Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ATTY. NORLINDA R. AMANTE-DESCALLAR v. JUDGE REINERIO ABRAHAM B. RAMAS

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AM No. RTJ-11-2259 2013-10-22	MA. REGINA S. PERALTA v. JUDGE GEORGE E. OMELIO PER CURIAM
Gross ignorance of the law is the disregard of basic rules and settled jurisprudence. A judge may also be administratively liable if shown to have been motivated by bad faith, fraud, dishonesty or corruption in ignoring, contradicting or failing to apply settled law and jurisprudence.[57] Though not every judicial error bespeaks ignorance of the law and that, if committed in good faith, does not warrant administrative sanction, the same applies only in cases within the parameters of tolerable misjudgment. Where the law is straightforward and the facts so evident, not to know it or to act as if one does not know it constitutes gross ignorance of the law.[58]
	AC. No. 7430 2012-02-15	MARTIN LAHM III v. LABOR ARBITER JOVENCIO LL. MAYOR REYES, J.
In Tadlip v. Atty. Borres, Jr., the respondent-lawyer and provincial adjudicator, found guilty of gross ignorance of the law, was suspended from the practice of law for six months. Additionally, in parallel cases,[25] a judge found guilty of gross ignorance of the law was meted the penalty of suspension for six months.
	AM No. MTJ-09-1737 2011-02-09	LYDELLE L. CONQUILLA v. JUDGE LAURO G. BERNARDO CARPIO, J.
When a law or a rule is basic, judges owe it to their office to simply apply the law. Anything less is gross ignorance of the law.[7] Judges should exhibit more than just a cursory acquaintance with the statutes and procedural rules,[8] and should be diligent in keeping abreast with developments in law and jurisprudence.[9]