Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ALFONSO v. JUDGE MAMERTO C. PANAL MCTC

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	AM No. P-09-2644 2009-07-30	EDGARDO A. QUILO v. ROGELIO G. JUNDARINO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The Court dismissed Quilo's Complaint in A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2078-MTJ through its Resolution dated 16 February 2009, on the ground that it was judicial in nature. It is conceded that the determination of whether Quilo's residence is the same property subject of Civil Case No. 158273-CV and whether it should be demolished pursuant to the judgment in said case, is a matter best left to the determination of the trial court in appropriate judicial proceedings. Questions judicial in nature ought to be threshed out in a judicial proceeding and definitely not in an administrative one. An administrative complaint is not a valid substitute for a judicial action.[14] In fact, Quilo himself alleged that he had already filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with the RTC of Manila, Branch 17, on 1 September 2008.
	AM No. P-09-2644 2009-06-30	EDGARDO A. QUILO v. ROGELIO G. JUNDARINO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The Court dismissed Quilo's Complaint in A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2078-MTJ through its Resolution dated 16 February 2009, on the ground that it was judicial in nature. It is conceded that the determination of whether Quilo's residence is the same property subject of Civil Case No. 158273-CV and whether it should be demolished pursuant to the judgment in said case, is a matter best left to the determination of the trial court in appropriate judicial proceedings. Questions judicial in nature ought to be threshed out in a judicial proceeding and definitely not in an administrative one. An administrative complaint is not a valid substitute for a judicial action.[14] In fact, Quilo himself alleged that he had already filed a Petition for Certiorari and Prohibition with the RTC of Manila, Branch 17, on 1 September 2008.