This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-01-31 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| We find respondent Banting's explanation of stealth and deception on the part of Tuazon unsatisfactory. As Clerk of Court, he has general supervision over all personnel of his court and was its cashier and disbursement officer (Section A[1] and Section B, Chapter VII, Manual for Clerks of Court). As cashier and disbursement officer, it was his duty to collect and receive, by himself or through a duly appointed cashier, all monies in payment of all legal fees, as well as to receive deposits, fines and dues.[45] It devolves upon him to personally attend to the collection of the fees, the safekeeping of the money collected, the making of the proper entries thereof in the corresponding book of accounts, and the deposit of the same in the offices concerned. The collection of legal fees, by its nature, is a delicate function of clerks of court as judicial officers entrusted with the correct and effective implementation of the regulations thereon.[46] He failed to properly supervise a subordinate. Though it appears that Ms. Tuazon was the one in charge of collecting the fees and recording the transactions, it behooves respondent Banting to ensure Ms. Tuazon was performing her duties and responsibilities to the end that there is full compliance with circulars on deposits and collections.[47] This, he failed to do. | |||||