G.R. No. A.M. No. P-97-1242 June 19, 1997
ESTHER P. MAGLEO, in behalf of Union Refinery Corporation, petitioner, vs. ATTY. ARISTON G. TAYAG Branch Clerk of Court, RTC, Branch 18, Malolos, Bulacan, respondent.

FACTS

The Union Refinery Corporation (URC) was the plaintiff in Civil Case No. 550-M-87 before the RTC of Malolos, Bulacan. A judgment was rendered against URC on July 11, 1994. URC filed a notice of appeal, and on August 25, 1994, the presiding judge ordered respondent Branch Clerk of Court, Atty. Ariston G. Tayag, to forward the complete records of the case to the Court of Appeals. However, by January 1995, the records had not been elevated. URC filed motions for elevation on January 19, 1995, and again on October 2, 1995, but the records remained untransmitted. On January 11, 1996, URC wrote respondent to inquire about compliance, but received no reply. After checking with the Court of Appeals on June 26, 1996, and confirming the records were still not there, Esther P. Magleo, URC’s vice president, filed the administrative complaint charging respondent with gross neglect of duty and other offenses. Respondent, in his Comment, stated the complete records were finally transmitted to the Court of Appeals on February 2, 1996. He explained the delay was due to the unavailability of duplicate copies of the transcript of stenographic notes and the disarranged state of the exhibits, which took him two weeks to prepare.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Atty. Ariston G. Tayag, Branch Clerk of Court, is administratively liable for neglect of duty due to the inordinate delay in transmitting the records of an appealed case to the appellate court.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of neglect of duty. The Court found the reasons given by respondent for the delay insubstantial. There was an inordinate delay of about 17 months from the judge’s order until the eventual transmittal. The duty of a Branch Clerk of Court includes the prompt and orderly transmittal of appealed cases and their records to the appellate court within five (5) days after the filing of the notice of appeal, as per Rule 122, Section 8 of the Rules of Court. This duty is vital to the administration of justice and cannot be excused merely because the transcript of stenographic notes (TSN) was not ready; the complete record, excluding the TSN if necessary, must be transmitted promptly, with the TSN to follow later. Furthermore, respondent failed to inform the complainant of the reasons for the delay or to make a written manifestation to the presiding judge about the anticipated delay. Accordingly, respondent Atty. Ariston G. Tayag was ordered to pay a fine of P5,000.00 and was warned that a repetition of similar acts would be dealt with more severely.