Back

Judge Rizalina T. Capco-Umali, RTC, Br. 212, Mandaluyong City Vs. Judge Paulita B. Acosta-Villarante, RTC, Br. 211, Mandaluyong City

JUDGE RIZALINA T. CAPCO-UMALI, RTC, Br. 212, Mandaluyong City, complainant, versus JUDGE PAULITA B. ACOSTA-VILLARANTE, RTC, Br. 211, Mandaluyong City, Respondent.

A.M. No. RTJ-08-2124 [Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 07-2631-RTJ] | 2009-08-27

D E C I S I O N


CARPIO MORALES, J.:

By Complaint-Affidavit of April 25, 2007[1] filed with the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), Judge Rizalina Capco-Umali (Judge Capco-Umali) charged Judge Paulita Acosta-Villarante[2] (Judge Acosta-Villarante) with violation of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary[3] (New Code of Judicial Conduct), Canon 2, Section 2[4] and Canon 4, Sections 1 and 2.[5]

The facts which spawned the filing of Judge Capco-Umali's complaint are not disputed.

Judge Acosta-Villarante wrote a Memorandum of March 27, 2007[6] addressed to Executive Judge Maria Cancino-Erum of the Regional Trial...