Short answer. Yes, personally. Rule 36, Section 1 of the Rules of Court requires that a judgment or final order determining the merits of a case be in writing personally and directly prepared by the judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law it is based on, then signed by him and filed with the clerk of court.
What the law says
A judgment or final order determining the merits of the case shall be in writing personally and directly prepared by the judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based, signed by him, and filed with the clerk of the court.
Rule 36, Section 1 — Rendition of judgments and final orders. Read the full provision →
Personally and directly prepared by the judge
Rule 36, Section 1 states that a judgment or final order determining the merits of the case shall be in writing personally and directly prepared by the judge. The rule uses both words — personally and directly — to describe how the judge must prepare it, which points to the judge himself doing the actual preparation of the decision rather than merely reviewing or approving a draft someone else wrote.
What the decision itself must contain
The same section requires the decision to be stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on which it is based. This is not simply a formatting requirement — it ties back to the personal-preparation requirement, since a judge who did not personally engage with the facts and the applicable law would have difficulty stating them clearly and distinctly in his own writing.
Signing and filing complete the process
Once prepared, the decision must be signed by him, and filed with the clerk of the court. The judge's own signature and the filing with the clerk are the final steps that make the judgment or final order official, coming only after the personal preparation the rule describes earlier in the same sentence — the signature is not a substitute for having personally and directly prepared the writing itself.
Why this rule exists
Requiring personal and direct preparation, rather than allowing staff to draft the decision for the judge's signature, keeps the actual analysis of the facts and the law tied to the person responsible for deciding the case. A signature alone would not guarantee that the judge himself worked through the reasoning stated in the decision; the personal-preparation requirement is what ties the writing to the judge's own judgment. It also gives the parties something to hold the decision to: reasoning stated clearly and distinctly can be examined and challenged, while a conclusion without stated facts and law cannot.