This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2005-12-15 |
CALLEJO, SR., J. |
||||
| [D]uring the hearing on September 8, 2005, respondent admitted that the casual employee assigned in the mailing failed to send a copy of the Order to the defendant (TSN, dated September 8, 2005, page 11). Thus, the undersigned finds that she committed an infraction in the performance of her official functions. She should see to it that copies of orders, decision and communication are properly [sent] to the parties and counsel.[8] The respondent should forthwith be reminded that as a clerk of court, she is an essential and ranking officer of our judicial system who performs delicate administrative functions vital to the prompt and proper administration of justice,[9] and that any conduct which tends to diminish the image of the Judiciary will not be countenanced. Moreover, court personnel are exhorted to at all times perform official duties properly and with diligence, and to carry out their responsibilities as public servants in as courteous a manner as possible.[10] It is only in this way that the integrity and the good name of the courts of justice shall be preserved. | |||||
|
2005-01-11 |
PANGANIBAN, J. |
||||
| We stress that clerks of court are essential judicial officers who perform delicate administrative functions vital to the prompt and proper administration of justice.[26] Their duty is, inter alia, to assist in the management of the calendar of the court and in all matters that do not involve the discretion or judgment properly belonging to the judge.[27] They play a key role in the complement of the court, as their office is the hub of adjudicative and administrative orders, processes and concerns.[28] As such, they are required to be persons of competence, honesty and probity;[29] they cannot be permitted to slacken on their jobs.[30] | |||||