Duty of Clerks of Court to Supervise Stenographers and Manage Court Records

The Office of the Court Administrator filed an administrative complaint against Imelda S. Perlez, Clerk of Court of the Municipal Trial Court, Branch 2, San Pedro, Laguna, for failing to ensure that stenographers transcribed their notes and for allegedly hiding court records. The case reached the Supreme Court, which clarified the duties of clerks of court in supervising court personnel and managing records.

The Facts of the Case

Judge Gloria B. Aglugub filed the complaint against Clerk of Court Perlez, alleging that the latter failed to submit transcripts of stenographic notes in certain cases and hid records of other cases. This allegedly resulted in Judge Aglugub's failure to decide 19 cases within the prescribed period, forcing her to request extensions of time.

Perlez denied the accusations. She argued that she had no physical control over the stenographers who failed to transcribe their notes. She claimed she repeatedly reminded them and reported their non-compliance to the judge. She pointed to former stenographer Jennifer Lancion as the main culprit, saying Lancion refused to transcribe her notes and eventually left without a trace.

However, evidence showed that Judge Aglugub had issued multiple orders and memoranda directing Perlez to produce records of cases or submit transcripts of stenographic notes. A periodic physical inventory revealed that records of 87 criminal cases and 8 civil cases were missing. The judge also ordered Perlez to explain why she failed to issue a writ of demolition in a civil case, despite the court having ordered its issuance as early as October 2, 1998.

The Issue

The central question was whether Clerk of Court Perlez was administratively liable for failing to ensure that stenographers transcribed their notes and for failing to properly manage court records.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court found Perlez guilty of simple neglect of duty, not insubordination as recommended by the Court Administrator. The Court suspended her for one month and one day without pay, with a warning that repetition of the same acts would be dealt with more severely.

The Court emphasized that a clerk of court is the administrative officer of the court, charged with control and supervision of all subordinate personnel, including stenographers. It is the clerk's duty to ensure that subordinates perform their duties well.

Duties of Clerks of Court Under the Rules

The Court cited specific rules that define the duties of clerks of court and stenographers:

Under Rule 136, Section 17 of the Rules of Court, a stenographer who has attended a court session must deliver all notes taken to the Clerk of Court immediately at the close of the session. The clerk must demand compliance and stamp the date of receipt. When notes are transcribed, the transcript must be delivered to the clerk, duly initialed on each page, and attached to the records.

Under Administrative Circular No. 21-90, all stenographers must transcribe their notes and attach the transcripts to the record of the case not later than 20 days from the time the notes are taken. The stenographer must also accomplish a verified monthly certification of compliance. If the stenographer fails to submit this certification, his or her salary shall be withheld.

The Court ruled that Perlez had the obligation to see that stenographers under her supervision regularly performed their duties. When Lancion refused to transcribe her notes, Perlez should have immediately reported the matter to the Court through the judge and recommended the withholding of Lancion's salary. This she failed to do.

Supervision Is Not Meaningless

The Court rejected Perlez's defense that she was powerless against the stenographers. As the Court Administrator observed, "Supervision is not a meaningless thing." Perlez showed passivity and indifference to the failure of those under her supervision to perform their duties faithfully.

The Court distinguished between insubordination and simple neglect of duty. Since this appeared to be Perlez's first offense, and it was not shown that her failure was willful or intentional, the Court classified her act as simple neglect of duty—a less grave offense under the Civil Service Law, punishable by suspension of one month and one day to six months for the first offense.

The incidents concerning missing court records were the subject of a separate administrative complaint (A.M. No. P-99-1348), so the Court made no findings on those matters in this case.

Practical Takeaways

• Clerks of court are administrative officers with direct supervision and control over all court personnel, including stenographers. They cannot disclaim responsibility by blaming subordinates.

• Immediate action is required. When a stenographer fails to transcribe notes, the clerk must report the matter to the judge and recommend administrative sanctions, including the withholding of salary under Administrative Circular No. 21-90.

• Stenographers must submit notes immediately after each session under Rule 136, Section 17, and must transcribe them within 20 days. Clerks must demand compliance and stamp the date of receipt.

• Passivity is punishable. Failure to exercise effective supervision over court personnel constitutes simple neglect of duty, a less grave offense under the Civil Service Law.

• Court records must be safeguarded. Clerks of court are responsible for the custody and availability of court records; failure to produce them when required may result in separate administrative liability.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.