G.R. No. A.M. No. 93-7-1158-RTC. March 24, 1994.
RE: LETTER OF MR. OCTAVIO KALALO.

FACTS

On June 1, 1993, Mr. Octavio A. Kalalo wrote a letter to Vice President Joseph Estrada, alleging acts of Judge Arturo A. Romero of the RTC, Branch 120, Caloocan City, in connection with Civil Case No. C-13094, “Leonie A. Mable vs. Asia Soiltest, Inc. and Octavio A. Kalalo.” Kalalo stated that in an order dated March 6, 1990, Judge Romero gave the parties 30 days to submit memoranda, after which the case would be deemed submitted for decision. Kalalo’s counsel submitted a memorandum on April 10, 1990, but did not receive a copy of the plaintiff’s memorandum. As of the date of the letter, more than three years after the case was deemed submitted for decision on April 5, 1990, no decision had been rendered. Kalalo pointed out that the case should have been decided within 90 days and alleged that Judge Romero must have submitted false monthly certificates of service stating he had no cases pending decision beyond 90 days. He requested disciplinary action.
The letter was referred to the Supreme Court. The Court required Judge Romero to explain the undue delay. In his explanation, Judge Romero stated that the case was decided on August 18, 1993, two days after a telephone call from the Office of the Court Administrator, and a notice of appeal was filed on September 7, 1993. He cited his sickly condition since mid-1990 (heart ailment, hypertension, severe arthritis, gallbladder infection), although he presided over court sessions with some official absences. He also stated that upon inquiry, his then Branch Clerk of Court informed him that the transcripts of stenographic notes were submitted and completed in June 1993. He mentioned a heavy caseload, brownouts, and that the case record could not be located initially after a change in Branch Clerks of Court.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Arturo A. Romero is administratively liable for gross inefficiency due to his failure to decide Civil Case No. C-13094 within the 90-day period mandated by law.

RULING

Yes, Judge Arturo A. Romero is guilty of gross inefficiency. The Court agreed with the Office of the Court Administrator’s report and recommendation, finding Judge Romero’s explanation unsatisfactory. The delay of more than three years was unreasonable. His defense of failing health was not acceptable as the records did not show he went on extended leave, and he did not request an extension of time to decide the case. The delay in the transcription of stenographic notes by court stenographers under his supervision and control is not a valid excuse; judges are directed to take notes of salient hearing portions and prepare decisions without waiting for transcripts. The 90-day period for deciding cases must be adhered to with or without transcribed notes. Failure to decide a case within the required period constitutes gross inefficiency.
DISPOSITIVE:
Judge Arturo A. Romero is found GUILTY of GROSS INEFFICIENCY. He is REPRIMANDED and ORDERED to pay a FINE of FIVE THOUSAND PESOS (P5,000.00), with a WARNING that a more drastic disciplinary action will be taken for a similar irregularity.