G.R. No. L-19208. March 20, 1922.
In re Impeachment of Honorable ANTONIO HORRILLENO, Judge of First Instance of the Twenty-sixth Judicial District.

FACTS

Charges were filed by Abundio Enrile 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.” The second charge was not pressed. The complainant alleged willful delay in the case, inaction on irregularities by the administrator, and that the judge lived on a parcel of land involved in the estate. An official investigation was conducted by the Attorney-General, who recommended dismissal of 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 are serious misconduct or inefficiency. “Serious misconduct” implies a wrongful intention, a transgression of an established rule, or unlawful behavior, and must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in such proceedings. The evidence showed that Judge Horrilleno was appointed to the district after the case began, continuances were granted at the parties’ request or due to short court sessions in Zamboanga, and he had no knowledge that the land he rented would become involved in the suit. There was no proof of partiality, malice, corruption, or oppression. Testimonials from prominent citizens and the bar attested to his excellent reputation and judicial performance. The Court found no serious misconduct or inefficiency and granted Judge Horrilleno complete exoneration. The proceedings were ordered filed without further action.