G.R. No.: A.M. No. P-91-642; June 6, 2001
Case Parties: SOLEDAD LAURO, complainant, vs. EFREN LAURO, Sheriff IV, Regional Trial Court, Office of the Clerk of Court, Butuan City, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Soledad Lauro, the legal wife of respondent Efren Lauro (Sheriff IV, RTC, Butuan City), filed an administrative complaint charging him with immorality for having illicit relations with Nida Escolin Montante. Respondent denied the charge and counter-alleged that it was complainant who had an illicit relationship with a certain Opiniano Silva, which forced him to leave their conjugal home. Complainant denied this, explaining Opiniano was a distant relative renting a room for additional income, and asserted respondent left due to a prior police complaint she filed regarding his relationship with another woman, Cristina Caldoza. To prove respondent’s relationship with Nida Montante, complainant submitted documentary evidence: a receipt from Jumilan Marketing Corporation and a Statement of Account from Otis Enterprises where Nida signed as “Nida Lauro,” and a COMELEC Voter’s Affidavit where Nida identified herself as “Nida Lauro” and declared Efren Lauro as her spouse. The case was referred to Judge Rosarito F. Dabalos for investigation. Judge Dabalos found respondent’s explanations for the documents unconvincing, noted his special treatment of Nida’s child compared to his own grandchild, and concluded from circumstantial evidence that respondent was living with and treating Nida as his wife. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) adopted these findings and recommended a higher penalty.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Efren Lauro is guilty of immorality, a disgraceful and immoral conduct under the Civil Service Rules, warranting administrative sanction.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of immorality. The Court found that the circumstantial evidence—specifically Nida Montante representing herself as “Nida Lauro” in business documents and a Voter’s Affidavit declaring respondent as her spouse, their cohabitation as confirmed by respondent’s daughter, and respondent’s failure to present Nida to deny the relationship—sufficiently established respondent’s illicit relationship. This conduct violates the exacting standards of morality and integrity required of judiciary personnel. Under Rule XIV, Section 23(o) of the Civil Service Rules, disgraceful and immoral conduct is a grave offense punishable by suspension for six months and one day to one year for the first offense. Considering this is respondent’s first proven offense, the Court imposed a suspension of six (6) months and one (1) day without pay, with a warning of a more severe penalty for any repetition.