G.R. No. P-05-2045. July 29, 2005
Bienvenido Bernal, Jr. vs. Jocelyn Fernandez, Court Stenographer, MTC, Caba, La Union

FACTS

Complainant Bienvenido Bernal, Jr., a store owner, alleged that in January 2003, respondent Jocelyn Fernandez, a Court Stenographer of the MTC of Caba, La Union, procured grocery items on credit by representing herself as a court employee and assuring that the goods were for her relatives’ retail business. Upon the due date, Fernandez refused to pay the debt amounting to P20,108.00 despite repeated demands, even taunting the complainant to file a case. An investigation revealed she did not deliver the goods to her relatives as claimed.
The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) directed Fernandez to comment on the complaint through multiple indorsements and a tracer. Registry receipts showed these directives were received at her court, but she failed to file any comment. Subsequently, the Supreme Court issued a resolution for the parties to manifest if they were submitting the case based on the pleadings. While complainant submitted his manifestation, respondent again failed to respond.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Jocelyn Fernandez is administratively liable for her actions.

RULING

Yes, respondent is administratively liable. Her failure to file a comment despite three opportunities given by the OCA and the Supreme Court is deemed an admission of the truth of the allegations in the complaint. This unjustified failure constitutes gross misconduct and insubordination, showing disrespect for judicial directives.
On the substantive charge, the established facts demonstrate willful failure to pay a just debt. Respondent incurred the obligation by misrepresenting the purpose of the credit transaction. Her prolonged refusal to settle the debt since January 2003 conclusively proves willfulness. This conduct violates Section 46(b)(22) of the Revised Administrative Code and is classified as a light offense under the Omnibus Civil Service Rules, which prescribes penalties from reprimand to dismissal for repeated offenses. As a court employee, she is held to a high standard of uprightness, and such failure to fulfill a just financial obligation tarnishes the integrity of the judiciary.
Accordingly, the Court found respondent guilty of willful failure to pay a just debt and misconduct. She was suspended from office for three months, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar offense would be dealt with more severely.