G.R. No. OCA-IPI No. 18-4887-RTJ, October 28, 2024
MARIA MAGDALENA R. JOVEN, COMPLAINANT, VS. HON. MONIQUE A. QUISUMBING-IGNACIO, PRESIDING JUDGE, BRANCH 209, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANDALUYONG CITY, VICTOR M. PE BENITO, SHERIFF IV, AND ALFREDO MARCELO BERMEJO, ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE IV, ALL OF BRANCH 209, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, MANDALUYONG CITY, RESPONDENTS.

FACTS

Complainant Maria Magdalena R. Joven was the defendant in Civil Case No. R-MND-18-00315-CV, a case for recovery of property with prayer for a preliminary mandatory injunction filed by Anna Marie Sison, represented by Rosario de Silva Perion. Joven filed an administrative complaint against respondents Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio, Sheriff Victor Pe Benito, and Administrative Aide Alfredo Marcelo Bermejo of RTC Branch 209, Mandaluyong City, for gross ignorance of the law, gross misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and violations of the New Code of Judicial Conduct. The allegations stemmed from the handling of the civil case. Joven claimed that during the pre-trial on May 15, 2018, only Perion’s counsel appeared, and Perion submitted her pre-trial brief only on that day without furnishing Joven a copy. Joven’s counsel moved for dismissal, but Judge Quisumbing-Ignacio did not rule on it and instead referred the case to mediation. Joven received court orders (dated May 21 and 22, 2018) denying her various motions only on May 30, 2018, while Perion received them earlier on June 5, 2018. Joven filed a Motion for Reconsideration with Motion for Voluntary Inhibition on June 19, 2018, claiming the belated receipt prevented her from pursuing remedies. Judge Quisumbing-Ignacio granted the writ of preliminary injunction on June 7, 2018, a day after Perion filed a compliance/request. Joven alleged bias, noting orders were sent to her by mail but to Perion personally, despite both counsels having offices in Mandaluyong. Joven filed a Motion to Recall the Writ, but on the hearing date, July 24, 2018, the judge instead proceeded with the pre-trial despite Joven’s counsel appearing only for the motion. A pre-trial order was issued setting trial dates. Joven was later ordered to show cause for contempt for allegedly disobeying the writ. Joven also moved for inhibition, alleging that court staff Bermejo was related to Perion’s counsel, Atty. Roberto C. Bermejo.

ISSUE

Whether respondents Judge Monique Quisumbing-Ignacio, Sheriff Victor Pe Benito, and Administrative Aide Alfredo Marcelo Bermejo are administratively liable for gross ignorance of the law, gross misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and violations of the New Code of Judicial Conduct based on the allegations in the complaint.

RULING

The Court dismissed the complaint against all respondents for lack of merit. The Court adopted the findings and recommendation of the Judicial Integrity Board (JIB). The JIB found that Judge Quisumbing-Ignacio’s actions were judicial in nature and within her discretionary powers. Her orders denying Joven’s motions and granting the writ of preliminary injunction were based on her assessment of the pleadings and evidence, and mere disagreement with judicial discretion is not a ground for administrative liability. The claim of bias due to differential service of court processes (mail vs. personal) was not substantiated, and the judge’s subsequent referral of the case to mediation negated any claim of partiality. The allegations against Sheriff Pe Benito for improper implementation of the writ were unsubstantiated. The allegation against Bermejo regarding his relationship to Perion’s counsel was not proven, and there was no evidence he interfered with the case proceedings. The charges of gross ignorance of the law, gross misconduct, and conduct prejudicial to the service require clear and convincing evidence, which was not presented. The complaint essentially questioned the judge’s judicial actions, for which the proper remedy was judicial appeal, not an administrative case.