Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 38 views

    Atty. Gonzales Vs Atty. Serrano Review Under Rule 45 For CA Reinstatement of The Decision of

    Uploaded by

    John Lester Tan
    Atty. Gonzales appealed a decision by the Ombudsman to modify the charges against him from grave misconduct to simple misconduct related to an incident where he forcibly kissed Atty. Serrano against her will in front of coworkers. The Court of Appeals denied Atty. Gonzales' motion for reconsideration, finding the motion was filed past the non-extendible 15-day deadline. However, the Supreme Court suspended this prohibition in the interest of justice and reviewed the merits of the case, determining a modification of the Court of Appeals' decision was warranted based on jurisprudence related to sexual harassment administrative cases.

    Copyright:

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

    Atty. Gonzales Vs Atty. Serrano Review Under Rule 45 For CA Reinstatement of The Decision of

    Uploaded by

    John Lester Tan
    38 views1 page
    Atty. Gonzales appealed a decision by the Ombudsman to modify the charges against him from grave misconduct to simple misconduct related to an incident where he forcibly kissed Atty. Serrano against her will in front of coworkers. The Court of Appeals denied Atty. Gonzales' motion for reconsideration, finding the motion was filed past the non-extendible 15-day deadline. However, the Supreme Court suspended this prohibition in the interest of justice and reviewed the merits of the case, determining a modification of the Court of Appeals' decision was warranted based on jurisprudence related to sexual harassment administrative cases.

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    Atty.GonzalesvsAtty.Serrano

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Atty. Gonzales appealed a decision by the Ombudsman to modify the charges against him from grave misconduct to simple misconduct related to an incident where he forcibly kissed Atty. Serrano against her will in front of coworkers. The Court of Appeals denied Atty. Gonzales' motion for reconsideration, finding the motion was filed past the non-extendible 15-day deadline. However, the Supreme Court suspended this prohibition in the interest of justice and reviewed the merits of the case, determining a modification of the Court of Appeals' decision was warranted based on jurisprudence related to sexual harassment administrative cases.

    Copyright:

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

    Atty. Gonzales Vs Atty. Serrano Review Under Rule 45 For CA Reinstatement of The Decision of

    Uploaded by

    John Lester Tan
    Atty. Gonzales appealed a decision by the Ombudsman to modify the charges against him from grave misconduct to simple misconduct related to an incident where he forcibly kissed Atty. Serrano against her will in front of coworkers. The Court of Appeals denied Atty. Gonzales' motion for reconsideration, finding the motion was filed past the non-extendible 15-day deadline. However, the Supreme Court suspended this prohibition in the interest of justice and reviewed the merits of the case, determining a modification of the Court of Appeals' decision was warranted based on jurisprudence related to sexual harassment administrative cases.

    Copyright:

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

    Atty. Gonzales vs Atty.

    Serrano

    Review under Rule 45 for CA reinstatement of the Decision of Ombudsman Administrative


    Adjudication Bureau which was already modified from Grave Misconduct to Simple Misconduct
    by the Overall Deputy Ombudsman.

    An administrative complaint was filed by Atty. Maila Clemen F. Serrano (respondent) for grave
    misconduct, sexual harassment and acts of lasciviousness.

    During lunch, where petitioner invited respondent, petitioner suddenly took hold of respondent's
    face and forcefully kissed her lips against her will in the presence of officemates and other
    customers. Then he said, “Ang sarap pala ng labi ni Maila!” Respondent also alleged that prior
    to that “kissing” incident, petitioner had already degraded her person on four (4) other separate
    occasions.

    She immediately reported the incident to PHILRACOM Executive Director Juan Lozano. Then,
    she elevated it to the Ombudsman. Records show that a Resolution dated May 8, 2001 in CHR
    Case No. 2001-037 which found petitioner to have committed acts of sexual harassment, abuse
    of authority, and illegal dismissal against respondent.

    Issue: WON CA erred in denying urgent reconsideration by applying the doctrine that the 15-
    day period for filing an appeal is non-extendible, and the prohibition against the filing of a motion
    for extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration in all courts, except the Supreme Court.

    In a long line of cases starting with Habaluyas Enterprises v. Japzon: No motion for extension of
    time to file a motion for new trial or reconsideration may be filed with the Metropolitan or
    Municipal Trial Courts, the Regional Trial Courts, and the Intermediate Appellate Court. Such a
    motion may be filed only in cases pending with the Supreme Court as the court of last resort,
    which may in its sound discretion either grant or deny the extension requested.

    This rule, however, admits of exceptions based on a liberal reading of the rule, so long as the
    petitioner is able to prove the existence of cogent reasons to excuse its non-observance. No
    such reasons were shown to obtain in this case. However, the Court, in the interest of justice,
    looked into the merits of the case, and opted to suspend the prohibition against such motion for
    extension after it found that a modification of the CA Decision is warranted by the law and the
    jurisprudence on administrative cases involving sexual harassment. The emerging trend of
    jurisprudence, after all, is more inclined to the liberal and flexible application of procedural rules.

    You might also like