This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-04-12 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, misconduct is a transgression of some established or definite rule of action, is a forbidden act, is a dereliction of duty, is willful in character, and implies wrongful intent and not mere error in judgment.[32] More particularly, it is an unlawful behavior by the public officer.[33] The term, however, does not necessarily imply corruption or criminal intent.[34] | |||||
|
2007-12-27 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The Court is duty-bound to sternly wield a corrective hand to discipline errant employees and to weed out those who are found undesirable.[22] We cannot countenance any act or omission by any court employee that violates the norm of public accountability, which would diminish the faith of the people in the Judiciary.[23] | |||||