Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEDRO SAN JOSE v. BENJAMIN CENTENO

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AM No. P-06-2169 2008-03-28	ROGELIO V. URBANOZO v. CRISANTO T. FLORA PER CURIAM
The administration of justice is a sacred task and it demands the highest degree of efficiency, dedication and professionalism.[9] Sheriffs ought to know that they have a sworn responsibility to serve writs of execution with utmost dispatch[10] so as not to unduly delay the administration of justice;[11] otherwise, the judgment, if not executed, would be futile,[12] an empty victory on the part of the prevailing party.[13]
	AM No. P-02-1655 2007-02-06	EMMANUEL M. PATAWARAN v. REYNALDO T. NEPOMUCENO AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
There is neglect in the performance of duty on the part of respondent when he failed to submit his report on time.[26] Records show that respondent failed to timely make a sheriff's return on the alias writ of execution as required under Section 14, Rule 39, Rules of Civil Procedure as hereinbefore quoted. Respondent admitted that his failure was due to oversight and the fact that when defendants filed an omnibus motion questioning the levy, the court was already informed of the proceedings taken on the said alias writ of execution. Records also show that the alias writ was placed in the hands of respondent on July 21, 1999 and the return was made only on January 3, 2000 or more than five months after its execution. Respondent cannot escape liability for not filing his return on time as mandated by the above cited Rule.
	AM NO. P-05-2005 2005-06-08	TOMAS GOTGOTAO v. RENATO C. MILLORA COURT INTERPRETER III TINGA, J.
The image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and women who work thereat, from the judge to the least and lowest of its personnel hence it becomes the imperative sacred duty of each and everyone in the court to maintain its good name and standing as a true temple of justice.[25] The conduct of court personnel at all times must not only be characterized by propriety and decorum but also be above suspicion.[26] Thus, all court personnel are enjoined and required to comport themselves in such manner as to avoid any taint of suspicion being cast on their actuations, official or private.[27]