AM RTJ 03 1770; (April, 2003) (Digest)
A.M. No. RTJ-03-1770. April 24, 2003. Melissa E. Maño, complainant, vs. Caesar A. Casanova, respondent.
FACTS
Complainant Melissa E. Maño, a former court stenographer, charged respondent Judge Caesar A. Casanova with grave abuse of authority and gross misconduct. She alleged that after the judge suspected her of leaking information about an irregularity in a civil case, he began to harass her. This culminated in him allegedly pressuring her to resign in July 1999, using an incident where she took a co-employee’s cassette recorder without permission as leverage, threatening her with a qualified theft charge if she did not comply.
Maño further accused the judge of serious misconduct, claiming that in 1996, he called her and another stenographer to his chambers to show them a handwritten draft of a decision he purportedly wrote for another judge, Judge Candido R. Belmonte. She alleged that the accused acquitted in that decision later gave the respondent a cassette recorder, which she was ordered to keep.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Judge Caesar A. Casanova is administratively liable for grave abuse of authority and gross misconduct.
RULING
The Supreme Court DISMISSED the complaint for lack of merit. The Court found the charges to be frivolous and unsupported by credible evidence. Regarding the allegation of writing a decision for another judge, the Court deemed it “unthinkable” for a judge to openly announce such an unethical act to staff. The claim was negated by the judge alluded to and the complainant’s failure to present the alleged draft or name the other stenographer witness. The story about accepting a cassette recorder was also rejected for lacking corroboration and specific details, appearing to be a product of a “vengeful imagination.”
On the charge of grave abuse of authority for forcing resignation, the Court found the evidence contradicted the claim. The complainant’s own resignation letter thanked the judge, and the record showed she was a problematic employee, having admitted to taking a co-worker’s property and being reprimanded for unauthorized absences and playing mahjong during office hours. The Court concluded that any workplace pressure she felt likely stemmed from her own shortcomings. The nearly two-year delay in filing the complaint further undermined her credibility. Thus, the respondent judge was found to be a victim of baseless accusations.