Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • (A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786) Diaz vs. Judge Gestopa Jr. (Digest)

    Uploaded by

    Ryan Leocario
    108 views1 page
    Felicisima R. Diaz filed a complaint against Judge Gerardo E. Gestopa for referring her unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation during a pre-trial conference, against her counsel's objection that this violated the Rules on Summary Procedure. The Office of the Court Administrator found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law for referring the case to conciliation instead of following the summary procedures. The Supreme Court ruled that referring the unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation did violate the Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Original Description:

    [A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786] Diaz vs. Judge Gestopa Jr. (digest)

    Original Title

    [A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786] Diaz vs. Judge Gestopa Jr. (digest)

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Felicisima R. Diaz filed a complaint against Judge Gerardo E. Gestopa for referring her unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation during a pre-trial conference, against her counsel's objection that this violated the Rules on Summary Procedure. The Office of the Court Administrator found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law for referring the case to conciliation instead of following the summary procedures. The Supreme Court ruled that referring the unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation did violate the Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    108 views1 page

    (A.M. No. MTJ-11-1786) Diaz vs. Judge Gestopa Jr. (Digest)

    Uploaded by

    Ryan Leocario
    Felicisima R. Diaz filed a complaint against Judge Gerardo E. Gestopa for referring her unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation during a pre-trial conference, against her counsel's objection that this violated the Rules on Summary Procedure. The Office of the Court Administrator found Judge Gestopa guilty of gross ignorance of the law for referring the case to conciliation instead of following the summary procedures. The Supreme Court ruled that referring the unlawful detainer case to the barangay for conciliation did violate the Rules on Summary Procedure.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    [A.M. No.

    MTJ-11-1786] June 22, 2011

    FELICISIMA R. DIAZ, Complainant,


    vs.
    JUDGE GERARDO E. GESTOPA, JR., Municipal Trial Court, Naga, Cebu, Respondent.

    Facts:

    Felicisima R. Diaz, herein Complainant, filed on 27 April 2009 an unlawful detainer case
    before the Municipal Trial Court of Naga, Cebu.

    During the pre-trial conference, Judge Gestopa, herein respondent, recommended the case
    for barangay conciliation, pursuant to Section 408 (g) of the Local Government Code.

    Complainant's counsel objected and moved for mediation instead. However, respondent
    judge insisted that he has the authority to refer it back to barangay for conciliation.

    Complainant moved for reconsideration. She argued that the referral of the case to
    the lupon is a violation of the Rules on Summary Procedure. The motion for reconsideration was
    denied.

    Dissatisfied, complainant filed an administrative complaint against Judge Gestopa for gross
    ignorance of the law. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found Judge Gestopa guilty of
    gross ignorance of the law and procedure.

    Issue:

    Whether or not referral of the case to the Lupon for conciliation is a violation of the Rules on
    Summary Procedure.

    Ruling:

    The referral of the unlawful detainer case to the Lupon for conciliation is a violation of the
    Rules on Summary procedure. An action for unlawful detainer is covered by the Revised Rules on
    Summary Procedure which provides a period within which judgment should be rendered. The
    requirement of pre-trial conference is precisely for the purpose of giving room for a possible
    amicable settlement.

    You might also like