G.R. No. A.M. No. RTJ-96-1337 and A.M. No. 97-8-242-RTC. August 5, 1998.
OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, complainant, vs. JUDGE WALERICO B. BUTALID, Regional Trial Court, Branch 9, Tacloban City, respondent.

FACTS

Two administrative cases were consolidated against respondent Judge Walerico B. Butalid of the RTC, Branch 9, Tacloban City. In A.M. No. RTJ-96-1337, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) charged him with serious misconduct, negligence, and inefficiency for failing to decide 27 cases within the 90-day reglementary period, and with falsification of public documents for falsely certifying in his monthly certificates of service from July 1994 to December 1995 that he had decided all cases submitted for decision for 90 days or more, in order to draw his salary. The OCA found that 15 of these 27 cases had been submitted for decision as early as 1994. Respondent requested a 90-day extension, citing incomplete transcripts of stenographic notes, but the OCA determined that most cases had been fully heard. Respondent, in his defense, claimed the unresolved cases were inherited from previous judges with incomplete transcripts, that his certifications were made in good faith as the case status was reflected in monthly reports, and that he suffered from diabetes for seven years. During the investigation by Associate Justice Arturo B. Buena, respondent appeared disoriented and expressed willingness to pay a fine equivalent to one year’s salary if allowed to retire.
In A.M. No. 97-8-242-RTC, arising from a litigant’s request for expeditious resolution of a civil case pending since May 1996, the OCA’s audit revealed respondent had failed to decide 69 additional cases within the reglementary period, bringing the total undecided cases to 96. Respondent explained the delay in the specific civil case was due to his suspension from November 1996 to October 1997 in another administrative case and late submission of transcripts. The OCA’s report noted a pattern of delay and falsification.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Walerico B. Butalid is administratively liable for gross inefficiency (failure to decide cases within the reglementary period) and dishonesty (falsification of certificates of service), and what is the appropriate penalty.

RULING

The Supreme Court found respondent judge guilty of gross inefficiency and dishonesty. The Court held that failure to decide cases within the 90-day period constitutes gross inefficiency and violates the Constitution, the Judiciary Act, and the Code of Judicial Conduct. The excuses of incomplete transcripts and illness were unacceptable; if illness hindered his duties, he should have retired voluntarily. The false certifications in his monthly certificates of service to collect his salary constituted dishonesty and falsification of public documents. These transgressions, taken together, justify dismissal. Under the Omnibus Rules, gross negligence, dishonesty, and falsification are grave offenses punishable by dismissal.
Respondent Judge Walerico B. Butalid is DISMISSED from service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and leave credits, and with prejudice to re-employment in any government branch or agency. The decision is immediately executory.