Title
Supreme Court
Concerned Citizen vs. Divina
Case
A.M. No. P-07-2369
Decision Date
Nov 16, 2011
A court stenographer was suspended for one year without pay due to inefficiency and delays in transcribing notes, but allegations of extortion and misconduct were dismissed for lack of evidence.

Case Summary (A.M. No. P-07-2369)

Allegations and Complaints

The case originated from an anonymous complaint alleging that Divina demanded P20,000 in exchange for the Transcript of Stenographic Notes (TSN). Additional grievances were reported by Atty. Camacho, who accused Divina of being arrogant, and Ricardo, who claimed extortion and inefficiency. These allegations were synthesized in a report submitted to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).

Investigation Process

Following the complaints, on December 8, 2005, the case was referred to Honorable Remigio M. Escalada Jr. for an investigation. The findings noted a backlog of untranscribed stenographic notes dating back to 2001. Despite Divina's denial of all allegations, evidence indicated that ongoing issues with the timely completion of transcripts persisted.

Charges and Findings

The investigation highlighted three main charges against Divina: (1) extortion and delay in submitting the TSN in Civil Case No. 7400; (2) overall delay in submitting TSNs; and (3) a belligerent attitude toward Atty. Camacho. Divina was found liable for inefficiencies in her role and an unauthorized collection of payments but was granted the benefit of the doubt concerning the extortion charge due to insufficient evidence.

Recommendations and Court's Decision

Judge Escalada recommended a six-month suspension; however, after a thorough evaluation, the OCA proposed a one-year suspension without pay, citing the extent of Divina's inefficiencies. The court agreed to this assessment but took into consideration Divina's improved performance ratings in subsequent months, suggesting potential mitigation in her punishment.

Legal and Procedural Basis

Applicable laws included Section 11 of Rule 141, which governs fees charged by court stenographers, and Administrative Circular No. 24-90, which mandates timely transcription of TSNs. The court clarified that any payments mad

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.