Samson v.

Mejia
A.M. No. RTJ-02-1710
June 17, 2013

Sec. 15 Art. 8 of the Constitution: All cases or matters filed after the effectivity
of this Constitution must be decided or resolved within twenty-four months
from date of submission for the Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by the
Supreme Court, twelve months for all lower collegiate courts, and "three
months for all other lower courts."

FACTS:
The petitioners filed an affidavit-complaint for gross misconduct with the
Office of Court Administrator against respondent which was re-docketed as an
administrative case against respondent. Petitioner claims that respondent in
deciding the Civil Case No. A-2274, entitled "Dorothy M. Cabal, et al. vs.
Dominador Cabal and Evangeline C. Samson" for annulment of contracts,
pending before respondent's court, had committed undue delay. That On April
26, 2000, the case was deemed submitted for decision. But as 4 months
thereafter passed no decision had been rendered, prompting petitioner to file 3
motions for resolution dated August 18, 2000, November 3, 2000 and January
9, 2001.
ISSUE:
1.
Whether or not the Judge Jules A. Mejia committed undue delay in
rendering a decision, in violation of Sec 15 Art 8 of the Constitution
HELD:
1.
Yes, The Court held that Judge Mejia committed undue delay in rendering
a decision. Under Sec 15 Art 8 of the Constitution, Respondent Only had
3months to render a decision being a judge for a lower court. Under
Administrative Circular 28 "a case is considered submitted for decision "upon
the admission of the evidence of the parties at the termination of the trial. The
ninety-day period for deciding the case shall commence to run from submission
of the case for decision without memoranda." Since the respondent on March
29, 2000, ordered the parties to submit their respective memoranda within

thirty (30) days. That the 90 days period would start at the end of the 30day
period for memoranda which is April 28,2001. The respondent having rendered
judgement only on Dec 11, 2001 cannot be excused since it took him more
than 1year and 7 months in rendering judgment in violation of the 3 month
limit set forth by the Constitution