PALMA v.

JUDGE OMELIO
August 20,2017
A.M No. RTJ 10-2223 Del Castillo, J.
Petitioner: Respondents:
Ms. Florita Palma and Ms. Filipina Mercado Judge George E. Omelio, Regional Trial Court,
Br.14, Davao City, Judge Virgilio G. Murcia and
Clerk of Court Ma. Florida C. Omelio, Municipal
Trial Court in Cities, Office of the Clerk of Court,
both of the Island Garden City of Samal.
Facts:
1. Petitioner Mercado sent an electronic mail (email) to the SC email account regarding the
alleged “marriage scam” in Davao City whom she has personal knowledge of the said illegal
activities as she once a “fixer” committed by respondent Judge Omelio and Judge Rufino
Ferraris. Petitioner Palma also sent an email complaining about the alleged dishonourable
conduct of respondents with Judge Omelio’s wife, Clerk of Court Ma. Florida C. Omelio
relative to the solemnization of the marriage of certain “Echeverria.”

2. Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) dispatched an investigating team to Davao City and
discovered that there is a record of marriage between Julius Regor M. Echevvaria and
Khristine Marie D. Duo to the Local Civil Registrar of Island Garden of Samal and it was
solemnized by Judge Virgilio Murcia and not of Judge George Omelio.

3. In response, respondent Judge Omelio denied the allegations of Palma and Mercado. With
regards to marriage of the Echevarrias, he explained that said meeting was a re-enacted for
those we were not to attend and for the purpose of picture taking and posterity and that he
did not demand any amount from the Echevarrias. He also added that those email should be
disregard for being unsigned and not under oath. CoC Omelia claimed that her husband did
nothing wrong as well as her whose only participation was accompanying her husband during
the party where the re-enacted took place. In addition, Palma who is not a party involved had
no reason to file the complaint. Judge Murcia insisted that his name was never mentioned in
the complaint and affirmed he solemnized the wedding in his courtroom with parties and
witnesses including the complete documents and receipts.

4. The Court redocket the complaint into a regular administrative matter and raise the issue to
Court of the Appeals (CA). Investigating Justice directed respondents and witnesses to submit
their affidavits.

5. In the final report, with the support of the Certificate of Marriage and four colored
photographs as basis, results were both judges solemnized the wedding where Judge Murcia
officiated the marriage without performing it while Judge Omelio performed the marriage
without signing the Marriage Certificate and Co Omelia failure of collecting the solemnization
fee.
ISSUES: WON Judges Omelio and Murcia are guilty of violating the rules on the solemnization of
marriage.
RULING: Yes, respondent judges violated the rules on the solemnization of marriage by the members
of the Judiciary.
  Both Murcia and Judge Omelia violated AO 12502007. Although they were clothed with
authority to solemnize marriages, they overstepped the bound of their authority in the case
at bar.
 Judge Murcia affixed his signature in the marriage contract without actually solemnizing the
marriage. He also lied that the contracting parties personally appeared before in his sala in
the Island Garden City of Samal, examining the documents in support for a valid marriage
under the Family Code and corresponding receipt of payment for marriage solemnization.
 On the other hand, Judge Omelio’s reenactment of marriage in request does not justify it.
Although he acknowledged it was a sham, but insisted thar it was unlawful, for the purpose of
pictures, because they were unable to do so in the sala of Judge Murcia. Worse, he allowed
additional witnesses, godparents to affix respondent Judge Murcia. Finally, all the guests were
deceived it was a real marriage.
 Evidently, respondent Judges Omelio and Murcia have undermined the very foundation of
marriage which is the basic social institution in our society whose nature, consequences and
incidents are governed by law.
DISPOSITION:
Respondent Clerk of Court Florida C. Omelio, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Island Garden City of
Samal, Davao del Norte, is DISMISSED. Respondent Judge George Omelio, Regional Trial Court,
Branch 14, Davao City, Davao del Sur, is found GUILTY of Gross Misconduct and FINED in the amount
of Php40,000.00 to be deducted from the money valued of his accrued leave credits. Respondent
Judge Virgilio G. Murcia. Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Branch 2, Island Garden City of Samal, Davao
del Norte is found GUILTY of gross misconduct and FINED in the amount of Php 40,000.00.