FIRST DIVISION
[OCA IPI No. 15-4425-RTJ. March 20, 2019.]
JOGIE SABERON COMLEY, petitioner, vs.HON. MARITES FILOMENA B. RANA-BERNALES, PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 39, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, MISAMIS ORIENTAL; AND HON. MARIA LUNA LLENA G. LANTICSE-SABA,1PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 5, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, MISAMIS ORIENTAL, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedMarch 20, 2019which reads as follows:
"OCA IPI No. 15-4425-RTJ (Jogie Saberon Comley v. Hon. Marites Filomena B. Rana-Bernales, Presiding Judge, Branch 39, Regional Trial Court, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental; and Hon. Maria Luna Llena G. Lanticse-Saba, Presiding Judge, Branch 5, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental)
Before this Court is an administrative complaint 2 against Marites Filomena B. Rana-Bernales (Judge Rana-Bernales), Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, Branch 39 and Maria Luna Llena G. Lanticse-Saba (Judge Lanticse-Saba), Presiding Judge, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, Branch 5, for gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion and authority, and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct relative to Civil Case No. C8-NOV-665, 3 entitled Jogie Saberon Comley represented by Orlando Saberon v. Artemio B. Magnaong, a case for breach of contract and damages.
The propriety of the January 13, 2014 Order issued by Judge Lanticse-Saba, denying the motion for execution filed by complainant, is not a proper subject for an administrative complaint. The errors attributed to judges in the exercise of their adjudicative functions should be assailed in a judicial proceeding instead of filing an administrative case. 4
As to the alleged inaction of Judge Rana-Bernales on the petition for certiorari filed by Artemio Magnaong, the Court finds the same to be without merit. As correctly found by the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), the petition was submitted for resolution after the Order of Reconstitution 5 was issued on October 16, 2015, and less than a month after the said order was issued, the petition was dismissed in an Order 6 dated November 2, 2015. 7 Nonetheless, for her failure to promptly comply with the directive of the OCA requiring her to file a comment on the complaint, the Court agrees that she should be admonished. TAIaHE
WHEREFORE, the administrative complaint against Marites Filomena B. Rana-Bernales, Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, Branch 39 and Maria Luna Llena G. Lanticse-Saba, Presiding Judge, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis Oriental, Branch 5 is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.
Judge Marites Filomena B. Rana-Bernales is, however, hereby ADMONISHED for her failure to promptly obey the directives of the OCA, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts in the future shall be dealt with more severely.
The complaint dated June 12, 2015 (with enclosures) of Jogie Saberon Comley charging Presiding Judge Mantes Filomena B. Rana-Bernales and Presiding Judge Ma. Luna Llena G. Lanticse-Saba with gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion and authority, and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct relative to Civil Case No. C8-NOV-665, the comment (with enclosures) of Presiding Judge Lanticse-Saba; the complainant's manifestations dated December 20, 2015 relative to his complaint; the comment of Presiding Judge Lanticse-Saba on the manifestations; the motion of Presiding Judge Rana-Bernales to admit with thereto attached comment on the complaint (with enclosures); and the Report dated January 21, 2019 of the Office of the Court Administrator, are all NOTED.
SO ORDERED." Bersamin, C.J., on official business.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Referred to as Hon. Ma. Luna Llena G. Lanticse-Saba in other parts of the rollo.
2.Rollo, pp. 3-5.
3.Id. at 11-13.
4.Hebron v. Judge Garcia II, 698 Phil. 615, 622-623 (2012).
5.Rollo, p. 142; petition not attached in the rollo.
6.Id. at 71-74.
7.Supra note 5.