Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786)
Background of the Case
On April 27, 2009, Diaz initiated an unlawful detainer action against Spouses Ruel & Diana Betito and Isidro Pungkol. Diaz, due to a heart ailment, could not attend a scheduled pre-trial conference on July 8, 2009, and instead sent her nephew, Elmer Llanes, to represent her. Judge Gestopa recommended referring the case to barangay conciliation, asserting that as the property involved was located in Naga and Diaz resided there, it was appropriate to seek an amicable settlement through the barangay. Diaz contended that she was not a resident of Naga, which led her to file a motion for reconsideration.
Legal Issues Raised
Diaz's motion for reconsideration argued that the referral to barangay conciliation violated the Rules on Summary Procedure, asserting her actual residence was in Dumlog, Talisay City, Cebu. Additionally, she highlighted that the case had already been previously referred to the barangay, with a Certification to File Action issued prior to her complaint. Judge Gestopa denied the motion on July 20, 2009, which prompted Diaz to file the present administrative complaint alleging incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge.
Office of the Court Administrator's Findings
The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and recommended a fine of Forty Thousand Pesos (₱40,000). The OCA's memo underscored that Civil Case No. R-595 fell under the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure, which mandates a prompt resolution—specifically a judgment rendered within thirty (30) days after the necessary filings.
Court’s Analysis of Judge Gestopa's Actions
The court scrutinized Judge Gestopa's rationale for referring the case back to barangay for conciliation. It noted that such referral, despite being discretionary under Section 408 (g) of the Local Government Code, was not appropriate given that the case was governed by the Rules on Summary Procedure. Drawing from previous jurisprudence, the court emphasized that such procedural rules are designed to ensure expeditious resolutions, particularly in unlawful detainer cases, which are matters of public policy demanding swift adjudication.
Judgment and Conclusion
Judge Gestopa’s conduct was viewed as a repeating failure to adhere to established procedural norms,
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786)
Overview of the Case
- The case is an administrative complaint lodged by Felicisima R. Diaz against Judge Gerardo E. Gestopa, Jr., of the Municipal Trial Court in Naga, Cebu.
- The allegations against Judge Gestopa include incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge, specifically in relation to Civil Case No. R-595.
Antecedent Facts
- On April 27, 2009, Felicisima R. Diaz filed an unlawful detainer case (Civil Case No. R-595) against Spouses Ruel & Diana Betito and Isidro Pungkol.
- The pre-trial conference was set for July 8, 2009, but Diaz could not attend due to a heart ailment and sent her nephew, Elmer Llanes, to represent her.
- Judge Gestopa recommended referring the case to barangay conciliation, citing Section 408 (g) of the Local Government Code, which was contested by Diaz's counsel who urged for mediation instead.
- Diaz claimed she was no longer a resident of Naga, arguing that the referral violated the Rules on Summary Procedure since the case had previously been referred to the lupon and a Certification to File Action was issued on May 20, 2008.
Respondent's Actions and Complaints
- Judge Gestopa denied Diaz's motion