This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2011-07-27 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| [44] Salcedo v. Bollozos, A.M. No. RTJ-10-2236, July 5, 2010, 623 SCRA 27, 42, citing Bello v. Diaz, 459 Phil. 214, 221-222(2003). | |||||
|
2011-04-13 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| The complainant should have elevated his grievance to the higher courts. The filing of an administrative case against the judge is not an alternative to the other judicial remedies provided by law, neither is it complementary or supplementary to such actions.[36] With regard to this matter, the case of Flores v. Abesamis[37] is instructive: As everyone knows, the law provides ample judicial remedies against errors or irregularities being committed by a Trial Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction. The ordinary remedies against errors or irregularities which may be regarded as normal in nature (i.e., error in appreciation or admission of evidence, or in construction or application of procedural or substantive law or legal principle) include a motion for reconsideration (or after rendition of a judgment or final order, a motion for new trial), and appeal. The extraordinary remedies against error or irregularities which may be deemed extraordinary in character (i.e., whimsical, capricious, despotic exercise of power or neglect of duty, etc.) are inter alia the special civil actions of certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, or a motion for inhibition, a petition for change of venue, as the case may be. | |||||