A.M. No. 98-3-114-RTC July 22, 1998
RE: CASES LEFT UNDECIDED BY JUDGE SERGIO D. MABUNAY, RTC, BRANCH 24, MANILA.

FACTS

Judge Sergio D. Mabunay retired on March 12, 1998, upon reaching compulsory retirement age. The Court Administrator recommended that he be fined P50,000.00 for failure to decide 2 civil cases from RTC, Branch 8, Tacloban City, and 13 criminal cases from RTC, Branch 10, Abuyog, Leyte, with the fine to be deducted from his retirement benefits. The records show that on January 27, 1998, a report indicated five cases from RTC-Branch 8, Tacloban City, remained undecided from his assignment there from August 1, 1985, to November 5, 1986. On February 17, 1998, he was directed to decide these cases, and he received the records on February 28, 1998. He immediately decided three of the five cases but could not decide the remaining two because the pertinent stenographic notes were missing and he had no notes as the cases were heard by other judges. These two cases were filed in 1970 and 1976 and were heard successively by five other judges. After his retirement, the Office of the Court Administrator also found thirteen other criminal cases from RTC-Branch 10, Abuyog, Leyte, that remained undecided. These thirteen cases were never referred to him for decision after he left that station.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Sergio D. Mabunay should be held administratively liable and fined for his failure to decide the aforementioned cases before his retirement.

RULING

No. Judge Sergio D. Mabunay is absolved from any administrative liability. The Court found no sound and valid basis for the recommended fine. Regarding the two undecided cases from Tacloban, he received the records only twelve days before retirement, decided three promptly, and could not decide the other two due to missing transcripts; he was not the one who substantially heard them. The thirteen cases from Abuyog, Leyte, were never brought to his attention or referred to him for decision during his incumbency or before his retirement; they were only mentioned in a recommendation after he retired. The Court established guidelines that a case belongs to the branch to which it is raffled. When a judge is transferred, cases are left with the branch, and the succeeding judge assumes responsibility. A transferred judge may only decide a case from a former station upon formal request of a party, endorsement by the incumbent judge, and direction from the Court Administrator. Judge Mabunay could not have taken the cases on his own initiative. It was unfair to impose a fine for cases never referred to him until after retirement. He is allowed to retire and receive his full retirement benefits. The incumbent presiding judges of the respective branches are directed to decide the remaining cases.