G.R. No. A.M. No. 97-9-282-RTC. April 22, 1998.
REPORT ON THE JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 27, OF LAPU-LAPU CITY, PRESIDED OVER BY JUDGE TEODORO K. RISOS.

FACTS

A judicial audit was conducted at the Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, Lapu-Lapu City, in view of the compulsory retirement of its presiding judge, Judge Teodoro K. Risos, on December 12, 1997. The audit revealed that numerous criminal and civil cases had been pending decision beyond the 90-day reglementary period, and several other cases had no court action taken for a considerable length of time. The Court En Banc, in a resolution dated October 7, 1997, directed Judge Risos to: (1) render decisions in specified criminal and civil cases already submitted for decision and submit proof of disposal; (2) explain his failure to decide cases within the 90-day period; and (3) explain the inaction in other pending cases. The Court also directed the Financial Management Office to withhold P100,000.00 from Judge Risos’s retirement benefits pending resolution of his administrative liabilities.
In compliance, Judge Risos submitted his explanation, stating that: (1) he had disposed of all enumerated cases; (2) the delays were due to pressure of work as Executive Judge, slowing down after a second heart attack, slow turnout of transcripts, destruction of his notes during a typhoon, and preference given to cases involving detention prisoners; and (3) action had been taken on most cases, except for some awaiting Land Registration Authority reports or retaking of testimony due to a stenographer’s death.
The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) noted that while Judge Risos decided most cases, he failed to provide proof of filing with the Clerk of Court or service to parties as required by the Rules. However, a subsequent verification with the new OIC-Clerk of Court confirmed that the decisions were duly filed, served, and promulgated, and that two non-existent cases on the list were due to typographical errors.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Teodoro K. Risos is administratively liable for gross inefficiency due to his failure to decide cases within the 90-day reglementary period.

RULING

Yes, Judge Risos is administratively liable for gross inefficiency. The Court found that he decided twelve (12) cases beyond the 90-day period, some pending for years (dating back to 19881996). His excusespressure of work, health issues, slow transcripts, and destroyed noteswere deemed insufficient. The Court emphasized that judges must decide cases promptly under Rule 3.05, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and Section 15(1) and (2), Article VIII of the Constitution . Failure to do so constitutes gross inefficiency, warranting administrative sanction. While the Court considered his failing health as a mitigating circumstance, it could not excuse the prolonged delay prejudicing litigants. Accordingly, Judge Risos was declared guilty of gross inefficiency and ordered to pay a fine of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00), to be deducted from his retirement benefits. The directives against the Branch Clerk of Court, Atty. Annie Christine B. Patalinghug, were rendered moot due to her resignation.