G.R. No. L-19296. March 20, 1922.
In re Impeachment of Honorable ANTONIO HORRILLENO, Judge of First Instance of the Twenty-sixth Judicial District.

FACTS

Abundio Enrile filed charges against Judge Antonio Horrilleno for (1) negligently and carelessly delaying the intestate estate proceedings of Nicolas Nuñez y Enrile (Case No. 21), and (2) being a “political judge.” An official investigation was conducted by the Attorney-General upon the joint request of both the complainant and the respondent judge. The Attorney-General submitted the evidence with a recommendation to dismiss the charges. The Supreme Court then reviewed the record to determine if sufficient cause existed to recommend Judge Horrilleno’s removal to the Governor-General.

ISSUE

Whether sufficient cause exists involving serious misconduct or inefficiency on the part of Judge Horrilleno to justify the Supreme Court in recommending his removal to the Governor-General.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court held that the charges were not proven. The grounds for removal of a judge are serious misconduct or inefficiency. “Serious misconduct” implies a wrongful intention and a transgression of an established rule, not mere error in judgment. The evidence showed that delays in the case were due to petitions of the parties or the court’s limited session periods in Zamboanga, not to corrupt or malicious intent. The insinuation of partiality due to the judge residing on a lot involved in the case was rebutted by proof he paid rent and had no prior knowledge of its involvement. The charges were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard applicable to such proceedings. Testimonials from prominent citizens and the bar attested to Judge Horrilleno’s excellent reputation and judicial performance. The Court granted him complete exoneration and ordered the proceedings filed without further action.