This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2010-05-06 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| The Court also variably set the fines at more than the maximum amount, usually when the judge's undue delay was coupled with other offenses. The judge, in one case, was fined P25,000.00 for undue delay in rendering a ruling and for making a grossly and patently erroneous decision.[29] The judge, in another case, was penalized with a fine of P40,000.00 for deciding a case only after an undue delay of one year and six months, as well as for simple misconduct and gross ignorance of the law, considering that the undue delay was already the judge's second offense.[30] The Court again imposed a fine of P40,000.00 upon a judge who failed to resolve one motion, bearing in mind that he was twice previously penalized for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct and for Gross Ignorance of Procedural Law and Unreasonable Delay.[31] | |||||
|
2006-06-23 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| Respondent judge's explanation that the delay was occasioned by her clerk of court's failure to bring the matter to her attention could not free her from administrative liability. As a judge, she has the bounden duty to maintain proper monitoring of cases submitted for her decision or resolution. A judge ought to know the cases submitted to her for decision or resolution and is expected to keep her own record of cases so that she may act on them promptly. It is her duty to take note of the cases submitted for her decision or resolution and see to it that they are decided within the prescribed period. She cannot hide behind the inefficiency or irresponsibility of her court personnel because the latter are not the guardians of her responsibilities. Indeed, Rule 3.09, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct[14] requires respondent judge to organize and supervise the court personnel for prompt and efficient dispatch of business.[15] | |||||
|
2005-06-23 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| decision or resolution. A judge ought to know the cases submitted to her for decision or resolution and is expected to keep her own record of cases so that she may act on them promptly. It is her duty to take note of the cases submitted for her decision or resolution and see to it that they are decided within the prescribed period. She cannot hide behind the inefficiency or irresponsibility of her court personnel because the latter are not the guardians of her responsibilities. Indeed, Rule 3.09, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct[14] requires respondent judge to organize and supervise the court personnel for prompt and efficient dispatch of business.[15] Section 4, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as amended, provides that undue delay in rendering a decision or order is considered a less serious offense punishable, under Section 11-B of the same rule, by (a) suspension from office without salary and other benefits for one (1) | |||||