Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

MARISSA M. GORDON v. JUDGE FRISCO T. LILAGAN

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AM NO. MTJ-07-1674 2007-04-19	REMBERTO C. KARA-AN v. JUDGE FRANCISCO S. LINDO TINGA, J.
It is the duty of judges to devise an efficient recording and filing system in their courts to enable them to monitor the flow of cases and to manage their speedy and timely disposition.[34] In Ricolcol v. Camarista,[35] the Court aptly ruled: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 incumbent upon her to devise an efficient recording and filing system in her court so that no disorderliness can affect the flow of cases and their speedy disposition. Proper and efficient court management is as much her responsibility. She is the one directly responsible for the proper discharge of her official functions.[36] The Court however increases the amount of the fine imposed to Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000.00) pursuant to jurisprudence.[37]
	AM No. MTJ-02-1432 2004-09-03	PROVINCIAL PROSECUTOR ROBERT M. VISBAL v. JUDGE MARINO S. BUBAN YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The reasons adduced by respondent for his delay in rendering judgment in Criminal Cases Nos. 98-07-19 and 98-07-20 are not novel. A judge cannot take refuge behind the mistakes and inefficiency of his court personnel.[13] He is charged with the administrative responsibility of organizing and supervising them to secure the prompt and efficient dispatch of business, requiring at all times the observance of high standards of public service and fidelity.[14] Indeed, he is ultimately responsible for ensuring that court personnel perform their tasks and that the parties are promptly notified of his orders and decisions.[15] It is his duty to devise an efficient recording and filing system in his court to enable him to monitor the flow of cases and to manage their speedy and timely disposition.[16]
	AM No. RTJ-04-1821 2004-08-12	JOSE E. FERNANDEZ v. JUDGE JAIME T. HAMOY PER CURIAM
Such an excuse hardly merits serious consideration. Respondent Judge cannot be absolved from liability for the inefficiency of his court personnel.[9] Judges are charged with the administrative responsibility of organizing and supervising his court personnel to secure the prompt and efficient dispatch of business, requiring at all times the observance of high standards of public service and fidelity.[10] Indeed, he is ultimately responsible for ensuring that court personnel perform their tasks and that the parties are promptly notified of his orders and decisions.[11] It is his duty to devise an efficient recording and filing system in his court to enable him to monitor the flow of cases and to manage their speedy and timely disposition.[12]