G.R. No.: A.M. No. RTJ-12-2337 (Formerly A.M. No. 12-10-224-RTC), June 23, 2020
Case Parties: Office of the Court Administrator, Complainant, v. Hon. Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap, Former Presiding Judge, Branch 28, Regional Trial Court, Mandaue City, Cebu (Now Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals), Respondent.

FACTS

This is an administrative complaint against then Judge Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap for gross inefficiency and dishonesty. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) initiated the complaint after it was discovered that Judge Lagura-Yap, prior to her appointment as Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals, left a significant number of cases undecided in her former court. She filed her application with the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) on September 20, 2011, and was appointed on February 24, 2012. Despite being reminded by the JBC of the requirement under A.M. No. 04-5-19-SC to submit a certification that she had decided or disposed of all cases assigned to her before assuming her new post, she took her oath and assumed office without resolving all pending cases. A certification from her Branch Clerk of Court later enumerated 134 pending cases submitted for decision. A subsequent judicial audit ordered by the Court revealed a total of 168 cases (133 criminal and 35 civil) submitted for decision, plus 6 cases with unresolved motions, left by Judge Lagura-Yap. The audit also found that in her application for the CA position, she indicated “NONE” in the portion asking for cases submitted for decision for more than 90 days, and her Monthly Report of Cases to the OCA did not accurately reflect the true number of pending cases. The OCA recommended the matter be re-docketed as a regular administrative matter.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Marilyn B. Lagura-Yap is administratively liable for: (1) Gross Inefficiency for failing to decide cases within the reglementary period prior to her promotion; and (2) Dishonesty for failing to indicate her caseload in her JBC application and for submitting inaccurate monthly reports to the OCA.

RULING

The Court found respondent GUILTY of Gross Inefficiency but NOT GUILTY of Dishonesty.
1. On Gross Inefficiency: The Court upheld the OCA’s finding. Judge Lagura-Yap failed to decide 160 cases (from the total 168, minus 8 cases where the audit team found the reglementary period had not yet lapsed) within the constitutionally mandated period. Her excuses—heavy caseload, designation as acting presiding judge in another court, and health issues—were deemed insufficient to justify the delay. The Court emphasized that failure to decide cases within the period is not excusable and constitutes gross inefficiency. Citing precedents, the Court noted that a judge who leaves a court clogged with undecided cases upon promotion or retirement is administratively liable.
2. On Dishonesty: The Court agreed with the OCA that while her act of indicating “NONE” in her JBC application was incorrect, it did not constitute dishonesty. The Court found she acted in good faith, believing that cases where memoranda were ordered but not filed were not yet “submitted for decision.” The Court also found no conclusive evidence that she deliberately falsified her monthly reports to the OCA, as the inaccuracies appeared to stem from a flawed reporting system in her court.
PENALTY: For Gross Inefficiency, considering the high number of undecided cases and her failure to submit the required certification to the JBC, the Court imposed a FINE equivalent to one (1) year of her current salary, payable within thirty (30) days. She was also ADMONISHED to be more diligent in her duties as an Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals.