Title
Spouses Nazareno vs. Almario
Case
A.M. No. RTJ-94-1195
Decision Date
Feb 26, 1997
Judge Almario solicited money and favors from litigants, exhibited bias, and was found guilty of gross misconduct, leading to forfeiture of retirement benefits.
A

Case Summary (G.R. No. 146367)

Factual Background

The spouses alleged a series of personal solicitations and improper exactions by respondent while he served as presiding judge in Trece Martires City and later in Naic, Cavite. They recounted that, beginning in about 1990, the judge invited Mrs. Nazareno into his chamber and stated that he needed money because he was nearing retirement. The spouses alleged several subsequent encounters in which the judge requested money and food. In 1992 Mrs. Nazareno averred that she delivered P10,000.00 to respondent at Roschelle Restaurant. In November 1992 the spouses brought food to a gathering at Seaside Beach pursuant to the judge’s request and handed respondent another P10,000.00. In December 1992 respondent allegedly asked Mrs. Nazareno to encash his salary check for P7,500.00; she testified that she gave cash in exchange but never received the check. The spouses also alleged that respondent sought to have Romeo Nazareno replaced as estate administrator and that respondent pressured them to change counsel. The Nazarenos charged that adverse rulings followed their refusal to comply with the judge’s personal demands.

Complaint and Respondent’s Response

The spouses filed a sworn complaint dated 28 February 1994 charging respondent with gross misconduct and acts unbecoming a judge. Respondent submitted a comment denying all allegations and maintaining that the charges were fabricated in retaliation for adverse rulings. The spouses affirmed the complaint by reply dated 24 May 1994.

Preliminary Action and Assignment of Investigating Justice

On 14 June 1994 the Office of the Court Administrator, noting the factual nature of the allegations, recommended that the matters be assigned to an Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals for a full investigation. The Supreme Court, on 27 July 1994, approved the recommendation and designated Associate Justice Conchita Carpio Morales to conduct the investigation and to submit a report and recommendation.

Evidence Presented at Investigation

At hearings before Justice Carpio Morales, Elisa Nazareno testified at length and affirmed the allegations, describing the two deliveries of P10,000.00, the provision of food on two occasions, and the encashment episode involving P7,500.00. Romeo Nazareno corroborated his wife’s testimony, confirmed at least four pending cases before respondent, and affirmed that the spouses had given a total of P20,000.00 and had furnished food as requested. Court employees Roldan Alcantara and Jose R. Salvadora, Jr. both corroborated occurrences involving the bringing of food to beach gatherings and Alcantara testified that he sometimes encashed respondent’s salary checks. A helper, Remedios Antipuesto, testified about preparing food taken at the judge’s request. Counsel Jacinto P. Dominguez testified that he informed respondent in counselled presence that the Nazarenos had made a complaint to Justice Secretary Drilon and specifically mentioned the alleged encashment and monetary payments. Opposing counsel Roman C. Cabading testified to having been shown by Atty. Dominguez the spouses’ letter to the Justice Secretary. Respondent denied receiving money or food and asserted that he never spoke with litigants outside the presence of counsel.

Findings of the Investigating Justice

Investigating Justice Conchita Carpio Morales found the Nazarenos’ allegations to be substantially proven. Justice Morales characterized Mrs. Nazareno’s testimony as convincing and undented by cross-examination and accepted that she had given P10,000.00 on two occasions and had furnished cash in connection with respondent’s salary check. The investigating justice also relied on the corroborative testimony of court employees and other witnesses to establish that food was brought to gatherings at respondent’s request. Justice Morales submitted a report and recommendation on 13 August 1996.

Supreme Court’s Analysis and Reasoning

After close study of the investigatory record, the Court found sufficient evidence to sustain the charges of gross dishonesty and

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.