Professional Documents
Culture Documents
7 Marohombsar Vs Adiong, G.R. No. RTJ-02-1674. January 22, 2004
7 Marohombsar Vs Adiong, G.R. No. RTJ-02-1674. January 22, 2004
JUDGE SANTOS
ADIONG
G.R. No. RTJ-02-1674. January 22, 2004
CORONA, J.:
Facts: Complainant Marohombsar was the defendant in the
civil case for injunction. The case was filed by Yasmira
Pangadapun questioning the legality of Marohombsars
appointment as Provincial Social Welfare Officer of the
DSWD-ARMM. Prior to his appointment, Pangadapun used to
occupy
said
position.
Upon the filing of the said complaint, respondent judge
issued a TRO and set the hearing on the application for the
issuance of the preliminary injunction. Summons, together
with a copy of the complaint and a notice, was also served
on both parties. Marohombsar filed an ex parte urgent
motion to dissolve the TRO. Pangadapun was given the time
to comment. Respondent judge issued an order stating that
a preliminary conference had been held and that both
parties had waived the raffle of the case and reset the
hearing on the application for the issuance of a writ of
injunction. The judge gave another time to file her comment
again.
During the hearing on the application for the issuance of a
writ of preliminary injunction, none of the lawyers appeared.
Hence, respondent judge considered it submitted for
resolution and issued the preliminary injunction. Hence, this
complaint for gross ignorance of law, abuse of discretion and
conduct
unbecoming
a
judge.
Issues:
1) Whether or not TRO ex parte is allowed in the instant
case.
2) Whether or not trial-type hearing is essential to due
process.