This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2012-01-17 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The Court has already given Hufana and Ancheta more than enough opportunity to explain their side. With their obstinate defiance and incessant refusal to submit their compliance to this Court, despite the latter's repeated directives and stern admonitions, Hufana and Ancheta displayed their insolence and disrespect for the lawful orders of the Court. "A resolution of the Supreme Court should not be construed as a mere request, [and] should be complied with promptly and completely." Such "failure to comply betrays not only a recalcitrant streak in character, but also a disrespect for the Court's lawful order and directive."[7] Furthermore, this contumacious conduct of refusing to abide by the lawful directives issued by the Court has likewise been considered as an utter lack of interest to remain with, if not contempt of, the system.[8] Hufana and Ancheta's transgression is highlighted even more by the fact that they are employees of the Judiciary, who, more than an ordinary citizen, should be aware of their duty to obey the orders and processes of the Supreme Court without delay.[9] Their willful disobedience to and disregard for the directive of this Court constitute grave and serious misconduct,[10] which cannot be tolerated. | |||||
|
2003-10-24 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| We emphasize at the outset that the main case from which this Petition arose has already been decided by the CA. The Decision is now final and executory.[16] Already terminated in that main case was Special Proceedings No. 704-R, which had given rise to a number of incidents and petitions including the herein matter. In CA-GR SP No. 64025, the CA found that Judge Reyes had gravely abused his discretion when he disallowed the Extrajudicial Partition[17] executed by the heirs of the Munsayac spouses. Thus, the appellate court disposed as follows: | |||||
|
2003-10-24 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| It should be clear that the CA Decision[20] terminating Special Proceedings No. 704-R found that the Deed of Extrajudicial Partition executed by all the parties was the "final, complete and absolute settlement of their respective shares and claims as heirs of deceased spouses Gelacio Munsayac, Sr. and Vicenta Munsayac."[21] As such, any and all incidents relating to the special proceedings should also be deemed to have been terminated. | |||||
|
2003-10-24 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| When Judge Reyes issued his Orders commanding the bank manager of the China Bank branch in Baguio City to freeze the safety deposit box of petitioners[22] and to deposit certain amounts in custodia legis,[23] he did so as the presiding judge in the probate court that was hearing Special Proceedings No. 704-R. Now that the case has finally been terminated, it follows that neither he nor his court has any more right to hold the properties that were the subject of his Orders in the special proceedings. | |||||