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

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 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 under the Administrative Code are serious misconduct and inefficiency. “Serious misconduct” implies a wrongful intention, a transgression of an established rule, unlawful behavior, or gross negligence—not a mere error in judgment. The evidence showed that Judge Horrilleno was appointed auxiliary judge in March 1919 and first encountered the case on July 1, 1919. Delays were due to petitions of the parties or the court’s limited session periods in Zamboanga. There was no proof of partiality, malice, corruption, or persistent disregard of legal rules. Testimonials from prominent citizens and the bar attested to his excellent reputation and judicial performance. The charges were not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the standard applicable to such proceedings. The Court granted Judge Horrilleno complete exoneration and ordered the proceedings filed without further action.