Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 190 views

    Jill M. Tormis Vs Judge Paredes

    Uploaded by

    Arya Karo
    1) Judge Paredes was found guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge for using intemperate language and unnecessary comments that projected Judge Tormis as corrupt and ignorant in class discussions, but was not held liable for grave misconduct. Remarks made in class discussions cannot be considered misconduct. Additionally, accepting a cash bail bond was found to be in accordance with the rules. 2) Judge Paredes was found to have violated the subjudice rule by discussing a pending marriage scams case involving Judge Tormis during class, which could unduly influence its resolution. While his objectives may have seemed noble, discussing the case publicly and criticizing Judge Tormis was done insensitively and in bad taste

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Jill M. Tormis Vs Judge Paredes

    Uploaded by

    Arya Karo
    190 views1 page
    1) Judge Paredes was found guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge for using intemperate language and unnecessary comments that projected Judge Tormis as corrupt and ignorant in class discussions, but was not held liable for grave misconduct. Remarks made in class discussions cannot be considered misconduct. Additionally, accepting a cash bail bond was found to be in accordance with the rules. 2) Judge Paredes was found to have violated the subjudice rule by discussing a pending marriage scams case involving Judge Tormis during class, which could unduly influence its resolution. While his objectives may have seemed noble, discussing the case publicly and criticizing Judge Tormis was done insensitively and in bad taste

    Original Description:

    Legal Ethics Case Digest

    Original Title

    Jill M. Tormis vs Judge Paredes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Judge Paredes was found guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge for using intemperate language and unnecessary comments that projected Judge Tormis as corrupt and ignorant in class discussions, but was not held liable for grave misconduct. Remarks made in class discussions cannot be considered misconduct. Additionally, accepting a cash bail bond was found to be in accordance with the rules. 2) Judge Paredes was found to have violated the subjudice rule by discussing a pending marriage scams case involving Judge Tormis during class, which could unduly influence its resolution. While his objectives may have seemed noble, discussing the case publicly and criticizing Judge Tormis was done insensitively and in bad taste

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    190 views1 page

    Jill M. Tormis Vs Judge Paredes

    Uploaded by

    Arya Karo
    1) Judge Paredes was found guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge for using intemperate language and unnecessary comments that projected Judge Tormis as corrupt and ignorant in class discussions, but was not held liable for grave misconduct. Remarks made in class discussions cannot be considered misconduct. Additionally, accepting a cash bail bond was found to be in accordance with the rules. 2) Judge Paredes was found to have violated the subjudice rule by discussing a pending marriage scams case involving Judge Tormis during class, which could unduly influence its resolution. While his objectives may have seemed noble, discussing the case publicly and criticizing Judge Tormis was done insensitively and in bad taste

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    A.M. No. RTJ-13-2366 [Formerly OCA IPI No.

    11-3740-RTJ], February 04, 2015

    JILL M. TORMIS, Complainant, v. JUDGE MEINRADO P. PAREDES, Respondent.

    Facts:

    Jill M. Tormis, a former student of Judge Paredes in Political Law Review, charged Judge Paredes with the violation of the
    subjudice rule and with grave misconduct for humiliating her family several times during class discussions by branding
    her mother, Judge Tormis, to be abusive of her position as a judge, corrupt and ignorant of the law due to the pending
    case marriage scams which was scandalized in the Judiciary, and also by branding her brother, Francis Tormis as a
    court-noted-addict; also, she claimed the Judge Paredes committed an offense by accepting a cash bond in the
    amount of P6,000 for the temporary release of Lita Guioguio.

    Issues:

    1) Was Judge Paredes held administratively liable for grave misconduct?

    2) Did Judge Paredes violate the subjudice rule?

    Decisions:

    1)

    No, Judge Paredes was not held administratively liable for grave misconduct because considering the acts complained
    of, the remarks against Judge Tormis and Francis, were made by Judge Paredes in his class discussions, they cannot be
    considered as misconduct. They are simply not related to the discharge of his official functions as a judge. . To
    constitute misconduct, the act or acts must have a direct relation to and be connected with the performance of his
    official duties. However, Judge Paredes in using intemperate language and unnecessary comments tending to project
    Judge Tormis as a corrupt and ignorant judge in his class discussions was correctly found guilty of conduct unbecoming
    of a judge. Also, regarding with his act on receiving the cash bail bond of Lita Guioguio, it was found that it cannot be
    regarded as grave misconduct since they found merit in the position of Judge Paredes that the approval, as well as the
    receipt, of the cash bail bond was in accordance with the rules.

    Misconduct is a transgression of some established and definite rule of action, more particularly, unlawful behavior or
    gross negligence by a public officer. The misconduct is grave if it involves any of the additional elements of corruption,
    willful intent to violate the law, or to disregard the established rules, which must be established by substantial evidence.
    As distinguished from simple misconduct, the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate the law, or flagrant
    disregard of established rule, must be manifest in a charge of grave misconduct. Corruption as an element of grave
    misconduct consists in the act of an official or fiduciary person who unlawfully and wrongfully uses his station or
    character to procure some benefit for himself of for another person, contrary to duty and the rights of others.

    2)

    Yes, Judge Paredes did violate the subjudice rule because notably, he was able to discuss the marriage scams involving
    Judge Tormis during the said pendency case where he should not make comments on the administrative case to prevent
    any undue influence in its resolution. Commenting on the marriage scams where Judge Tormis was one of the judges
    involved was in contravention of the subjudice rule. Although the reasons of Judge Paredes for discussing the marriage
    scams in his classes seemed noble, his objectives were carried out insensitively and in bad taste. The pendency of the
    administrative case of Judge Tormis and the publicity of the marriage scams did not give Judge Paredes unrestrained
    license to criticize Judge Tormis in his class discussions. The publicity given to the investigation of the said scams and the
    fact that it was widely discussed in legal circles let people expressed critical opinions on the issue.

    You might also like