Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT
EN BANC
A.M. No. 518-MJ May 28, 1974
ELMER RAÑESES, complainant, CELESTINO TOMINES, Former Municipal Judge of Coron, Palawan, respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
FERNANDEZ, J.:p
The complaint in this case, dated February 10, 1972, was ordered investigated notwithstanding the compulsory retirement of the respondent Municipal Judge of Coron, Palawan on April 7, 1972 when he reached the retirement age in order that the result of the investigation might guide the government in acting upon his application for retirement benefits.
The evidence presented clearly shows that contrary to the complainant's allegation, the complaint for unlawful detainer prepared by the complainant for and in behalf of his parents-in-law was in fact forwarded by the respondent Judge to the Court of First Instance in his belief that the complaint was for recovery of ownership and possession of a parcel of land and therefore not within his jurisdiction. And the respondent so informed the plaintiffs.
As a matter of fact, after the investigation, the complainant himself submitted a manifestation wherein he stated: "That the acts or omissions subject of this administrative complaint were satisfactorily explained by the respondent;" and "that the complainant sincerely regrets this honest mistake of facts in filing and prosecuting the case and, in atonement, he is respectfully withdrawing and/or disclaiming any further interest in the case."
WHEREFORE, the administrative complaint filed by the complainant against the respondent is hereby dismissed.
Makalintal, C. J., Zaldivar, Castro, Fernando, Teehankee, Barredo, Makasiar, Antonio, Esguerra, Muñoz Palma and Aquino, JJ., concur.
Elmer Rañeses vs. Celestino Tomines
This is an administrative case, Republic of the Philippines v. Tomines, decided by the Supreme Court of the Philippines on May 28, 1974. The case involves a complaint filed by Elmer Raeses against Celestino Tomines, a former Municipal Judge of Coron, Palawan, alleging that Tomines failed to act on a complaint for unlawful detainer. However, the evidence presented showed that Tomines forwarded the complaint to the Court of First Instance, as he believed it was for recovery of ownership and possession of land, which was beyond his jurisdiction. Raeses himself later submitted a manifestation stating that Tomines' acts or omissions were satisfactorily explained and withdrawing his interest in the case. Thus, the Supreme Court dismissed the administrative complaint against Tomines.
Case Information
- Case Number
- A.M. No. 518-MJ
- Decision Date
- Court
- Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Jurisdiction
- Philippines
Full Decision Text
Cite This Case
Elmer Rañeses vs. Celestino Tomines, A.M. No. 518-MJ, May 28, 1974 (Supreme Court of the Philippines)
Supreme Court of the Philippines. (1974). Elmer Rañeses vs. Celestino Tomines (A.M. No. 518-MJ). Retrieved from https://legaldex.com/jurisprudence/elmer-raneses-vs-celestino-tomines
Related Cases
- Ra+¦eses v. TominesA.M. No. 518-MJ (Resolution) • May 28, 1974
- U.S. v. TominesG.R. No. 2094 • Jan 11, 1905
- Celestino Algas vs. Wilfredo GarridoA.M. No. 289-MJ • Nov 15, 1974
- People v. CelestinoG.R. No. L-44363 • Mar 12, 1980
- Agdoma v. CelestinoA.C. No. 289 • Nov 29, 1962
- People v. CelestinoG.R. No. L-19924 • Dec 23, 1964
Need Help Understanding This Case?
Ask our AI assistant to explain the key points, implications, or related cases.
Ask AI About This Case