Bisnar v. Nicandro
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Macrina M. Bisnar charged respondent Myrla P. Nicandro, a Court Stenographer, with Willful Failure to Pay Just Debts. Complainant alleged that respondent borrowed ₱51,300.00 in 1996, issuing postdated checks that all bounced due to an "account closed" status. Despite demands, respondent failed to pay. Procedural History: The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) required respondent to comment on the complaint. Respondent failed to submit her comment despite repeated directives and resolutions from the Court, including imposition of fines for contempt. Respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration, claiming she did not receive the orders and that the case was amicably settled, which the Court denied. The Court eventually deemed the case submitted for resolution without respondent's comment. The Petition: The complainant sought administrative action against the respondent for willful failure to pay a just debt.
Issue(s)
Whether respondent Myrla P. Nicandro is guilty of willful failure to pay a just debt. Whether respondent Myrla P. Nicandro is guilty of gross insubordination for failing to comply with Court Resolutions.
Ruling
The Court found respondent Myrla P. Nicandro guilty of willful failure to pay a just debt and gross insubordination. She was reprimanded for the first offense and ordered to pay a fine of ₱5,000.00 for gross insubordination. Additionally, she was ordered to pay complainant Macrina M. Bisnar the amount of ₱51,300.00 within 30 days from receipt of the Resolution.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of willful failure to pay a just debt: The Court held that the complainant sufficiently established that respondent was indebted to her, and this debt remained unpaid at the time of the complaint's filing. Respondent's silence and failure to refute the charge were deemed an admission of the allegations' truth. The Court emphasized that a court personnel, as a public servant, must exhibit honesty and integrity in both official and personal dealings to preserve the court's good name. The respondent's averment of an amicable settlement was considered an admission of indebtedness, and her refusal to pay for several years, even if the debt was eventually paid, attached her liability for willful failure to pay a just debt. The Court cited Bago v. Feraren to underscore the moral duty and legal responsibility of a debtor to settle obligations when due and the importance of adhering to high ethical standards. On the issue of gross insubordination: The Court found respondent liable for gross insubordination for her persistent failure to comply with Court Resolutions requiring her to comment on the complaint. The Court stressed that resolutions requiring comment are not mere requests and must be complied with fully. Indifference to administrative complaints and resolutions requiring comment will not be tolerated. The respondent's deliberate refusal to comply with repeated orders evinced gross misconduct and insubordination, warranting disciplinary sanction in the form of a fine.
Main Doctrine
Willful failure to pay just debts and gross insubordination are grounds for administrative liability for court personnel, warranting penalties such as reprimand and fines, and requiring adherence to court resolutions.