Case Summary (G.R. No. L-29591)
Antecedent Facts
The events leading to the complaint began when Que Fi Luan, represented by Atty. Magno, filed a complaint for forcible entry against Rodolfo Dimarucut on March 3, 2010. Following Rodolfo's death, Atty. Magno amended the complaint, which was ultimately dismissed by Judge Lorredo due to Luan's non-appearance at a mediation session. The Regional Trial Court later reversed this dismissal, finding the MeTC had acted hastily without notifying the parties adequately.
Remarks Leading to Complaint
During a preliminary conference, Judge Lorredo made several derogatory remarks toward Atty. Magno, questioning how he secured the RTC's favorable ruling and referring dismissively to the competence of Luan’s legal representation. This incident prompted Atty. Magno to file the complaint, asserting that Judge Lorredo's remarks were not only demeaning but also insinuated unethical behavior on his part.
Judge Lorredo's Response
In his response, Judge Lorredo denied the allegations, explaining that his line of questioning stemmed from what he believed to be misrepresentation by Atty. Magno in front of the RTC. He claimed the remarks were made out of curiosity, supported by documentation of the mediation scheduling that he argued contradicted Atty. Magno’s claims.
Supplemental Complaint
On August 14, 2013, Atty. Magno submitted a Supplemental Complaint, which included further accusations against Judge Lorredo for actions viewed as inappropriate, such as delaying case calling times and failing to follow procedural protocols, which he contended led to unjust decisions.
OCA's Recommendation
The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), in a memorandum dated March 3, 2016, recommended that Judge Lorredo be held guilty of conduct unbecoming a judge. The recommendation stressed the need for judges to maintain professionalism to avoid humiliating parties involved in legal proceedings.
Ruling of the Court
After examination of the case record, the Court concurred with the OCA’s recommendation, emphasizing that Judge Lorredo's conduct fell short of the standards expected from members of the judiciary. It highlighted the importance of propriety and respect in judicial proceedi
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-29591)
Case Overview
- The case involves a complaint filed by Atty. Pablo B. Magno against Judge Jorge Emmanuel M. Lorredo of the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila.
- The complaint, dated March 6, 2013, alleges bias and partiality, arrogance and oppression, and violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct (CJC).
Antecedent Facts
- On March 3, 2010, Que Fi Luan, represented by Atty. Magno, filed a forcible entry complaint against Rodolfo Dimarucut, which was registered as Civil Case No. 186797-CV.
- Following Rodolfo's death, Atty. Magno amended the complaint to include Teresa Alcober and Teresita Dimarucut, Rodolfo's widow and daughter, respectively.
- Judge Lorredo dismissed the original complaint on September 8, 2010, due to Luan's failure to attend a mediation session.
- The Regional Trial Court later reversed this dismissal, stating that the MeTC had not properly notified the parties about the mediation.
- During a subsequent preliminary conference, Judge Lorredo questioned Atty. Magno about how he managed to persuade the RTC to reverse the dismissal, insinuating unethical conduct.
Judge's Comments and Conduct
- Judge Lorredo expressed frustration at the absence of the defendants' counsel and made derogatory remarks about Atty. Magno’s effectiveness as a lawyer.
- He questioned Atty. Magno's follow-up on the case and suggested that Luan's failure to win in RTC was due to Atty. Magno's incompetence.
- Judge Lorredo's comments included calling Atty. Magno "mahina" (we