Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 363 views

    Malinao Vs Reyes

    Uploaded by

    Maria Ligaya
    Malinao filed an administrative case against Mayor Red for abuse of authority and denial of due process. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan initially found Red guilty in a 5-3 vote, but later acquitted him in a 7-2 vote. Malinao argued the first decision was final, but the court held the second decision of acquittal was valid. Additionally, the case was moot as Red's term expired and further proceedings were barred by his reelection under Section 66(b) of the LGC, as reelection abates any administrative proceedings against local officials.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Malinao Vs Reyes

    Uploaded by

    Maria Ligaya
    363 views1 page
    Malinao filed an administrative case against Mayor Red for abuse of authority and denial of due process. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan initially found Red guilty in a 5-3 vote, but later acquitted him in a 7-2 vote. Malinao argued the first decision was final, but the court held the second decision of acquittal was valid. Additionally, the case was moot as Red's term expired and further proceedings were barred by his reelection under Section 66(b) of the LGC, as reelection abates any administrative proceedings against local officials.

    Original Description:

    digest pubcorp

    Original Title

    Malinao vs Reyes

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Malinao filed an administrative case against Mayor Red for abuse of authority and denial of due process. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan initially found Red guilty in a 5-3 vote, but later acquitted him in a 7-2 vote. Malinao argued the first decision was final, but the court held the second decision of acquittal was valid. Additionally, the case was moot as Red's term expired and further proceedings were barred by his reelection under Section 66(b) of the LGC, as reelection abates any administrative proceedings against local officials.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    363 views1 page

    Malinao Vs Reyes

    Uploaded by

    Maria Ligaya
    Malinao filed an administrative case against Mayor Red for abuse of authority and denial of due process. The Sangguniang Panlalawigan initially found Red guilty in a 5-3 vote, but later acquitted him in a 7-2 vote. Malinao argued the first decision was final, but the court held the second decision of acquittal was valid. Additionally, the case was moot as Red's term expired and further proceedings were barred by his reelection under Section 66(b) of the LGC, as reelection abates any administrative proceedings against local officials.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Malinao vs.

    Reyes (1996)

    Facts: Malinao filed an administrative case against Mayor Red for abuse of authority and denial of due process with
    the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Marinduque. On August 12, 1994, members of the Sanggunian, by a vote of 5 to 3,
    found Red guilty, vote signed only by presiding chairman. On September 5, the Sanggunian, voting 7 to 2, acquitted
    Red of the charges against him. This vote was embodied in a Decision which was signed by all the members.
    Malinao argued that the First Sanggunian Decision had already become final and executory for failure of Red to
    appeal. The issue is whether or not the second Decision is valid.
    Held: Yes, the second decision of acquittal is valid. In any case, this issue is already moot and academic as a result
    of the expiration of Reds term during which the act complained of was allegedly committed, and further proceedings
    are barred by his reelection. [Sec 66(b) LGC]. Reelection abates any administrative disciplinary proceedings against
    the local elective official.

    [Under Sec. 66 (b) of the LGC, the penalty of suspension cannot exceed the unexpired term of the official and any
    administrative disciplinary proceeding against said official is abated if in the meantime he is re-elected because such
    re-election is a condonation of whatever misconduct he might have committed during his previous term. In order to
    render a decision in an administrative case involving elected local officials, the decision of the Sanggunian must be in
    writing, stating clearly the facts and the reasons for such a decision.]

    You might also like