Title
Supreme Court
Opena vs. Luna
Case
A.M. No. P-02-1549
Decision Date
Dec 16, 2005
Stenographer Fe Rizalina V. Luna charged excessive fees for TSN, violating Rule 141. Despite complainant's death, SC fined her P2,000, emphasizing judicial integrity.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-29043)

Factual Background

The conflict originated when Atty. OpeAa, who represented the plaintiff in the aforementioned civil case, requested a TSN from respondent Luna. Despite the TSN being only eighteen pages long, Luna demanded a payment of five hundred pesos (₱500.00), a sum Atty. OpeAa contested, arguing that payment should be based on the number of pages transcribed. Respondent held that customary practice permitted such a demand due to the ex parte nature of the proceedings, despite Atty. OpeAa contending that the hearing was conducted in open court with the presence of a judge and an assistant city prosecutor. Tensions heightened, leading Atty. OpeAa to ultimately pay the requested amount, resulting in his formal complaint.

Respondent’s Position

In her comment dated May 15, 2001, respondent Luna denied that she coerced Atty. OpeAa into paying the ₱500.00 fee but acknowledged receiving the payment. She cited a longstanding practice within the judiciary wherein party-presenting evidence in ex parte matters assumes all associated costs, including those for the stenographic notes. Luna emphasized her two-decade tenure as a stenographic reporter, highlighting her previously unblemished record of service and asserting her good faith in this matter.

Findings of the Office of the Court Administrator

In an Agenda Report dated December 14, 2001, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) determined that respondent violated Section 10, Rule 141 of the Revised Rules of Court, which prescribes specific fees for stenographers. The OCA noted that the fees cannot be arbitrarily elevated, regardless of the nature of the hearing, and recommended a fine of one thousand pesos (₱1,000.00) against Luna as a penalty. This recommendation incorporated mitigating factors, including her length of service and previously clean record.

Court Proceedings and Rulings

On February 4, 2002, the Court formalized the proceedings as a regular administrative matter, inviting the parties to submit their positions based on earlier pleadings. While Atty. OpeAa confirmed his continued participation, the respondent made no submissions. Following the death of Atty. OpeAa in July 2003, Luna sought dismissal of the case, which was later contested by the OCA, reiterating the recommendation for a fine based on the earlier findings.

Administrative Accountability Considerations

The Court acknowledged respondent Luna’s denial of coercing Atty. OpeAa to pay the disputed amount. However, it found that the context demonstrated that she effectively compelled payment due to the urgent requir

...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.