Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 146 views

    26 Diaz V Judge Gestopa

    Uploaded by

    Mariline Lee
    Judge Gestopa Jr. was accused of incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge in an administrative complaint filed by Felicisima R. Diaz. Diaz had filed an unlawful detainer case before Judge Gestopa's court that he referred back to barangay conciliation, despite rules requiring expedited resolution. The OCA found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and procedure for unduly delaying the case. The Court upheld this finding, fining Judge Gestopa for violating the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    26 Diaz V Judge Gestopa

    Uploaded by

    Mariline Lee
    146 views1 page
    Judge Gestopa Jr. was accused of incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge in an administrative complaint filed by Felicisima R. Diaz. Diaz had filed an unlawful detainer case before Judge Gestopa's court that he referred back to barangay conciliation, despite rules requiring expedited resolution. The OCA found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and procedure for unduly delaying the case. The Court upheld this finding, fining Judge Gestopa for violating the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Original Description:

    civpro case digest

    Original Title

    26 Diaz v Judge Gestopa

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Judge Gestopa Jr. was accused of incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge in an administrative complaint filed by Felicisima R. Diaz. Diaz had filed an unlawful detainer case before Judge Gestopa's court that he referred back to barangay conciliation, despite rules requiring expedited resolution. The OCA found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and procedure for unduly delaying the case. The Court upheld this finding, fining Judge Gestopa for violating the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    146 views1 page

    26 Diaz V Judge Gestopa

    Uploaded by

    Mariline Lee
    Judge Gestopa Jr. was accused of incompetence, gross ignorance of the law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge in an administrative complaint filed by Felicisima R. Diaz. Diaz had filed an unlawful detainer case before Judge Gestopa's court that he referred back to barangay conciliation, despite rules requiring expedited resolution. The OCA found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and procedure for unduly delaying the case. The Court upheld this finding, fining Judge Gestopa for violating the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    RULING

    # 26

    FELICISIMA R. DIAZ vs. JUDGE GERARDO E. GESTOPA, JR.,

    This is an administrative complaint filed by complainant Diaz


    against Judge Gestopa, Jr. for incompetence, gross ignorance of the
    law, neglect of duty, and conduct unbecoming of a judge.
    FACTS: Complainant filed an unlawful detainer case before the
    MTC of Naga, Cebu. The case was scheduled for pre-trial
    conference. During the conference, Judge Gestopa recommended
    the case for barangay conciliation. Complainant moved for
    reconsideration and argued that the referral of the case to
    the lupon is a violation of the Rules on Summary Procedure. She
    stressed that she is no longer a resident of Naga and is now
    actually residing in Dumlog, Talisay City, Cebu. Complainant
    further pointed out that the case had already been previously
    referred to the lupon. Judge Gestopa denied the motion for
    reconsideration.
    Dissatisfied, complainant filed the instant administrative
    complaint against Judge Gestopa. She alleged that respondent
    judge exhibited gross ignorance of the law in referring the case
    back to barangay conciliation when clearly she is not a resident of
    Naga. She accused respondent judge of unduly delaying for months
    the resolution of the case. She further claimed that respondent
    judge appeared to be biased, thus, she requested that the case be
    transferred to another court.
    In a Memorandum dated January 12, 2011, the OCA found Judge
    Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law and procedure, and
    recommended that he be fined in the amount of Forty Thousand
    Pesos (P40,000.00).
    ISSUE: WON, Judge Gestopa is guilty of gross ignorance of the
    Revised Rules on Summary Procedure ?

    YES. (1) There is no doubt that the case at bar was a case of
    unlawful detainer covered by the Revised Rules on Summary
    Procedure.
    (2) The Rule on Summary Procedure clearly and undoubtedly
    provides for the period within which judgment should be
    rendered. The period for rendition of judgments in cases falling
    under summary procedure is 30 days.
    (3) To further strengthen and emphasize the objective of
    expediting the adjudication of cases falling under the Revised
    Rules on Summary Procedure, Sections 7 and 8 mandated
    preliminary conference which is precisely for the purpose of
    giving room for a possible amicable settlement. Thus, there was
    no reason anymore to refer the case back to the barangay for the
    sole purpose of amicable settlement, because Sections 7 and 8
    provided already for such action.
    Furthermore, considering that complainant had already
    manifested in court, albeit belatedly, the presence of what it
    considered to be a valid Certification to File Action in court due to
    unsuccessful conciliation, respondent's act of referring the case
    to barangay conciliation rendered its purpose moot and
    academic.lawph!1
    DECISION: the Court finds Judge Gestopa, Jr., GUILTY of Gross
    Ignorance of the Law and is hereby FINED in the amount of
    P21,000.00, with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same
    or similar offenses in the future shall be dealt with more severely.

    You might also like