Office of the Court Administrator v.

Judge De Guzman

Facts: An
administrative suit was
instituted against
respondent judge De
Guzman for serious
misconduct in
connection with the
lifting of the formal
notice in the case of
Norvic. According to
the testimony of judge
Cosico, the respondent
approached him with
regards to the civil
case wherein Norvic
prayed for the
annulment of the Deed
of Conveyanc and
exchange of the Yakal
property to SMIRM due
to being fraudulent
transfer to which SMIT
and SMIRM objected by
filing a motion to
cancel the lis pendens.
Respondent allegedly
approached judge
cosico and asked the
granting of the motion
to lift notice of lis
pendens. That when it
was denied,
respondent once again
asked him to
reconsider his order.
Respondent denied the
allegation. He was only
made aware of the
case when he was
informed through
telephone by the
president of Atty,
Santos, president of
Norvic who was his
former classmate, he
offered to inhibit
himself from the case
because of his
friendship with the
latter but both parties
requested to keep the
case and tp help them
in reaching amicable
settlement. And that
the reversal of the
decision of Judge
Cosico was done in
good faith.
Issue: W/n Judge De
Guzman violated the
New Code of Judicial
Conduct
Held: YES. The act of
interference by
respondent De Guzman
with the subject case
pending in the sala of
Judge
Cosico clearly
tarnishes the integrity
and independence of
the judiciary and
subverts the people’s
faith in our judicial
process. Judge de
Guzman approached
Judge Cosico at least
twice asking him to
cancel the notice of lis
pendens,
thereby, trying to
influence the course of
the litigation in the
case in violation of
Code of Judicial
Conduct. His evident
misconduct collides
with the established
ethical standards
mandated upon those
who sit in the bench. It
is significant to
stress that judges are
held to higher
standards of integrity
and ethical conduct
than attorneys or other
persons not
invested with the
public trust. They
should inspire trust and
confidence, and should
bring honor to the
judiciary.
Being the dispensers of
justice, judges should
not act in a way that
would invite suspicion
in order to preserve
faith in the
administration of
justice. They should
inspire trust and
confidence, and should
bring honor to the
judiciary.
The Court finds
sufficient evidence to
hold respondent
GUILTY OF SERIOUS
MISCONDUCT for
influencing the course
of
litigation in evident
violation of the Code of
Judicial Conduct and
ordered to pay a fine of
ten thousand pesos
(P10,000.00)
with a STERN
WARNING that a
repetition of the same
or similar act will be
dealt with more
SEVERE