as there were no corroborating testimonies from the employees mentioned by Abellanosa. Moreover, it was determined that her claims lacked merit, leading to a dismissal of charges against Delorino.
Allegations Against Ramos
Abellanosa accused Ramos of inefficiency, demanding money from litigants, cheating on the civil service examination, and leveraging her relationship with Delorino to retain her husband in the branch. These claims were also subject to scrutiny and led to their own examination.
Findings on Ramos
Ramos countered the allegations, maintaining her performance was satisfactory and denied any engagement in soliciting funds or influencing her husband's employment status. The Investigating Justice found no supporting evidence for Abellanosa's claims against Ramos, resulting in a dismissal of the complaints against her.
Findings Against Abellanosa
The Court ruled that substantial evidence supported claims of Abellanosa's misconduct. Testimonies from affected litigants confirmed that she had
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. P-08-2472, RTJ-08-2106, P-08-2420)
Introduction
- The case involves multiple complaints filed by and against various court personnel, primarily focusing on allegations of misconduct, abuse of authority, and violations of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.
- The complaints were consolidated due to their intertwined facts.
Parties Involved
- Complainants:
- Judge Jenny Lind R. Aldecoa-Delorino
- Jessica B. Abellanosa, Court Stenographer III
- Rowena L. Ramos, Court Stenographer III
- Respondents:
- Jessica B. Abellanosa
- Judge Jenny Lind R. Aldecoa-Delorino
- Rowena L. Ramos
Summary of Complaints
- A.M. No. P-08-2472: Judge Aldecoa-Delorino filed an administrative complaint against Abellanosa for grave misconduct and violations of relevant laws.
- A.M. No. RTJ-08-2106: Abellanosa filed for conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service against Judge Aldecoa-Delorino.
- A.M. No. P-08-2420: Abellanosa filed a complaint against Rowena L. Ramos for inefficiency and other allegations.
Charges Against Jessica B. Abellanosa
Solicitation of Money:
- Allegations of soliciting money from litigants for various court-related favors, including:
- People v. Bernard Sapitula: Solicited P8,000 from Mrs. Sapitula for favorable treatment from the prosecutor.
- Big Pix Graphics Systems, Inc. v. Josephine S. Velasco: Received P20,000 from Atty. Palafox for facilitating a writ.
- People v. Winifredo F. Onio and Beatrice PeAa: Asked for P9,000 for bail renewal.
- Publication Cases: Requested P9,500 for publication of orders without following proper procedures.
- Allegations of soliciting money from litigants for various court-related favors, including:
Behavioral Issues:
- Exhibited disruptive behavior in the