ADMU V CA
ADMU V CA
ADMU V CA
GR No. L-56180
Petitioner: Ateneo de Manila University
Respondents: Court of Appeals, and Spouses Romeo G.
Guanzon and Terresita Regalado
Ponente: Gutierrez, Jr., J.
Date: October 16, 1986
TOPIC: Procedural Due Process
DOCTRINE
Due Process in administrative proceeding requires
consideration of evidence presented and existence of
evidence to support the decision.
SHORT VERSION
Juan Ramon Guanzon (son of private respondents)
slapped Carmelita Mateo, a waitress in the cafeteria of
Cervini Hall inside the university campus of the
petitioners. Guanzon was charged with unbecoming
conduct and was subjected to the rules and regulations of
the Ateneo. Eventually, Guanzon was dropped from the
rolls of students. The respondents brought action to
courts alleging that their son was not given due process
and the school violated their sons constitutional rights.
RTC rules in the favor of the respondents. CA reversed,
but through respondents Motion for Reconsideration CA
upheld RTC ruling.
SC reviewed the facts of the case since they believe CA
erred in their findings of facts. SC found that Ateneo
observed all proceedings needed and there was no
arbitrariness in their decision. There was no breach of
due process.
FACTS
Juan Ramon Guanzon, a boarder of Cervini (campus
dormitory) ordered a siopao in the cafeteria. Carmelita
Mateo told Guanzon that the siopao has to be heated and
he need to wait for a while. Guanzon then started
mumbling rude words and when Carmelita asked him to
stop he replied that it was not her business. Carmelita
offered to return his money back but Guanzon refused.
Instead, he hit Carmelita on the temple then his friends
restrained him before he could strike again while
Carmelita hid in the kitchen.
Because of his unbecoming behavior, he was subjected
as a student to the universitys disciplinary regulations
Judgement reversed.
O