Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	AM NO. RTJ-02-1735 2007-04-27	SPS. RODOLFO AND SYLVIA CABICO v. JUDGE EVELYN L. DIMACULANGAN- QUERIJERO CARPIO, J.
A display of petulance and impatience in the conduct of a trial is a norm of behavior incompatible with the needful attitude and sobriety of a good judge.[27] Respondent Judge's actuations violated Rule 3.04 of Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, thus:Rule 3.04. A judge should be patient, attentive, and courteous to lawyers, especially the inexperienced, to litigants, witnesses, and others appearing before the court. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts, instead of the courts for the litigants.
	AM NO. RTJ-05-1946 2007-01-26	LIGAYA V. SANTOS v. RTC AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
To constitute gross ignorance of the law, it is not enough that the subject decision, order or actuation of the judge in the performance of his official duties is contrary to existing law and jurisprudence but, most importantly, he must be moved by bad faith, fraud, dishonesty, or corruption.[20] Good faith and absence of malice, corrupt motives or improper considerations, are sufficient defenses in which a judge charged with ignorance of the law can find refuge.[21]