CUENCO v OMBUDSMAN
FACTS
Complainant Cuenco filed an untitled pleading which the Supreme Court treated as a consolidation of 3 actions: (1) a second Motion for Reconsideration of the decision dated July 23, 1987 – said decision became final and executor thus, MoR invalid; (2) a Motion for Reconsideration of the Court’s En Banc Resolution of February 17, 1988 – said MoR was for an administrative case for disbarment filed by Cuenco against Justice Fernan which was dismissed by the Court for utter lack of merit; (3) Compliance with the directive in aforesaid Resolution of Feb 17, 1988 – requires complainant Cuenco to show why he should not be administratively dealt with for having made unfounded and serious accusations against Justice Fernan.
ISSUE
Whether Cuenco should be administratively liable for having made serious accusations against Justice Fernan.
RULING:
YES Cuenco has not only declined to prove the accusations he has made against Mr. Justice Fernan but has also chosen to make additional statements and charges so extravagant and so clearly uninformed as to require no discussion. Because the Court cannot assume the complainant Cuenco is totally unaware of the nature and gravity of the charges he has made against Justice Fernan and which he has completely failed to support with anything but his own bare assertion. The Court is compelled to conclude that those accusations were in bad faith.
