This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2011-11-16 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| A review of the records shows that complainant failed to timely raise her concerns in an appropriate judicial proceeding. Until and unless there is an authoritative pronouncement that the questioned orders of the respondent Judges were indeed tainted by anomaly, there would be no ground lo prosecute the respondent Judges, either administratively or criminally, for rendering them.[30] Thus, an administrative complaint is not the appropriate remedy for every act of a judge deemed aberrant or irregular where a judicial remedy exists and is available, for if subsequent developments prove the judge's challenged act to be correct, there would be no occasion to proceed against him at all.[31] Thus, the charges being judicial in nature, the remedy of the complainant should have been with the proper court for the appropriate judicial action and not with the OCA by means of an administrative complaint.[32] | |||||
|
2006-03-31 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| [25] Santos v. Orlino, 357 Phil. 102 (1998). | |||||