Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ESMERALDO D. VISITACION v. GREDAM P. EDIZA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	AM No. P-07-2398 2008-02-13	IRENEO GERONCA v. VINCENT HORACE V. MAGALONA
Respondent ought to be reminded that he is an officer of the court and should at all times show a high degree of honesty and professionalism in the performance of his duties. As a front-line representative of the judicial system, he must always demonstrate integrity in his conduct for once he loses the people's trust, he also diminishes the people's faith in the entire judiciary.[11]
	AM NO. P-07-2396 2007-12-04	JUDGE JACINTO C. GONZALES v. REWEL P. CERENIO PER CURIAM
Moreover, Section 9, Rule 141 provides that a party requesting the process of any court, preliminary, incidental, or final, shall pay the expenses of the sheriff and/or other persons serving or executing processes, in an amount estimated by the sheriff, subject to the approval of the court. Upon approval of such estimated expense, the requesting party should deposit the amount with the clerk of court and ex-officio sheriff, who shall disburse the same to the deputy sheriff assigned. Further, this same amount is subject to liquidation within the same period for making a return, and any unspent amount should be refunded to the party making the deposit.[15] Evidently, this procedure was not observed by respondent.
	AM NO. P-05-2017 2005-06-29	MILAGROS A. LOPEZ v. NICOLAS C. RAMOS TINGA, J.
Ramos ought to be reminded that as an officer of the court, he should at all times show a high degree of professionalism in the performance of his duties. By failing to observe the proper procedure, respondent showed very little regard in upholding the law. As front-line representative of our justice system, he should be more vigilant in the execution of the law, for once he loses the people's trust, he diminishes the people's faith in the judiciary.[32]
	AM No. P-04-1884 2004-12-09	QBE INSURANCE INC. BY: MARCELINA F. VALLES v. CRESENCIANO K. RABELLO TINGA, J,
Respondent must be reminded that he should at all times show a high degree of professionalism in the performance of his duties;[17] and owing to the very sensitive function that he performs in the dispensation of justice, his conduct, moreover, must at all times be above suspicion.[18]
	AM No. P-02-1581 2003-10-28	MA. CORAZON M. ANDAL v. NICOLAS A. TONGA PER CURIAM
The respondent ought to be reminded that as an officer of the court, he should at all times show a high degree of professionalism in the performance of his duties. By failing to observe the proper procedure, the respondent showed very little regard in upholding the law. As a front-line representative of our justice system, he should be more vigilant in the execution of the law, for once he loses the people's trust, he diminishes the people's faith in the judiciary.[20] The imperative and sacred duty of each and everyone in the court is to maintain its good name and standing as a temple of justice.[21]