OCA IPI NO.

14-220-CA-J, March 17, 2015

RE: COMPLAINT DATED JANUARY 28, 2014 OF WENEFREDO PARREÑO, ET AL., AGAINST HON. CELIA C. LIBREA-LEAGOGO,
HON. ELIHU A. YBAÑEZ AND HON. AMY C. LAZARO-JAVIER, ASSOCIATE JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, RELATIVE TO
CA G.R. SP NO. 108807

Facts:

Wenefredo Parreῆo, Ronnie Cuevas and Joseph Denamarca filed an administrative case against Justices Librea-Leagogo,
Ybaῆez and Lazaro Javier for delaying the issuance of the resolution for the submission of the decision in their case
against Susan Enriquez and Alma Rodriguez that was filed in the Special 16 th Division of the CA.

In the comments of the three Justices:

1) Justice Librea-Leagogo denied liability for incurring delay because she only became the Chairperson of the 16 th Division
from June 2012 until July 2012.

2) Justice Ybaῆez admitted that the case was part in his caseload; however, due to his heavy case-load, he assigned the
said case to a member of his legal staff which, sadly, became ill so it was later assigned to a contractual-lawyer that he
had hired which eventually resigned for a permanent position in another Government agency. After disposing all of the
old cases assigned to him, he was able to render a decision on the said case on February 28, 2014, before he was aware
of this administrative complaint.

3) Justice Lazaro-Javier explained that she was only able to participate in the adoption and promulgation of the
resolution since she was only there temporarily due to the absence of Justice Paredes, who is a regular member of the
16th Division.

Issue:

Were the Justices administratively liable for the delay?

Decision:

No, the Justices were not administratively liable for the delay because although the case was submitted for decision in
the Special 16th Division, it was the 13th Division where Justive Ybaῆez promulgated his decision. The settlement of the
cases is the responsibility of the Justices and the Members of the Division. In order to determine who were
administratively accountable, their specific roles must be considered. Justice Librea-Leagogo and Justice Lazaro-Javier
were not accountable for the delay because Justice Librea-Leagogo was only able to participate the reorganization of the
CA after the promulgation of the resolution until she was transferred to the 15 th Division which then terminated her
responsibility of the said case, while Justice Lazaro-Javier was only able to participate when she temporarily sat in that
position due to the absence of Justice Paredes.

On the other hand, Justice Ybaῆez was able to carry the said case when he was transferred to the 13 th Division. His delay
was without malice or deliberate attempt to impede the dispensation of justice. He was able to assign the case to a
member of his legal staff which, sadly, became ill so it was later assigned to a contractual-lawyer that he had hired which
eventually resigned for a permanent position in another Government agency. Although holding a heavy caseload is an
insufficient excuse for the delay in disposing his cases, it was ruled that the causes of the delay should be considered.
Thus, Justice Ybaῆez’ explanation for the delay is accepted. Wherefore, the Court dismisses for lack of merit.