263 Rayos - OMBAC V. Rayos 247-417 “Estafal01: The Withdrawal Method” * Atty. R induced his 85-year-old aunt © withdraw all her bank deposits and entrust them to him for safekeeping. + 588,000 was withdrawn and deposited under the name of Atty. R’s wife in trust for seven beneficiaries, including his son. * Complainant demanded for the return of the amount with interest © Atty. R failed to retum the entire amount. * Atty. R issued checks for installments, but were later on dishonored duc to insufficiency of funds * A disbarment case was filed against Atty. R. s8 Disbarment RLOL ROB CASE #417 RAYOS-OMBAC V RAYOS “Money is thicker than blood"; Nephew” '‘Depravity” "Wicked + Mrs, RO filed a disbarment case against her nephew, R saying that he defrauded her and filed frivolous cases to harass her. * R Induced the complainant who was then 85 years old, to withdraw all her money and entrust them to him claiming that if she does so, the money will be excluded from the estate of her husband, * Respondent violated the Code of Professional Responsibility as well as his oath when he deceived his 85 year old aunt into entrusting him all her her money and refused to return them. The wicked deed was aggravated by unfounded suits to compel her to withdraw the disbarment suit against him. * The nature of the office of a lawyer requires good moral character. This qualification is not only a condition precedent but a continuing requirement to maintain good standing with the Bar. The depravity of the offense calls for the severance of the privilege to practice law not only for 2 years but for life. PENALTY Disbarment C-4 R-1.01, R-1.03; C-7, R= 7.03; C-19,R-19.01VIOJAN v. DURAN 264-514 “The Wealmess of the Flesh” * Y filed with the DO) a complaint against D as Justice of the Peace, charging him with having had a carnal knowledge with her by force * D denied allegations; Secretary of Justice found him guilty of immorality and recommending his suspension from service for 3 months * The president suspended D for 6 months. * Viiled an MR asking for increase of penalty - disbarment * Disbarment was denied because D is already punished for 6 months, that he is supporting 9 children, and that the sexual intercourse was made possible by the act of V herself. CASE #514 VIOJAN V DURAN “His flesh was weak, but so was yours"; “1 is enough, 2 is too much” + A complaint was filed in the DOJ by V against Judge D for having supposedly raped her. + Judge D was found guilty of immorality and was suspended from the service for 6 months in the administrative case, * V filed another case with the court for disbarment based on the same facts saying that the punishment was too lenient. + D argued that V had no personality to file because she herself Is party to the immorality referred to the in the decision. * By committing the immorality In question, respondent violated the trust reposed in his high office, and utterly falled to to the noble ideals and strict standarés of morality required of the law profession, * But to suspend him further in capacity as 2 lawyer would in effec prolong his former suspension. PENALTY [Warning Ci = R101 RI240 Corpova v. Corpova 254-95 “Sana Taito ang Puso Ko” + C charged her husband, Atty. C with immorality and acts unbecoming a member of the Bar. + Hearings never took place as Mrs. C informed the Commission that they have already “reconciled.” + The IBP submitted to the court its report reprimanding respondent for his acts. # [twas found that Atty. C left his family for F. + F was herself married and left her husband. * Atty. C and F lived publicly as husband and wife * Atty. C and C then reconciled, but he still neglected to support his legitimate family. © Atty. C then had an affair with one L and left CASE #95 CORDOVA V CORDOVA “DI na natuto” "Si Salve, si Sita o si Fe’; “ Fours a crowd”; “Ako legal wife” + SD charged her husband LC with gross immorality and acts unbecoming of a member of the bar + SD and LC were married and had 2 children. LC left his family as well as his job and cohabited with FH wha was also married. LC introduced FH as his legitimate wife and gave her funds while failing to support his legitimate family. * SL and LC had an apparent reconciliation but he would frequently come home from beerhouses or cabarets, drunk, and continued to neglect the support of his legitimate family. + He took another mistress named LM and lived with her together with his legitimate daughter M. + The moral delinquency that affects the fitness of a member of the bar to continue as such includes conduct that outrages the generally accepted moral standards of the community, conduct for instance, which makes 'a mockery of the inviolable social his h his home. Institution or marriage.” S ——— bf R1024 Sdiwentov. Cur 255-459 “Cuit Ka Nal © The Sol. Gen held an inquiry against Atty. C for gross immoral conduct, aggravated by abuse of client-attorney relationship. + The SC found C guilty of the charges and disbarred him, * Circumstances prompting the inquiry and judgment were not discussed. Disbarment CASE # 459 SARMIENTO V. CUI “Nasty Niece” A lawyer acted as counsel for his niece in a divorce proceeding. + Allegedly, he succeeded in having sexual intercourse with his niece for several times allegedly through farce or duress. + Solicitor General found that consent of the niece. + Even so, the lawyer is still guilty of gross immorality and unprofessional concuct with abuse of the powers and privilege of an attorney. was all done with the Disbarment PENALTY 1, R-1.01; C-7,R-7.03273 Sicanv. O8UsAN, IR. IST 348 “LRT 2 Lover” + P filed a disbarment case against her husband ‘Atty O on the ground of adultery or grossly immoral conduct. * Prior to their marriage O met N who claimed to be a widow. O and N had a son, J «After ] was born, O married P but subsequently left her and lived with Nand J. * Several people attested to the fact that O and N were civilly mazried and living together, even if N were actually still married to someone else. + O was unable to overcome the burden of proof to overthrow P's evidence against him. * © failed to maintain the highest degree of morality expected and required of a lawyer, leading to his disbarment. CASE # 348 OBUSAN V. OBUSAN, JR. “Abandoner Husband” * O, a lawyer and married man, abandoned his wife and resumed carnal relations with a former paramour, who was also married. * His conduct is willful, flagrant and shameless and shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the good and respectable members of the community. * He falled to maintain the highest degree of morality expected and required from a member of the bar. | Disbar PENALTY ment244 SANTOS V. TAN 258-457 “The Lucky Geriatric” * Atty. $ filed a disbarment case against Atty. T, who works in the DAR for gross misconduct for acts of immorality, falsification and bigamy + T allegedly had a relationship with O, married in her and bore a son, N, with her + In applying for a marriage certificate with O, T indicated he was single, while in his employment records he said he was married to E * T denied having married O and fathering N but admitted his marriage to E. * T failed to refute the cyidence against him and such put his morality in doubt. * But due to the fact that he was 72, disbarment would be too harsh a penalty, so the SC suspended T from the practice of law for 1 year 88 S=lyear CASE # 457 SANTOS V. TAN "Dirty Old Man” + Atty. $ charged Atty. T with having committed acts of immorality, falsification and bigamy. + Salleged that T, while employed as a trial attorney, maintained an amorous relationship with @ married clerk, + T later married the clerk by misrepresenting himself as single in his marriage contract even though he had already married another woman. + The Solicitor General recommended that considering T's advanced age and his retirement, disbarment would be too harsh a penalty to impose. The Court agreed. * A lawyer should not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct PENALTY Suspended for 1 year 6 A&B C=1, R=1.012 PANGAN V. RAMOS 260°- 363 “Hin-D Ko Alam ang Pangalan Kol * Ina contempt proceeding, Atty. D filed for postponement saying that he had another hearing set in a different court. + Upon verification, the attomey of record in the other case was Atty, P. * Dclaimed that he used the name P as his birth certificate showed such was his full name. « The name appearing in the Roll of Atorneys is DR, and lawyers are not authorized to use any other name in the practice of law, than that inscribed in the Roll * In using another name, D violated his oath to do no falsehood and deceived the count. + Thus, he was reprimanded by the SC (area Violation of Oath Mem Mn =~ Ma Venema R101 CASE # 363 PANGAN V. RAMOS. "Pick a name & stick with It!” + Ina postponement for trial, Atty. R used a different name other than the name, which appeared in the Roll of Attorneys. + In representing himself as “Pedro D.D. Ramos", even if such Is his birth name, Instead of “Dionisio Ramos”, which appears in the Roll of Attorneys, he violated his oath to do no falsehood, + He took refuge in deception, which demonstrated a lack of candor towards the courts, + As this is his first aberration, he is severely reprimanded. PENALTY | Severe Reprimand & Warning C1, R-1.01, C10, R-10.01CABRERA V. AGUSTIN 26t- 66 is Love” A proposed to C. Upon appl they also discovered union. lawyer. live as husband bar exam, ‘was pregnant; there was no civil C was deranged and h wedding. naintaining the y required of a Cabrera v, Agustin “A certain smile. filed © disborment egainst Atty. having reached only year of high to the sexial desi Atty. Agustin, ofter hoving nade her believed by At 1 that they were already civily married. Atty. made Anita believed that they were alread civilly married after going to Kanila City all and signed vo sheets of paper ond ofter undergoing bbod test, the resort of the blood fest had « handwritten vord “bride” in it. Atty. Agustin also promised Anita that they will have a cturch wedding at the Espiritu Santo Church But efter Anite bore a daughter aut of their relationship, Atty. Agustin backed out from his promise to marry Anita ed in fact merried another woman. He said that Anite wes mertelly deranged becouse she: offen smiled for no cause at all ard Anitas family nsisted on a pompous wedding which he could not afford. ISSUE: Whether Atty. Agustin is guilty of grossly immoral conduct? SC: Yes Ratio: = Atty. Agustin deceived her into beteving that they had been merried civilly to satisfy his corral desire. He himself admits that what prompted him to offer and propose marriage to her was to satisfy such desire. The woman only finished first year high school while Atty. Agustin iso lawyer who knows the intricacies of the lam. Herce, when « member of the bar, bent on satisfying his lust, lures on innocent woman, who des not have. an exact notion of « legal ard valid marriage, into goirg through the different stages of « simulated mariage is guilty of mmorality that is expected of ‘every member of the bar. Rule 101, Rile 70324? Détos Revs v.AZNAR 262= 117 “Sex 0 Singko” CASE # 117 DELOS REYES v. AZNAR “Ambassador Hotel Scandal”, “Sex in the City” + DR charged Atty. A, chairman of the college of medicine where DR is enrolled, of having carnal knowledge of her for several times under threat that she would fail in his class if she would not submit to A’s lustful desires, + DR submitted to A’s solicitation for sexual intercourse because of respondent's moral ascendancy over her and fear she would flunk in her subject, + [tis the duty of a lawyer to satisfy the court that he is a fit and proper person to enjoy continued membership in the Bar, and he cannot dispense with nor downgrade the high and exacting moral standards of the law profession + [twas highly immoral of Atty. A, a marri man with children, to have taken advantage of his position. 8 Disbarred DR, a medical student, alleged that Atty. A, chairman of the university, had carnal knowledge of her several times under threat that she would fail ir her Pathology subject if she did not submit to his lustful desires. itor General recommends the lawyer's suspension for a period not less than 3 years, finding that the charge of immorality has been substantiated. However, SolGen comments that DR is partly to blame for having gone with respondent to Manilé knowing fully well that the lawyer was a married man with children. Atty. Als DISBARRED. DR’s knowledge of Atty. al status is immaterial, Complainant submitted herself no: for sexual gratification but under the fear of flunking in her subjects and his moral ascendancy over her. Also, Atty, d not present evidence to rebut complainant’s evidence. It is the duty of a lawyer, whenever his moral character is put into issue, to satisfy the Court that he Is a worthy member in the Bar. PENALTY Disbarment [ 2,3, AE CA C-1.01 C-7_R-7.03BARRIENTOS V, DAAROL 263-43 flartloloko ka, Trans” * D proposed marriage to 20-year old B, and succeeded in having carnal relations with B. + Tt was found out that D was already marzied, although he justified that he had been separated from his wife for 16 years and that he breached such promise to marry. «By his acts of deceit and immoral tendencies to appease his sexual desires, D has amply demonstrated his moral delinquency. * Good moral character is a condition which precedes admission to the Bar, and is not dispensed with upon admission thereto - itis a continuing qualification which all lawyers must possess. « The practice of law is a privilege accorded only to those who measure up to the standards of mental & moral fitness CASE #43 BARRIENTOS v. DAAROL “Backseat Scandal” + Atty. D, a family friend, invited B to be one of the usherettes in the M’s Convention. This was followed by a series of “joyrides” wherein the D and B engaged in intimacies. B finally submitted herself to him upon his promise of marriage. Then, B got pregnant and D confessed that he was already a married man albeit estranged for 16 years with his wife. D alleged that he was a Moslem convert and can marry up to four wives. * Atty. D is DISBARRED. B was never informed of his real marital status. Atty. D misrepresented himself as being eligible to remarry, however, this was a deception since he never bothered to annul said marriage. His allegation that he was a Moslem convert was not supported by any evidence and purely self-serving, + Atty. D succeeded in having carnal relations with complainant by deception, made her pregnant, suggested abortion, breached his promise to marry her, and then deserted her and the child. Atty A is therefore guilty of deceit and grossly Immoral conduct. Disbarred PENALTY | Disbarment None fe CL ROL C-1 C-1.01 C-7_R-7.03wy 2x0 SopERANO V. VILLANUEVA 264~ 468 “Pinekeng Pekeng Kasal” * S filed an action against Atty. V alleging that V had induced her to take part ina fake wedding and to cohabit. + The SC found the complaint unmeritorious. + An attorney may be disbarred or suspended for misconduct committed before his admission to the Bar. + To justify disbarment for breach of good faith committed before admission, the transaction or act must be so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree. + Intimacy between a man and a woman who are not married is neither so corrupt nor so unprincipled as to warrant disbarment, a- None None a RLV CASE # 468 SOBERANO v. VILLANUEVA “Friends with Benefits”, “Consenting Adults” S petitioned the SC for disbarment of Atty. V, alleging that V cohabited with her as a consequence of which she bore him two children. She alleged that the lawyer procured a fake marriage with her end that subsequently he abandoned her and their children The court found that there was no simulated Marriage between the parties. Letters written by S to V shows that they have been engaging In intimate relations even prior to the alleged date of the simulated marriage. Petition is DISMISSED. Intimacy between a man and a woman who are not married, especially in the light of the circumstances attending in this case, is neither so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act nor so unprincipled as to warrant a disbarment or disciplinary action against a lawyer.CAS) 280 MonraNa v. Ruabo 264-330 “Long Beach Hotel Diet Makes You Pregnant” Atty. R, then Assistant Provincial Fiscal courted the complainant M In the course of their relations involving sexual trysts M became pregnant Atty. R, however, married another woman, prompting M to file the instant action Intimacy between a man and a woman who are not married is neither so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act nor so unprincipled as to warrant disbarment or disciplinary action against the ‘man as a member of the Bar His dismissal as Assistant Provincial Fiscal is punishment enough for what he had cone, and it would be harsh under the special circumstances of the case to impose upon him the extreme penalty of disbarment Severe R. CLR1O1 CASE # 330 MONTANA v. RUADO “A Woman's Sweet Revenge" M petitioned the SC for the disbarment of Provincial Fiscal R. R courted M, then a filing clerk of the court. Allegedly, she believed in the sincerity of R, both of them being single at that time, and submitted herself to him resulting in her pregnancy. However, after the delivery of the child, R married another woman. Atty. R wes dismissed from his position as Fiscal because of M's administrative case, Petition is DISMISSED. SC held that disbarment is too harsh considering that he was already discharged as a Fiscal. Court also held that the sexual relations were of mutual desire and were not prompted solely by the expectancy of a marriage. PENALTY | Disbarment case dis C-1 C-1.01 C-7_R-7.03 C-102¥e Rapaza v. THANO 264-412 “Let’s Get Physical” + Tis a lawyer, age 28 and single while R, age 30, a physical education teacher * T had sexual intercourse with R who later on gave birth to their child. + T recognized the child, he and R being free to marry + Thowever married R’s cousin whom R knew T had been courting, + The Supreme Court held that since T and R were both unmarried at that time and that the subsequent marriage of T to R's cousin does not amount to gross misconduct. + To warrant disbarment, the act must be “grossly immoral”; in this case, the cohabitation without benefit of marriage is only immoral —— — CASE #412 RADAZA v. TEJANO “3” Party Ka Lang!” + Disberment case on the ground of immorality, respondent having had sexual intercourse with compleinant resulting in her giving birth to a child, whom respondent readiily recognized, both complainant and he being free to merry, she being about 30 years of age and he 28. + Subsequently, however, T married R’s cousin, whom she knew T had been courting. + To be the basis of a disciplinary action, the act must not merely be immoral; it must be ‘grossly immoral’ ~ It must be so corrupt ard false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree. + Because of petitioner's active and voluntary participation in her relationship with respondent, T’s acts are mot grossly immoral nor highly reprehensible, (PENALTY [Exculpated 6 FE C7, R-7.03