You are on page 1of 132

ARTICLE XII interested financially in any contract with, or in any ARTICLE IX AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL

NATIONAL ECONOMY AND PATRIMONY franchise or special privilege granted by the CONSTITUTIONAL COMMISSION GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991
Government, or any subdivision, agency, or
Section 14. The sustained development of a instrumentality thereof, including any government- A. COMMON PROVISIONS Section 90. Practice of Profession. -
reservoir of national talents consisting of Filipino owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary,
scientists, entrepreneurs, professionals, managers, Section 2. No member of a Constitutional (a) All governors, city and municipal mayors are
during his term of office. He shall not intervene in
high-level technical manpower and skilled workers Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other prohibited from practicing their profession or
any matter before any office of the Government for
and craftsmen in all fields shall be promoted by the office or employment. Neither shall he engage in the engaging in any occupation other than the exercise
his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called
State. The State shall encourage appropriate practice of any profession or in the active of their functions as local chief executives.
upon to act on account of his office.
technology and regulate its transfer for the national management or control of any business which, in
any way, may be affected by the functions of his (b) Sanggunian members may practice their
benefit. The practice of all professions in the ARTICLE VIII
office, nor shall he be financially interested, directly professions, engage in any occupation, or teach in
Philippines shall be limited to Filipino citizens, save JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise schools except during session hours: Provided, That
in cases prescribed by law.
Section 15. or privilege granted by the Government, any of its sanggunian members who are also members of the
RULE 115 subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, Bar shall not:
1. All cases or matters filed after the including government-owned or controlled
RIGHTS OF ACCUSED effectivity of this Constitution must be (1) Appear as counsel before any court in any civil
corporations or their subsidiaries.
decided or resolved within twenty-four case wherein a local government unit or any office,
Section 1. Rights of accused at the trial . — In all months from date of submission for the B. THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION agency, or instrumentality of the government is the
criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be entitled Supreme Court, and, unless reduced by adverse party;
to the following rights: the Supreme Court, twelve months for all Section 8. No elective or appointive public officer or
employee shall receive additional, double, or indirect (2) Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein
lower collegiate courts, and three months
(c) To be present and defend in person and by compensation, unless specifically authorized by law, an officer or employee of the national or local
for all other lower courts.
counsel at every stage of the proceedings, from nor accept without the consent of the Congress, any government is accused of an offense committed in
arraignment to promulgation of the judgment. The 2. A case or matter shall be deemed present, emolument, office, or title of any kind from relation to his office.
accused may, however, waive his presence at the submitted for decision or resolution upon any foreign government.
trial pursuant to the stipulations set forth in his bail, (3) Collect any fee for their appearance in
the filing of the last pleading, brief, or
unless his presence is specifically ordered by the Pensions or gratuities shall not be considered as administrative proceedings involving the local
memorandum required by the Rules of
court for purposes of identification. The absence of additional, double, or indirect compensation. government unit of which he is an official; and
Court or by the court itself.
the accused without justifiable cause at the trial of
ARTICLE XI (4) Use property and personnel of the government
which he had notice shall be considered a waiver of 3. Upon the expiration of the corresponding
ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC OFFICERS except when the sanggunian member concerned is
his right to be present thereat. When an accused period, a certification to this effect signed
defending the interest of the government.
under custody escapes, he shall be deemed to have by the Chief Justice or the presiding judge
Section 8. The Ombudsman and his Deputies shall
waived his right to be present on all subsequent trial shall forthwith be issued and a copy (c) Doctors of medicine may practice their profession
be natural-born citizens of the Philippines, and at the
dates until custody over him is regained. Upon thereof attached to the record of the case even during official hours of work only on occasions
time of their appointment, at least forty years old, of
motion, the accused may be allowed to defend or matter, and served upon the parties. of emergency: Provided, That the officials concerned
recognized probity and independence, and
himself in person when it sufficiently appears to the The certification shall state why a decision do not derive monetary compensation therefrom.
members of the Philippine Bar, and must not have
court that he can properly protect his right without or resolution has not been rendered or
been candidates for any elective office in the
the assistance of counsel. issued within said period. Section 91. Statement of Assets and Liabilities.  - (a)
immediately preceding election. The Ombudsman
Officials and employees of local government units
ARTICLE VI 4. Despite the expiration of the applicable must have, for ten years or more, been a judge or
shall file sworn statements of assets, liabilities and
THE LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT mandatory period, the court, without engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.
net worth, lists of relatives within the fourth civil
prejudice to such responsibility as may degree of consanguinity or affinity in government
Section 14. No Senator or Member of the House of During their tenure, they shall be subject to the same
have been incurred in consequence service, financial and business interests, and
Representatives may personally appear as counsel disqualifications and prohibitions as provided for in
thereof, shall decide or resolve the case or personnel data sheets as required by law.
before any court of justice or before the Electoral Section 2 of Article 1X-A of this Constitution.
matter submitted thereto for
Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative determination, without further delay. REPUBLIC ACT NO. 910
Republic Act No. 7160             October 10, 1991
bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be

Page 1 of 132
AN ACT TO PROVIDE FOR THE RETIREMENT OF EN BANC Official Receipt Number and Date of Payment of from signing a pleading himself as presently allowed
JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT AND OF Current IBP Membership Dues be Indicated by by the Rules.
THE COURT OF APPEALS, FOR THE Gentlemen: Counsel per IBP Resolution NO. XIV-1999-63, we
ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROVISIONS HEREOF defined on 26 September 2000 the consequences ACCORDINGLY, our Resolution dated 12
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a November 2002 is amended for clarification to read
BY THE GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE for non-compliance with the requirement for lawyers
resolution of this Court dated APR 01 2003. as follows-
SYSTEM, AND TO REPEAL COMMONWEALTH to indicate their IBP Official Receipt Number and
ACT NUMBERED FIVE HUNDRED AND THIRTY- Bar Matter No. 1132(Re: Resolution No. 112-2002 of Date of Issue in all pleadings, motions and papers
The Court Resolved, upon recommendation of the
SIX the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Ilocos Norte, filed in court as follows -
Office of the Bar Confidant, to GRANT the request of
Requesting to Require Lawyers to Indicate in their the Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the
Section 1. When a Justice of the Supreme Court or All pleadings, motions and papers filed in
Pleadings their Number in the Roll of Attorneys.) Philippines and the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of
of the Court of Appeals who has rendered at least court, whether personally or by mail, shall bear
twenty years' service either in the judiciary or in any counsel's current IBP official receipt number and Ilocos Norte to require all lawyers to indicate their
On 12 November 2002 we granted the request of the
other branch of the Government, or in both, (a) date of issue, otherwise, such pleadings, motions Roll of Attorneys Number in all papers or pleadings
Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the
retires for having attained the age of seventy years, and papers may not be acted upon by the court, submitted to the various judicial or quasi-judicial
Philippines (IBP) and the Sangguniang
or (b) resigns by reason of his incapacity to without prejudice to whatever disciplinary action the bodies in addition to the requirement of indicating
Panlalawigan of Ilocos Norte to require all lawyers to
discharge the duties of his office, he shall receive court may take against the erring counsel who shall the current Professional Tax Receipt (PTR) and the
indicate their Roll of Attorneys Number in all papers
during the residue of his natural life, in the manner likewise be required to comply with the requirement IBP Official Receipt or Life Member Number.
and pleadings filed in judicial or quasi-judicial bodies
hereinafter provided, the salary which he was in addition to the previously required current within five (5) days from notice.Failure to comply
All pleadings, motions and papers filed in court,
receiving at the time of his retirement or resignation. Professional Tax Receipt (PTR) and the IBP Official with such requirement shall be a ground for further
whether personally or by mail, which do not bear
And when a Justice of the Supreme Court or of the Receipt or life Member Number.The requirement disciplinary sanction and for contempt of court."
counsel's Roll of Attorneys Number as herein
Court of Appeals has attained the age of fifty-seven was meant to protect the public by making it easier
Considering that the requirement to state the Roll of required may not be acted upon by the court,
years and has rendered at least twenty-years' to detect impostors who represent themselves as
Attorneys Number in all pleadings filed in court or without prejudice to whatever disciplinary action the
service in the Government, ten or more of which members of the Bar.It was likewise intended to help
quasi-judicial body, like that of the requirement to court may take against the erring counsel who shall
have been continuously rendered as such Justice or lawyers keep track of their Roll of Attorneys Number.
indicate the IBP Official Receipt Number and Date of likewise be required to comply with the requirement
as judge of a court of record, he shall be likewise
Issue, pertains to counsel filing the pleading or other within five (5) days from notice.Failure to comply
entitled to retire and receive during the residue of his On 16 January 2003 Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, Head,
paper in behalf of his client, we see no reason why with such requirement shall be a ground for further
natural life, in the manner also hereinafter Academic Affairs Office, Philippine Judicial Academy
non-compliance should not be meted the same disciplinary sanction and for contempt of court.
prescribed, the salary which he was then receiving. (PHILJA), filed this Motion for Clarification dated 16
It is a condition of the pension provided for herein January 2003 asking that aforesaid Resolution dated penalty as in the case of failure to indicate the IBP
Strict compliance herewith is enjoined effective
that no retiring Justice during the time that he is 12 November 2002 be clarified so that proper Official Receipt Number and Date of Issue.Hence,
immediately (amendments italized).
receiving said pension shall appear as counsel instruction may be conveyed to judges during we adopt by analogy in the present matter what we
before any court in any civil case wherein the seminars, courses, and programs conducted by the have already stated in our Resolution of 26 Very truly yours,
Government or any subdivision or instrumentality PHILJA. September 2000 in Bar Matter No. 287.
thereof is the adverse party, or in any criminal case LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO
According to Fr. Aquino, two (2) issues needed With respect to the second issue, it is asked whether Clerk of Court
wherein and officer or employee of the Government
clarification, to wit:(a) whether or not a judge may our Resolution of 12 November 2002 may be
is accused of an offense committed in relation to his
dismiss an action, expunge from the records or construed as precluding a party who may not be a By:
office, or collect any fee for his appearance in any
refuse inclusion from the records of any pleading lawyer from signing his own pleadings, as presently
administrative proceedings to maintain an interest (Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA
wherein signatory counsel failed to state his roll of allowed by the Rules.
adverse to the Government, insular, provincial or
municipal, or to any of its legally constituted officers. Attorneys Number; and (b) whether or not the Assistant Clerk of Court
We answer the query in the negative.As the
Resolution of 12 November 2002 maybe construed
requirement is directed against lawyers only and the
[B.M. No. 1132. April 1, 2003] as precluding a party who may not be a lawyer from B.M. No. 1922             June 3, 2008
purpose for which is to screen bogus lawyers and
signing his own pleadings, as presently allowed by
RE: RESOLUTION NO. 112-2002 OF THE protect the public from them, the requirement and RE. NUMBER AND DATE OF MCLE CERTIFICATE
the Rules.
SANGGUNIANG PANLALAWIGAN OF ILOCOS the consequent penalties therefore cannot be OF COMPLETION/EXEMPTION REQUIRED IN
NORTE With respect to the first issue, it is worth mentioning construed as precluding a party who is not a lawyer ALL PLEADINGS/MOTIONS.
that in Bar Matter No. 287 Re: Requirement that

Page 2 of 132
Sirs/Mesdames: 1999, or almost three years later, we declared to the victims of the Doña Paz tragedy for free.
respondent Martinez guilty of Contempt under Rule However, when the plaintiff in the said civil case was
Quoted hereunder, for your information is a 71, Sec. 3[b] of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure issued a check for P90,000 by Sulpicio Lines
resolution of the Court En Banc dated  June 3, 2008 DECISION and ordered his imprisonment until he complied with representing compensation for the deaths of his wife
the aforesaid resolutions.8 and two daughters, Atty. Martinez asked plaintiff to
"Bar Matter No. 1922. – Re: Recommendation of the
endorse said check, which was then deposited in
Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) On 05 April 1999, the National Bureau of the account of Dr. Martinez, Atty. Martinez's wife.
Board to Indicate in All Pleadings Filed with the Investigation reported9 that respondent was arrested When plaintiff asked for his money, he was only able
Courts the Counsel’s MCLE Certificate of in Tacloban City on 26 March 1999, but was
PER CURIAM: to recover a total of P30,000. Atty. Martinez claimed
Compliance or Certificate of Exemption. – The Court subsequently released after having shown proof of the remaining P60,000 as his attorney's fees.
Resolved to NOTE the Letter, dated May 2, 2008, of This is a verified petition 1 for disbarment filed against compliance with the resolutions of 17 February 1997 Holding that it was "absurd and totally ridiculous
Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura, Atty. Francisco Martinez for having been convicted and 27 April 1998 by remitting the amount of P2,000 that for a simple legal service … he would collect 2/3
Chairperson, Committee on Legal Education and by final judgment in Criminal Case No. 6608 of a and submitting his long overdue Comment. of the money claim," the trial court ordered Atty.
Bar Matters, informing the Court of the diminishing crime involving moral turpitude by Branch 8 of the Martinez to pay the plaintiff therein the amount of
interest of the members of the Bar in the MCLE Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Tacloban City. 2 In the said Comment10 dated 16 March 1999,
P60,000 with interest, P5,000 for moral and
requirement program. respondent stated that:
exemplary damages, and the costs of the suit.
The dispositive portion of the same states:
The Court further Resolved, upon the 1. He failed to respond to our Resolution dated 17
Said trial court also made particular mention of
recommendation of the Committee on Legal WHEREFORE, this Court finds the accused February 1997 as he was at that time undergoing
Martinez's dilatory tactics during the trial, citing
Education and Bar Matters, to REQUIRE practicing Francisco Martinez guilty beyond reasonable doubt medical treatment at Camp Ruperto Kangleon in
fourteen (14) specific instances thereof. Martinez's
members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings of the crime for (sic) violation of Batas Pambansa Palo, Leyte;
appeal from the above judgment was dismissed by
filed before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies, the Blg. 22 charged in the Information. He is imposed a
2. Complainant Michael Barrios passed away the Court of Appeals for his failure to file his brief,
number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate penalty of one (1) year imprisonment and fine double
sometime in June 1997; and despite having been granted three thirty (30)-day
of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may the amount of the check which is EIGHT
extensions to do so.13
be applicable, for the immediately preceding THOUSAND (8,000.00) PESOS, plus payment of the
3. Said administrative complaint is an offshoot of a
compliance period. Failure to disclose the tax pursuant to Section 205 of the Internal Revenue On 16 June 1999, we referred 14 the present case to
civil case which was decided in respondent's favor
required information would cause the dismissal Code and costs against the accused.3 the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for
(as plaintiff in the said case). Respondent avers that
of the case and the expunction of the pleadings investigation, report, and recommendation.
Complainant further submitted our Resolution dated as a result of his moving for the execution of
from the records.
13 March 1996 and the Entry of Judgment from this judgment in his favor and the eviction of the family
The report15 of IBP Investigating Commissioner
The New Rule shall take effect sixty (60) days after Court dated 20 March 1996. of herein complainant Michael Barrios, the latter filed
Winston D. Abuyuan stated in part that:
its publication in a newspaper of general the present administrative case.
circulation." Caprio-Morales Velasco, Jr., Nachura, On 03 July 1996, we required4 respondent to Several dates for the hearing of the case were
comment on said petition within ten (10) days from In the meantime, on 11 September 1997, a certain
JJ., on official leave. (adv216a) scheduled but none of the parties appeared before
notice. On 17 February 1997, we issued a second Robert Visbal of the Provincial Prosecution Office of
the Commission, until finally it was considered
Very truly yours, resolution5 requiring him to show cause why no Tacloban City submitted a letter 11 to the First
submitted for resolution last 27 June 2002. On the
disciplinary action should be imposed on him for Division Clerk of Court alleging that respondent
same date respondent filed a motion for the
MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA(sgd) failure to comply with our earlier Resolution, and to Martinez also stood charged in another estafa case
dismissal of the case on the ground that the
submit said Comment. On 07 July 1997, we before the Regional Trial Court of Tacloban City,
Clerk of Court complainant died sometime in June 1997 and that
imposed a fine of P1,000 for respondent's failure to Branch 9, as well as a civil case involving the victims
dismissal is warranted because "the case filed by
file said Comment and required him to comply with of the Doña Paz tragedy in 1987, for which the
A.C. No. 4585             November 12, 2004 him does not survive due to his demise; as a matter
our previous resolution within ten days. 6 On 27 April Regional Trial Court of Basey, Samar, Branch 30
of fact, it is extinguished upon his death."
MICHAEL P. BARRIOS, complainant,  1998, we fined respondent an additional P2,000 and rendered a decision against him, his appeal thereto
vs. required him to comply with the resolution requiring having been dismissed by the Court of Appeals. We disagree with respondent's contention.
ATTY. FRANCISCO P. MARTINEZ, respondent. his comment within ten days under pain of
In the said Decision of Branch 30 of the Regional Pursuant to Section 1, Rule 139-B of the Revised
imprisonment and arrest for a period of five (5) days
Trial Court of Basey, Samar,12 it appears that herein Rules of Court, the Honorable Supreme Court or the
or until his compliance.7 Finally, on 03 February
respondent Atty. Martinez offered his legal services

Page 3 of 132
IBP may motu proprio initiate the proceedings when 3. Respondent is now 71 years of age, and has In the present case, respondent has been found a penalty of more than eighteen months, or for
they perceive acts of lawyers which deserve served the judiciary in various capacities (from guilty and convicted by final judgment for violation of a crime involving moral turpitude , shall be
sanctions or when their attention is called by any acting city judge to Municipal Judges League Leyte B.P. Blg. 22 for issuing a worthless check in the disqualified to be a candidate and to hold any office,
one and a probable cause exists that an act has Chapter President) for almost 17 years prior to amount of P8,000. The issue with which we are now unless he has been given plenary pardon or granted
been perpetrated by a lawyer which requires resuming his law practice. concerned is whether or not the said crime is one amnesty. (emphasis supplied)
disciplinary sanctions. involving moral turpitude. 22
On 14 January 2004, we required 18 complainant to Enumerating the elements of that crime, we held that
As earlier cited, respondent lawyer's propensity to file a comment within ten days. On 16 February Moral turpitude "includes everything which is done the act of a person in issuing a check knowing at the
disregard or ignore orders of the Honorable 2004, we received a Manifestation and Motion 19 from contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good time of the issuance that he or she does not have
Supreme Court for which he was fined twice, complainant's daughter, Diane Francis Barrios morals."23 It involves "an act of baseness, vileness, sufficient funds in, or credit with, the drawee bank
arrested and imprisoned reflects an utter lack of Latoja, alleging that they had not been furnished or depravity in the private duties which a man owes for the check in full upon its presentment, is a
good moral character. with a copy of respondent's Motion, notwithstanding his fellow men, or to society in general, contrary to manifestation of moral turpitude. Notwithstanding
the fact that respondent ostensibly lives next door to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty therein petitioner's averment that he was not a
Respondent's conviction of a crime involving moral complainant's family. Required to Comment on 17 between man and woman, or conduct contrary to lawyer, we nevertheless applied our ruling in People
turpitude (estafa and/or violation of BP Blg. 22) May 2004, respondent has until now failed to do so. justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals."24 v. Tuanda, to the effect that
clearly shows his unfitness to protect the
administration of justice and therefore justifies the The records show that respondent, indeed, failed to In People of the Philippines v. Atty. Fe (A) conviction for violation of B.P. Blg. 22, "imports
imposition of sanctions against him (see In re: furnish a copy of said Motion to herein complainant. Tuanda,25 where the erring lawyer was indefinitely deceit" and "certainly relates to and affects the good
Abesamis, 102 Phil. 1182; In re: Jaramillo, 101 Phil. The records also show that respondent was given suspended for having been convicted of three moral character of a person." [Indeed] the effects of
323; In re: Vinzon, 19 SCRA 815; Medina vs. several opportunities to present evidence by this counts of violation of B.P. Blg. 22, we held that the issuance of a worthless check, as we held in the
Bautista, 12 SCRA 1, People vs. Tuanda, Adm. Case Court20 as well as by the IBP.21 Indeed, he only has conviction by final judgment of violation of B.P. Blg. landmark case of Lozano v. Martinez, through
No. 3360, 30 Jan. 1990). himself to blame, for he has failed to present his 22 involves moral turpitude and stated: Justice Pedro L. Yap, "transcends the private
case despite several occasions to do so. It is now interests of the parties directly involved in the
WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is respectfully too late in the day for respondent to ask this court to We should add that the crimes of which respondent transaction and touches the interests of the
recommended that respondent Atty. Francisco P. receive his evidence. was convicted also import deceit and violation of her community at large. The mischief it creates is not
Martinez be disbarred and his name stricken out attorney's oath and the Code of Professional only a wrong to the payee or holder, but also an
from the Roll of Attorneys immediately. This court, moreover, is unwilling to exercise the Responsibility under both of which she was bound injury to the public" since the circulation of valueless
same patience that it did when it waited for his to "obey the laws of the land." Conviction of a crime commercial papers "can very well pollute the
On 27 September 2003, the IBP Board of Governors comment on the original petition. At any rate, after a involving moral turpitude might not (as in the instant channels of trade and commerce, injure the banking
passed a Resolution16 adopting and approving the careful consideration of the records of the instant case, violation of B.P. Blg. 22 does not) relate to the system and eventually hurt the welfare of society
report and recommendation of its Investigating case, we find the evidence on record sufficient to exercise of the profession of a lawyer; however, it and the public interest." Thus, paraphrasing Black's
Commissioner. support the IBP's findings. certainly relates to and affects the good moral definition, a drawer who issues an unfunded check
character of a person convicted of such offense … deliberately reneges on his private duties he owes
On 03 December 2003, respondent Martinez filed a Under Sec. 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, a 26 
(emphasis supplied) his fellow men or society in a manner contrary to
Motion for Reconsideration and/or member of the Bar may be disbarred or suspended
Reinvestigation,17 in the instant case alleging that: accepted and customary rule of right and duty,
from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for Over ten years later, we reiterated the above ruling
justice, honesty or good morals.28(emphasis
any deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in Villaber v. Commission on Elections27 and
1. The Report and Recommendation of the IBP supplied)
in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by disqualified a congressional candidate for having
Investigating Commissioner is tantamount to a
reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral been sentenced by final judgment for three counts In the recent case of Barrientos v. Libiran-
deprivation of property without due process of law,
turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is of violation of B.P. Blg. 22 in accordance with Sec. Meteoro,29 we stated that:
although admittedly the practice of law is a privilege;
required to take before admission to practice, or for 12 of the Omnibus Election Code, which states:
2. If respondent is given another chance to have his a willful disobedience of any lawful order of a (T)he issuance of checks which were later
superior court, or for corruptly or willfully appearing SEC. 12. Disqualifications. — Any person who has dishonored for having been drawn against a closed
day in court and allowed to adduce evidence, the
as an attorney for a party to a case without authority been declared by competent authority insane or account indicates a lawyer's unfitness for the trust
result/outcome would be entirely different from that
to do so. incompetent, or has been sentenced by final and confidence reposed on her. It shows a lack of
arrived at by the Investigating Commissioner; and
judgment for subversion, insurrection, rebellion, or personal honesty and good moral character as to
for any offense for which he has been sentenced to render her unworthy of public confidence. [ Cuizon v.

Page 4 of 132
Macalino, A.C. No. 4334, 07 July 2004] The issuance faithfully perform their duties to society, to the bar, Moreover, the IBP report cited the failure of both The IBP Board of Governors recommended that
of a series of worthless checks also shows the to the courts and to their clients. Their conduct must parties to appear before the Commission as the respondent be disbarred from the practice of law.
remorseless attitude of respondent, unmindful to the always reflect the values and norms of the legal main reason for the long delay, until the same was We agree.
deleterious effects of such act to the public interest profession as embodied in the Code of Professional finally submitted for Resolution on 27 June 2002.
and public order. [Lao v. Medel, 405 SCRA 227] It Responsibility. On these considerations, the Court Respondent, therefore, squandered away seven We come now to the matter of the penalty
also manifests a lawyer's low regard for her may disbar or suspend lawyers for any professional years to "have his day in court and adduce imposable in this case. In Co v. Bernardino and Lao
commitment to the oath she has taken when she or private misconduct showing them to be wanting evidence" in his behalf, which inaction also unduly v. Medel, we upheld the imposition of one year's
joined her peers, seriously and irreparably tarnishing in moral character, honesty, probity and good delayed the court's prompt disposition of this suspension for non-payment of debt and issuance of
the image of the profession she should hold in high demeanor — or to be unworthy to continue as petition. worthless checks, or a suspension of six months
esteem. [Sanchez v. Somoso, A.C. No. 6061, 03 officers of the Court."33 upon partial payment of the obligation. 42 However, in
October 2003] In Pajares v. Abad Santos,35 we reminded attorneys these cases, for various reasons, none of the
Nor are we inclined to look with favor upon that "there must be more faithful adherence to Rule issuances resulted in a conviction by the erring
Clearly, therefore, the act of a lawyer in issuing a respondent's plea that if "given another chance to 7, Section 5 of the Rules of Court [now Rule 7, lawyers for either estafa or B.P. Blg. 22. Thus, we
check without sufficient funds to cover the same have his day in court and to adduce evidence, the Section 3] which provides that the signature of an held therein that the issuance of worthless checks
constitutes such willful dishonesty and immoral result/outcome would be entirely different from that attorney constitutes a certificate by him that he has constitutes gross misconduct, for which a lawyer
conduct as to undermine the public confidence in arrived at." We note with displeasure the inordinate read the pleading and that to the best of his may be sanctioned with suspension from the
law and lawyers. And while "the general rule is that a length of time respondent took in responding to our knowledge, information and belief, there is good practice of law.
lawyer may not be suspended or disbarred, and the requirement to submit his Comment on the original ground to support it; and that it is not interposed for
court may not ordinarily assume jurisdiction to petition to disbar him. These acts constitute a willful delay, and expressly admonishes that for a willful In the instant case, however, herein respondent has
discipline him for misconduct in his non-professional disobedience of the lawful orders of this Court, violation of this rule an attorney may be subjected to been found guilty and stands convicted by final
or private capacity, where, however, the misconduct which under Sec. 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court disciplinary action.36 It is noteworthy that in the past, judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude.
outside of the lawyer's professional dealings is so is in itself a cause sufficient for suspension or the Court has disciplined lawyers and judges for In People v. Tuanda, which is similar to this case in
gross a character as to show him morally unfit for disbarment. Thus, from the time we issued our first willful disregard of its orders to file comments or that both respondents were convicted for violation of
the office and unworthy of the privilege which his Resolution on 03 July 1996 requiring him to submit appellant's briefs, as a penalty for disobedience B.P. Blg. 22 which we have held to be such a crime,
licenses and the law confer on him, the court may his Comment, until 16 March 1999, when he thereof. 37 we affirmed the order of suspension from the
be justified in suspending or removing him from the submitted said Comment to secure his release from practice of law imposed by the Court of Appeals,
office of attorney."30 arrest, almost three years had elapsed. For the same reasons, we are disinclined to take until further orders.
respondent's old age and the fact that he served in
The argument of respondent that to disbar him now It is revealing that despite the unwarranted length of the judiciary in various capacities in his favor. If at However, in a long line of cases, some of which
is tantamount to a deprivation of property without time it took respondent to comply, his Comment all, we hold respondent to a higher standard for it, were decided after Tuanda, we have held
due process of law is also untenable. As respondent consists of all of two pages, a copy of which, it for a judge should be the embodiment of disbarment to be the appropriate penalty for
himself admits, the practice of law is a privilege. The appears, he neglected to furnish complainant. 34 And competence, integrity, and independence, 38 and his conviction by final judgment for a crime involving
purpose of a proceeding for disbarment is "to while he claims to have been confined while conduct should be above reproach. 39 The fact that moral turpitude. Thus:
protect the administration of justice by requiring that undergoing medical treatment at the time our respondent has chosen to engage in private practice
1. In In The Matter of Disbarment Proceedings v.
those who exercise this important function shall be Resolution of 17 February 1997 was issued, he does not mean he is now free to conduct himself in
Narciso N. Jaramillo,43 we disbarred a lawyer
competent, honorable and reliable; men in whom merely reserved the submission of a certification to less honorable – or indeed in a less than honorable –
convicted of estafa without discussing the
courts and clients may repose confidence." 31 "A that effect. Nor, indeed, was he able to offer any manner.
circumstances behind his conviction. We held that:
proceeding for suspension or disbarment is not in explanation for his failure to submit his Comment
any sense a civil action where the complainant is from the time we issued our first Resolution of 03 We stress that membership in the legal profession is
There is no question that the crime of estafa involves
plaintiff and the respondent lawyer is a defendant. July 1996 until 16 March 1999. In fact, said a privilege,40 demanding a high degree of good moral
moral turpitude. The review of respondent's
Disciplinary proceedings involve no private interest Comment alleged, merely, that the complainant, character, not only as a condition precedent to
conviction no longer rests upon us. The judgment
and afford no redress for private grievance. They are Michael Barrios, passed away sometime in June admission, but also as a continuing requirement for
not only has become final but has been executed.
undertaken and prosecuted solely for the public 1997, and imputed upon the latter unsupported ill- the practice of law.41 Sadly, herein respondent falls
No elaborate argument is necessary to hold the
welfare, and for the purpose of preserving courts of motives for instituting the said Petition against him, short of the exacting standards expected of him as a
respondent unworthy of the privilege bestowed on
justice from the official ministrations of persons unfit which argument has already been resolved squarely vanguard of the legal profession.
him as a member of the bar. Suffice it to say that, by
to practice them."32 "Verily, lawyers must at all times in the abovementioned IBP report.

Page 5 of 132
his conviction, the respondent has proved himself questioned, his disbarment is inevitable . (emphasis a copy of this Decision be entered in the well from then on and that the illicit relationship
unfit to protect the administration of justice.44 supplied)50 respondent's record as a member of the Bar, and between her husband and respondent would come
notice of the same be served on the Integrated Bar to an end.
2. In In Re: Dalmacio De Los Angeles,45 a lawyer was 6. In In Re: Attorney Jose Avanceña ,51 the of the Philippines, and on the Office of the Court
convicted of the crime of attempted bribery in a final conditional pardon extended to the erring lawyer by Administrator for circulation to all courts in the However, complainant again discovered that the
decision rendered by the Court of Appeals. "And the Chief Executive also failed to relieve him of the country. illicit relationship between her husband and
since bribery is admittedly a felony involving moral penalty of disbarment imposed by this court. respondent continued, and that sometime in
turpitude (7 C.J.S., p. 736; 5 Am. Jur. p. 428), this SO ORDERED. December 1988, respondent and her husband,
Court, much as it sympathizes with the plight of 7. In In Re Disbarment of Rodolfo Pajo ,52 a lawyer Carlos Ui, had a second child. Complainant then met
respondent, is constrained to decree his disbarment was charged and found guilty of the crime of ADM. CASE No. 3319               June 8, 2000 again with respondent sometime in March 1989 and
as ordained by Section 25 of Rule 127." 46 falsification of public document for having prepared pleaded with respondent to discontinue her illicit
and notarized a deed of sale of a parcel of land LESLIE UI, complainant, 
relationship with Carlos Ui but to no avail. The illicit
3. In Ledesma De Jesus-Paras v. Quinciano knowing that the supposed affiant was an impostor vs.
relationship persisted and complainant even came to
Vailoces,47 the erring lawyer acknowledged the and that the vendor had been dead for almost eight ATTY. IRIS BONIFACIO, respondent.
know later on that respondent had been employed
execution of a document purporting to be a last will years. We ruled that disbarment follows as a by her husband in his company.
DE LEON, JR., J.:
and testament, which later turned out to be a consequence of a lawyer's conviction by final
forgery. He was found guilty beyond reasonable judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude, and Before us is an administrative complaint for A complaint for disbarment, docketed as Adm. Case
doubt of the crime of falsification of public since the crime of falsification of public document disbarment against Atty. Iris Bonifacio for allegedly No. 3319, was then filed on August 11, 1989 by the
document, which the Court held to be a crime involves moral turpitude, we ordered respondent's carrying on an immoral relationship with Carlos L. Ui, complainant against respondent Atty. Iris Bonifacio
involving moral turpitude, said act being contrary to name stricken off the roll of attorneys. husband of complainant, Leslie Ui. before the Commission on Bar Discipline of the
justice, honesty and good morals, and was Integrated Bar of the Philippines (hereinafter,
subsequently disbarred. 8. In Adelina T. Villanueva v. Atty. Teresita Sta. The relevant facts are: Commission) on the ground of immorality, more
Ana,53 we upheld the recommendation of the IBP particularly, for carrying on an illicit relationship with
4. In In Re: Disbarment Proceedings Against Atty. Board of Governors to disbar a lawyer who had On January 24, 1971 complainant Leslie Ui married the complainant's husband, Carlos Ui. In her
Diosdado Q. Gutierrez,48 Atty. Gutierrez was been convicted of estafa through falsification of Carlos L. Ui at the Our Lady of Lourdes Church in Answer,2 respondent averred that she met Carlos Ui
convicted for murder. After serving a portion of the public documents, because she was "totally unfit to Quezon City1and as a result of their marital union, sometime in 1983 and had known him all along to be
sentence, he was granted a conditional pardon by be a member of the legal profession." 54 they had four (4) children, namely, Leilani, Lianni, a bachelor, with the knowledge, however, that
the President. Holding that the pardon was not Lindsay and Carl Cavin, all surnamed Ui. Sometime Carlos Ui had children by a Chinese woman in
absolute and thus did not reach the offense itself but 9. In Victoriano P. Resurreccion v. Atty. Ciriaco C. in December 1987, however, complainant found out Amoy, China, from whom he had long been
merely remitted the unexecuted portion of his term, Sayson,55 a lawyer was disbarred for having been that her husband. Carlos Ui, was carrying on an illicit estranged. She stated that during one of their trips
the court nevertheless disbarred him. convicted of estafa by final judgment for relationship with respondent Atty. Iris Bonifacio with abroad, Carlos Ui formalized his intention to marry
misappropriating the funds of his client. whom he begot a daughter sometime in 1986, and her and they in fact got married in Hawaii, USA in
5. In In Re: Atty. Isidro P. Vinzon ,49 Atty. Vinzon was that they had been living together at No. 527 San
In this case as well, we find disbarment to be the 19853 . Upon their return to Manila, respondent did
convicted of the crime of estafa for misappropriating Carlos Street, Ayala Alabang Village in Muntinlupa
appropriate penalty. "Of all classes and professions, not live with Carlos Ui. The latter continued to live
the amount of P7,000.00, and was subsequently City. Respondent who is a graduate of the College
the lawyer is most sacredly bound to uphold the with his children in their Greenhills residence
disbarred. We held thus: of Law of the University of the Philippines was
laws. He is their sworn servant; and for him, of all because respondent and Carlos Ui wanted to let the
admitted to the Philippine Bar in 1982. children gradually to know and accept the fact of his
Upon the other hand, and dealing now with the men in the world, to repudiate and override the laws,
merits of the case, there can be no question that the to trample them underfoot and to ignore the very second marriage before they would live together. 4
Carlos Ui admitted to complainant his relationship
term "moral turpitude" includes everything which is bands of society, argues recreancy to his position with the respondent. Complainant then visited In 1986, respondent left the country and stayed in
done contrary to justice, honesty, or good morals. In and office and sets a pernicious example to the respondent at her office in the later part of June Honolulu, Hawaii and she would only return
essence and in all respects, estafa, no doubt, is a insubordinate and dangerous elements of the body 1988 and introduced herself as the legal wife of occasionally to the Philippines to update her law
crime involving moral turpitude because the act is politic."56 Carlos Ui. Whereupon, respondent admitted to her practice and renew legal ties. During one of her trips
unquestionably against justice, honesty and good that she has a child with Carlos Ui and alleged,
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Francisco P. to Manila sometime in June 1988, she was
morals (In re Gutierrez, Adm. Case No. 263, July 31, however; that everything was over between her and
Martinez is hereby dISBARRED and his name is confronted by a woman who insisted that she was
1962; Bouvier's Law Dictionary; In re Basa, 41 Phil. Carlos Ui. Complainant believed the representations
ORDERED STRICKEN from the Roll of Attorneys. Let the lawful wife of Carlos Ui. Hurt and desolate upon
275-76). As respondent's guilt cannot now be of respondent and thought things would turn out her discovery of the true civil status of Carlos Ui,

Page 6 of 132
respondent then left for Honolulu, Hawaii sometime complainant in December 1987. The same evidence respondent and Carlos Ui lived together as husband she has conducted herself in an immoral manner for
in July 1988 and returned only in March 1989 with however show that respondent Carlos Ui was still and wife at 527 San Carlos Street, Ayala Alabang, which she deserves to be barred from the practice
her two (2) children. On March 20, 1989, a few days living with complainant up to the latter part of 1988 Muntinlupa, Metro Manila. of law. Respondent averred that the complaint
after she reported to work with the law firm 5 she was and/or the early part of 1989. should be dismissed on two (2) grounds, namely:
connected with, the woman who represented herself In the proceedings before the IBP Commission on
to be the wife of Carlos Ui again came to her office, It would therefore be logical and safe to state that Bar Discipline, complainant filed a Motion to Cite (i) Respondent conducted herself in a manner
demanding to know if Carlos Ui has been the "relationship" of respondents started and was Respondent in Contempt of the consistent with the requirement of good moral
communicating with her. discovered by complainant sometime in 1987 when Commission 10 wherein she charged respondent with character for the practice of the legal profession;
she and respondent Carlos were still living at No. 26 making false allegations in her Answer and for and
It is respondent's contention that her relationship Potsdam Street, Northeast Greenhills, San Juan, submitting a supporting document which was
with Carlos Ui is not illicit because they were married Metro Manila and they, admittedly, continued to live altered and intercalated. She alleged that in the (ii) Complainant failed to prove her allegation that
abroad and that after June 1988, when respondent together at their conjugal home up to early ( sic) part Answer of respondent filed before the Integrated respondent conducted herself in an immoral
discovered Carlos Ui's true civil status, she cut off of 1989 or later 1988, when respondent Carlos left Bar, respondent averred, among others, that she manner.
all her ties with him. Respondent averred that Carlos the same. was married to Carlos Ui on October 22, 1985 and
In her defense, respondent contends, among others,
Ui never lived with her in Alabang, and that he attached a Certificate of Marriage to substantiate her
From the above, it would not be amiss to conclude that it was she who was the victim in this case and
resided at 26 Potsdam Street, Greenhills, San Juan, averment. However, the Certificate of
that altho (sic) the relationship, illicit as complainant not Leslie Ui because she did not know that Carlos
Metro Manila. It was respondent who lived in Marriage 11duly certified by the State Registrar as a
puts it, had been prima facie established by Ui was already married, and that upon learning of
Alabang in a house which belonged to her mother, true copy of the record on file in the Hawaii State
complainant's evidence, this same evidence had this fact, respondent immediately cut-off all her ties
Rosalinda L. Bonifacio; and that the said house was Department of Health, and duly authenticated by the
failed to even  prima facie establish the "fact of with Carlos Ui. She stated that there was no reason
built exclusively from her parents' funds. 6 By way of Philippine Consulate General in Honolulu, Hawaii,
respondent's cohabitation in the concept of for her to doubt at that time that the civil status of
counterclaim, respondent sought moral damages in USA revealed that the date of marriage between
husband and wife at the 527 San Carlos St., Ayala Carlos Ui was that of a bachelor because he spent
the amount of Ten Million Pesos (Php10,000,000.00) Carlos Ui and respondent Atty. Iris Bonifacio was
Alabang house, proof of which is necessary and so much time with her, and he was so open in his
against complainant for having filed the present October 22, 1987, and not October 22, 1985 as
indispensable to at least create probable cause for courtship. 18
allegedly malicious and groundless disbarment case claimed by respondent in her Answer. According to
against respondent. the offense charged. The statement alone of complainant, the reason for that false allegation was On the issue of the falsified marriage certificate,
complainant, worse, a statement only of a because respondent wanted to impress upon the respondent alleged that it was highly incredible for
In her Reply dated April 6, 1990, complainant

conclusion respecting the fact of cohabitation does said IBP that the birth of her first child by Carlos Ui her to have knowingly attached such marriage
states, among others, that respondent knew not make the complainant's evidence thereto any was within the wedlock. 12 It is the contention of certificate to her Answer had she known that the
perfectly well that Carlos Ui was married to better/stronger (U.S. vs. Casipong and Mongoy, 20 complainant that such act constitutes a violation of same was altered. Respondent reiterated that there
complainant and had children with her even at the Phil. 178). Articles 183 13 and 184 14 of the Revised Penal Code, was no compelling reason for her to make it appear
start of her relationship with Carlos Ui, and that the and also contempt of the Commission; and that the
It is worth stating that the evidence submitted by that her marriage to Carlos Ui took place either in
reason respondent went abroad was to give birth to act of respondent in making false allegations in her
respondents in support of their respective positions 1985 or 1987, because the fact remains that
her two (2) children with Carlos Ui. Answer and submitting an altered/intercalated
on the matter support and bolster the foregoing respondent and Carlos Ui got married before
document are indicative of her moral perversity and complainant confronted respondent and informed
During the pendency of the proceedings before the conclusion/recommendation.
lack of integrity which make her unworthy to be a the latter of her earlier marriage to Carlos Ui in June
Integrated Bar, complainant also charged her
WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully recommended member of the Philippine Bar. 1988. Further, respondent stated that it was Carlos
husband, Carlos Ui, and respondent with the crime
of Concubinage before the Office of the Provincial that the instant complaint be dismissed for want of Ui who testified and admitted that he was the person
In her Opposition (To Motion To Cite Respondent in
Fiscal of Rizal, docketed as I.S. No. 89-5247, but the evidence to establish probable cause for the offense responsible for changing the date of the marriage
Contempt), 15 respondent averred that she did not
same was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence to charged. certificate from 1987 to 1985, and complainant did
have the original copy of the marriage certificate
establish probable cause for the offense charged. not present evidence to rebut the testimony of
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.8 because the same was in the possession of Carlos
The resolution dismissing the criminal complaint Carlos Ui on this matter.
Ui, and that she annexed such copy because she
against respondent reads: Complainant appealed the said Resolution of the relied in good faith on what appeared on the copy of Respondent posits that complainant's evidence,
Provincial Fiscal of Rizal to the Secretary of Justice, the marriage certificate in her possession. consisting of the pictures of respondent with a child,
Complainant's evidence had prima facie established
but the same was dismissed9 on the ground of pictures of respondent with Carlos Ui, a picture of a
the existence of the "illicit relationship" between the Respondent filed her Memorandum 16 on February
insufficiency of evidence to prove her allegation that garage with cars, a picture of a light colored car with
respondents allegedly discovered by the 22, 1995 and raised the lone issue of whether or not

Page 7 of 132
Plate No. PNS 313, a picture of the same car, and Respondent insists that contrary to the allegations of dated December 13, 1997, the dispositive portion of must be continuous as a requirement to the
portion of the house and ground, and another complainant, there is no showing that respondent which reads as follows: enjoyment of the privilege of law practice, otherwise,
picture of the same car bearing Plate No. PNS 313 had knowledge of the fact of marriage of Carlos Ui the loss thereof is a ground for the revocation of
and a picture of the house and the garage, 19 does to complainant. The allegation that her mother knew RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby such privilege. It has been held —
not prove that she acted in an immoral manner. They Carlos Ui to be a married man does not prove that ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and
have no evidentiary value according to her. The such information was made known to respondent. Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner If good moral character is a sine qua non for
pictures were taken by a photographer from a in the above-entitled case, herein made part of this admission to the bar, then the continued possession
private security agency and who was not presented Hearing on the case ensued, after which the Resolution/Decision as Annex "A", and, finding the of good moral character is also a requisite for
during the hearings. Further, the respondent Commission on Bar Discipline submitted its Report recommendation fully supported by the evidence on retaining membership in the legal profession.
presented the Resolution of the Provincial Fiscal of and Recommendation, finding that: record and the applicable laws and rules, the Membership in the bar may be terminated when a
Pasig in I.S. Case No. 89-5427 dismissing the complaint for Gross Immorality against Respondent lawyer ceases to have good moral character.
In the case at bar, it is alleged that at the time is DISMISSED for lack of merit. Atty. Iris Bonifacio is (Royong vs. Oblena, 117 Phil. 865).
complaint filed by Leslie Ui against respondent for
respondent was courted by Carlos Ui, the latter REPRIMANDED for knowingly and willfully attaching
lack of evidence to establish probable cause for the
represented himself to be single. The Commission to her Answer a falsified Certificate of Marriage with A lawyer may be disbarred for "grossly immoral
offense charged 20 and the dismissal of the appeal by
does not find said claim too difficult to believe in the a stern warning that a repetition of the same will conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime
the Department of Justice21 to bolster her argument
light of contemporary human experience. merit a more severe penalty. involving moral turpitude". A member of the bar
that she was not guilty of any immoral or illegal act
should have moral integrity in addition to
because of her relationship with Carlos Ui. In fine, Almost always, when a married man courts a single We agree with the findings aforequoted. professional probity.
respondent claims that she entered the relationship woman, he represents himself to be single,
with Carlos Ui in good faith and that her conduct separated, or without any firm commitment to The practice of law is a privilege. A bar candidate It is difficult to state with precision and to fix an
cannot be considered as willful, flagrant, or another woman. The reason therefor is not hard to does not have the right to enjoy the practice of the inflexible standard as to what is "grossly immoral
shameless, nor can it suggest moral indifference. fathom. By their very nature, single women prefer legal profession simply by passing the bar conduct" or to specify the moral delinquency and
She fell in love with Carlos Ui whom she believed to single men. examinations. It is a privilege that can be revoked, obliquity which render a lawyer unworthy of
be single, and, that upon her discovery of his true subject to the mandate of due process, once a continuing as a member of the bar. The rule implies
civil status, she parted ways with him. The records will show that when respondent lawyer violates his oath and the dictates of legal that what appears to be unconventional behavior to
became aware the (sic) true civil status of Carlos Ui, ethics. The requisites for admission to the practice the straight-laced may not be the immoral conduct
In the Memorandum 22 filed on March 20, 1995 by she left for the United States (in July of 1988). She of law are: that warrants disbarment.
complainant Leslie Ui, she prayed for the disbarment broke off all contacts with him. When she returned
of Atty. Iris Bonifacio and reiterated that respondent to the Philippines in March of 1989, she lived with a. he must be a citizen of the Philippines; Immoral conduct has been defined as "that conduct
committed immorality by having intimate relations her brother, Atty. Teodoro Bonifacio, Jr. Carlos Ui which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and which
with a married man which resulted in the birth of two and respondent only talked to each other because b. a resident thereof; shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the
(2) children. Complainant testified that respondent's of the children whom he was allowed to visit. At no good and respectable members of the community."
mother, Mrs. Linda Bonifacio, personally knew c. at least twenty-one (21) years of age;
time did they live together. (7 C.J.S. 959). 26
complainant and her husband since the late 1970s
d. a person of good moral character;
because they were clients of the bank where Mrs. Under the foregoing circumstances, the Commission In the case at bar, it is the claim of respondent Atty.
Bonifacio was the Branch Manager. 23 It was thus fails to find any act on the part of respondent that e. he must show that no charges against him Bonifacio that when she met Carlos Ui, she knew
highly improbable that respondent, who was living can be considered as unprincipled or disgraceful as involving moral turpitude, are filed or pending in and believed him to be single. Respondent fell in
with her parents as of 1986, would not have been to be reprehensible to a high degree. To be sure, court; love with him and they got married and as a result of
informed by her own mother that Carlos Ui was a she was more of a victim that ( sic) anything else and such marriage, she gave birth to two (2) children.
married man. Complainant likewise averred that should deserve compassion rather than f. possess the required educational qualifications; Upon her knowledge of the true civil status of Carlos
respondent committed disrespect towards the condemnation. Without cavil, this sad episode and Ui, she left him.
Commission for submitting a photocopy of a destroyed her chance of having a normal and happy
family life, a dream cherished by every single girl. g. pass the bar examinations. 25 (Emphasis supplied) Simple as the facts of the case may sound, the
document containing an intercalated date.
effects of the actuations of respondent are not only
x x x           x x x          x x x Clear from the foregoing is that one of the conditions far from simple, they will have a rippling effect on
In her Reply to Complainant's Memorandum 24 ,
prior to admission to the bar is that an applicant how the standard norms of our legal practitioners
respondent stated that complainant miserably failed
Thereafter, the Board of Governors of the Integrated must possess good moral character. More should be defined. Perhaps morality in our liberal
to show sufficient proof to warrant her disbarment.
Bar of the Philippines issued a Notice of Resolution importantly, possession of good moral character

Page 8 of 132
society today is a far cry from what it used to be standards." 29 Respondent's act of immediately However, respondent is hereby REPRIMANDED for marriage. He gave only P10.00 for the child on the
before. This permissiveness notwithstanding, distancing herself from Carlos Ui upon discovering attaching to her Answer a photocopy of her latter's birthdays. Her trust in him and their
lawyers, as keepers of public faith, are burdened his true civil status belies just that alleged moral Marriage Certificate, with an altered or intercalated relationship ended in 1971, when she learned that
with a higher degree of social responsibility and thus indifference and proves that she had no intention of date thereof, with a STERN WARNING that a more respondent married another woman. Hence, this
must handle their personal affairs with greater flaunting the law and the high moral standard of the severe sanction will be imposed on her for any petition.
caution. The facts of this case lead us to believe that legal profession. Complainant's bare assertions to repetition of the same or similar offense in the future.
perhaps respondent would not have found herself in the contrary deserve no credit. After all, the burden Upon complainant's motion, the Court authorized
such a compromising situation had she exercised of proof rests upon the complainant, and the Court SO ORDERED. the taking of testimonies of witnesses by deposition
prudence and been more vigilant in finding out more will exercise its disciplinary powers only if she in 1972. On February 18, 1974, respondent filed a
SBC Case No. 519 July 31, 1997 Manifestation and Motion to Dismiss the case
about Carlos Ui's personal background prior to her establishes her case by clear, convincing and
intimate involvement with him. satisfactory evidence. 30 This, herein complainant citing  complainant's failure to comment on the
PATRICIA FIGUEROA, complainant, 
miserably failed to do. motion of Judge Cuello seeking to be relieved from
vs.
Surely, circumstances existed which should have at the duty to take aforesaid testimonies by deposition.
SIMEON BARRANCO, JR., respondent.
least aroused respondent's suspicion that On the matter of the falsified Certificate of Marriage Complainant filed her comment required and that
something was amiss in her relationship with Carlos attached by respondent to her Answer, we find RESOLUTION she remains interested in the resolution of the
Ui, and moved her to ask probing questions. For improbable to believe the averment of respondent present case. On June 18, 1974, the Court denied
instance, respondent admitted that she knew that that she merely relied on the photocopy of the respondent's motion to dismiss.
Carlos Ui had children with a woman from Amoy, Marriage Certificate which was provided her by
China, yet it appeared that she never exerted the Carlos Ui. For an event as significant as a marriage ROMERO, J.: On October 2, 1980, the Court once again denied a
slightest effort to find out if Carlos Ui and this ceremony, any normal bride would verily recall the motion to dismiss on the ground of abandonment
In a complaint made way back in 1971, Patricia filed by respondent on September 17,
woman were indeed unmarried. Also, despite their date and year of her marriage. It is difficult to fathom
Figueroa petitioned that respondent Simeon 1979.2 Respondent's third motion to dismiss was
marriage in 1987, Carlos Ui never lived with how a bride, especially a lawyer as in the case at
Barranco, Jr. be denied admission to the legal noted in the Court's Resolution dated September 15,
respondent and their first child, a circumstance that bar, can forget the year when she got married.
profession. Respondent had passed the 1970 bar 1982.3 In 1988, respondent repeated his request,
is simply incomprehensible considering Simply stated, it is contrary to human experience
examinations on the fourth attempt, after citing his election as a member of the Sangguniang
respondent's allegation that Carlos Ui was very open and highly improbable.
unsuccessful attempts in 1966, 1967 and 1968. Bayan of Janiuay, Iloilo from 1980-1986, his active
in courting her.
Furthermore, any prudent lawyer would verify the Before be could take his oath, however, complainant participation in civic organizations and good
All these taken together leads to the inescapable information contained in an attachment to her filed the instant petition averring that respondent standing in the community as well as the length of
conclusion that respondent was imprudent in pleading, especially so when she has personal and she had been sweethearts, that a child out of time this case has been pending as reasons to allow
managing her personal affairs. However, the fact knowledge of the facts and circumstances wedlock was born to them and that respondent did him to take his oath as a lawyer.4
remains that her relationship with Carlos Ui, clothed contained therein. In attaching such Marriage not fulfill his repeated promises to many her.
as it was with what respondent believed was a valid Certificate with an intercalated date, the defense of On September 29, 1988, the Court resolved to
The facts were manifested in hearings held before dismiss the complaint for failure of complainant to
marriage, cannot be considered immoral. For good faith of respondent on that point cannot stand.
Investigator Victor F. Sevilla in June and July 1971. prosecute the case for an unreasonable period of
immorality connotes conduct that shows
It is the bounden duty of lawyers to adhere Respondent and complainant were townmates in time and to allow Simeon Barranco, Jr. to take the
indifference to the moral norms of society and the
unwaveringly to the highest standards of Janiuay, Iloilo. Since 1953, when they were both in lawyer's oath upon payment of the required fees.5
opinion of good and respectable members of the
morality.1avvphi1 The legal profession exacts from their teens, they were steadies. Respondent even
community. 27 Moreover, for such conduct to warrant
its members nothing less. Lawyers are called upon acted as escort to complainant when she reigned as Respondent's hopes were again dashed on
disciplinary action, the same must be "grossly
to safeguard the integrity of the Bar, free from Queen at the 1953 town fiesta. Complainant first November 17, 1988 when the Court, in response to
immoral," that is, it must be so corrupt and false as
misdeeds and acts constitutive of malpractice. Their acceded to sexual congress with respondent complainant's opposition, resolved to cancel his
to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to
exalted positions as officers of the court demand no sometime in 1960. Their intimacy yielded a son, scheduled oath-taking. On June 1, 1993, the Court
be reprehensible to a high degree. 28
less than the highest degree of morality. Rafael Barranco, born on December 11, 1964. 1 It referred the case to the Integrated Bar of the
We have held that "a member of the Bar and officer was after the child was born, complainant alleged, Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
of the court is not only required to refrain from WHEREFORE, the complaint for disbarment against that respondent first promised he would marry her recommendation.
adulterous relationships . . . but must also so behave respondent Atty. Iris L. Bonifacio, for alleged after he passes the bar examinations. Their
himself as to avoid scandalizing the public by immorality, is hereby DISMISSED. relationship continued and respondent allegedly
creating the belief that he is flouting those moral made more than twenty or thirty promises of

Page 9 of 132
The IBP's report dated May 17, 1997 recommended relations refute her allegations that she was forced her husband, Atty. Laurence D. Cordova, with reprimanding respondent for his acts, admonishing
the dismissal of the case and that respondent be to have sexual congress with him. Complainant was immorality and acts unbecoming a member of the him that any further acts of immorality in the future
allowed to take the lawyer's oath. then an adult who voluntarily and actively pursued Bar. The letter-complaint was forwarded by the will be dealt with more severely, and ordering him to
their relationship and was not an innocent young girl Court to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, support his legitimate family as a responsible parent
We agree. who could be easily led astray. Unfortunately, Commission on Bar Discipline ("Commission"), for should.
respondent chose to marry and settle permanently investigation, report and recommendation.
Respondent was prevented from taking the lawyer's The findings of the IBP Board of Governors may be
with another woman. We cannot castigate a man for
oath in 1971 because of the charge of gross The Commission, before acting on the complaint, summed up as follows:
seeking out the partner of his dreams, for marriage
immorality made by complainant. To recapitulate, required complainant to submit a verified complaint
is a sacred and perpetual bond which should be
respondent bore an illegitimate child with his within ten (10) days from notice. Complainant Complainant and respondent Cordova were married
entered into because of love, not for any other
sweetheart, Patricia Figueroa, who also claims that complied and submitted to the Commission on 27 on 6 June 1976 and out of this marriage, two (2)
reason.
he did not fulfill his promise to marry her after he September 1988 a revised and verified version of her children were born. In 1985, the couple lived
passes the bar examinations. We cannot help viewing the instant complaint as an long and detailed complaint against her husband somewhere in Quirino Province. In that year,
act of revenge of a woman scorned, bitter and charging him with immorality and acts unbecoming respondent Cordova left his family as well as his job
We find that these facts do not constitute gross as Branch Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court,
unforgiving to the end. It is also intended to make a member of the Bar.
immorality warranting the permanent exclusion of Cabarroguis, Quirino Province, and went to
respondent suffer severely and it seems, perpetually,
respondent from the legal profession. His engaging In an Order of the Commission dated 1 December Mangagoy, Bislig, Surigao del Sur with one Fely G.
sacrificing the profession he worked very hard to be
in premarital sexual relations with complainant and 1988, respondent was declared in default for failure Holgado. Fely G. Holgado was herself married and
admitted into. Even assuming that his past
promises to marry suggests a doubtful moral to file an answer to the complaint within fifteen (15) left her own husband and children to stay with
indiscretions are ignoble, the twenty-six years that
character on his part but the same does not days from notice. The same Order required respondent. Respondent Cordova and Fely G.
respondent has been prevented from being a lawyer
constitute grossly immoral conduct. The Court has complainant to submit before the Commission her Holgado lived together in Bislig as husband and
constitute sufficient punishment therefor. During this
held that to justify suspension or disbarment the act evidence ex parte, on 16 December 1988. Upon the wife, with respondent Cordova introducing Fely to
time there appears to be no other indiscretion
complained of must not only be immoral, but grossly telegraphic request of complainant for the resetting the public as his wife, and Fely Holgado using the
attributed to him.10 Respondent, who is now sixty-
immoral. "A grossly immoral act is one that is so of the 16 December 1988 hearing, the Commission name Fely Cordova. Respondent Cordova gave Fely
two years of age, should thus be allowed, albeit
corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or so scheduled another hearing on 25 January 1989. The Holgado funds with which to establish a sari-sari
belatedly, to take the lawyer's oath.
unprincipled or disgraceful as to be reprehensible to hearing scheduled for 25 January 1989 was store in the public market at Bislig, while at the same
a high degree."6 It is a willful, flagrant, or shameless WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby rescheduled two (2) more times-first, for 25 February time failing to support his legitimate family.
act which shows a moral indifference to the opinion DISMISSED. Respondent Simeon Barranco, Jr. is 1989 and second, for 10 and 11 April 1989. The
of respectable members of the community. 7 ALLOWED to take his oath as a lawyer upon hearings never took place as complainant failed to On 6 April 1986, respondent Cordova and his
payment of the proper fees. appear. Respondent Cordova never moved to set complainant wife had an apparent reconciliation.
We find the ruling in Arciga v. Maniwang  quite 8
Respondent promised that he would separate from
aside the order of default, even though notices of
relevant because mere intimacy between a man and SO ORDERED. Fely Holgado and brought his legitimate family to
the hearings scheduled were sent to him.
a woman, both of whom possess no impediment to Bislig, Surigao del Sur. Respondent would, however,
marry, voluntarily carried on and devoid of any A.M. No. 3249 November 29, 1989 In a telegraphic message dated 6 April 1989, frequently come home from beerhouses or cabarets,
deceit on the part of respondent, is neither so complainant informed the Commission that she and drunk, and continued to neglect the support of his
corrupt nor so unprincipled as to warrant the SALVACION DELIZO CORDOVA, complainant, 
her husband had already "reconciled". In an order legitimate family. In February 1987, complainant
imposition of disciplinary sanction against him, even vs.
dated 17 April 1989, the Commission required the found, upon returning from a trip to Manila
if as a result of such relationship a child was born ATTY. LAURENCE D. CORDOVA, respondent.
parties (respondent and complainant) to appear necessitated by hospitalization of her daughter
out of wedlock.9 before it for confirmation and explanation of the Loraine, that respondent Cordova was no longer
RESOLUTION
telegraphic message and required them to file a living with her (complainant's) children in their
Respondent and complainant were sweethearts
formal motion to dismiss the complaint within fifteen conjugal home; that respondent Cordova was living
whose sexual relations were evidently consensual.
(15) days from notice. Neither party responded and with another mistress, one Luisita Magallanes, and
We do not find complainant's assertions that she PER CURIAM: nothing was heard from either party since then. had taken his younger daughter Melanie along with
had been forced into sexual intercourse, credible.
him. Respondent and his new mistress hid Melanie
She continued to see and be respondent's girlfriend In an unsworn letter-complaint dated 14 April 1988 Complainant having failed to submit her evidence ex from the complinant, compelling complainant to go
even after she had given birth to a son in 1964 and addressed to then Mr. Chief Justice Claudio parte before the Commission, the IBP Board of to court and to take back her daughter by habeas
until 1971. All those years of amicable and intimate Teehankee, complainant Salvacion Delizo charged Governors submitted to this Court its report

Page 10 of 132
corpus. The Regional Trial Court, Bislig, gave her a single, 21-year old teacher who subsequently PER CURIAM: Complainant later found, in the master's bedroom, a
custody of their children. cohabited with him and bore him a son. Because folded social card bearing the words "I Love You" on
respondent's conduct in Mortel  was particularly Joselano Guevarra (complainant) filed on March 4, its face, which card when unfolded contained a
Notwithstanding respondent's promises to reform, morally repulsive, involving the marrying of his 2002 a Complaint for Disbarment 1 before the handwritten letter dated October 7, 2000, the day of
he continued to live with Luisita Magallanes as her mistress to his own son and thereafter cohabiting Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Committee on his wedding to Irene, reading:
husband and continued to fail to give support to his with the wife of his own son after the marriage he Bar Discipline (CBD) against Atty. Jose Emmanuel
legitimate family. had himself arranged, respondent was disbarred. M. Eala a.k.a. Noli Eala (respondent) for "grossly My everdearest Irene,
immoral conduct and unmitigated violation of the
Finally the Commission received a telegram In Royong v. Oblena, 4 the respondent was declared lawyer's oath." By the time you open this, you'll be moments away
message apparently from complainant, stating that unfit to continue as a member of the bar by reason from walking down the aisle. I will say a prayer for
complainant and respondent had been reconciled of his immoral conduct and accordingly disbarred. In his complaint, Guevarra gave the following you that you may find meaning in what you're about
with each other. He was found to have engaged in sexual relations account: to do.
with the complainant who consequently bore him a
After a review of the record, we agree with the He first met respondent in January 2000 when his Sometimes I wonder why we ever met. Is it only for
son; and to have maintained for a number of years
findings of fact of the IBP Board. We also agree that (complainant's) then-fiancee Irene Moje (Irene) me to find fleeting happiness but experience eternal
an adulterous relationship with another woman.
the most recent reconciliation between complainant introduced respondent to him as her friend who was pain? Is it only for us to find a true love but then lose
and respondent, assuming the same to be real, does In the instant case, respondent Cordova maintained married to Marianne (sometimes spelled "Mary Ann") it again? Or is it because there's a bigger plan for
not excuse and wipe away the misconduct and for about two (2) years an adulterous relationship Tantoco with whom he had three children. the two of us?
immoral behavior of the respondent carried out in with a married woman not his wife, in full view of the
public, and necessarily adversely reflecting upon After his marriage to Irene on October 7, 2000, I hope that you have experienced true happiness
general public, to the humiliation and detriment of
him as a member of the Bar and upon the Philippine complainant noticed that from January to March with me. I have done everything humanly possible to
his legitimate family which he, rubbing salt on the
Bar itself. An applicant for admission to membership 2001, Irene had been receiving from respondent love you. And today, as you make your vows . . . I
wound, failed or refused to support. After a brief
in the bar is required to show that he is possessed cellphone calls, as well as messages some of which make my own vow to YOU!
period of "reform" respondent took up again with
of good moral character. That requirement is not read "I love you," "I miss you," or "Meet you at
another woman not his wife, cohabiting with her and I will love you for the rest of my life. I loved you from
exhausted and dispensed with upon admission to Megamall."
bringing along his young daughter to live with them. the first time I laid eyes on you, to the time we spent
membership of the bar. On the contrary, that Clearly, respondent flaunted his disregard of the Complainant also noticed that Irene habitually went together, up to the final moments of your single life.
requirement persists as a continuing condition for fundamental institution of marriage and its home very late at night or early in the morning of the But more importantly, I will love you until the life in
membership in the Bar in good standing. elementary obligations before his own daughter and following day, and sometimes did not go home from me is gone and until we are together again.
the community at large. work. When he asked about her whereabouts, she
In Mortel v. Aspiras, 1 this Court, following the rule in
replied that she slept at her parents' house in Do not worry about me! I will be happy for you. I
the United States, held that "the continued WHEREFORE, the Court Resolved to SUSPEND
Binangonan, Rizal or she was busy with her work. have enough memories of us to last me a lifetime.
possession ... of a good moral character is a respondent from the practice of law indefinitely and Always remember though that in my heart, in my
requisite condition for the rightful continuance in the until farther orders from this Court. The Court will In February or March 2001, complainant saw Irene mind and in my soul, YOU WILL ALWAYS
practice of the law ... and its loss requires consider lifting his suspension when respondent and respondent together on two occasions. On the
suspension or disbarment, even though the statutes Cordova submits proof satisfactory to the . . . AND THE WONDERFUL THINGS YOU DO!
second occasion, he confronted them following
do not specify that as a ground for disbarment. " 2 It Commission and this Court that he has and which Irene abandoned the conjugal house.
is important to note that the lack of moral character continues to provide for the support of his legitimate BE MINE . . . . AND MINE ALONE, and I WILL
that we here refer to as essential is not limited to family and that he has given up the immoral course On April 22, 2001, complainant went uninvited to ALWAYS BE YOURS AND YOURS ALONE!
good moral character relating to the discharge of the of conduct that he has clung to. Irene's birthday celebration at which he saw her and
duties and responsibilities of an attorney at law. The I LOVE YOU FOREVER, I LOVE YOU FOR ALWAYS.
respondent celebrating with her family and friends.
moral delinquency that affects the fitness of a A.C. No. 7136             August 1, 2007 AS LONG AS I'M LIVING MY TWEETIE YOU'LL
Out of embarrassment, anger and humiliation, he left
member of the bar to continue as such includes BE!"2
the venue immediately. Following that incident, Irene
conduct that outrages the generally accepted moral JOSELANO GUEVARRA, complainant, 
went to the conjugal house and hauled off all her Eternally yours,
standards of the community, conduct for instance, vs.
personal belongings, pieces of furniture, and her
which makes "a mockery of the inviolable social ATTY. JOSE EMMANUEL EALA, respondent.
share of the household appliances.
institution or marriage." 3 In Mortel, the respondent Complainant soon saw respondent's car and that of
DECISION
being already married, wooed and won the heart of Irene constantly parked at No. 71-B 11th Street, New

Page 11 of 132
Manila where, as he was to later learn sometime in the institution of marriage, calling it a "piece of 19. Respondent's grossly immoral conduct runs Answer were adopted as his testimony on direct
April 2001, Irene was already residing. He also paper." Morally reprehensible was his writing the afoul of the Constitution and the laws he, as a examination.16 Respondent's counsel did not cross-
learned still later that when his friends saw Irene on love letter to complainant's bride on the very day of lawyer, has been sworn to uphold. In pursuing examine complainant.17
or about January 18, 2002 together with respondent her wedding, vowing to continue his love for her obsessively his illicit love for the complainant's wife,
during a concert, she was pregnant. "until we are together again," as now they he mocked the institution of marriage, betrayed After investigation, IBP-CBD Investigating
are.6 (Underscoring supplied), his own family, broke up the complainant's Commissioner Milagros V. San Juan, in a 12-page
In his ANSWER,3 respondent admitted having sent marriage, commits adultery with his wife, REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION18 dated October
the I LOVE YOU card on which the above-quoted respondent stated in his ANSWER as follows: and degrades the legal profession.10 (Emphasis 26, 2004, found the charge against respondent
letter was handwritten. and underscoring supplied), sufficiently proven.
5. Respondent specifically denies the allegations in
On paragraph 14 of the COMPLAINT reading: paragraph 15 of the Complaint regarding respondent, in his ANSWER, stated: The Commissioner thus recommended 19 that
his adulterousrelationship and that his acts respondent be disbarred for violating Rule 1.01 of
14. Respondent and Irene were even FLAUNTING demonstrate gross moral depravity thereby making 7. Respondent specifically denies the allegations in Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
THEIR ADULTEROUS RELATIONSHIP as they him unfit to keep his membership in the bar, the paragraph 19 of the Complaint, the reason being Responsibility reading:
attended social functions together. For instance, in reason being that Respondent's relationship with that under the circumstances the acts of
or about the third week of September 2001, the Irene was not under scandalous Respondent with respect to his purely personal and Rule 1.01: A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
couple attended the launch of the "Wine All You circumstances and that as far as his relationship low profile special relationship with Irene is dishonest, immoral or
Can" promotion of French wines, held at the Mega with his own family: neither under scandalous circumstances nor deceitful conduct (Underscoring supplied),
Strip of SM Megamall B at Mandaluyong City. Their tantamount to grossly immoral conduct as would
attendance was reported in Section B of the Manila 5.1 Respondent has maintained a civil, cordial and and Rule 7.03 of Canon 7 of the same
be a ground for disbarment pursuant to Rule 138,
Standard issue of 24 September 2001, on page 21. peaceful relationship with [his wife] Mary Anne as in Code reading:
Section 27 of the Rules of Court.11(Emphasis and
Respondent and Irene were photographed together; fact they still occasionally meet in public, even if underscoring supplied) Rule 7.03: A lawyer shall not engage
their picture was captioned: "Irene with Mary Anne is aware of Respondent's special
in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to
Sportscaster Noli Eala." A photocopy of the report friendship with Irene. To respondent's ANSWER, complainant filed a
practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or
is attached as Annex C.4 (Italics and emphasis in the REPLY,12 alleging that Irene gave birth to a girl and
xxxx private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the
original; CAPITALIZATION of the phrase "flaunting Irene named respondent in the Certificate of Live
discredit of the legal profession. (Underscoring
their adulterous relationship" supplied), Birth as the girl's father. Complainant attached to
5.5 Respondent also denies that he has flaunted his supplied)
the Reply, as Annex "A," a copy of a Certificate of
respondent, in his ANSWER, stated: aversion to the institution of marriage by calling the
Live Birth13 bearing Irene's signature and naming The IBP Board of Governors, however, annulled and
institution of marriage a mere piece of paper
respondent as the father of her daughter Samantha set aside the Recommendation of the Investigating
4. Respondent specifically denies having ever because his reference [in his above-quoted
Irene Louise Moje who was born on February 14, Commissioner and accordingly dismissed the case
flaunted an adulterous relationship  with Irene as handwritten letter to Irene] to the marriage between
2002 at St. Luke's Hospital. for lack of merit, by Resolution dated January 28,
alleged in paragraph 14 of the Complaint, the truth Complainant and Irene as a piece of paper was
of the matter being that their relationship was low merely with respect to the formality of the marriage 2006 briefly reading:
Complainant's REPLY merited a REJOINDER WITH
profile and known only to the immediate contract.7 (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) MOTION TO DISMISS14 dated January 10, 2003 RESOLUTION NO. XVII-2006-06
members of their respective families, and that from respondent in which he denied having
Respondent, as far as the general public was Respondent admitted8 paragraph 18 of the
"personal knowledge of the Certificate of Live Birth CBD Case No. 02-936
concerned, was still known to be legally married to COMPLAINT reading:
attached to the complainant's Reply." 15 Respondent Joselano C. Guevarra vs.
Mary Anne Tantoco.5 (Emphasis and underscoring moved to dismiss the complaint due to the Atty. Jose Emmanuel M. Eala
18. The Rules of Court requires lawyers to support
supplied) pendency of a civil case filed by complainant for the a.k.a. Noli Eala
the Constitution and obey the laws. The Constitution
regards marriage as an inviolable social institution annulment of his marriage to Irene, and a criminal
On paragraph 15 of the COMPLAINT reading: RESOLVED to ANNUL and SET ASIDE, as it is
and is the foundation of the family (Article XV, Sec. complaint for adultery against respondent and Irene
which was pending before the Quezon City hereby ANNULLED AND SET ASIDE, the
15. Respondent's adulterous conduct with the 2).9
Prosecutor's Office. Recommendation of the Investigating
complainant's wife and his apparent abandoning or
And on paragraph 19 of the COMPLAINT reading: Commissioner, and to APPROVE the  DISMISSAL of
neglecting of his own family, demonstrate his gross
During the investigation before the IBP-CBD, the above-entitled case for lack of merit. 20  (Italics
moral depravity, making him morally unfit to keep his
complainant's Complaint-Affidavit and Reply to and emphasis in the original)
membership in the bar. He flaunted his aversion to

Page 12 of 132
Hence, the present petition21 of complainant before Certificate of Live Birth of Samantha Louise Irene circumstances alone are denied while the fact Respondent insists, however, that disbarment does
this Court, filed pursuant to Section 12 (c), Rule Moje (Annex "H-1") sufficiently prove that there itself is admitted.27 (Citations omitted; emphasis not lie because his relationship with Irene was not,
13922 of the Rules of Court. was indeed an illicit relationship between and underscoring supplied) under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of
respondent and Irene which resulted in the birth of Court, reading:
The petition is impressed with merit. the child "Samantha". In the Certificate of Live A negative pregnant too is respondent's denial of
Birth of Samantha it should be noted that having "personal knowledge" of Irene's daughter SEC. 27. Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by
Oddly enough, the IBP Board of Governors, in Samantha Louise Irene Moje's Certificate of Live Supreme Court, grounds therefor. ─ A member of
complainant's wife Irene supplied the
setting aside the Recommendation of the Birth. In said certificate, Irene named respondent – a the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his
information that respondent was the father of
Investigating Commissioner and dismissing the case "lawyer," 38 years old – as the child's father. And office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any
the child. Given the fact that the respondent
for lack of merit, gave no reason therefor as its the phrase "NOT MARRIED" is entered on the deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in
admitted his special relationship with Irene there is
above-quoted 33-word Resolution shows. desired information on "DATE AND PLACE OF such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason
no reason to believe that Irene would lie or make
any misrepresentation regarding the paternity of MARRIAGE." A comparison of the signature of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude,
Respondent contends, in his Comment23 on the
the child. It should be underscored attributed to Irene in the certificate 28 with her or for any violation of the oath which he is required
present petition of complainant, that there is no
that respondent has not categorically denied that signature on the Marriage Certificate 29 shows that to take before admission to practice, or for a willful
evidence against him.24 The contention fails. As the
he is the father of Samantha Louise Irene they were affixed by one and the same disobedience appearing as an attorney for a party to
IBP-CBD Investigating Commissioner observed:
Moje.25 (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) person. Notatu dignum is that, as the Investigating a case without authority so to do. The practice of
While it may be true that the love letter dated Commissioner noted, respondent never denied soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either
October 7, 2000 (Exh. "C") and the news item Indeed, from respondent's Answer, he does not being the father of the child. personally or through paid agents or brokers,
published in the Manila Standard (Exh. "D"), even deny carrying on an adulterous relationship with constitutes malpractice.
Irene, "adultery" being defined under Art. 333 of the Franklin A. Ricafort, the records custodian of St.
taken together do not sufficiently prove that
Revised Penal Code as that "committed by any Luke's Medical Center, in his January 29, 2003 The disbarment or suspension of a member of the
respondent is carrying on an adulterous relationship
married woman who shall have sexual intercourse Affidavit30 which he identified at the witness stand, Philippine Bar by a competent court or other
with complainant's wife, there are other pieces of
with a man not her husband and by the man who declared that Irene gave the information in the disciplinatory agency in a foreign jurisdiction where
evidence on record which support the accusation of
has carnal knowledge of her, knowing her to be Certificate of Live Birth that the child's father is he has also been admitted as an attorney is a
complainant against respondent.
married, even if the marriage be subsequently "Jose Emmanuel Masacaet Eala," who was 38 years ground for his disbarment or suspension if the basis
It should be noted that in his Answer dated 17 declared void."26 (Italics supplied) What respondent old and a lawyer.31 of such action includes any of the acts hereinabove
October 2002, respondent through counsel made denies is havingflaunted such relationship, he enumerated.
Without doubt, the adulterous relationship between
the following statements to wit: "Respondent maintaining that it was "low profile and known only
respondent and Irene has been sufficiently proven The judgment, resolution or order of the foreign
specifically denies having [ever] flaunted an to the immediate members of their respective
by more than clearly preponderant evidence – that court or disciplinary agency shall be prima
adulterous relationship with Irene as alleged in families."
evidence adduced by one party which is more facie evidence of the ground for disbarment or
paragraph [14] of the Complaint, the truth of the
In other words, respondent's denial is a negative conclusive and credible than that of the other party suspension (Emphasis and underscoring supplied),
matter being [that] their relationship was low profile
pregnant, and, therefore, has greater weight than the other 32 –
and known only to immediate members of their under scandalous circumstances. 34
which is the quantum of evidence needed in an
respective families . . . , and Respondent specifically
a denial pregnant with the admission of the administrative case against a lawyer.
denies the allegations in paragraph 19 of the The immediately-quoted Rule which provides the
substantial facts in the pleading responded to which
complaint, the reason being that under the Administrative cases against lawyers belong to a grounds for disbarment or suspension uses the
are not squarely denied. It was in effect an
circumstances the acts of the respondents with class of their own. They are distinct from and they phrase "grossly immoral conduct," not "under
admission of the averments it was directed at.
respect to his purely personal and low profile may proceed independently of civil and criminal scandalous circumstances." Sexual intercourse
Stated otherwise, a negative pregnant is a form of
relationship with Irene is neither under scandalous cases. under scandalous circumstances is, following Article
negative expression which carries with it in
circumstances nor tantamount to grossly immoral 334 of the Revised Penal Code reading:
affirmation or at least an implication of some kind
conduct . . ." . . . of proof for these types of cases differ. In a
favorable to the adverse party. It is a denial pregnant ART. 334. Concubinage. - Any husband who shall
criminal case, proof beyond reasonable doubt is
These statements of respondent in his Answer with an admission of the substantial facts alleged in keep a mistress in the conjugal dwelling, or, shall
necessary; in an administrative case for disbarment
are an admission that there is indeed a "special" the pleading. Where a fact is alleged with qualifying have sexual intercourse, under scandalous
or suspension, "clearly preponderant evidence" is
relationship between him and complainant's or modifying language and the words of the circumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or
all that is required.33 (Emphasis supplied)
wife, Irene, [which] taken together with the allegation as so qualified or modified are literally shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be
denied, it has been held that the  qualifying

Page 13 of 132
punished by prision correccional in its minimum and of this administrative case substantiate the findings Furthermore, respondent violated Rule 1.01 Irene prior to the judicial declaration that her
medium periods. of the Investigating Commissioner, as well as the of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional marriage with complainant was null and void, and
IBP Board of Governors, i.e., that indeed respondent Responsibility which proscribes a lawyer from despite respondent himself being married, he
x x x x, has been carrying on an illicit affair with engaging in "unlawful, dishonest, immoral or showed disrespect for an institution held sacred by
a married woman, a grossly immoral conduct deceitful conduct," and Rule 7.03 of Canon 7 of the the law. And he betrayed his unfitness to be a
an element of the crime of concubinage  when a
and indicative of an extremely low regard for the same Code which proscribes a lawyer from lawyer.
married man has sexual intercourse with a woman
fundamental ethics of his profession. This engaging in any "conduct that adversely reflects on
elsewhere. As for complainant's withdrawal of his petition for
detestable behavior renders him regrettably unfit his fitness to practice law."
and undeserving of the treasured honor and review before the DOJ, respondent glaringly omitted
"Whether a lawyer's sexual congress with a woman
privileges which his license confers upon Clutching at straws, respondent, during the to state that before complainant filed his December
not his wife or without the benefit of marriage should
him.39 (Underscoring supplied) pendency of the investigation of the case before the 23, 2003 Motion to Withdraw his Petition for Review,
be characterized as 'grossly immoral conduct'
IBP Commissioner, filed a Manifestation 41 on March the DOJ had already promulgated a Resolution
depends on the surrounding circumstances." 35 The
Respondent in fact also violated the lawyer's oath 22, 2005 informing the IBP-CBD that complainant's on September 22, 2003 reversing the dismissal by
case at bar involves a relationship between a
he took before admission to practice law which petition for nullity of his (complainant's) marriage to the Quezon City Prosecutor's Office of
married lawyer and a married woman who is not his
goes: Irene had been granted by Branch 106 of the complainant's complaint for adultery. In reversing
wife. It is immaterial whether the affair was carried
Quezon City Regional Trial Court, and that the the City Prosecutor's Resolution, DOJ Secretary
out discreetly. Apropos is the following I _________, having been permitted to continue in criminal complaint for adultery complainant filed Simeon Datumanong held:
pronouncement of this Court in Vitug v. Rongcal:36 the practice of law in the Philippines, do solemnly against respondent and Irene "based on the same
swear that I recognize the supreme authority of the set of facts alleged in the instant case," which was Parenthetically the totality of evidence adduced by
On the charge of immorality, respondent does not
Republic of the Philippines; I will support its pending review before the Department of Justice complainant would, in the fair estimation of the
deny that he had an extra-marital affair with
Constitution andobey the laws as well as the legal (DOJ), on petition of complainant, had been, on Department, sufficiently establish all the elements of
complainant, albeit brief and discreet, and which act
orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I motion of complainant, withdrawn. the offense of adultery on the part of both
is not "so corrupt and false as to constitute a
will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any respondents. Indeed, early on, respondent Moje
criminal act or so unprincipled as to be
in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or The Secretary of Justice's Resolution of January 16, conceded to complainant that she was going out on
reprehensible to a high degree" in order to merit
sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give 2004 granting complainant's Motion to Withdraw dates with respondent Eala, and this she did when
disciplinary sanction. We disagree.
aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for Petition for Review reads: complainant confronted her about Eala's frequent
xxxx money or malice, and will conduct myself as a phone calls and text messages to her. Complainant
lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and Considering that the instant motion was filed before also personally witnessed Moje and Eala having a
While it has been held in disbarment cases that the discretion with all good fidelity as well as to the the final resolution of the petition for review, we are rendezvous on two occasions. Respondent Eala
mere fact of sexual relations between courts as to my clients; and I impose upon myself inclined to grant the same pursuant to Section 10 of never denied the fact that he knew Moje to be
two unmarriedadults is not sufficient to warrant this voluntary obligation without any mental Department Circular No. 70 dated July 3, 2000, married to complainant[.] In fact, he (Eala) himself
administrative sanction for such illicit behavior, it is reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God. which provides that "notwithstanding the perfection was married to another woman. Moreover, Moje's
not so with respect to betrayals of the marital vow (Underscoring supplied) of the appeal, the petitioner may withdraw the same eventual abandonment of their conjugal home, after
of fidelity. Even if not all forms of extra-marital at any time before it is finally resolved, in which complainant had once more confronted her about
relations are punishable under penal law, sexual Respondent admittedly is aware of Section 2 of case the appealed resolution shall stand as Eala, only served to confirm the illicit relationship
relations outside marriage is considered disgraceful Article XV (The Family) of the Constitution reading: though no appeal has been taken."42 (Emphasis involving both respondents. This becomes all the
and immoral as it manifests  deliberate disregard of supplied by complainant) more apparent by Moje's subsequent relocation in
Section 2. Marriage, as an inviolable social
the sanctity of marriage and the marital No. 71-B, 11thStreet, New Manila, Quezon City,
institution, is the foundation of the family and shall That the marriage between complainant and Irene
vows protected by the Constitution and affirmed by which was a few blocks away from the church where
be protected by the State. was subsequently declared void ab initio  is
our laws.37 (Emphasis and underscoring supplied) she had exchange marital vows with complainant.
immaterial.  The acts complained of took
In this connection, the Family Code (Executive Order place before the marriage was declared null and
And so is the pronouncement in Tucay v. Atty. It was in this place that the two lovers apparently
No. 209), which echoes this constitutional provision, void.43 As a lawyer, respondent should be aware that
Tucay:38 cohabited. Especially since Eala's vehicle and that of
obligates the husband and the wife "to live together, a man and a woman deporting themselves as Moje's were always seen there. Moje herself admits
The Court need not delve into the question of observe mutual love, respect and fidelity, and render husband and wife are presumed, unless proven that she came to live in the said address whereas
whether or not the respondent did contract a mutual help and support." 40 otherwise, to have entered into a lawful contract of Eala asserts that that was where he held office. The
bigamous marriage . . . It is enough that the records marriage.44 In carrying on an extra-marital affair with happenstance that it was in that said address that

Page 14 of 132
Eala and Moje had decided to hold office for the firm Administrative cases against lawyers belong to a Because of the failure of Atty. Dizon to submit his the accused, by now enraged, stood up immediately
that both had formed smacks too much of a class of their own. They are distinct from and they Answer to the Complaint, the CBD issued a Notice and was about to deal the taxi driver a fist blow
coincidence. For one, the said address appears to may proceed independently of civil and criminal dated May 20, 2004, informing him that he was in when the latter boxed him on the chest instead. The
be a residential house, for that was where Moje cases. default, and that an ex-parte hearing had been accused fell down a second time, got up again and
stayed all throughout after her separation from scheduled for June 11, 2004.4After that hearing, was about to box the taxi driver but the latter caught
complainant. It was both respondent's love nest, to WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. Resolution complainant manifested that he was submitting the his fist and turned his arm around. The taxi driver
put short; their illicit affair that was carried out there No. XVII-2006-06 passed on January 28, 2006 by case on the basis of the Complaint and its held on to the accused until he could be pacified
bore fruit a few months later when Moje gave birth the Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the attachments.5 Accordingly, the CBD directed him to and then released him. The accused went back to
to a girl at the nearby hospital of St. Luke's Medical Philippines is ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. file his Position Paper, which he did on July 27, his car and got his revolver making sure that the
Center. What finally militates against the 2004.6Afterwards, the case was deemed submitted handle was wrapped in a handkerchief. The taxi
Respondent, Atty. Jose Emmanuel M. Eala,
respondents is the indubitable fact that in the for resolution. driver was on his way back to his vehicle when he
is DISBARRED for grossly immoral conduct,
certificate of birth of the girl, Moje furnished the noticed the eyeglasses of the accused on the
violation of his oath of office, and violation of Canon On December 6, 2004, Commissioner Teresita J.
information that Eala was the father. This speaks all ground. He picked them up intending to return them
1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the Code of Herbosa rendered her Report and Recommendation,
too eloquently of the unlawful and damning to the accused. But as he was handing the same to
Professional Responsibility. which was later adopted and approved by the IBP
nature of the adulterous acts of the respondents. the accused, he was met by the barrel of the gun
Complainant's supposed illegal procurement of the Board of Governors in its Resolution No. XVI-2005- held by the accused who fired and shot him hitting
Let a copy of this Decision, which is immediately
birth certificate is most certainly beside the point for 84 dated March 12, 2005. him on the neck. He fell on the thigh of the accused
executory, be made part of the records of
both respondents Eala and Moje have not respondent in the Office of the Bar Confidant, so the latter pushed him out and sped off. The
In his Complaint-Affidavit, Soriano alleged that
denied, in any categorical manner, that Eala is Supreme Court of the Philippines. And let copies of incident was witnessed by Antonio Billanes whose
respondent had violated Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the
the father of the child Samantha Irene Louise the Decision be furnished the Integrated Bar of the testimony corroborated that of the taxi driver, the
Code of Professional Responsibility; and that the
Moje.45(Emphasis and underscoring supplied) Philippines and circulated to all courts. complainant in this case, Roberto Soriano." 8
conviction of the latter for frustrated
It bears emphasis that adultery is a private offense homicide,7 which involved moral turpitude, should It was the prosecution witness, Antonio Billanes,
This Decision takes effect immediately.
which cannot be prosecuted de oficio and thus result in his disbarment. who came to the aid of Soriano and brought the
leaves the DOJ no choice but to grant complainant's SO ORDERED. latter to the hospital. Because the bullet had
The facts leading to respondent’s conviction were
motion to withdraw his petition for review. But even lacerated the carotid artery on the left side of his
A.C. No. 6792             January 25, 2006 summarized by Branch 60 of the Regional Trial
if respondent and Irene were to be acquitted of neck,9 complainant would have surely died of
Court of Baguio City in this wise:
adultery after trial, if the Information for adultery hemorrhage if he had not received timely medical
ROBERTO SORIANO, Complainant, 
were filed in court, the same would not have been a "x x x. The accused was driving his brown Toyota assistance, according to the attending surgeon, Dr.
vs.
bar to the present administrative complaint. Corolla and was on his way home after gassing up in Francisco Hernandez, Jr. Soriano sustained a spinal
Atty. MANUEL DIZON, Respondent.
preparation for his trip to Concepcion, Tarlac with cord injury, which caused paralysis on the left part of
Citing the ruling in Pangan v. Ramos,46 viz: his body and disabled him for his job as a taxi driver.
DECISION his wife. Along Abanao Street, a taxi driver overtook
x x x The acquittal of respondent Ramos [of] the the car driven by the accused not knowing that the
PER CURIAM: The trial court promulgated its Decision dated
criminal charge is not a bar to these [administrative] driver of the car he had overtaken is not just
November 29, 2001. On January 18, 2002,
proceedings. The standards of legal profession are someone, but a lawyer and a prominent member of
Before us is a Complaint-Affidavit 1 for the respondent filed an application for probation, which
not satisfied by conduct which merely enables one the Baguio community who was under the influence
disbarment of Atty. Manuel Dizon, filed by Roberto was granted by the court on several conditions.
to escape the penalties of x x x criminal of liquor. Incensed, the accused tailed the taxi driver
Soriano with the Commission on Bar Discipine These included satisfaction of "the civil liabilities
law. Moreover, this Court, in disbarment until the latter stopped to make a turn at [the]
(CBD) of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). imposed by [the] court in favor of the offended party,
proceedings is acting in an entirely different capacity Chugum and Carino Streets. The accused also
Complainant alleges that the conviction of Roberto Soriano."10
from that which courts assume in trying criminal stopped his car, berated the taxi driver and held him
respondent for a crime involving moral turpitude,
case47 (Italics in the original), by his shirt. To stop the aggression, the taxi driver According to the unrefuted statements of
together with the circumstances surrounding the
forced open his door causing the accused to fall to complainant, Atty. Dizon, who has yet to comply
conviction, violates Canon 1 of Rule 1.01 of the
this Court in Gatchalian Promotions Talents Pools, the ground. The taxi driver knew that the accused with this particular undertaking, even appealed the
Code of Professional Responsibility; 2 and
Inc. v. Atty. Naldoza,48 held: had been drinking because he smelled of liquor. civil liability to the Court of Appeals. 11
constitutes sufficient ground for his disbarment
Taking pity on the accused who looked elderly, the
under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. 3
taxi driver got out of his car to help him get up. But

Page 15 of 132
In her Report and Recommendation, Commissioner ground for disbarment or suspension. By such the surrounding circumstances. x x x. "16 (Emphasis impression that the assault was already over, the
Herbosa recommended that respondent be conviction, a lawyer is deemed to have become unfit supplied) unarmed complainant was merely returning the
disbarred from the practice of law for having been to uphold the administration of justice and to be no eyeglasses of Atty. Dizon when the latter
convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude. longer possessed of good moral character.13 In the In the IRRI case,  in which the crime of homicide did unexpectedly shot him. To make matters worse,
instant case, respondent has been found guilty; and not involve moral turpitude, the Court appreciated respondent wrapped the handle of his gun with a
The commissioner found that respondent had not he stands convicted, by final judgment, of frustrated the presence of incomplete self-defense and total handkerchief so as not to leave fingerprints. In so
only been convicted of such crime, but that the latter homicide. Since his conviction has already been absence of aggravating circumstances. For a better doing, he betrayed his sly intention to escape
also exhibited an obvious lack of good moral established and is no longer open to question, the understanding of that Decision, the circumstances punishment for his crime.
character, based on the following facts: only issues that remain to be determined are as of the crime are quoted as follows:
follows: 1) whether his crime of frustrated homicide The totality of the facts unmistakably bears the
"1. He was under the influence of liquor while driving "x x x. The facts on record show that Micosa [the earmarks of moral turpitude. By his conduct,
involves moral turpitude, and 2) whether his guilt
his car; IRRI employee] was then urinating and had his back respondent revealed his extreme arrogance and
warrants disbarment.
turned when the victim drove his fist unto Micosa's feeling of self-importance. As it were, he acted like a
"2. He reacted violently and attempted to assault face; that the victim then forcibly rubbed Micosa's
Moral turpitude has been defined as "everything god on the road, who deserved to be venerated and
Complainant only because the latter, driving a taxi, face into the filthy urinal; that Micosa pleaded to the
which is done contrary to justice, modesty, or good never to be slighted. Clearly, his inordinate reaction
had overtaken him; victim to stop the attack but was ignored and that it
morals; an act of baseness, vileness or depravity in to a simple traffic incident reflected poorly on his
the private and social duties which a man owes his was while Micosa was in that position that he drew a fitness to be a member of the legal profession. His
"3. Complainant having been able to ward off his
fellowmen, or to society in general, contrary to fan knife from the left pocket of his shirt and overreaction also evinced vindictiveness, which was
attempted assault, Respondent went back to his
justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals."14 desperately swung it at the victim who released his definitely an undesirable trait in any individual, more
car, got a gun, wrapped the same with a
hold on Micosa only after the latter had stabbed him so in a lawyer. In the tenacity with which he pursued
handkerchief and shot Complainant[,] who was
The question of whether the crime of homicide several times. These facts show that Micosa's complainant, we see not the persistence of a person
unarmed;
involves moral turpitude has been discussed intention was not to slay the victim but only to who has been grievously wronged, but the obstinacy
"4. When Complainant fell on him, Respondent in International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) v. defend his person. The appreciation in his favor of of one trying to assert a false sense of superiority
simply pushed him out and fled; NLRC,15  a labor case concerning an employee who the mitigating circumstances of self-defense and and to exact revenge.
was dismissed on the basis of his conviction for voluntary surrender, plus the total absence of any
"5. Despite positive identification and overwhelming homicide. Considering the particular circumstances aggravating circumstance demonstrate that It is also glaringly clear that respondent seriously
evidence, Respondent denied that he had shot surrounding the commission of the crime, this Court Micosa's character and intentions were not transgressed Canon 1 of the Code of Professional
Complainant; rejected the employer’s contention and held that inherently vile, immoral or unjust." 17 Responsibility through his illegal possession of an
homicide in that case did not involve moral unlicensed firearm18 and his unjust refusal to satisfy
"6. Apart from [his] denial, Respondent also lied turpitude. (If it did, the crime would have been The present case is totally different. As the IBP his civil liabilities.19 He has thus brazenly violated the
when he claimed that he was the one mauled by violative of the IRRI’s Employment Policy correctly found, the circumstances clearly evince the law and disobeyed the lawful orders of the courts.
Complainant and two unidentified persons; and, Regulations and indeed a ground for dismissal.) The moral turpitude of respondent and his unworthiness We remind him that, both in his attorney’s oath20 and
Court explained that, having disregarded the to practice law. in the Code of Professional Responsibility, he bound
"7. Although he has been placed on probation,
attendant circumstances, the employer made a himself to "obey the laws of the land."
Respondent has[,] to date[,] not yet satisfied his civil Atty. Dizon was definitely the aggressor, as he
pronouncement that was precipitate. Furthermore, it
liabilities to Complainant."12 pursued and shot complainant when the latter least All told, Atty. Dizon has shown through this incident
was not for the latter to determine conclusively
expected it. The act of aggression shown by that he is wanting in even a basic sense of justice.
On July 8, 2005, the Supreme Court received for its whether a crime involved moral turpitude. That
respondent will not be mitigated by the fact that he He obtained the benevolence of the trial court when
final action the IBP Resolution adopting the Report discretion belonged to the courts, as explained thus:
was hit once and his arm twisted by complainant. it suspended his sentence and granted him
and Recommendation of the Investigating Under the circumstances, those were reasonable
"x x x. Homicide may or may not involve moral probation. And yet, it has been four years 21 since he
Commissioner. actions clearly intended to fend off the lawyer’s
turpitude depending on the degree of the was ordered to settle his civil liabilities to
crime. Moral turpitude is not involved in every assault. complainant. To date, respondent remains adamant
We agree with the findings and recommendations of
Commissioner Herbosa, as approved and adopted criminal act and is not shown by every known and in refusing to fulfill that obligation. By his extreme
We also consider the trial court’s finding of treachery
by the IBP Board of Governors. intentional violation of statute, but whether any impetuosity and intolerance, as shown by his violent
as a further indication of the skewed morals of
particular conviction involves moral turpitude may reaction to a simple traffic altercation, he has taken
respondent. He shot the victim when the latter was
Under Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, be a question of fact and frequently depends on all away the earning capacity, good health, and youthful
not in a position to defend himself. In fact, under the
conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude is a vigor of his victim. Still, Atty. Dizon begrudges

Page 16 of 132
complainant the measly amount that could never Lawyers must be ministers of truth. No moral with our lofty aspiration for the legal profession -- In the morning of January 20, 1975, while
even fully restore what the latter has lost. qualification for bar membership is more important that every lawyer be a shining exemplar of truth and complainant was away, respondent Atty. Abraham
than truthfulness.29The rigorous ethics of the justice. A. Suller went to the complainant's abode in
Conviction for a crime involving moral turpitude may profession places a premium on honesty and Aringay, La Union ostensibly to borrow a blade.
relate, not to the exercise of the profession of condemns duplicitous behavior.30 Hence, lawyers We stress that membership in the legal profession is
lawyers, but certainly to their good moral must not mislead the court or allow it to be misled a privilege demanding a high degree of good moral As the respondent was a friend of the family and a
character.22 Where their misconduct outside of their by any artifice. In all their dealings, they are character, not only as a condition precedent to neighbor, the complainant's wife let him in.
professional dealings is so gross as to show them expected to act in good faith. admission, but also as a continuing requirement for Thereafter, respondent began touching her in
morally unfit for their office and unworthy of the the practice of law. Sadly, herein respondent has different parts of her body. When she protested,
privileges conferred upon them by their license and The actions of respondent erode rather than fallen short of the exacting standards expected of respondent threatened her and forced her to have
the law, the court may be justified in suspending or enhance public perception of the legal profession. him as a vanguard of the legal profession. sexual intercourse with him. At that moment,
removing them from that office.23 They constitute moral turpitude for which he should complainant returned home to get money to pay for
be disbarred. "Law is a noble profession, and the In sum, when lawyers are convicted of frustrated real estate taxes. When he entered the house, he
We also adopt the IBP’s finding that respondent privilege to practice it is bestowed only upon homicide, the attending circumstances – not the saw his wife and respondent having sexual
displayed an utter lack of good moral character, individuals who are competent intellectually, mere fact of their conviction – would demonstrate intercourse on the bed.1 She was kicking respondent
which is an essential qualification for the privilege to academically and, equally important, morally. their fitness to remain in the legal profession. In the with one foot while the latter pressed on her arms
enter into the practice of law. Good moral character Because they are vanguards of the law and the legal present case, the appalling vindictiveness, and other leg, preventing her from defending herself.
includes at least common honesty.24 system, lawyers must at all times conduct treachery, and brazen dishonesty of respondent
themselves, especially in their dealings with their clearly show his unworthiness to continue as a On January 23, 1975, complainant filed with the
In the case at bar, respondent consistently displayed member of the bar. Municipal Court, Aringay, La Union a criminal
clients and the public at large, with honesty and
dishonest and duplicitous behavior. As found by the complaint2 for rape against respondent. The case
integrity in a manner beyond reproach."31
trial court, he had sought, with the aid of Vice-Mayor WHEREFORE, RESPONDENT MANUEL DIZON is was later remanded to the Court of First Instance,
Daniel Fariñas, an out-of-court settlement with The foregoing abhorrent acts of respondent are not hereby DISBARRED, and his name is ORDERED Agoo, La Union.
complainant’s family.25 But when this effort failed, merely dishonorable; they reveal a basic moral flaw. STRICKEN from the Roll of Attorneys. Let a copy of
respondent concocted a complete lie by making it Considering the depravity of the offense he this Decision be entered in his record as a member On June 3, 1975, Cristino G. Calub filed with the
appear that it was complainant’s family that had committed, we find the penalty recommended by of the Bar; and let notice of the same be served on Supreme Court the instant complaint for disbarment
sought a conference with him to obtain his referral to the IBP proper and commensurate. the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and on the against respondent Atty. Abraham A. Suller.3
a neurosurgeon.26 Office of the Court Administrator for circulation to all
The purpose of a proceeding for disbarment is to courts in the country. On June 16, 1975, the Court required respondent to
The lies of Atty Dizon did not end there. He went on protect the administration of justice by requiring that file an answer within ten (10) days from notice.4
to fabricate an entirely implausible story of having those who exercise this important function be SO ORDERED.
been mauled by complainant and two other On July 14, 1975, respondent filed his answer. He
competent, honorable and reliable -- lawyers in
persons.27 The trial court had this to say: Adm. Case No. 1474           January 28, 2000 denied the accusation as a fabrication.5
whom courts and clients may repose
confidence.32 Thus, whenever a clear case of CRISTINO G. CALUB, complainant,  On July 21, 1975, the Court referred the case to the
"The physical evidence as testified to by no less
degenerate and vile behavior disturbs that vital yet vs. Solicitor General for investigation, report, and
than three (3) doctors who examined [Atty. Dizon]
fragile confidence, we shall not hesitate to rid our ATTY. ABRAHAM A. SULLER, respondent. recommendation.6
does not support his allegation that three people
profession of odious members.
including the complainant helped each other in
RESOLUTION From 1975 until 1978, the Office of the Solicitor
kicking and boxing him. The injuries he sustained We remain aware that the power to disbar must be General conducted hearings where both parties
were so minor that it is improbable[,] if not downright exercised with great caution, and that disbarment PER CURIAM: appeared with their respective counsel. In a petition
unbelievable[,] that three people who he said were should never be decreed when any lesser penalty filed on November 6, 1978, respondent prayed for
bent on beating him to death could do so little would accomplish the end desired. In the instant What is before the Court is a complaint for
the suspension of proceedings pending final
damage. On the contrary, his injuries sustain the case, however, the Court cannot extend that disbarment against respondent premised on grossly
termination of Criminal Case No. A-420 pending with
complainant’s version of the incident particularly munificence to respondent. His actions so immoral conduct for having raped his neighbor's
the Court of First Instance, La Union, Branch 3,
when he said that he boxed the accused on the despicably and wantonly disregarded his duties to wife.
Agoo.7
chest. x x x."28 society and his profession. We are convinced that
meting out a lesser penalty would be irreconcilable

Page 17 of 132
On December 11, 1978, the Court referred the worthy to remain a member of the bar. The privilege "3. That Criminal Cases No. 26558, No. 26565 and case/s of Estrada v. Arroyo, 353 SCRA 452 and 356
petition to the Solicitor General, the case having to practice law is bestowed upon individuals who No. 26905 pending before the Sandiganbayan be SCRA 108; and,
been referred to him previously.8 are competent intellectually, academically and, dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
equally important, morally.13 "Good moral character "b) A subpoena ad testificandum and duces tecum
In 1991, the investigation of the case was is not only a condition precedent to admission to the "Attorney Alan F. Paguia, speaking for petitioner, be issued to Justice Artemio Panganiban, Justice
transferred to the Committee on Bar Discipline, legal profession, but it must also be possessed at all asserts that the inhibition of the members of the Antonio Carpio, Justice Renato Corona, Secretary
Integrated Bar of the Philippines. On August 28, times in order to maintain one's good standing in Supreme Court from hearing the petition is called for Angelo Reyes of the Department of National
1991 the latter sent notice of hearings to both that exclusive and honored fraternity."14 under Rule 5.10 of the Code of Judicial Conduct Defense, Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,
parties.9 prohibiting justices or judges from participating in Senator Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., and Chief Justice
WHEREFORE, respondent Abraham A. Suller is any partisan political activity which proscription, Hilario Davide, Jr. for them to testify and bring
On January 23, 1992, the Committee issued an DISBARRED from the practise of law. Let his name according to him, the justices have violated by whatever supporting documents they may have in
order terminating the proceedings and considering be stricken off the Roll of Attorneys. attending the ‘EDSA 2 Rally’ and by authorizing the relation to their direct and indirect participation in
the case submitted for resolution as notice to assumption of Vice-President Gloria Macapagal the proclamation of Vice President Gloria Macapagal
complainant remained unserved while respondent SO ORDERED. Arroyo to the Presidency in violation of the 1987 Arroyo on January 20, 2001, as cited in the book of
failed to appear despite due notice.10 Constitution. Petitioner contends that the justices Justice Panganiban, including the material events
G.R. No. 159486-88               November 25, 2003
have thereby prejudged a case that would assail the that led to that proclamation and the ruling/s in the
On March 3, 1993, the Board of Governors,
PRESIDENT JOSEPH EJERCITO legality of the act taken by President Arroyo. The Estrada vs. Arroyo, supra.’ (Rollo, pp. 6-7.)
Integrated Bar of the Philippines issued a resolution
ESTRADA, petitioner,  subsequent decision of the Court in Estrada v.
recommending that the disciplinary penalty of "The ‘truth’ referred to in paragraph a) of the relief
vs. Arroyo (353 SCRA 452 and 356 SCRA 108) is,
suspension from the practice of law for a period of sought in the motion of petitioner pertains to what
THE HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN [SPECIAL petitioner states, a patent mockery of justice and
one (1) year be meted on respondent.11 he claims should have been included in the
DIVISION], HON. MINITA CHICO-NAZARIO, HON. due process.
resolution of the Sandiganbayan; viz:
The record discloses that the Court of First Instance EDILBERTO SANDOVAL, HON. TERESITA
"Attorney Paguia first made his appearance for
acquitted respondent Suller for failure of the LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, and THE PEOPLE OF ‘The request of the movant is simply for the Court to
petitioner when he filed an Omnibus Motion on 19
prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable THE PHILIPPINES, respondents. include in its Joint Resolution the TRUTH of the acts
May 2003, before the Sandiganbayan, asking that
doubt. Such acquittal, however, is not determinative of Chief Justice Davide, et al., last January 20, 2001
RESOLUTION ‘the appointment of counsels de officio (sic) be
of this administrative case. in:
declared functus officio’ and that, being the now
The testimonies of witnesses in the criminal PER CURIAM: counsel de parte, he be notified of all subsequent
‘a) going to EDSA 2;
complaint, particularly that of the complainant proceedings in Criminal Cases No. 26558, No.
On 23 September 2003, this Court issued its 26565 and No. 26905 pending therein. Finally,
suffice to show that respondent acted in a grossly ‘b) authorizing the proclamation of Vice-President
resolution in the above-numbered case; it read: Attorney Paguia asked that all the foregoing criminal
reprehensible manner in having carnal knowledge of Arroyo as President on the ground of ‘permanent
his neighbor's wife without her consent in her very cases against his client be dismissed. disability’ even without proof of compliance with the
"The case for consideration has been brought to this
home. Court via a Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 of corresponding constitutional conditions, e.g., written
"During the hearing of the Omnibus Motion on 30
the Rules of Court filed by Joseph Ejercito Estrada, declaration by either the President or majority of his
A lawyer may be disbarred or suspended for May 2003, petitioner presented to the court several
acting through his counsel Attorney Alan F. Paguia, cabinet; and
misconduct, whether in his professional or private portions of the book, entitled ‘Reforming the
against the Sandiganbayan, et al. The Petition prays Judiciary,’ written by Justice Artemio Panganiban, to
capacity, which shows him to be wanting in moral ‘c) actually proclaiming Vice-President Arroyo on
– be part of the evidence for the defense. On 9 June
character, in honesty, probity and good demeanor or that same ground of permanent disability.
unworthy to continue as an officer of the court.12 2003, petitioner filed a motion pleading, among
"1. That Chief Justice Davide and the rest of the
other things, that – ‘It is patently unreasonable for the Court to refuse to
members of the Honorable Court disqualify
In this case, we find that suspension for one year include these material facts which are obviously
themselves from hearing and deciding this petition; "a) x x x President Estrada be granted the
recommended by the Integrated Bar of the undeniable. Besides, it is the only defense of
Philippines is not sufficient punishment for the opportunity to prove the ‘truth’ of the statements President Estrada.’ (Petition, Rollo, pp. 13-14.)
"2. That the assailed resolutions of the
immoral act of respondent. The rape of his contained in Justice Artemio Panganiban’s book,
Sandiganbayan be vacated and set aside; and
neighbor's wife constituted serious moral depravity ‘REFORMING THE JUDICIARY,’ in relation to the "On 2 July 2003, the Sandiganbayan issued an order
even if his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable prejudgment committed by the Supreme Court denying the foregoing motion, as well as the motion
doubt in the criminal prosecution for rape. He is not justices against President Estrada in the subject to dismiss, filed by petitioner. Forthwith, petitioner

Page 18 of 132
filed a ‘Mosyong Pangrekonsiderasyon’ of the disclaim the authority and jurisdiction of the a member of the bar from making such public endorse candidates for political office or participate
foregoing order. According to Attorney Paguia, members of this tribunal and, on the other hand, he statements on any pending case tending to arouse in other partisan political activities."
during the hearing of his ‘Mosyong would elevate the petition now before it to challenge public opinion for or against a party. By his acts,
Pangrekonsiderasyon’ on 11 June 2003, the three the two resolutions of the Sandiganbayan. He Attorney Paguia may have stoked the fires of public Section 79(b) of the Omnibus Election Code defines
justices of the Special Division of the denounces the decision as being a patent mockery dissension and posed a potentially dangerous threat the term "partisan political activities;" the law states:
Sandiganbayan made manifest their bias and of justice and due process. Attorney Pagula went on to the administration of justice.
"The term ‘election campaign’ or ‘partisan political
partiality against his client. Thus, he averred, to state that-
"It is not the first time that Attorney Paguia has activity’ refers to an act designed to promote the
Presiding Justice Minita V. Chico-Nazario
‘The act of the public officer, if LAWFUL, is the act exhibited similar conduct towards the Supreme election or defeat of a particular candidate or
supposedly employed foul and disrespectful
of the public office.1awp++i1 But the act of the Court. In a letter, dated 30 June 2003, addressed to candidates to a public office which shall include:
language when she blurted out, ‘Magmumukha
naman kaming gago,’ (Rollo, p. 13.) and Justice public officer, if UNLAWFUL, is not the act of the Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., and Associate
"(1) Forming organizations, associations, clubs,
Teresita Leonardo-De Castro characterized the public office. Consequently, the act of the justices, if Justice Artemio V. Panganiban, he has demanded,
committees or other groups of persons for the
motion as insignificant even before the prosecution LAWFUL, is the act of the Supreme Court. But the in a clearly disguised form of forum shopping, for
purpose of soliciting votes and/or undertaking any
could file its comments or opposition thereto, (Rollo, act of the justices, if UNLAWFUL, is not the act of several advisory opinions on matters pending before
campaign for or against a candidate;
p. 12.) remarking in open court that to grant the Supreme Court. It is submitted that the Decision the Sandiganbayan. In a resolution, dated 08 July
Estrada’s motion would result in chaos and disorder. in ESTRADA vs. ARROYO being patently unlawful in 2003, this Court has strongly warned Attorney Alan "(2) Holding political caucuses, conferences,
(Ibid.) Prompted by the alleged ‘bias and partial view of Rule 5.10 of the CODE OF JUDICIAL Paguia, on pain of disciplinary sanction, to desist meetings, rallies, parades, or other similar
attitude’ of the Sandiganbayan justices, Attorney CONDUCT, is not the act of the Supreme Court but from further making, directly or indirectly, similar assemblies, for the purpose of soliciting votes
Paguia filed, on 14 July 2003, a motion for their is merely the wrong or trespass of those individual submissions to this Court or to its Members. But, and/or undertaking any campaign or propaganda for
disqualification. On 31 July 2003, petitioner received Justices who falsely spoke and acted in the name of unmindful of the well-meant admonition to him by or against a candidate.
the two assailed resolutions, i.e., the resolution the Supreme Court. (Urbano vs. Chavez, 183 SCRA the Court, Attorney Paguia appears to persist on
(Promulgated on 30 July 2003.) of 28 July 2003, [347]). Furthermore, it would seem absurd to allow end. "(3) Making speeches, announcements or
denying petitioner’s motion for reconsideration of 6 the Justices to use the name of the Supreme Court commentaries, or holding interviews for or against
as a shield for their UNLAWFUL act.’ (Petition, Rollo, "WHEREFORE, the instant petition for certiorari is the election of any candidate for public office;
July 2003; viz:
p. 11.) DISMISSED, and the Court hereby orders Attorney
‘WHEREFORE, premises considered, accused- Alan Paguia, counsel for petitioner Joseph Ejercito "(4) Publishing or distributing campaign literature or
movant Joseph Ejercito Estrada’s ‘Mosyong "Criticism or comment made in good faith on the Estrada, to SHOW CAUSE, within ten days from materials designed to support or oppose the
Pangrekonsiderasyon’ (Na tumutukoy sa Joint correctness or wrongness, soundness or notice hereof, why he should not be sanctioned for election of any candidate; or
Resolution ng Hulyo 2, 2003) dated July 6, 2003 is unsoundness, of a decision of the Court would be conduct unbecoming a lawyer and an officer of the
welcome for, if well-founded, such reaction can Court." "(5) Directly or indirectly soliciting votes, pledges or
DENIED for lack of merit.’ (Rollo, p. 37.)
enlighten the court and contribute to the correction support for or against a candidate."
"and the resolution (Promulgated on 30 July 2003.) of an error if committed. (In Re Sotto, 82 Phil 595.) On 10 October 2003, Atty. Paguia submitted his
compliance with the show-cause order. In a three- It should be clear that the phrase "partisan political
of 25 July 2003, denying petitioner’s motion for
"The ruling in Estrada v. Arroyo, being a final page pleading, Atty. Paguia, in an obstinate display activities," in its statutory context, relates to acts
disqualification of 14 July 2003; viz:
judgment, has long put to end any question of defiance, repeated his earlier claim of political designed to cause the success or the defeat of a
‘WHEREFORE, prescinding from all the foregoing, pertaining to the legality of the ascension of Arroyo partisanship against the members of the Court. particular candidate or candidates who have filed
the Court, for want of merit, hereby DENIES the into the presidency. By reviving the issue on the certificates of candidacy to a public office in an
Motion for Disqualification.’ (Rollo, p. 48.) validity of the assumption of Mme. Gloria Canon 5.10 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which election. The taking of an oath of office by any
Macapagal-Arroyo to the presidency, Attorney Atty. Paguia has tirelessly quoted to give some incoming President of the Republic before the Chief
"The instant petition assailing the foregoing orders Paguia is vainly seeking to breathe life into the semblance of validity for his groundless attack on Justice of the Philippines is a traditional official
must be DISMISSED for gross insufficiency in carcass of a long dead issue. the Court and its members, provides - function of the Highest Magistrate. The assailed
substance and for utter lack of merit. The presence of other justices of the Court at such an
Sandiganbayan committed no grave abuse of "Attorney Paguia has not limited his discussions to "Rule 5.10. A judge is entitled to entertain personal event could be no different from their appearance in
discretion, an indispensable requirement to warrant the merits of his client’s case within the judicial views on political questions. But to avoid suspicion such other official functions as attending the Annual
a recourse to the extraordinary relief of petition for forum; indeed, he has repeated his assault on the of political partisanship, a judge shall not make State of the Nation Address by the President of the
certiorari under Rule 65 of the Revised Rules of Civil Court in both broadcast and print media. Rule 13.02 political speeches, contribute to party funds, publicly Philippines before the Legislative Department.
Procedure. On the one hand, petitioner would of the Code of Professional Responsibility prohibits

Page 19 of 132
The Supreme Court does not claim infallibility; it will Unrelentingly, Atty. Paguia has continued to make In A. M. No. MTJ-90-383, 3 complainant Venustiano 3. Crim. Case No. 93-67, 7 for evasion through
not denounce criticism made by anyone against the public statements of like nature. Saburnido filed charges of grave threats and acts negligence under Article 224 of the Revised Penal
Court for, if well-founded, can truly have unbecoming a member of the judiciary against Code, filed by respondent against Venustiano
constructive effects in the task of the Court, but it The Court has already warned Atty. Paguia, on pain respondent. Respondent was therein found guilty of Saburnido. Respondent alleged that Venustiano
will not countenance any wrongdoing nor allow the of disciplinary sanction, to become mindful of his pointing a high-powered firearm at complainant, Saburnido, without permission from his superior,
erosion of our people’s faith in the judicial system, grave responsibilities as a lawyer and as an officer of who was unarmed at the time, during a heated took into custody a prisoner by final Judgment who
let alone, by those who have been privileged by it to the Court. Apparently, he has chosen not to at all altercation. Respondent was accordingly dismissed thereafter escaped.
practice law in the Philippines. 1âwphi1 take heed. from the service with prejudice to reemployment in
government but without forfeiture of retirement 4. Adm. Case No. 95 33,8 filed by respondent
Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility WHEREFORE, Attorney Alan Paguia is hereby against Rosalia Saburnido for violation of the
benefits.
mandates that the lawyer should observe and indefinitely suspended from the practice of law, Omnibus Election Code. Respondent alleged that
maintain the respect due to the courts and judicial effective upon his receipt hereof, for conduct Respondent was again administratively charged in Rosalia Saburnido served as chairperson of the
officers and, indeed, should insist on similar conduct unbecoming a lawyer and an officer of the Court. the consolidated cases of Sealana-Abbu v. Judge Board of Election Inspectors during the 1995
by others. In liberally imputing sinister and devious Madroño, A.M. No. 92-1-084-RTC and Sps. elections despite being related to a candidate for
Let copies of this resolution be furnished the Office
motives and questioning the impartiality, integrity, Saburnido v. Judge Madroño, A.M. No. MTJ-90- barangay councilor.
of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the
and authority of the members of the Court, Atty. 486.4 In the first case, Assistant Provincial
Philippines and all courts of the land through the At the time the present complaint was filed, the three
Paguia has only succeeded in seeking to impede, Prosecutor Florencia Sealana-Abbu charged that
Office of the Court Administrator. actions filed against Venustiano Saburnido had been
obstruct and pervert the dispensation of justice. respondent granted and reduced bail in a criminal
case without prior notice to the prosecution. In the dismissed while the case against Rosalia Saburnido
SO ORDERED.
The attention of Atty. Paguia has also been called to second case, the spouses Saburnido charged that was still pending.
the mandate of Rule 13.02 of the Code of A.C. No. 4497            September 26, 2001 respondent, in whose court certain confiscated
Professional Responsibility prohibiting a member of Complainants allege that respondent filed those
smuggled goods were deposited, allowed other
the bar from making such public statements on a MR. and MRS. VENUSTIANO G. cases against them in retaliation, since they had
persons to take the goods but did not issue the
case that may tend to arouse public opinion for or SABURNIDO, complainants,  earlier filed administrative cases against him that
corresponding memorandum receipts. Some of the
against a party. Regrettably, Atty. Paguia has vs. resulted in his dismissal from the judiciary.
goods were lost while others were substituted with
persisted in ignoring the Court’s well-meant ATTY. FLORANTE E. MADROÑO,1 respondent. Complainants assert that due to the complaints filed
damaged goods. Respondent was found guilty of
admonition. against them, they suffered much moral, mental,
both charges and his retirement benefits were
QUISUMBING, J.: physical, and financial damage. They claim that their
forfeited.
On the 7th September 2003 issue of the Daily children had to stop going to school since the family
Tribune, Atty. Paguia wrote to say - For our resolution is the administrative complaint 2 for funds were used up in attending to their cases.
In the present case, the spouses Saburnido allege
disbarment of respondent, Atty. Florante E. Madroño
that respondent has been harassing them by filing
"What is the legal effect of that violation of President filed by spouses Venustiano and Rosalia Saburdino. For his part, respondent contends that the grounds
numerous complaints against them, namely:
Estrada’s right to due process of law? It renders the Complainants allege that respondent has been mentioned in the administrative cases in which he
decision in Estrada vs. Arroyo unconstitutional and harassing them by filing numerous complaints 1. Adm. Case No. 90-0755, 5 for serious irregularity, was dismissed and his benefits forfeited did not
void. The rudiments of fair play were not observed. against them, in addition to committing acts of filed by respondent against Venustiano Saburnido. constitute moral turpitude. Hence, he could not be
There was no fair play since it appears that when dishonesty. Respondent claimed that Venustiano lent his service disbarred therefor. He then argues that none of the
President Estrada filed his petition, Chief Justice firearm to an acquaintance who thereafter extorted complaints he filed against complainants was
Davide and his fellow justices had already Complainant Venustiano Saburnido is a member of manufactured. He adds that he "was so unlucky that
money from public jeepney drivers while posing as a
committed to the other party - GMA - with a the Philippine National Police stationed at Saburnido was not convicted." 9 He claims that the
member of the then Constabulary Highway Patrol
judgment already made and waiting to be formalized Balingasag, Misamis Oriental, while his wife Rosalia complaint for serious irregularity against Venustiano
Group.
after the litigants shall have undergone the charade is a public school teacher. Respondent is a former Saburnido was dismissed only because the latter
of a formal hearing. After the justices had authorized judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court, 2. Adm. Case No. 90-0758, 6 for falsification, filed by was able to antedate an entry in the police blotter
the proclamation of GMA as president, can they be Balingasag-Lagonglong, Misamis Oriental. respondent against Venustiano Saburnido and two stating that his service firearm was lost. He also
expected to voluntarily admit the unconstitutionality others. Respondent averred that Venustiano, with points out that Venustiano was suspended when a
Previous to this administrative case, complainants
of their own act?" the help of his co-respondents in the case, inserted prisoner escaped during his watch. As for his
also filed three separate administrative cases
an entry in the police blotter regarding the loss of complaint against Rosalia Saburnido, respondent
against respondent.
Venustiano's firearm. contends that by mentioning this case in the present

Page 20 of 132
complaint, Rosalia wants to deprive him of his right uphold the dignity and integrity of the legal officer of the court. 12 While we will not hesitate to Ago in the Court of First Instance of Manila to
to call the attention of the proper authorities to a profession. Specifically, in Rule 7.03, the Code remove an erring attorney from the esteemed recover certain machineries (civil case 27251). In
violation of the Election Code. provides: brotherhood of lawyers, where the evidence calls for 1957 judgment was rendered in favor of the
it, we will also not disbar him where a lesser penalty plaintiffs, ordering Ago to return the machineries or
In their reply, complainants reiterate their charge RULE 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct will suffice to accomplish the desired end. 13 In this pay definite sums of money. Ago appealed, and on
that the cases against them were meant only to that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, case, we find suspension to be a sufficient sanction June 30, 1961 this Court, in Ago vs. Castañeda, L-
harass them. In addition, Rosalia Saburnido stressed nor shall be whether in public or private life, behave against respondent. Suspension, we may add, is not 14066, affirmed the judgment. After remand, the trial
that she served in the BEI in 1995 only because the in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal primarily intended as a punishment, but as a means court issued on August 25, 1961 a writ of execution
supposed chairperson was indisposed. She stated profession. to protect the public and the legal profession. 14 for the sum of P172,923.87. Ago moved for a stay of
that she told the other BEI members and the execution but his motion was denied, and levy was
pollwatchers that she was related to one candidate Clearly, respondent's act of filing multiple WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Florante E. Madroño made on Ago's house and lots located in Quezon
and that she would desist from serving if anyone complaints against herein complainants reflects on is found GUILTY of gross misconduct and is City. The sheriff then advertised them for auction
objected. Since nobody objected, she proceeded to his fitness to be a member of the legal profession. SUSPENDED from the practice of law for one year sale on October 25, 1961. Ago moved to stop the
dispense her duties as BEI chairperson. She added His act evinces vindictiveness, a decidedly with a WARNING that a repetition the same or auction sale, failing in which he filed a petition for
that her relative lost in that election while undesirable trait whether in a lawyer or another similar act will be dealt with more severely. certiorari with the Court of Appeals. The appellate
respondent's son won. individual, as complainants were instrumental in Respondent's suspension is effective upon his court dismissed the petition and Ago appealed. On
respondent's dismissal from the judiciary. We see in receipt of notice of this decision. Let notice of this January 31,1966 this Court, in Ago vs. Court of
In a resolution dated May 22, 1996,10 we referred respondent's tenacity in pursuing several cases decision be spread in respondent's record as an Appeals, et al., L-19718 , affirmed the dismissal. Ago
this matter to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines against complainants not the persistence of one attorney in this Court, and notice of the same served thrice attempted to obtain a writ of preliminary
(IBP) for investigation, report, and recommendation. who has been grievously wronged but the obstinacy on the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and on the injunction to restrain the sheriff from enforcing the
of one who is trying to exact revenge. Office of the Court Administrator for circulation to all
In its report submitted to this Court on October 16, writ of execution "to save his family house and lot;"
the courts concerned. his motions were denied, and the sheriff sold the
2000, the IBP noted that respondent and his counsel Respondent's action erodes rather than enhances
failed to appear and present evidence in the hearing public perception of the legal profession. It house and lots on March 9, 1963 to the highest
SO ORDERED.
of the case set for January 26, 2000, despite notice. constitutes gross misconduct for which he may be bidders, the petitioners Castañeda and Henson. Ago
Thus, respondent was considered to have waived suspended, following Section 27, Rule 138 of the G.R. No. L-28546 July 30, 1975 failed to redeem, and on April 17, 1964 the sheriff
his right to present evidence in his behalf during said Rules of Court, which provides: executed the final deed of sale in favor of the
hearing. Neither did respondent submit his VENANCIO CASTANEDA and NICETAS vendees Castañeda and Henson. Upon their
memorandum as directed by the IBP. SECTION 27. Disbarment or suspension of HENSON, petitioners,  petition, the Court of First Instance of Manila  issued
attorneys by Supreme Court, grounds therefor. — A vs. a writ of possession to the properties.
After evaluating the evidence before it, the IBP member of the bar may be disbarred or suspended PASTOR D. AGO, LOURDES YU AGO and THE
concluded that complainants submitted convincing from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for COURT OF APPEALS, respondents. However, on May 2, 1964 Pastor Ago, now joined by
proof that respondent indeed committed acts any deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct his wife, Lourdes Yu Ago, as his co-plaintiff, filed a
constituting gross misconduct that warrant the in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by Quijano and Arroyo for petitioners. complaint in the Court of First Instance of Quezon
imposition of administrative sanction. The IBP reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral City (civil case Q-7986) to annul the sheriff's sale on
Jose M. Luison for respondents. the ground that the obligation of Pastor Ago upon
recommends that respondent be suspended from turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is
the practice of law for one year. required to take before admission to practice, or for which judgment was rendered against him in the
a wilful disobedience appearing as an attorney for a replevin suit was his personal obligation, and that
We have examined the records of this case and find party to a case without authority so to do.x x x Lourdes Yu Ago's one-half share in their conjugal
no reason to disagree with the findings and residential house and lots which were levied upon
CASTRO, J.:
recommendation of the IBP. Complainants ask that respondent be disbarred. and sold by the sheriff could not legally be reached
However, we find that suspension from the practice The parties in this case, except Lourdes Yu Ago, for the satisfaction of the judgment. They alleged in
A lawyer may be disciplined for any conduct, in his of law is sufficient to discipline respondent. their complaint that wife Lourdes was not a party in
have been commuting to this Court for more than a
professional or private capacity, that renders him the replevin suit, that the judgment was rendered
decade.
unfit to continue to be an officer of the The supreme penalty of disbarment is meted out and the writ of execution was issued only against
court.11 Canon 7 of the Code of Professional only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously In 1955 the petitioners Venancio Castañeda and husband Pastor, and that wife Lourdes was not a
Responsibility commands all lawyers to at all times affect the standing and character of the lawyer as an Nicetas Henson filed a replevin suit against Pastor party to her husband's venture in the logging

Page 21 of 132
business which failed and resulted in the replevin due course to the petition and granted preliminary said appellate court assuming that Lourdes Yu Ago logging business and not a party to the replevin suit.
suit and which did not benefit the conjugal injunction. After hearing, it rendered decision, the was a "stranger" or a "third-party" to her husband. The spouses Ago had every opportunity to raise the
partnership. dispositive portion of which reads: The assumption is of course obviously wrong, for, issue in the various proceedings hereinbefore
besides living with her husband Pastor, she does not discussed but did not; laches now effectively bars
The Court of First Instance of Quezon City issued WHEREFORE, writ of preliminary injunction from claim ignorance of his business that failed, of the them from raising it.
an ex parte  writ of preliminary injunction restraining enforcement of the writ of possession on and relevant cases in which he got embroiled, and of the
the petitioners, the Register of Deeds and the sheriff ejectment from the one-half share in the properties auction sale made by the sheriff of their conjugal Laches, in a general sense, is failure or neglect, for
of Quezon City, from registering the latter's final involved belonging to Lourdes Yu Ago dated June properties. Even then, the ruling in Omnas  is not an unreasonable and unexplained length of time, to
deed of sale, from cancelling the respondents' 15, 1967 is made permanent pending decision on that a writ of possession may not issue until the do that which, by exercising due diligence, could or
certificates of title and issuing new ones to the the merits in Civil Case No. Q-7986 and ordering claim of a third person is adversely determined, but should have been done earlier; it is negligence or
petitioners and from carrying out any writ of respondent Court to proceed with the trial of Civil that the writ of possession being a complement of omission to assert a right within a reasonable time,
possession. A situation thus arose where what Case No. Q-7986 on the merits without unnecessary the writ of execution, a judge with jurisdiction to warranting a presumption that the party entitled to
the Manila court had ordered to be done, delay. No pronouncement as to costs. issue the latter also has jurisdiction to issue the assert it either has abandoned it or declined to
the Quezon City  court countermanded. On former, unless in the interval between the judicial assert it.2
November 1, 1965, however, the latter court lifted Failing to obtain reconsideration, the petitioners
sale and the issuance of the writ of possession, the
the preliminary injunction it had previously issued, Castañeda and Henson filed the present petition for 5. The decision of the appellate court under review
rights of third parties to the property sold have
and the Register of deeds of Quezon City cancelled review of the aforesaid decision. suffers from two fatal infirmities.
supervened. The ruling in Omnas  is clearly
the respondents' certificates of title and issued new inapplicable in the present case, for, here, there has
1. We do not see how the doctrine that a court may (a) It enjoined the enforcement of the writ of
ones in favor of the petitioners. But enforcement of been no change in the ownership of the properties
not interfere with the orders of a co-equal court can possession to and ejectment from the one-half share
the writ of possession was again thwarted as the or of any interest therein from the time the writ of
apply in the case at bar. The Court of First Instance in the properties involved belonging to Lourdes Yu
Quezon City court again issued a temporary execution was issued up to the time writ of
of Manila, which issued the writ of possession, Ago. This half-share is not in esse, but is merely an
restraining order which it later lifted but then re- possession was issued, and even up to the present.
ultimately was not interfered with by its co-equal inchoate interest, a mere expectancy, constituting
restored. On May 3, 1967 the court finally, and for
court, the Court of First Instance of Quezon City as neither legal nor equitable estate, and will ripen into
the third time, lifted the restraining order. 4. We agree with the trial court (then presided by
the latter lifted the restraining order it had previously title when only upon liquidation and settlement there
Judge Lourdes P. San Diego) that it is much too late
While the battle on the matter of the lifting and issued against the enforcement of the Manila court's appears to be assets of the community. 3 The
in the day for the respondents Agos to raise the
restoring of the restraining order was being fought in writ of possession; it is the Court of Appeals that decision sets at naught the well-settled rule that
question that part of the property is unleviable
the Quezon City court, the Agos filed a petition for enjoined, in part, the enforcement of the writ. injunction does not issue to protect a right not in
because it belongs to Lourdes Yu Ago, considering
certiorari and prohibition with this Court under date esse and which may never arise.4
2. Invoking Comilang vs. Buendia, et al .,1 where the that (1) a wife is normally privy to her husband's
of May 26, 1966, docketed as L-26116, praying for a activities; (2) the levy was made and the properties
wife was a party in one case and the husband was a (b) The decision did not foresee the absurdity, or
writ of preliminary injunction to enjoin the sheriff advertised for auction sale in 1961; (3) she lives in
party in another case and a levy on their conjugal even the impossibility, of its enforcement. The Ago
from enforcing the writ of possession. This Court the very properties in question; (4) her husband had
properties was upheld, the petitioners would have spouses admittedly live together in the same
found no merit in the petition and dismissed it in a moved to stop the auction sale; (5) the properties
Lourdes Yu Ago similarly bound by the replevin house5 which is conjugal property. By the Manila
minute resolution on June 3, 1966; reconsideration were sold at auction in 1963; (6) her husband had
judgment against her husband for which their court's writ of possession Pastor could be ousted
was denied on July 18, 1966. The respondents then thrice attempted to obtain a preliminary injunction to
conjugal properties would be answerable. The case from the house, but the decision under review would
filed on August 2, 1966 a similar petition for restrain the sheriff from enforcing the writ of
invoked is not at par with the present case. prevent the ejectment of Lourdes. Now, which part
certiorari and prohibition with the Court of Appeals execution; (7) the sheriff executed the deed of final
In Comilang the actions were admittedly instituted of the house would be vacated by Pastor and which
(CA-G.R. 37830-R), praying for the same preliminary sale on April 17, 1964 when Pastor failed to redeem;
for the protection of the common interest of the part would Lourdes continue to stay in? The
injunction. The Court of Appeals also dismissed the (8) Pastor had impliedly admitted that the conjugal
spouses; in the present case, the Agos deny that absurdity does not stop here; the decision would
petition. The respondents then appealed to this properties could be levied upon by his pleas "to
their conjugal partnership benefited from the actually separate husband and wife, prevent them
Court (L-27140).1äwphï1.ñët  We dismissed the save his family house and lot" in his efforts to
husband's business venture. from living together, and in effect divide their
petition in a minute resolution on February 8, 1967. prevent execution; and (9) it was only on May 2, conjugal properties during coverture and before the
3. Relying upon Omnas vs. Rivera, 67 Phil. 419, the 1964 when he and his wife filed the complaint for dissolution of the conjugal union.
The Ago spouses repaired once more to the Court of
Court of Appeals held that a writ of possession may annulment of the sheriff's sale upon the issue that
Appeals where they filed another petition
not issue until the claim of a third person to half- the wife's share in the properties cannot be levied 6. Despite the pendency in the trial court of the
for certiorari  and prohibition with preliminary
interest in the property is adversely determined, the upon on the ground that she was not a party to the complaint for the annulment of the sheriff's sale (civil
injunction (CA-G.R. 39438-R). The said court gave

Page 22 of 132
case Q-7986), elementary justice demands that the 7. In view of the private respondents' propensity to granting preliminary injunction, the dispositive This third cause of action, therefore, actually states
petitioners, long denied the fruits of their victory in use the courts for purposes other than to seek portion of which was herein-before quoted. This no valid cause of action and is moreover barred by
the replevin suit, must now enjoy them, for, the justice, and in order to obviate further delay in the ruling applies as well to the first cause of action of prior judgment.
respondents Agos, abetted by their lawyer Jose M. disposition of the case below which might again the complaint.
Luison, have misused legal remedies and prostituted come up to the appellate courts but only to fail in the The  fourth cause of action  pertains to moral
the judicial process to thwart the satisfaction of the end, we have motu proprio  examined the record of Upon the second cause of action, the Agos allege damages allegedly suffered by the Agos on account
judgment, to the extended prejudice of the civil case Q-7986 (the mother case of the present that on January 5, 1959 the Castañedas and the of the acts complained of in the preceding causes of
petitioners. The respondents, with the assistance of case). We find that sheriff, pursuant to an alias  writ of seizure, seized action. As the fourth cause of action derives its life
counsel, maneuvered for fourteen (14) years to and took possession of certain machineries, from the preceding causes of action, which, as
doggedly resist execution of the judgment thru (a) the complaint was filed on May 2, 1964 (more depriving the Agos of the use thereof, to their shown, are baseless, the said fourth cause of action
manifold tactics in and from one court to another (5 than 11 years ago) but trial on the merits has not damage in the sum of P256,000 up to May 5, 1964. must necessarily fail.
times in the Supreme Court). even started; This second cause of action fails to state a valid
cause of action for it fails to allege that the order of The Counterclaim
We condemn the attitude of the respondents and (b) after the defendants Castañedas had filed their seizure is invalid or illegal.
answer with a counterclaim, the plaintiffs Agos filed As a counterclaim against the Agos, the Castañedas
their counsel who,
a supplemental complaint where they impleaded It is averred as a third cause of action that the aver that the action was unfounded and as a
far from viewing courts as sanctuaries for those who new parties-defendants; sheriff's sale of the conjugal properties was irregular, consequence of its filing they were compelled to
seek justice, have tried to use them to subvert the illegal and unlawful because the sheriff did not retain the services of counsel for not less than
very ends of justice.6 (c) after the admission of the supplemental require the Castañeda spouses to pay or liquidate P7,500; that because the Agos obtained a
complaint, the Agos filed a motion to admit an the sum of P141,750 (the amount for which they preliminary injunction enjoining the transfer of titles
Forgetting his sacred mission as a sworn public amended supplemental complaint, which impleads bought the properties at the auction sale) despite and possession of the properties to the Castañedas,
servant and his exalted position as an officer of the an additional new party-defendant (no action has yet the fact that there was annotated at the back of the they were unlawfully deprived of the use of the
court, Atty. Luison has allowed himself to become been taken on this motion); certificates of title a mortgage of P75,000 in favor of properties from April 17, 1964, the value of such
an instigator of controversy and a predator of the Philippine National Bank; moreover, the sheriff deprived use being 20% annually of their actual
conflict instead of a mediator for concord and a (d) the defendants have not filed an answer to the value; and that the filing of the unfounded action
sold the properties for P141,750 despite the
conciliator for compromise, a virtuoso of technicality admitted supplemental complaint; and besmirched their feelings, the pecuniary worth of
pendency of L-19718 where Pastor Ago contested
in the conduct of litigation instead of a true exponent the amount of P99,877.08 out of the judgment value which is for the court to assess.
(e) the last order of the Court of First Instance, dated
of the primacy of truth and moral justice. of P172,923.37 in civil case 27251; and because of
April 20, 1974, grants an extension to the The Supplemental Complaint
suspension of time to file answer. ( Expediente, p. said acts, the Agos suffered P174,877.08 in
A counsel's assertiveness in espousing with candour
815) damages. Upon the  first cause of action, it is alleged that after
and honesty his client's cause must be encouraged
and is to be commended; what we do not and the filing of the complaint, the defendants, taking
We also find that the alleged causes of action in the Anent this third cause of action, the sheriff was
cannot countenance is a lawyer's insistence despite advantage of the dissolution of the preliminary
complaint, supplemental complaint and amended under no obligation to require payment of the
the patent futility of his client's position, as in the injunction, in conspiracy and with gross bad faith
supplemental complaint are all untenable, for the purchase price in the auction sale because "when
case at bar. and evident intent to cause damage to the plaintiffs,
reasons hereunder stated. The Complaint the purchaser is the judgment creditor, and no third-
caused the registration of the sheriff's final deed of
party claim has been filed, he need not pay the
It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, sale; that, to cause more damage, the defendants
Upon the  first cause of action, it is alleged that the amount of the bid if it does not exceed the amount
ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and vagaries of sold to their lawyer and his wife two of the parcels of
sheriff levied upon conjugal properties of the of his judgment." (Sec. 23, Rule 39, Rules of Court)
the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If land in question; that the purchasers acquired the
spouses Ago despite the fact that the judgment to
he finds that his client's cause is defenseless, then it The annotated mortgage in favor of the PNB is the properties in bad faith; that the defendants
be satisfied was personal only to Pastor Ago, and
is his bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce concern of the vendees Castañedas but did not mortgaged the two other parcels to the Rizal
the business venture that he entered into, which
and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. affect the sheriff's sale; the cancellation of the Commercial Banking Corporation while the
resulted in the replevin suit, did not redound to the
A lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his annotation is of no moment to the Agoo. defendants' lawyer and his wife also mortgaged the
benefit of the conjugal partnership. The issue here,
client, and temper his clients propensity to litigate. A parcels bought by them to the Rizal Commercial
which is whether or not the wife's inchoate share in
lawyer's oath to uphold the cause of justice is Case L-19718 where Pastor Ago contested the sum Bank; and that the bank also acted in bad faith.
the conjugal property is leviable, is the same issue
superior to his duty to his client; its primacy is of P99,877.08 out of the amount of the judgment
that we have already resolved, as barred by laches,
indisputable.7 was dismissed by this Court on January 31, 1966.
in striking down the decision of the Court of Appeals

Page 23 of 132
The second cause of action  consists of an allegation complaint and the amended supplemental accused that must be taken seriously into in this case without the express authority of the
of additional damages caused by the defendants' complaint. consideration. In appropriate cases, it should tilt the Commission on Elections); and since according to
bad faith in entering into the aforesaid agreements balance. This is not one of them. What is easily the prosecution there are two witnesses who are
and transactions. ACCORDINGLY, the decision of the Court of discernible was the obvious reluctance of petitioner ready to take the stand, after which the government
Appeals under review is set aside. Civil case Q-7986 to comply with the responsibilities incumbent on the would rest, the motion for postponement is denied.
The Amended Supplemental Complaint of the Court of First Instance of Rizal is ordered counsel de oficio. Then, too, even on the When counsel for the accused assumed office as
dismissed, without prejudice to the re-filing of the assumption that he continues in his position, his Election Registrar on October 13, 1964, he knew
The amendment made pertains to the first cause of petitioners' counterclaim in a new and independent volume of work is likely to be very much less at since October 2, 1964 that the trial would be
action of the supplemental complaint, which is, the action. Treble costs are assessed against the present. There is not now the slightest pretext for resumed today. Nevertheless, in order not to
inclusion of a paragraph averring that, still to cause spouses Pastor Ago and Lourdes Yu Ago, which him to shirk an obligation a member of the bar, who prejudice the civil service status of counsel for the
damage and prejudice to the plaintiffs, Atty. & Mrs. shall be paid by their lawyer, Atty. Jose M. Luison. expects to remain in good standing, should fulfill. accused, he is hereby designated counsel de
Juan Quijano, in bad faith sold the two parcels of Let a copy of this decision be made a part of the The petition is clearly without merit. oficio for the accused. The defense obtained
land they had previously bought to Eloy Ocampo personal file of Atty. Luison in the custody of the postponements on May 17, 1963, June 13, 1963,
who acquired them also in bad faith, while Venancio Clerk of Court. According to the undisputed facts, petitioner, on June 14, 1963, October 28, 1963, November 27,
Castañeda and Nicetas Henson in bad faith sold the October 13, 1964, was appointed Election Registrar 1963, February 11, 1964, March 9, 1964, June 8,
two other parcels to Juan Quijano (60%) and Eloy CANON 2 for the Municipality of Cadiz, Province of Negros 1964 July 26, 1964, and September 7,
Ocampo (40%) who acquired them in bad faith and Occidental. Then and there, he commenced to
G.R. No. L-23815 June 28, 1974 1964."4 Reference was then made to another order
with knowledge that the properties are the subject of discharge its duties. As he was counsel de parte for of February 11, 1964: "Upon petition of Atty. Adelino
a pending litigation. one of the accused in a case pending in the sala of
ADELINO H. LEDESMA, petitioner,  H. Ledesma, alleging indisposition, the continuation
vs. respondent Judge, he filed a motion to withdraw as of the trial of this case is hereby transferred to March
Discussion on The Causes of Action
HON. RAFAEL C. CLIMACO, Presiding Judge of such. Not only did respondent Judge deny such 9, 1964 at 8:30 in the morning. The defense is
of The Supplemental Complaint And
the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental, motion, but he also appointed him counsel de reminded that at its instance, this case has been
The Amended Supplemental Complaint
Branch I, Silay City, respondent. oficio for the two defendants. Subsequently, on postponed at least eight (8) times, and that the
Assuming hypothetically as true the allegations in November 3, 1964, petitioner filed an urgent motion government witnesses have to come all the way
the first cause of action of the supplemental FERNANDO, J.: to be allowed to withdraw as counsel de oficio, from Manapala."5 After which, it was noted in such
complaint and the amended supplemental premised on the policy of the Commission on order that there was no incompatibility between the
What is assailed in this certiorari proceeding is an Elections to require full time service as well as on the
complaint, the validity of the cause of action would duty of petitioner to the accused and to the court
order of respondent Judge denying a motion filed by volume or pressure of work of petitioner, which
depend upon the validity of the first cause of action and the performance of his task as an election
petitioner to be allowed to withdraw as counsel de could prevent him from handling adequately the
of the original complaint, for, the Agos would suffer registrar of the Commission on Elections and that
oficio.1One of the grounds for such a motion was his defense. Respondent Judge, in the challenged order
no transgression upon their rights of ownership and the ends of justice "would be served by allowing and
allegation that with his appointment as Election of November 6, 1964, denied said motion. A motion
possession of the properties by reason of the requiring Mr. Ledesma to continue as counsel de
Registrar by the Commission on Elections, he was for reconsideration having proved futile, he instituted
agreements subsequently entered into by the oficio, since the prosecution has already rested its
not in a position to devote full time to the defense of this certiorari proceeding.3
Castañedas and their lawyer if the sheriff's levy and case."6
the two accused. The denial by respondent Judge of
sale are valid. The reverse is also true: if the sheriff's
such a plea, notwithstanding the conformity of the As noted at the outset, the petition must fail. 2. What is readily apparent therefore, is that
levy and sale are invalid on the ground that the
defendants, was due "its principal effect [being] to petitioner was less than duly mindful of his
conjugal properties could not be levied upon, then 1. The assailed order of November 6, 1964 denying
delay this case."2 It was likewise noted that the obligation as counsel de oficio. He ought to have
the transactions would perhaps prejudice the Agos, the urgent motion of petitioner to withdraw as
prosecution had already rested and that petitioner known that membership in the bar is a privilege
but, we have already indicated that the issue in the counsel de oficiospeaks for itself. It began with a
was previously counsel de parte, his designation in burdened with conditions. It could be that for some
first cause of action of the original complaint is reminder that a crime was allegedly committed on
the former category being precisely to protect him in lawyers, especially the neophytes in the profession,
barred by laches, and it must therefore follow that February 17, 1962, with the proceedings having
his new position without prejudicing the accused. It being appointed counsel de oficio is an irksome
the first cause of action of the supplemental started in the municipal court of Cadiz on July 11,
cannot be plausibly asserted that such failure to chore. For those holding such belief, it may come as
complaint and the amended supplemental complaint 1962. Then respondent Judge spoke of his order of
allow withdrawal of de oficio counsel could ordinarily a surprise that counsel of repute and of eminence
is also barred. October 16, 1964 which reads thus: "In view of the
be characterized as a grave abuse of discretion welcome such an opportunity. It makes even more
correctible by certiorari. There is, however, the objection of the prosecution to the motion for
For the same reason, the same holding applies to manifest that law is indeed a profession dedicated to
overriding concern for the right to counsel of the postponement of October 15, 1964 (alleging that
the remaining cause of action in the supplemental the ideal of service and not a mere trade. It is
counsel for the accused cannot continue appearing

Page 24 of 132
understandable then why a high degree of fidelity to The weakness of the petition is thus quite evident. Such a consideration could have sufficed for provision. As such, filing fees, though one of the
duty is required of one so designated. A recent petitioner not being allowed to withdraw as essential elements in court procedures, should not
statement of the doctrine is found in People v. 3. If respondent Judge were required to answer the counsel de oficio. For he did betray by his moves his be an obstacle to poor litigants' opportunity to seek
Daban:7 "There is need anew in this disciplinary petition, it was only due to the apprehension that lack of enthusiasm for the task entrusted to him, to redress for their grievances before the courts.
proceeding to lay stress on the fundamental considering the frame of mind of a counsel loath and put matters mildly. He did point though to his
postulate that membership in the bar carries with it a reluctant to fulfill his obligation, the welfare of the responsibility as an election registrar. Assuming his The Case
responsibility to live up to its exacting standard. The accused could be prejudiced. His right to counsel good faith, no such excuse could be availed now.
could in effect be rendered nugatory. Its importance This Petition for Review on Certiorari seeks the
law is a profession, not a trade or a craft. Those There is not likely at present, and in the immediate
was rightfully stressed by Chief Justice Moran annulment of the September 11, 2001 Order of the
enrolled in its ranks are called upon to aid in the future, an exorbitant demand on his time. It may
in People v. Holgado in these words: "In criminal Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Naga City, Branch 27,
performance of one of the basic purposes of the likewise be assumed, considering what has been set
cases there can be no fair hearing unless the in Civil Case No. 99-4403 entitled Spouses Antonio
State, the administration of justice. To avoid any forth above, that petitioner would exert himself
accused be given an opportunity to be heard by F. Algura and Lorencita S.J. Algura v. The Local
frustration thereof, especially in the case of an sufficiently to perform his task as defense counsel
counsel. The right to be heard would be of little avail Government Unit of the City of Naga, et al. ,
indigent defendant, a lawyer may be required to act with competence, if not with zeal, if only to erase
if it does not include the right to be heard by dismissing the case for failure of petitioners Algura
as counsel de oficio. The fact that his services are doubts as to his fitness to remain a member of the
counsel. Even the most intelligent or educated man spouses to pay the required filing fees. 2 Since the
rendered without remuneration should not occasion profession in good standing. The admonition is ever
may have no skill in the science of law, particularly in instant petition involves only a question of law based
a diminution in his zeal. Rather the contrary. This is timely for those enrolled in the ranks of legal
the rules of procedure, and; without counsel, he may on facts established from the pleadings and
not, of course, to ignore that other pressing matters practitioners that there are times, and this is one of
be convicted not because he is guilty but because documents submitted by the parties, 3 the Court
do compete for his attention. After all, he has his them, when duty to court and to client takes
he does not know how to establish his innocence. gives due course to the instant petition sanctioned
practice to attend to. That circumstance possesses precedence over the promptings of self-interest.
And this can happen more easily to persons who are under Section 2(c) of Rule 41 on Appeal from the
a high degree of relevance since a lawyer has to live;
ignorant or uneducated. It is for this reason that the WHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari is dismissed. RTCs, and governed by Rule 45 of the 1997 Rules of
certainly he cannot afford either to neglect his
right to be assisted by counsel is deemed so Costs against petitioner. Civil Procedure.
paying cases. Nonetheless, what is incumbent upon
him as counsel de oficio must be fulfilled." 8 important that it has become a constitutional right
G.R. No. 150135             October 30, 2006 The Facts
and it is so implemented that under rules of
So it has been from the 1905 decision of In re procedure it is not enough for the Court to apprise On September 1, 1999, spouses Antonio F. Algura
SPOUSES ANTONIO F. ALGURA and LORENCITA
Robles Lahesa,9 where respondent was de an accused of his right to have an attorney, it is not and Lorencita S.J. Algura filed a Verified Complaint
S.J. ALGURA, petitioners, 
oficio counsel, the opinion penned by Justice enough to ask him whether he desires the aid of an dated August 30, 1999 4 for damages against the
vs.
Carson making clear: "This Court should exact from attorney, but it is essential that the court should Naga City Government and its officers, arising from
THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT UNIT OF THE CITY
its officers and subordinates the most scrupulous assign one de oficio for him if he so desires and he the alleged illegal demolition of their residence and
OF NAGA, ATTY. MANUEL TEOXON, ENGR.
performance of their official duties, especially when is poor or grant him a reasonable time to procure an boarding house and for payment of lost income
LEON PALMIANO, NATHAN SERGIO and
negligence in the performance of those duties attorney of his  derived from fees paid by their boarders amounting
BENJAMIN NAVARRO, SR., respondents.
necessarily results in delays in the prosecution of own."13 So it was under the previous Organic to PhP 7,000.00 monthly.
criminal cases ...." 10 Justice Sanchez in People v. Acts.14 The present Constitution is even more DECISION
Estebia11reiterated such a view in these words: "It is emphatic. For, in addition to reiterating that the Simultaneously, petitioners filed an Ex-Parte Motion
true that he is a court-appointed counsel. But we do accused "shall enjoy the right to be heard by himself VELASCO, JR., J.: to Litigate as Indigent Litigants, 5 to which petitioner
say that as such counsel de oficio, he has as high a and counsel,"15 there is this new provision: "Any Antonio Algura's Pay Slip No. 2457360 (Annex "A" of
duty to the accused as one employed and paid by person under investigation for the commission of an Anyone who has ever struggled with poverty motion) was appended, showing a gross monthly
defendant himself. Because, as in the case of the offense shall have the right to remain silent and to knows how extremely expensive it is to be poor . income of Ten Thousand Four Hundred Seventy
latter, he must exercise his best efforts and counsel, and to be informed of such right. No force, –– James Baldwin Four Pesos (PhP 10,474.00) and a net pay of Three
professional ability in behalf of the person assigned violence, threat, intimidation, or any other means Thousand Six Hundred Sixteen Pesos and Ninety
The Constitution affords litigants—moneyed or poor
to his care. He is to render effective assistance. The which vitiates the free will shall be used against him. Nine Centavos (PhP 3,616.99) for [the month of] July
—equal access to the courts; moreover, it
accused-defendant expects of him due diligence, Any confession obtained in violation of this section 1999.6 Also attached as Annex "B" to the motion
specifically provides that poverty shall not bar any
not mere perfunctory representation. For, indeed a shall be inadmissible in evidence."16 was a July 14, 1999 Certification 7 issued by the
person from having access to the
lawyer who is a vanguard in the bastion of justice is Office of the City Assessor of Naga City, which
Thus is made manifest the indispensable role of a courts.1 Accordingly, laws and rules must be
expected to have a bigger dose of social conscience stated that petitioners had no property declared in
member of the Bar in the defense of an accused. formulated, interpreted, and implemented pursuant
and a little less of self-interest."12 their name for taxation purposes.
to the intent and spirit of this constitutional

Page 25 of 132
Finding that petitioners' motion to litigate as indigent and from several boarders who paid rentals to them. boarders, plus the salary of her husband, were not The Ruling of the Court
litigants was meritorious, Executive Judge Jose T. Hence, respondents concluded that petitioners were enough to pay the family's basic necessities.
Atienza of the Naga City RTC, in the September 1, not indigent litigants. The petition is meritorious.
1999 Order,8 granted petitioners' plea for exemption To buttress their position as qualified indigent
On March 28, 2000, petitioners subsequently litigants, petitioners also submitted the affidavit of A review of the history of the Rules of Court on suits
from filing fees.
interposed their Opposition to the Motion 12 to Erlinda Bangate, who attested under oath, that she in forma pauperis (pauper litigant) is necessary
Meanwhile, as a result of respondent Naga City respondents' motion to disqualify them for non- personally knew spouses Antonio Algura and before the Court rules on the issue of the Algura
Government's demolition of a portion of petitioners' payment of filing fees. Lorencita Algura, who were her neighbors; that they spouses' claim to exemption from paying filing fees.
house, the Alguras allegedly lost a monthly income derived substantial income from their boarders; that
On April 14, 2000, the Naga City RTC issued an When the Rules of Court took effect on January 1,
of PhP 7,000.00 from their boarders' rentals. With they lost said income from their boarders' rentals
Order disqualifying petitioners as indigent litigants 1964, the rule on pauper litigants was found in Rule
the loss of the rentals, the meager income from when the Local Government Unit of the City of
on the ground that they failed to substantiate their 3, Section 22 which provided that:
Lorencita Algura's sari-sari store and Antonio Naga, through its officers, demolished part of their
Algura's small take home pay became insufficient for claim for exemption from payment of legal fees and house because from that time, only a few boarders Section 22. Pauper litigant.—Any court may
the expenses of the Algura spouses and their six (6) to comply with the third paragraph of Rule 141, could be accommodated; that the income from the authorize a litigant to prosecute his action or
children for their basic needs including food, bills, Section 18 of the Revised Rules of Court—directing small store, the boarders, and the meager salary of defense as a pauper upon a proper showing that he
clothes, and schooling, among others. them to pay the requisite filing fees.13 Antonio Algura were insufficient for their basic has no means to that effect by affidavits, certificate
necessities like food and clothing, considering that of the corresponding provincial, city or municipal
On October 13, 1999, respondents filed an Answer On April 28, 2000, petitioners filed a Motion for
the Algura spouses had six (6) children; and that she treasurer, or otherwise. Such authority[,] once
with Counterclaim dated October 10, 1999, 9 arguing Reconsideration of the April 14, 2000 Order. On May
knew that petitioners did not own any real property. given[,] shall include an exemption from payment of
that the defenses of the petitioners in the complaint 8, 2000, respondents then filed their
Comment/Objections to petitioner's Motion for legal fees and from filing appeal bond, printed
had no cause of action, the spouses' boarding Thereafter, Naga City RTC Acting Presiding Judge
Reconsideration. record and printed brief. The legal fees shall be a
house blocked the road right of way, and said Andres B. Barsaga, Jr. issued his July 17,
lien to any judgment rendered in the case [favorable]
structure was a nuisance per se. 200018 Order denying the petitioners' Motion for
On May 5, 2000, the trial court issued an to the pauper, unless the court otherwise provides.
Reconsideration.
Praying that the counterclaim of defendants Order14 giving petitioners the opportunity to comply
with the requisites laid down in Section 18, Rule From the same Rules of Court, Rule 141 on Legal
(respondents) be dismissed, petitioners then filed Judge Barsaga ratiocinated that the pay slip of
141, for them to qualify as indigent litigants. Fees, on the other hand, did not contain any
their Reply with Ex-Parte Request for a Pre-Trial Antonio F. Algura showed that the "GROSS
provision on pauper litigants.
Setting10 before the Naga City RTC on October 19, INCOME or TOTAL EARNINGS of plaintiff Algura
On May 13, 2000, petitioners submitted their
1999. On February 3, 2000, a pre-trial was held [was] ₧10,474.00 which amount [was] over and On July 19, 1984, the Court, in Administrative Matter
Compliance15 attaching the affidavits of petitioner
wherein respondents asked for five (5) days within above the amount mentioned in the first paragraph No. 83-6-389-0 (formerly G.R. No. 64274), approved
Lorencita Algura16and Erlinda Bangate, 17 to comply
which to file a Motion to Disqualify Petitioners as of Rule 141, Section 18 for pauper litigants residing the recommendation of the Committee on the
with the requirements of then Rule 141, Section 18
Indigent Litigants. outside Metro Manila."19 Said rule provides that the Revision of Rates and Charges of Court Fees,
of the Rules of Court and in support of their claim to
gross income of the litigant should not exceed PhP through its Chairman, then Justice Felix V. Makasiar,
On March 13, 2000, respondents filed a Motion to be declared as indigent litigants.
3,000.00 a month and shall not own real estate with to revise the fees in Rule 141 of the Rules of Court to
Disqualify the Plaintiffs for Non-Payment of Filing an assessed value of PhP 50,000.00. The trial court
In her May 13, 2000 Affidavit, petitioner Lorencita generate funds to effectively cover administrative
Fees dated March 10, 2000. 11 They asserted that in found that, in Lorencita S.J. Algura's May 13, 2000
Algura claimed that the demolition of their small costs for services rendered by the courts. 20 A
addition to the more than PhP 3,000.00 net income Affidavit, nowhere was it stated that she and her
dwelling deprived her of a monthly income provision on pauper litigants was inserted which
of petitioner Antonio Algura, who is a member of the immediate family did not earn a gross income of
amounting to PhP 7,000.00. She, her husband, and reads:
Philippine National Police, spouse Lorencita Algura PhP 3,000.00.
their six (6) minor children had to rely mainly on her
also had a mini-store and a computer shop on the Section 16. Pauper-litigants exempt from payment
husband's salary as a policeman which provided
ground floor of their residence along Bayawas St., The Issue of court fees.—Pauper-litigants include wage
them a monthly amount of PhP 3,500.00, more or
Sta. Cruz, Naga City. Also, respondents claimed that earners whose gross income do not exceed
less. Also, they did not own any real property as Unconvinced of the said ruling, the Alguras
petitioners' second floor was used as their residence P2,000.00 a month or P24,000.00 a year for those
certified by the assessor's office of Naga City. More instituted the instant petition raising a solitary issue
and as a boarding house, from which they earned residing in Metro Manila, and P1,500.00 a month or
so, according to her, the meager net income from for the consideration of the Court: whether
more than PhP 3,000.00 a month. In addition, it was P18,000.00 a year for those residing outside Metro
her small sari-sari store and the rentals of some petitioners should be considered as indigent litigants
claimed that petitioners derived additional income Manila, or those who do not own real property with
from their computer shop patronized by students who qualify for exemption from paying filing fees.

Page 26 of 132
an assessed value of not more than P24,000.00, or hearing that the party declared as an indigent is in It can be readily seen that the rule on pauper Amendments to Rule 141 (including the amendment
not more than P18,000.00 as the case may be. fact a person with sufficient income or property, the litigants was inserted in Rule 141 without revoking to Rule 141, Section 18) were made to implement
proper docket and other lawful fees shall be or amendingSection 21 of Rule 3, which provides RA 9227 which brought about new increases in filing
Such exemption shall include exemption from assessed and collected by the clerk of court. If for the exemption of pauper litigants from payment fees. Specifically, in the August 16, 2004
payment of fees for filing appeal bond, printed payment is not made within the time fixed by the of filing fees. Thus, on March 1, 2000, there were amendment, the ceiling for the gross income of
record and printed brief. court, execution shall issue for the payment thereof, two existing rules on pauper litigants; litigants applying for exemption and that of their
without prejudice to such other sanctions as the namely, Rule 3, Section 21 and Rule 141, Section immediate family was increased from PhP 4,000.00
The legal fees shall be a lien on the monetary or
court may impose. 18. a month in Metro Manila and PhP 3,000.00 a month
property judgment rendered in favor of the pauper-
outside Metro Manila, to double the monthly
litigant. At the time the Rules on Civil Procedure were On August 16, 2004, Section 18 of Rule 141 was minimum wage of an employee; and the maximum
amended by the Court in Bar Matter No. 803, further amended in Administrative Matter No. 04-2- value of the property owned by the applicant was
To be entitled to the exemption herein provided, the
however, there was no amendment made on Rule 04-SC, which became effective on the same date. It increased from an assessed value of PhP 50,000.00
pauper-litigant shall execute an affidavit that he
141, Section 16 on pauper litigants. then became Section 19 of Rule 141, to wit: to a maximum market value of PhP 300,000.00, to
does not earn the gross income abovementioned,
nor own any real property with the assessed value be able to accommodate more indigent litigants and
On March 1, 2000, Rule 141 on Legal Fees was Sec. 19. Indigent litigants exempt from payment
afore-mentioned [sic], supported by a certification to promote easier access to justice by the poor and the
amended by the Court in A.M. No. 00-2-01-SC, of legal fees.– INDIGENT LITIGANTS (A) WHOSE
that effect by the provincial, city or town assessor or marginalized in the wake of these new increases in
whereby certain fees were increased or adjusted. In GROSS INCOME AND THAT OF THEIR
treasurer. filing fees.
this Resolution, the Court amended Section 16 of IMMEDIATE FAMILY DO NOT EXCEED AN
Rule 141, making it Section 18, which now reads: AMOUNT DOUBLE THE MONTHLY MINIMUM Even if there was an amendment to Rule 141 on
When the Rules of Court on Civil Procedure were
WAGE OF AN EMPLOYEE AND (B) WHO DO NOT August 16, 2004, there was still no amendment or
amended by the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure Section 18. Pauper-litigants exempt from payment OWN REAL PROPERTY WITH A FAIR MARKET recall of Rule 3, Section 21 on indigent litigants.
(inclusive of Rules 1 to 71) in Supreme Court of legal fees.—Pauper litigants (a) whose gross VALUE AS STATED IN THE CURRENT TAX
Resolution in Bar Matter No. 803 dated April 8, income and that of their immediate family do not DECLARATION OF MORE THAN THREE HUNDRED With this historical backdrop, let us now move on to
1997, which became effective on July 1, 1997, Rule exceed four thousand (P4,000.00) pesos a month if THOUSAND (P300,000.00) PESOS SHALL BE the sole issue—whether petitioners are exempt from
3, Section 22 of the Revised Rules of Court was residing in Metro Manila, and three thousand EXEMPT FROM PAYMENT OF LEGAL FEES. the payment of filing fees.
superseded by Rule 3, Section 21 of said 1997 (P3,000.00) pesos a month if residing outside Metro
Rules of Civil Procedure, as follows: Manila, and (b) who do not own real property with an The legal fees shall be a lien on any judgment It is undisputed that the Complaint (Civil Case No.
assessed value of more than fifty thousand rendered in the case favorable to the indigent litigant 99-4403) was filed on September 1, 1999. However,
Section 21. Indigent party.—A party may be
(P50,000.00) pesos shall be exempt from the unless the court otherwise provides. the Naga City RTC, in its April 14, 2000 and July 17,
authorized to litigate his action, claim or defense as
payment of legal fees. 2000 Orders, incorrectly applied Rule 141, Section
an indigent if the court, upon an ex parte application To be entitled to the exemption herein provided, 18 on Legal Feeswhen the applicable rules at that
and hearing, is satisfied that the party is one who The legal fees shall be a lien on any judgment the litigant shall execute an affidavit that he and time were Rule 3, Section 21 on Indigent
has no money or property sufficient and available for rendered in the case favorably to the pauper litigant, his immediate family do not earn a gross income Party which took effect on July 1, 1997 and Rule
food, shelter and basic necessities for himself and unless the court otherwise provides. abovementioned, and they do not own any real 141, Section 16 on Pauper Litigants which became
his family. property with the fair value aforementioned, effective on July 19, 1984 up to February 28, 2000.
To be entitled to the exemption herein provided, the supported by an affidavit of a disinterested
Such authority shall include an exemption from litigant shall execute an affidavit that he and his person attesting to the truth of the litigant's The old Section 16, Rule 141 requires applicants to
payment of docket and other lawful fees, and of immediate family do not earn the gross income affidavit. The current tax declaration, if any, shall be file an ex-parte motion to litigate as a pauper litigant
transcripts of stenographic notes which the court abovementioned, nor do they own any real property attached to the litigant's affidavit. by submitting an affidavit that they do not have a
may order to be furnished him. The amount of the with the assessed value aforementioned, supported gross income of PhP 2,000.00 a month or PhP
docket and other lawful fees which the indigent was by an affidavit of a disinterested person attesting to Any falsity in the affidavit of litigant or disinterested 24,000.00 a year for those residing in Metro Manila
exempted from paying shall be a lien on any the truth of the litigant's affidavit. person shall be sufficient cause to dismiss the and PhP 1,500.00 a month or PhP 18,000.00 a year
judgment rendered in the case favorable to the complaint or action or to strike out the pleading of for those residing outside Metro Manila or those who
indigent, unless the court otherwise provides. Any falsity in the affidavit of a litigant or disinterested that party, without prejudice to whatever criminal do not own real property with an assessed value of
person shall be sufficient cause to strike out the liability may have been incurred. (Emphasis
Any adverse party may contest the grant of such not more than PhP 24,000.00 or not more than PhP
pleading of that party, without prejudice to whatever supplied.)
authority at any time before judgment is rendered by 18,000.00 as the case may be. Thus, there are two
criminal liability may have been incurred.
the trial court. If the court should determine after requirements: a) income requirement—the

Page 27 of 132
applicants should not have a gross monthly income applied Rule 141 but ignored Rule 3, Section 21 on indigent litigants to cover applications to litigate as Consequently, every statute should be construed in
of more than PhP 1,500.00, and b) property Indigent Party. an indigent litigant. such a way that will harmonize it with existing laws.
requirement––they should not own property with an This principle is expressed in the legal maxim
assessed value of not more than PhP 18,000.00. The position of petitioners on the need to use Rule It may be argued that Rule 3, Section 21 has been 'interpretare et concordare leges legibus est
3, Section 21 on their application to litigate as impliedly repealed by the recent 2000 and 2004 optimus interpretandi,' that is, to interpret and to do
In the case at bar, petitioners Alguras submitted the indigent litigants brings to the fore the issue on amendments to Rule 141 on legal fees. This position it in such a way as to harmonize laws with laws is
Affidavits of petitioner Lorencita Algura and neighbor whether a trial court has to apply both Rule 141, is bereft of merit. Implied repeals are frowned upon the best method of interpretation.26
Erlinda Bangate, the pay slip of petitioner Antonio F. Section 16 and Rule 3, Section 21 on such unless the intent of the framers of the rules is
Algura showing a gross monthly income of PhP applications or should the court apply only Rule 141, unequivocal. It has been consistently ruled that: In the light of the foregoing considerations,
10,474.00,21 and a Certification of the Naga City Section 16 and discard Rule 3, Section 21 as having therefore, the two (2) rules can stand together and
assessor stating that petitioners do not have been superseded by Rule 141, Section 16 on Legal (r)epeals by implication are not favored, and will not are compatible with each other. When an application
property declared in their names for Fees. be decreed, unless it is manifest that the legislature to litigate as an indigent litigant is filed, the court
taxation.22 Undoubtedly, petitioners do not own real so intended. As laws are presumed to be passed shall scrutinize the affidavits and supporting
property as shown by the Certification of the Naga The Court rules that Rule 3, Section 21 and Rule with deliberation and with full knowledge of all documents submitted by the applicant to determine
City assessor and so the property requirement is 141, Section 16 (later amended as Rule 141, Section existing ones on the subject, it is but reasonable to if the applicant complies with the income and
met. However with respect to the income 18 on March 1, 2000 and subsequently amended by conclude that in passing a statute[,] it was not property standards prescribed in the present Section
requirement, it is clear that the gross monthly Rule 141, Section 19 on August 16, 2003, which is intended to interfere with or abrogate any former law 19 of Rule 141—that is, the applicant's gross
income of PhP 10,474.00 of petitioner Antonio F. now the present rule) are still valid and enforceable relating to same matter, unless the repugnancy income and that of the applicant's immediate family
Algura and the PhP 3,000.00 income of Lorencita rules on indigent litigants. between the two is not only irreconcilable, but also do not exceed an amount double the monthly
Algura when combined, were above the PhP clear and convincing, and flowing necessarily from minimum wage of an employee; and the applicant
For one, the history of the two seemingly conflicting the language used, unless the later act fully
1,500.00 monthly income threshold prescribed by does not own real property with a fair market value
rules readily reveals that it was not the intent of the embraces the subject matter of the earlier, or unless
then Rule 141, Section 16 and therefore, the income of more than Three Hundred Thousand Pesos (PhP
Court to consider the old Section 22 of Rule 3, the reason for the earlier act is beyond peradventure
requirement was not satisfied. The trial court was 300,000.00). If the trial court finds that the applicant
which took effect on January 1, 1994 to have been removed. Hence, every effort must be used to make
therefore correct in disqualifying petitioners Alguras meets the income and property requirements, the
amended and superseded by Rule 141, Section 16, all acts stand and if, by any reasonable construction
as indigent litigants although the court should have authority to litigate as indigent litigant is
which took effect on July 19, 1984 through A.M. No. they can be reconciled, the later act will not operate
applied Rule 141, Section 16 which was in effect at automatically granted and the grant is a matter of
83-6-389-0. If that is the case, then the Supreme as a repeal of the earlier.24 (Emphasis supplied).
the time of the filing of the application on September right.
Court, upon the recommendation of the Committee
1, 1999. Even if Rule 141, Section 18 (which
on the Revision on Rules, could have already Instead of declaring that Rule 3, Section 21 has However, if the trial court finds that one or both
superseded Rule 141, Section 16 on March 1, 2000)
deleted Section 22 from Rule 3 when it amended been superseded and impliedly amended by Section requirements have not been met, then it would set a
were applied, still the application could not have
Rules 1 to 71 and approved the 1997 Rules of Civil 18 and later Section 19 of Rule 141, the Court finds hearing to enable the applicant to prove that the
been granted as the combined PhP 13,474.00
Procedure, which took effect on July 1, 1997. The that the two rules can and should be harmonized. applicant has "no money or property sufficient and
income of petitioners was beyond the PhP 3,000.00
fact that Section 22 which became Rule 3, Section available for food, shelter and basic necessities for
monthly income threshold. The Court opts to reconcile Rule 3, Section 21 and
21 on indigent litigant was retained in the rules of himself and his family." In that hearing, the adverse
procedure, even elaborating on the meaning of an Rule 141, Section 19 because it is a settled principle
Unrelenting, petitioners however argue in their party may adduce countervailing evidence to
indigent party, and was also strengthened by the that when conflicts are seen between two
Motion for Reconsideration of the April 14, 2000 disprove the evidence presented by the applicant;
addition of a third paragraph on the right to contest provisions, all efforts must be made to harmonize
Order disqualifying them as indigent litigants 23 that after which the trial court will rule on the application
the grant of authority to litigate only goes to show them. Hence, "every statute [or rule] must be so
the rules have been relaxed by relying on Rule 3, depending on the evidence adduced. In addition,
that there was no intent at all to consider said rule as construed and harmonized with other statutes [or
Section 21 of the 1997 Rules of Civil procedure Section 21 of Rule 3 also provides that the adverse
expunged from the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. rules] as to form a uniform system of
which authorizes parties to litigate their action as party may later still contest the grant of such
jurisprudence." 25
indigents if the court is satisfied that the party is authority at any time before judgment is rendered by
Furthermore, Rule 141 on indigent litigants was
"one who has no money or property sufficient and In Manila Jockey Club, Inc. v. Court of Appeals , this the trial court, possibly based on newly discovered
amended twice: first on March 1, 2000 and the
available for food, shelter and basic necessities for Court enunciated that in the interpretation of evidence not obtained at the time the application
second on August 16, 2004; and yet, despite these
himself and his family." The trial court did not give seemingly conflicting laws, efforts must be made to was heard. If the court determines after hearing, that
two amendments, there was no attempt to delete
credence to this view of petitioners and simply first harmonize them. This Court thus ruled: the party declared as an indigent is in fact a person
Section 21 from said Rule 3. This clearly evinces the
with sufficient income or property, the proper docket
desire of the Court to maintain the two (2) rules on

Page 28 of 132
and other lawful fees shall be assessed and does not satisfy one or both requirements, then the vs. public is not served by the absolute prohibition on
collected by the clerk of court. If payment is not application should not be denied outright; instead, ATTY. RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO, Respondent. lawyer advertising; that the Court can lift the ban on
made within the time fixed by the court, execution the court should apply the "indigency test" under lawyer advertising; and that the rationale behind the
shall issue or the payment of prescribed fees shall Section 21 of Rule 3 and use its sound discretion in RESOLUTION decades-old prohibition should be abandoned.
be made, without prejudice to such other sanctions determining the merits of the prayer for exemption. Thus, he prayed that he be exonerated from all the
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
as the court may impose. charges against him and that the Court promulgate a
Access to justice by the impoverished is held ruling that advertisement of legal services offered by
This administrative complaint arose from a paid
The Court concedes that Rule 141, Section 19 sacrosanct under Article III, Section 11 of the 1987 a lawyer is not contrary to law, public policy and
advertisement that appeared in the July 5, 2000
provides specific standards while Rule 3, Section 21 Constitution. The Action Program for Judicial public order as long as it is dignified.4
issue of the newspaper, Philippine Daily Inquirer,
does not clearly draw the limits of the entitlement to Reforms (APJR) itself, initiated by former Chief
which reads: "ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE
the exemption. Knowing that the litigants may abuse Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., placed prime The case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the
Specialist 532-4333/521-2667." 1
the grant of authority, the trial court must use sound importance on 'easy access to justice by the poor' Philippines for investigation, report and
discretion and scrutinize evidence strictly in granting as one of its six major components. Likewise, the Ms. Ma. Theresa B. Espeleta, a staff member of the recommendation.5 On June 29, 2002, the IBP
exemptions, aware that the applicant has not judicial philosophy of Liberty and Prosperity of Chief Public Information Office of the Supreme Court, Commission on Bar Discipline passed Resolution
hurdled the precise standards under Rule 141. The Justice Artemio V. Panganiban makes it imperative called up the published telephone number and No. XV-2002-306,6 finding respondent guilty of
trial court must also guard against abuse and that the courts shall not only safeguard but also pretended to be an interested party. She spoke to violation of Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of
misuse of the privilege to litigate as an indigent enhance the rights of individuals—which are Mrs. Simbillo, who claimed that her husband, Atty. Professional Responsibility and Rule 138, Section 27
litigant to prevent the filing of exorbitant claims considered sacred under the 1987 Constitution. Rizalino Simbillo, was an expert in handling of the Rules of Court, and suspended him from the
which would otherwise be regulated by a legal fee Without doubt, one of the most precious rights annulment cases and can guarantee a court decree practice of law for one (1) year with the warning that
requirement. which must be shielded and secured is the within four to six months, provided the case will not a repetition of similar acts would be dealt with more
unhampered access to the justice system by the involve separation of property or custody of children. severely. The IBP Resolution was noted by this
Thus, the trial court should have applied Rule 3, poor, the underprivileged, and the marginalized. Court on November 11, 2002. 7
Mrs. Simbillo also said that her husband charges a
Section 21 to the application of the Alguras after
fee of P48,000.00, half of which is payable at the
their affidavits and supporting documents showed WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED and the In the meantime, respondent filed an Urgent Motion
time of filing of the case and the other half after a
that petitioners did not satisfy the twin requirements April 14, 2000 Order granting the disqualification of for Reconsideration,8 which was denied by the IBP in
decision thereon has been rendered.
on gross monthly income and ownership of real petitioners, the July 17, 2000 Order denying Resolution No. XV-2002-606 dated October 19,
property under Rule 141. Instead of disqualifying the petitioners' Motion for Reconsideration, and the Further research by the Office of the Court 20029
Alguras as indigent litigants, the trial court should September 11, 2001 Order dismissing the case in Administrator and the Public Information Office
have called a hearing as required by Rule 3, Section Civil Case No. RTC-99-4403 before the Naga City Hence, the instant petition for certiorari, which was
revealed that similar advertisements were published
21 to enable the petitioners to adduce evidence to RTC, Branch 27 are ANNULLED and SET ASIDE. docketed as G.R. No. 157053 entitled, " Atty.
in the August 2 and 6, 2000 issues of the Manila
show that they didn't have property and money Furthermore, the Naga City RTC is ordered to set Rizalino T. Simbillo, Petitioner versus IBP
Bulletin and August 5, 2000 issue of The Philippine
sufficient and available for food, shelter, and basic the "Ex-Parte Motion to Litigate as Indigent Commission on Bar Discipline, Atty. Ismael G. Khan,
Star.2
necessities for them and their family. 27 In that Litigants" for hearing and apply Rule 3, Section 21 of Jr., Asst. Court Administrator and Chief, Public
hearing, the respondents would have had the right the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure to determine On September 1, 2000, Atty. Ismael G. Khan, Jr., in Information Office, Respondents ." This petition was
to also present evidence to refute the allegations whether petitioners can qualify as indigent litigants. his capacity as Assistant Court Administrator and consolidated with A.C. No. 5299 per the Court’s
and evidence in support of the application of the Chief of the Public Information Office, filed an Resolution dated March 4, 2003.
petitioners to litigate as indigent litigants. Since this No costs. administrative complaint against Atty. Rizalino T.
In a Resolution dated March 26, 2003, the parties
Court is not a trier of facts, it will have to remand the Simbillo for improper advertising and solicitation of
SO ORDERED. were required to manifest whether or not they were
case to the trial court to determine whether his legal services, in violation of Rule 2.03 and Rule
willing to submit the case for resolution on the basis
petitioners can be considered as indigent litigants CANON 3 3.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and
of the pleadings.10 Complainant filed his
using the standards set in Rule 3, Section 21. Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court.3
Manifestation on April 25, 2003, stating that he is not
A.C. No. 5299               August 19, 2003
Recapitulating the rules on indigent litigants, In his answer, respondent admitted the acts imputed submitting any additional pleading or evidence and
therefore, if the applicant for exemption meets the ATTY. ISMAEL G. KHAN, JR., Assistant Court to him, but argued that advertising and solicitation is submitting the case for its early resolution on the
salary and property requirements under Section 19 Administrator and Chief, Public Information per se are not prohibited acts; that the time has basis of pleadings and records
of Rule 141, then the grant of the application is Office,Complainant,  come to change our views about the prohibition on thereof. 11 Respondent, on the other hand, filed a
mandatory. On the other hand, when the application advertising and solicitation; that the interest of the Supplemental Memorandum on June 20, 2003.

Page 29 of 132
We agree with the IBP’s Resolutions Nos. XV-2002- 2. A relation as an "officer of the court" to the decorous manner, it would bring no injury to the publication of a simple announcement of the
306 and XV-2002-606. administration of justice involving thorough sincerity, lawyer and to the bar.20 Thus, the use of simple signs opening of a law firm or of changes in the
integrity and reliability; stating the name or names of the lawyers, the office partnership, associates, firm name or office address,
Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of Professional and residence address and fields of practice, as well being for the convenience of the profession, is not
Responsibility read: 3. A relation to clients in the highest degree of as advertisement in legal periodicals bearing the objectionable. He may likewise have his name listed
fiduciary; same brief data, are permissible. Even the use of in a telephone directory but not under a designation
Rule 2.03. – A lawyer shall not do or permit to be
calling cards is now acceptable.21 Publication in of special branch of law. (emphasis and italics
done any act designed primarily to solicit legal 4. A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized
reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the supplied)
business. by candor, fairness, and unwillingness to resort to
standards of conduct imposed by the canon, of brief
current business methods of advertising and WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, respondent
Rule 3.01. – A lawyer shall not use or permit the use biographical and informative data is likewise
encroachment on their practice, or dealing directly RIZALINO T. SIMBILLO is found GUILTY of violation
of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, allowable. As explicitly stated in Ulep v. Legal Clinic,
with their clients.16 of Rules 2.03 and 3.01 of the Code of Professional
undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or Inc.:22
Responsibility and Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules
claim regarding his qualifications or legal services. There is no question that respondent committed the
Such data must not be misleading and may include of Court. He is SUSPENDED from the practice of law
acts complained of. He himself admits that he
Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court states: only a statement of the lawyer’s name and the for ONE (1) YEAR effective upon receipt of this
caused the publication of the advertisements. While
names of his professional associates; addresses, Resolution. He is likewise STERNLY WARNED that a
he professes repentance and begs for the Court’s
SEC. 27. Disbarment and suspension of attorneys telephone numbers, cable addresses; branches of repetition of the same or similar offense will be dealt
indulgence, his contrition rings hollow considering
by Supreme Court, grounds therefor. – A member of law practiced; date and place of birth and admission with more severely.
the fact that he advertised his legal services again
the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his to the bar; schools attended with dates of
after he pleaded for compassion and after claiming Let copies of this Resolution be entered in his record
office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any graduation, degrees and other educational
that he had no intention to violate the rules. Eight as attorney and be furnished the Integrated Bar of
deceit, malpractice or other gross misconduct in distinctions; public or quasi-public offices; posts of
months after filing his answer, he again advertised the Philippines and all courts in the country for their
such office, grossly immoral conduct or by reason of honor; legal authorships; legal teaching positions;
his legal services in the August 14, 2001 issue of the information and guidance.
his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, membership and offices in bar associations and
Buy & Sell Free Ads Newspaper. 17 Ten months later,
or for any violation of the oath which he is required committees thereof, in legal and scientific societies
he caused the same advertisement to be published SO ORDERED.
to take before the admission to practice, or for a and legal fraternities; the fact of listings in other
in the October 5, 2001 issue of Buy & Sell. 18 Such
willful disobedience appearing as attorney for a reputable law lists; the names and addresses of March 23, 1929
acts of respondent are a deliberate and
party without authority to do so. references; and, with their written consent, the
contemptuous affront on the Court’s authority.
names of clients regularly represented. In re LUIS B. TAGORDA,
It has been repeatedly stressed that the practice of
What adds to the gravity of respondent’s acts is that
law is not a business. 12 It is a profession in which The law list must be a reputable law list published Duran & Lim for respondent.
in advertising himself as a self-styled "Annulment of
duty to public service, not money, is the primary primarily for that purpose; it cannot be a mere Attorney-General Jaranilla and Provincial Fiscal Jose
Marriage Specialist," he wittingly or unwittingly
consideration. Lawyering is not primarily meant to supplemental feature of a paper, magazine, trade for the Government.
erodes and undermines not only the stability but
be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is journal or periodical which is published principally
also the sanctity of an institution still considered MALCOLM, J.:
not a capital that necessarily yields profits. 13 The for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may
sacrosanct despite the contemporary climate of
gaining of a livelihood should be a secondary not properly publish his brief biographical and
permissiveness in our society. Indeed, in assuring The respondent, Luis B. Tagorda, a practising
consideration.14 The duty to public service and to the informative data in a daily paper, magazine, trade
prospective clients that an annulment may be attorney and a member of the provincial board of
administration of justice should be the primary journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer permit
obtained in four to six months from the time of the Isabela, admits that previous to the last general
consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate his name to be published in a law list the conduct,
filing of the case,19 he in fact encourages people, elections he made use of a card written in Spanish
their personal interests or what they owe to management, or contents of which are calculated or
who might have otherwise been disinclined and and Ilocano, which, in translation, reads as follows:
themselves.15 The following elements distinguish the likely to deceive or injure the public or the bar, or to
would have refrained from dissolving their marriage
legal profession from a business: lower dignity or standing of the profession. LUIS B. TAGORDA
bonds, to do so.
Attorney
1. A duty of public service, of which the emolument The use of an ordinary simple professional card is
Nonetheless, the solicitation of legal business is not Notary Public
is a by-product, and in which one may attain the also permitted. The card may contain only a
altogether proscribed. However, for solicitation to be CANDIDATE FOR THIRD MEMBER
highest eminence without making much money; statement of his name, the name of the law firm
proper, it must be compatible with the dignity of the Province of Isabela
which he is connected with, address, telephone
legal profession. If it is made in a modest and
number and special branch of law practiced. The

Page 30 of 132
(NOTE. — As notary public, he can execute for you a residence as member of the Board will be in Ilagan the outcome of character and conduct. The Common barratry consisting of frequently stirring up
deed of sale for the purchase of land as required by and that I would then be disqualified to exercise my publication or circulation of ordinary simple business suits and quarrels between individuals was a crime
the cadastral office; can renew lost documents of profession as lawyer and as notary public. Such is cards, being a matter of personal taste or local at the common law, and one of the penalties for this
your animals; can make your application and final not the case and I would make it clear that I am free custom, and sometimes of convenience, is not per offense when committed by an attorney was
requisites for your homestead; and can execute any to exercise my profession as formerly and that I will se improper. But solicitation of business by circulars disbarment. Statutes intended to reach the same evil
kind of affidavit. As a lawyer, he can help you collect have my residence here in Echague. or advertisements, or by personal communications have been provided in a number of jurisdictions
your loans although long overdue, as well as any or interview not warranted by personal relations, is usually at the instance of the bar itself, and have
complaint for or against you. Come or write to him in I would request you kind favor to transmit this unprofessional. It is equally unprofessional to been upheld as constitutional. The reason behind
his town, Echague, Isabela. He offers free information to your barrio people in any of your procure business by indirection through touters of statutes of this type is not difficult to discover. The
consultation, and is willing to help and serve the meetings or social gatherings so that they may be any kind, whether allied real estate firms or trust law is a profession and not a business. The lawyer
poor.) informed of my desire to live and to serve with you in companies advertising to secure the drawing of may not seek or obtain employment by himself or
my capacity as lawyer and notary public. If the deeds or wills or offering retainers in exchange for through others for to do so would be unprofessional.
The respondent further admits that he is the author people in your locality have not as yet contracted executorships or trusteeships to be influenced by (State vs. Rossman [1909], 53 Wash., 1; 17 Ann.
of a letter addressed to a lieutenant of barrio in his the services of other lawyers in connection with the the lawyer. Indirect advertisement for business by Cas., 625; People vs. Mac Cabe [1893], 19 L. R. A.,
home municipality written in Ilocano, which letter, in registration of their land titles, I would be willing to furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments 231; 2 R. C. L., 1097.)
translation, reads as follows: handle the work in court and would charge only concerning the manner of their conduct, the
three pesos for every registration. magnitude of the interest involved, the importance of It becomes our duty to condemn in no uncertain
ECHAGUE, ISABELA, September 18, 1928 terms the ugly practice of solicitation of cases by
the lawyer's position, and all other like self-
Yours respectfully, lawyers. It is destructive of the honor of a great
MY DEAR LIEUTENANT: I would like to inform you laudation, defy the traditions and lower the tone of
our high calling, and are intolerable. profession. It lowers the standards of that
of the approaching date for our induction into office (Sgd.) LUIS TAGORDA
profession. It works against the confidence of the
as member of the Provincial Board, that is on the Attorney 
28. STIRRING UP LITIGATION, DIRECTLY OR community in the integrity of the members of the
16th of next month. Before my induction into office I Notary Public.
THROUGH AGENTS. — It is unprofessional for a bar. It results in needless litigation and in incenting
should be very glad to hear your suggestions or
The facts being conceded, it is next in order to write lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit, except to strife otherwise peacefully inclined citizens.
recommendations for the good of the province in
down the applicable legal provisions. Section 21 of in rare cases where ties of blood, relationship or
general and for your barrio in particular. You can The solicitation of employment by an attorney is a
the Code of Civil Procedure as originally conceived trust make it his duty to do so. Stirring up strife and
come to my house at any time here in Echague, to ground for disbarment or suspension. That should
related to disbarments of members of the bar. In litigation is not only unprofessional, but it is
submit to me any kind of suggestion or be distinctly understood.
1919 at the instigation of the Philippine Bar indictable at common law. It is disreputable to hunt
recommendation as you may desire.
Association, said codal section was amended by Act up defects in titles or other causes of action and
Giving application of the law and the Canons of
I also inform you that despite my membership in the No. 2828 by adding at the end thereof the following: inform thereof in order to the employed to bring suit,
Ethics to the admitted facts, the respondent stands
Board I will have my residence here in Echague. I "The practice of soliciting cases at law for the or to breed litigation by seeking out those with
convicted of having solicited cases in defiance of the
will attend the session of the Board of Ilagan, but will purpose of gain, either personally or through paid claims for personal injuries or those having any other
law and those canons. Accordingly, the only
come back home on the following day here in agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice." grounds of action in order to secure them as clients,
remaining duty of the court is to fix upon the action
Echague to live and serve with you as a lawyer and or to employ agents or runners for like purposes, or
which should here be taken. The provincial fiscal of
notary public. Despite my election as member of the The statute as amended conforms in principle to the to pay or reward directly or indirectly, those who
Isabela, with whom joined the representative of the
Provincial Board, I will exercise my legal profession Canons of Professionals Ethics adopted by the bring or influence the bringing of such cases to his
Attorney-General in the oral presentation of the
as a lawyer and notary public. In case you cannot American Bar Association in 1908 and by the office, or to remunerate policemen, court or prison
case, suggests that the respondent be only
see me at home on any week day, I assure you that Philippine Bar Association in 1917. Canons 27 and officials, physicians, hospital attaches or others who
reprimanded. We think that our action should go
you can always find me there on every Sunday. I 28 of the Code of Ethics provide: may succeed, under the guise of giving disinterested
further than this if only to reflect our attitude toward
also inform you that I will receive any work regarding friendly advice, in influencing the criminal, the sick
27. ADVERTISING, DIRECT OR INDIRECT. — The cases of this character of which unfortunately the
preparations of documents of contract of sales and and the injured, the ignorant or others, to seek his
most worthy and effective advertisement possible, respondent's is only one. The commission of
affidavits to be sworn to before me as notary public professional services. A duty to the public and to the
even for a young lawyer, and especially with his offenses of this nature would amply justify
even on Sundays. profession devolves upon every member of the bar
brother lawyers, is the establishment of a well- permanent elimination from the bar. But as
having knowledge of such practices upon the part of
merited reputation for professional capacity and mitigating, circumstances working in favor of the
I would like you all to be informed of this matter for any practitioner immediately to inform thereof to the
fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced, but must be respondent there are, first, his intimation that he was
the reason that some people are in the belief that my end that the offender may be disbarred.
unaware of the impropriety of his acts, second, his

Page 31 of 132
youth and inexperience at the bar, and, third, his purpose in using the letterhead of another law is in conflict with his official functions as Branch Asked to comment, respondent Atty. Gatdula recited
promise not to commit a similar mistake in the office." Not having received any reply, he filed the Clerk of Court. the antecedents in the ejectment case and the
future. A modest period of suspension would seem instant complaint. issuance of the restraining order by the Regional
to fit the case of the erring attorney. But it should be Complainant alleges that she is the authorized Trial Court, and claimed that contrary to complainant
distinctly understood that this result is reached in We hold that Baker & McKenzie, being an alien law representative of her sister Flor Borromeo de Leon, Samonte's allegation that she was not notified of the
view of the considerations which have influenced the firm, cannot practice law in the Philippines (Sec. 1, the plaintiff, in Civil Case No. 37-14552 for raffle and the hearing, the Notice of Hearing on the
court to the relatively lenient in this particular Rule 138, Rules of Court). As admitted by the ejectment, filed with the Metropolitan Trial Court of motion for the issuance of a Temporary Retraining
instance and should, therefore, not be taken as respondents in their memorandum, Baker & Quezon City, Branch 37. A typographical error was Order was duly served upon the parties, and that the
indicating that future convictions of practice of this McKenzie is a professional partnership organized in committed in the complaint which stated that the application for injunctive relief was heard before the
kind will not be dealt with by disbarment. 1949 in Chicago, Illinois with members and address of defendant is No. 63-C instead of 63-B, P. temporary restraining order was issued. The
associates in 30 cities around the world. Tuazon Blvd., Cubao, Quezon City. The mistake was preliminary injunction was also set for hearing on
In view of all the circumstances of this case, the Respondents, aside from being members of the rectified by the filing of an amended complaint August 7, 1996.
judgment of the court is that the respondent Luis B. Philippine bar, practising under the firm name of which was admitted by the Court. A decision was
Tagorda be and is hereby suspended from the Guerrero & Torres, are members or associates of rendered in favor of the plaintiff who subsequently The respondent's version of the incident is that
practice as an attorney-at-law for the period of one Baker & Mckenzie. filed a motion for execution. Complainant, however, sometime before the hearing of the motion for the
month from April 1, 1929, was surprised to receive a temporary restraining issuance of the temporary restraining order,
As pointed out by the Solicitor General, order signed by Judge Prudencio Castillo of Branch complainant Samonte went to court "very mad"
Adm. Case No. 2131 May 10, 1985 respondents' use of the firm name Baker & 220, RTC, Quezon City, where Atty. Rolando because of the issuance of the order stopping the
McKenzie constitutes a representation that being Gatdula is the Branch Clerk Court, enjoining the execution of the decision in the ejectment case.
ADRIANO E. DACANAY, complainant  associated with the firm they could "render legal execution of the decision of the Metropolitan Trial Respondent tried to calm her down, and assured her
vs. services of the highest quality to multinational Court. Complainant alleges that the issuance of the that the restraining order was only temporary and
BAKER & MCKENZIE and JUAN G. COLLAS JR., business enterprises and others engaged in foreign temporary restraining order was hasty and irregular that the application for preliminary injunction would
LUIS MA. GUERRERO, VICENTE A. TORRES, trade and investment" (p. 3, respondents' memo). as she was never notified of the application for still be heard. Later the Regional Trial Court granted
RAFAEL E. EVANGELISTA, JR., ROMEO L. This is unethical because Baker & McKenzie is not preliminary injunction. the application for a writ of preliminary injunction.
SALONGA, JOSE R. SANDEJAS, LUCAS M. authorized to practise law here. (See Ruben E. The complainant went back to court "fuming mad"
NUNAG, J. CLARO TESORO, NATIVIDAD B. Agpalo, Legal Ethics, 1983 Ed., p. 115.) Complainant further alleges that when she went to because of the alleged unreasonableness of the
KWAN and JOSE A. CURAMMENG, Branch 220, RTC, Quezon City, to inquire about the court in issuing the injunction.
JR., respondents. WHEREFORE, the respondents are enjoined from reason for the issuance of the temporary restraining
practising law under the firm name Baker & order, respondent Atty. Rolando Gatdula, blamed Respondent Gatdula claims that thereafter
AQUINO, J.: McKenzie. her lawyer for writing the wrong address in the complainant returned to his office, and informed him
Lawyer Adriano E. Dacanay, admitted to the bar in complaint for ejectment, and told her that if she that she wanted to change counsel and that a friend
SO ORDERED.
1954, in his 1980 verified complaint, sought to enjoin wanted the execution to proceed, she should of hers recommended the Law Firm of "Baligod,
Juan G. Collas, Jr. and nine other lawyers from A.M. No. P-99-1292 February 26, 1999 change her lawyer and retain the law office of Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig and Celera," at the
practising law under the name of Baker & McKenzie, respondent, at the same time giving his calling card same time showing a calling card, and asking if he
a law firm organized in Illinois. JULIETA BORROMEO SAMONTE, complainant,  with the name "Baligod, Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig could handle her case. Respondent refused as he
vs. and Celera" with office at Rm. 220 Mariwasa Bldg., was not connected with the law firm, although he
In a letter dated November 16, 1979 respondent ATTY. ROLANDO R. GATDULA, Branch Clerk of 717 Aurora Blvd., Cubao, Quezon City; otherwise was invited to join but he choose to remain in the
Vicente A. Torres, using the letterhead of Baker & Court, respondent. she will not be able to eject the defendant Dave judiciary. Complainant returned to court a few days
McKenzie, which contains the names of the ten Knope. Complainant told respondent that she could later and told him that if he cannot convince the
lawyers, asked Rosie Clurman for the release of 87 RESOLUTION not decide because she was only representing her judge to recall the writ of preliminary injunction, she
shares of Cathay Products International, Inc. to H.E. sister. To her consternation, the RTC Branch 220 will file an administrative case against respondent
GONZAGA-REYES, J.:
Gabriel, a client. issued an order granting the preliminary injunction and the judge. The threat was repeated but the
The complaint filed by Julieta Borremeo Samonte as threatened by the respondent despite the fact respondent refused to be pressured. Meanwhile, the
Attorney Dacanay, in his reply dated December 7, that the MTC, Brach 37 had issued an Order Complainant's Motion to Dissolve the Writ of
charges Rolando R. Gatdula, RTC, Branch 220,
1979, denied any liability of Clurman to Gabriel. He directing the execution of the Decision in Civil Case Preliminary Injunction was denied. Respondent
Quezon City with grave misconduct consisting in the
requested that he be informed whether the lawyer of No. 37-14552. Gatdula claims that the complainant must have filed
alleged engaging in the private practice of law which
Gabriel is Baker & McKenzie "and if not, what is your

Page 32 of 132
this administrative charge because of her frustration issuance of the TRO and the subsequent orders of respondent vehemently denies the complainant's Time and again this Court has said that the conduct
in procuring the ejectment of the defendant lessee Judge Prudencio Altre Castillo, Jr. of RTC, Branch allegations, he does not deny that his name appears and behavior of every one connected with an office
from the premises. Respondent prays for the 220. Complainant's lack of interest in prosecuting on the calling card attached to the complaint, which charged with the dispensation of justice, from the
dismissal of the complainant against him. this administrative case could be an indication that admittedly came into the hands of the complainant. presiding judge to the lowliest clerk, should be
her filing of the charge against the respondent is The respondent testified before the Investigating circumscribed with the heavy burden of
The case was referred to Executive Judge Estrella only intended to harass the respondent for her Judge as follows: responsibility. His conduct, at all times must only be
Estrada, RTC, Quezon City, for investigation, report failure to obtain a favorable decision from the Court. characterized by propriety and decorum but above
and recommendation. Q: How about your statement that you even gave all else must be above suspicion. 3
However, based on the record of this administrative her a calling card of the "Baligod, Gatdula, Pardo,
In her report, Judge Estrada states that the case case, the calling card attached as Annex "B" of the Dimailig and Celera law Offices at Room 220 WHEREFORE, respondent Rolando R. Gatdula.
was set for hearing three times, on September 7, complainant's affidavit dated September 25, 1996 Mariwasa building? Branch Clerk of Court, RTC, Branch 220, Quezon
1997, on September 17, and on September 24, allegedly given by respondent to complainant would City is hereby reprimanded for engaging in the
1997, but neither complainant nor her counsel show that the name of herein respondent was A: I vehemently deny the allegation of the private practice of law with the warning that a
appeared, despite due notice. The return of service indeed include in the BALIGOD, GATDULA, complainant that I gave her a calling card. I was repetition of the same offense will be dealt with more
of the Order setting the last hearing stated that TACARDON, DIMAILIG & CELERA LAW OFFICES. surprised when she presented (it) to me during one severely. He is further ordered to cause the
complainant is still abroad. There being no definite While respondent denied having assumed any of her follow-ups of the case before the court. She exclusion of his name in the firm name of any office
time conveyed to the court for the return of the position in said office, the fact remains that his name told me that a friend of hers recommended such firm engaged in the private practice of law.
complainant, the investigating Judge proceeded is included therein which may therefore tend to and she found out that my name is included in that
with the investigation by "conducting searching show that he has dealings with said office. Thus, firm. I told her that I have not assumed any position SO ORDERED.
question" upon respondent based on the allegations while he may not be actually and directly employed in the law firm. And I am with the Judiciary since I
in the complaint, and asked for the record of Civil passed the bar. It is impossible for me to enter an G.R. No. L-12871             July 25, 1959
with the firm, the fact that his name appears on the
Case No. Q-96-28187 for evaluation. The case was calling card as partner in the Baligod, Gatdula, appearance as her counsel in the very same court
TIMOTEO V. CRUZ, petitioner, 
set for hearing for the last time on October 22, 1997, Tacardon, Dimailig & Celera Law Offices give the where I am the Branch Clerk of Court.
vs.
to give complainant a last chance to appear, but impression that he is connected therein and may
The above explanation tendered by the Respondent FRANCISCO G. H. SALVA, respondent.
there was again no appearance despite notice. constitute an act of solicitation and private practice
is an admission that it is his name appears on the
which is declared unlawful under Republic Act. No. MONTEMAYOR, J.:
The respondent testified in his own behalf to affirm calling card, a permissible form of advertising or
6713. It is to be noted, however, that complainant
the statements in his Comment, and submitted solicitation of legal services. 1 Respondent does not This is a petition for certiorari and prohibition with
failed to establish by convincing evidence that
documentary evidence consisting mainly of the claim that the calling card was printed without his preliminary injunction filed by Timoteo V. Cruz
respondent actually offered to her the services of
pleadings in MTC Civil Case No. 37-14552, and in knowledge or consent, and the calling card 2 carries against Francisco G. H. Salva, in his capacity as City
their law office. Thus, the violation committed by
RTC Civil Case No. Q-9628187 to show that the his name primarily and the name "Baligod, Gatdula, Fiscal of Pasay City, to restrain him from continuing
respondent in having his name included/retained in
questioned orders of the court were not improperly Tacardon, Dimailig and Celera with address at 220 with the preliminary investigation he was conducting
the calling card may only be considered as a minor
issued. Mariwasa Bldg., 717 Aurora Blvd., Cubao, Quezon in September, 1957 in connection with the killing of
infraction for which he must also be administratively
City" in the left corner. The card clearly gives the Manuel Monroy which took place on June 15, 1953
The investigating judge made the following findings: sanctioned.
impression that he is connected with the said law in Pasay City. To better understand the present case
and recommended that Atty. Gatdula be firm. The inclusion/retention of his name in the and its implications, the following facts gathered
For failure of the complainant to appear at the
admonished and censured for the minor infraction professional card constitutes an act of solicitation from the pleadings and the memoranda filed by the
several hearings despite notice, she failed to
he has committed. which violates Section 7 sub-par. (b)(2) of Republic parties, may be stated.
substantiate her allegations in the complaint,
Act No. 6713, otherwise known as "Code of
particularly that herein respondent gave her his
Finding: We agree with the investigating judge that Conduct and Ethical Standards for the Public Following the killing of Manuel Monroy in 1953 a
calling card and tried to convince her to change her
the respondent is guilty of an infraction. The Officials and Employees" which declares it unlawful number of persons were accused as involved and
lawyer. This being the case, it cannot be established
complainant by her failure to appear at the hearings, for a public official or employee to, among others: implicated in said crime. After a long trial, the Court
with certainty that respondent indeed gave her his
failed to substantiate her allegation that it was the of First Instance of Pasay City found Oscar Castelo,
calling card even convinced her to change her (2) Engage in the private practice of their profession
respondent who gave her calling card "Baligod, Jose de Jesus, Hipolito Bonifacio, Bienvenido
lawyer. Moreover, as borne by the records of the unless authorized by the Constitution or law,
Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig and Celera Law Offices" Mendoza, Francis Berdugo and others guilty of the
Civil Case No. Q-96-28187, complainant was duly provided that such practice will not conflict or tend
and that he tried to convince her to change crime of murder and sentenced them to death. They
notified of all the proceedings leading to the to conflict with official functions.
counsels. We find however, that while the all appealed the sentence although without said

Page 33 of 132
appeal, in view of the imposition of the extreme Salva proceeded to conduct a reinvestigation less a prosecuting attorney like respondent Salva, according to respondent, two government attorneys
penalty, the case would have to be reviewed designating for said purposes a committee of three had any right or authority to conduct a preliminary had been designed by the Secretary of Justice to
automatically by this Court. Oscar Castelo sought a composed of himself as chairman and Assistant City investigation or reinvestigation of the case for that handle the prosecution in the trial of the case in the
new trial which was granted and upon retrial, he was Attorneys Herminio A. Avendañio and Ernesto A. would be obstructing the administration of justice court below, is tried and decided and it is appealed
again found guilty and his former conviction of Bernabe. and interferring with the consideration on appeal of to a higher court such as this Tribunal, the functions
sentence was affirmed and reiterated by the same the main case wherein appellants had been found and actuations of said fiscal have terminated;
trial court. In connection with said preliminary investigation guilty and convicted and sentenced; neither had usually, the appeal is handled for the government by
being conducted by the committee, petitioner respondent authority to cite him to appear and the Office of the Solicitor General. Consequently,
It seems that pending appeal, the late President Timoteo Cruz was subpoenaed by respondent to testify at said investigation. there would be no reason or occasion for said fiscal
Magsaysay ordered a reinvestigation of the case. appear at his office on September 21, 1957, to to conduct a reinvestigation to determine criminal
The purpose of said reinvestigation does not appear testify "upon oath before me in a certain criminal Respondent Salva, however, contends that if he responsibility for the crime involved in the appeal.
in the record. Anyway, intelligence agents of the investigation to be conducted at the time and place subpoenaed petitioner Cruz at all, it was because of
Philippine Constabulary and investigators of by this office against you and Sergio Eduardo, et al., the latter's oral and personal request to allow him to However, in the present case, respondent has, in our
Malacañang conducted the investigation for the for murder." On September 19, 1957, petitioner appear at the investigation with his witnesses for his opinion, established a justification for his
Chief Executive, questioned a number of people and Timoteo Cruz wrote to respondent Salva asking for own protection, possibly, to controvert and rebut reinvestigation because according to him, in the
obtained what would appear to be confession, the transfer of the preliminary investigation from any evidence therein presented against him. Salva original criminal case against Castelo, et al., one of
pointing to persons, other than those convicted and September 21, due to the fact that this counsel, claims that were it not for this request and if, on the the defendants named Salvador Realista y de
sentenced by the trial court, as the real killers of Atty. Crispin Baizas, would attend a hearing on that contrary, Timoteo Cruz had expressed any objection Guzman was not included for the reason that he was
Manuel Monroy. same day in Naga City. Acting upon said request for to being cited to appear in the investigation he arrested and was placed within the jurisdiction of the
postponement, Fiscal Salva set the preliminary (Salva) would never have subpoenaed him. trial court only after the trial against the other
Counsel for Oscar Castelo and his co-defendants investigation on September 24. On that day, Atty. accused had commenced, even after the
wrote to respondent Fiscal Salva to conduct a Baizas appeared for petitioner Cruz, questioned the Although petitioner Cruz now stoutly denies having prosecution had rested its case and the defense had
reinvestigation of the case presumably on the basis jurisdiction of the committee, particularly respondent made such request that he be allowed to appear at begun to present its evidence. Naturally, Realista
of the affidavits and confessions obtained by those Salva, to conduct the preliminary investigation in the investigation, we are inclined to agree with Fiscal remained to stand trial. The trial court, according to
who had investigated the case at the instance of view of the fact that the same case involving the Salva that such a request had been made. Inasmuch respondent, at the instance of Realista, had
Malacañang. Fiscal Salva conferred with the killing of Manuel Monroy was pending appeal in this as he, Timoteo Cruz, was deeply implicated in the scheduled the hearing at an early date, that is in
Solicitor General as to what steps he should take. A Court, and on the same day filed the present petition killing of Manuel Monroy by the affidavits and August, 1957. Respondent claims that before he
conference was held with the Secretary of Justice for certiorari and prohibition. This Tribunal gave due confessions of several persons who were being would go to trial in the prosecution of Realista he
who decided to have the results of the investigation course to the petition for certiorari and prohibition investigated by Salva and his committee, it was but had to chart his course and plan of action, whether
by the Philippine Constabulary and Malacañang and upon the filing of a cash bond of P200.00 issued natural that petitioner should have been interested, to present the same evidence, oral and
investigators made available to counsel for the a writ of preliminary injunction thereby stopping the even desirous of being present at that investigation documentary, presented in the original case and
appellants. preliminary investigation being conducted by so that he could face and cross examine said trial, or, in view of the new evidence consisting of
respondent Salva. witnesses and affiants when they testified in the affidavits and confessions sent to him by the
Taking advantage of this opportunity, counsel for the connection with their affidavits or confessions, either Philippine Constabulary, he should first assess and
appellants filed a motion for new trial with this The connection, if any, that petitioner Cruz had with repudiating, modifying or ratifying the same. determine the value of said evidence by conducting
Tribunal supporting the same with the so-called the preliminary investigation being conducted by Moreover, in the communication, addressed to an investigation and that should he be convinced
affidavits and confessions of some of those persons respondent Salva and his committee was that respondent Salva asking that the investigation, that the persons criminally responsible for the killing
investigated, such as the confessions of Sergio affidavits and confessions sent to Salva by the scheduled for September 21, 1957, be postponed of Manuel Monroy were other than those already
Eduardo y de Guzman, Oscar Caymo, Pablo Canlas, Chief, Philippine Constabulary, and which were because his attorney would be unable to attend, tried and convicted, like Oscar Castelo and his co-
and written statements of several others. By being investigated, implicated petitioner Cruz, even Timoteo Cruz expressed no opposition to the accused and co-appellants, including Salvador
resolution of this Tribunal, action on said motion for picturing him as the instigator and mastermind in the subpoena, not even a hint that he was objecting to Realista, then he might act accordingly and even
new trial was deferred until the case was studied killing of Manuel Monroy. his being cited to appear at the investigation. recommend the dismissal of the case against
and determined on the merits. In the meantime, the
Realista.
Chief, Philippine Constabulary, head sent to the The position taken by petitioner Cruz in this case is As to the right of respondent Salva to conduct the
Office of Fiscal Salva copies of the same affidavits that inasmuch as the principal case of People vs. preliminary investigation which he and his In this, we are inclined to agree with respondent
and confessions and written statements, of which Oscar Castelo, et al., G.R. No. L-10794, is pending committee began ordinarily, when a criminal case in Salva. For, as contended by him and as suggested
the motion for new trial was based, and respondent appeal and consideration before us, no court, much which a fiscal intervened though nominally, for

Page 34 of 132
by authorities, the duty and role of prosecuting or legal obligation. Consequently, even if, as claimed press, is difficult for us to understand, unless he, imposition of a more or less severe penal sanction.
attorney is not only to prosecute and secure the by respondent Salva, petitioner expressed the desire respondent, wanted to curry favor with the press After mature deliberation, we have finally agreed that
conviction of the guilty but also to protect the to be given an opportunity to be present at the said and publicize his investigation as much as possible. a public censure would, for the present, be
innocent. investigation, if he latter changed his mind and Fortunately, the gentlemen of the press to whom he sufficient.
renounced his right, and even strenuously objected accorded such unusual privilege and favor appeared
We cannot overemphasize the necessity of close to being made to appear at said investigation, he to have wisely and prudently declined the offer and In conclusion, we find and hold that respondent
scrutiny and investigation of the prosecuting officers could not be compelled to do so. did not ask questions, this according to the Salva was warranted in holding the preliminary
of all cases handled by them, but whilst this court is transcript now before us. investigation involved in this case, insofar as
averse to any form of vacillation by such officers in Now we come to the manner in which said Salvador Realista is concerned, for which reason the
the prosecution of public offenses, it is investigation was conducted by the respondent. If, But, the newspapers certainly played up and gave writ of preliminary injunction issued stopping said
unquestionable that they may, in appropriate cases, as contended by him, the purpose of said wide publicity to what took place during the preliminary investigation, is dissolved; that in view of
in order to do justice and avoid investigation was only to acquaint himself with and investigation, and this involved headlines and petitioner's objection to appear and testify at the
injustice, reinvestigate cases in which they have evaluate the evidence involved in the affidavits and extensive recitals, narrations of and comments on said investigation, respondent may not compel him
already filed the corresponding informations. In the confessions of Sergio Eduardo, Cosme Camo and the testimonies given by the witnesses as well as to attend said investigation, for which reason, the
language of Justice Sutherland of the Supreme others by questioning them, then he, respondent, vivid descriptions of the incidents that took place subpoena issued by respondent against petitioner is
Court of the United States, the prosecuting  officer could well have conducted the investigation in his during the investigation. It seemed as though the hereby set aside.
"is the representative not of an ordinary party to a office, quietly, unobtrusively and without much criminal responsibility for the killing of Manuel
controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation fanfare, much less publicity. Monroy which had already been tried and finally In view of the foregoing, the petition for certiorari
to govern impartially is as compelling as its determined by the lower court and which was under and prohibition is granted in part and denied in part.
obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, However, according to the petitioner and not denied appeal and advisement by this Tribunal, was being Considering the conclusion arrived at by us,
therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall by the respondent, the investigation was conducted retried and redetermined in the press, and all with respondent Francisco G. H. Salva is hereby publicly
win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, not in respondent's office but in the session hall of the apparent place and complaisance of reprehended and censured for the uncalled for and
he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant the Municipal Court of Pasay City evidently, to respondent. wide publicity and sensationalism that he had given
of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall accommodate the big crowd that wanted to witness to and allowed in connection with his investigation,
not escape nor innocent suffer. He may prosecute the proceeding, including members of the press. A Frankly, the members of this Court were greatly which we consider and find to be contempt of court;
with earnestness and vigor — indeed, he should do number of microphones were installed. Reporters disturbed and annoyed by such publicity and and, furthermore, he is warned that a repetition of
so. But, while he may strike had blows, he is not at were everywhere and photographers were busy sensationalism, all of which may properly be laid at the same would meet with a more severe
liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to taking pictures. In other words, apparently with the the door of respondent Salva. In this, he committed disciplinary action and penalty. No costs.
refrain from improper methods calculated to permission of, if not the encouragement by the what was regard a grievous error and poor judgment
respondent, news photographers and newsmen had for which we fail to find any excuse or satisfactory CANON 4
produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every
legitimate means to bring about a just one. (69 a filed day. Not only this, but in the course of the explanation. His actuations in this regard went well
A.M. No. 08-11-7-SC               August 28, 2009
United States law Review, June, 1935, No. 6, p. 309, investigation, as shown by the transcript of the beyond the bounds of prudence, discretion and
cited in the case of Suarez vs. Platon, 69 Phil., 556) stenographic notes taken during said investigation, good taste. It is bad enough to have such undue RE: REQUEST OF NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON
on two occasions, the first, after Oscar Caymo had publicity when a criminal case is being investigated LEGAL AID1 TO EXEMPT LEGAL AID CLIENTS
With respect to the right of respondent Salva to cite concluded his testimony respondent Salva, by the authorities, even when it being tried in court; FROM PAYING FILING, DOCKET AND OTHER
petitioner to appear and testify before him at the addressing the newspapermen said, "Gentlemen of but when said publicity and sensationalism is FEES.
scheduled preliminary investigation, under the law, the press, if you want to ask questions I am willing allowed, even encouraged, when the case is on
petitioner had a right to be present at that to let you do so and the question asked will be appeal and is pending consideration by this RESOLUTION
investigation since as was already stated, he was reproduced as my own"; and the second, after Jose Tribunal, the whole thing becomes inexcusable,
more or less deeply involved and implicated in the Maratella y de Guzman had finished testifying and even abhorrent, and this Court, in the interest of CORONA, J.:
killing of Monroy according to the affiants whose respondent Salva, addressing the newsmen, again justice, is constrained and called upon to put an end
On September 23, 2008 the Misamis Oriental
confessions, affidavits and testimonies respondent said, "Gentlemen of the press is free to ask to it and a deterrent against its repetition by meting
Chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
Salva was considering or was to consider at said questions as ours." Why respondent was willing to an appropriate disciplinary measure, even a penalty
promulgated Resolution No. 24, series of 2008. 2 The
preliminary investigation. But he need not be present abdicate and renounce his right and prerogative to to the one liable.
resolution requested the IBP’s National Committee
at said investigation because his presence there make and address the questions to the witnesses
Some of the members of the Court who appeared to on Legal Aid3 (NCLA) to ask for the exemption from
implies, and was more of a right rather than a duty under investigation, in favor of the members of the
feel more strongly than the others favored the the payment of filing, docket and other fees of

Page 35 of 132
clients of the legal aid offices in the various IBP WHEREAS, the courts, quasi-judicial bodies, the requests or representations with the Supreme Court, in the various IBP chapters do not enjoy the same
chapters. Resolution No. 24, series of 2008 various mediation centers and prosecutor’s offices the Philippine Mediation Center, the Department of exemption. IBP’s indigent clients are advised to
provided: are collecting fees, be they filing, docket, motion, Justice and the National Prosecution Service and litigate as pauper litigants under Section 21, Rule 3
mediation or other fees in cases, be they original other quasi-judicial agencies to effect the grant of a of the Rules of Court;
RESOLUTION NO. 24, SERIES OF 2008 proceedings or on appeal; like exemption from the payment of filing, docket
and other fees to the IBP Legal Aid clients as that (b) They are further advised to submit documentary
RESOLUTION OF THE IBP–MISAMIS ORIENTAL WHEREAS, IBP Legal Aid clients are qualified under evidence to prove compliance with the requirements
enjoyed by PAO clients, towards the end that IBP
CHAPTER FOR THE IBP NATIONAL LEGAL AID the same indigency and merit tests used by the under Section 21, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court, i.e.,
Legal Aid clients be automatically exempted from
OFFICE TO REQUEST THE COURTS AND OTHER Public Attorney’s Office (PAO), and would have certifications from the barangay and the Department
the filing of the abovementioned fees;
QUASI-JUDICIAL BODIES, THE PHILIPPINE qualified for PAO assistance, but for reasons other of Social Welfare and Development. However, not
MEDIATION CENTER AND PROSECUTOR’S than indigency, are disqualified from availing of the RESOLVED FURTHER, that copies of this Resolution only does the process involve some expense which
OFFICES TO EXEMPT LEGAL AID CLIENTS services of the PAO, like the existence of a conflict be furnished to Supreme Court Chief Justice indigent clients could ill-afford, clients also lack
FROM PAYING FILING, DOCKET AND OTHER of interests or conflicting defenses, and other similar Honorable Reynato S. Puno, IBP National President knowledge on how to go about the tedious process
FEES INCIDENTAL TO THE FILING AND causes; Feliciano M. Bautista, the IBP Board of Governors, of obtaining these documents;
LITIGATION OF ACTIONS, AS ORIGINAL Secretary of Justice Hon. Raul M. Gonzalez, the
PROCEEDINGS OR ON APPEAL. WHEREAS, PAO clients are automatically exempt National Supervisor of the Philippine Mediation (c) Although the IBP is given an annual legal aid
from the payment of docket and other fees for Center, the National Labor Relations Commission, subsidy, the amount it receives from the government
WHEREAS, Section 1, Article I of the Guidelines cases, be they original proceedings or on appeal, by is barely enough to cover various operating
the Civil Service Commission and other quasi-
Governing the Establishment and Operation of Legal virtue of the provisions of Section 16–D of R.A. 9406 expenses;8
judicial bodies and their local offices;
Aid Offices in All Chapters of the Integrated Bar of (PAO Law), without the need for the filing of any
the Philippines (otherwise known as ["]Guideline[s] petition or motion to declare them as pauper RESOLVED FINALLY to move the IBP Board of (d) While each IBP local chapter is given a quarterly
on Legal Aid["]) provides: Legal aid is not a matter of litigants; Governors and National Officers to make the allocation (from the legal aid subsidy), 9 said
charity. It is a means for the correction of social necessary representations with the National allocation covers neither the incidental expenses
imbalances that may often lead to injustice, for WHEREAS, there is no similar provision in any Legislature and its members to effect the filing of a defrayed by legal aid lawyers in handling legal aid
which reason, it is a public responsibility of the Bar. substantive law or procedural law giving IBP Legal bill before the House of Representatives and the cases nor the payment of docket and other fees
The spirit of public service should therefore unde[r]ly Aid clients the same benefits or privileges enjoyed Senate granting exemption to IBP Legal Aid clients collected by the courts, quasi-judicial bodies and the
all legal aid offices. The same should be so by PAO clients with respect to the payment of from the payment of docket, filing and or other fees prosecutor’s office, as well as mediation fees and
administered as to give maximum possible docket and other fees before the courts, quasi- in cases before the courts, quasi-judicial agencies
assistance to indigent and deserving members of judicial bodies and prosecutor’s offices; (e) Considering the aforementioned factors, a
and prosecutor’s offices and the mediation centers.
the community in all cases, matters and situations in directive may be issued by the Supreme Court
which legal aid may be necessary to forestall WHEREAS, the collection of docket and other fees Done this 23rd day of September 2008, Cagayan De granting IBP’s indigent clients an exemption from
injustice. from the IBP Legal Aid clients poses an additional Oro City. the payment of docket and other fees similar to that
strain to their next to non-existent finances; given to PAO clients under Section 16-D of RA 9406.
WHEREAS, Section 2 of the same provides: In order Unanimously approved upon motion severally In this connection, the Supreme Court previously
to attain the objectives of legal aid, legal aid office WHEREAS, the quarterly allowance given by the seconded.4 issued a circular exempting IBP clients from the
should be as close as possible to those who are in National Legal Aid Office to the IBP Misamis Oriental payment of transcript of stenographic notes. 10
need thereof – the masses. Hence, every chapter of Chapter is insufficient to even cover the incidental The Court noted Resolution No. 24, series of 2008
the IBP must establish and operate an adequate expenses of volunteer legal aid lawyers, much less and required the IBP, through the NCLA, to At the outset, we laud the Misamis Oriental Chapter
legal aid office. answer for the payment of docket and other fees comment thereon.5 of the IBP for its effort to help improve the
collected by the courts, quasi-judicial bodies and administration of justice, particularly, the access to
WHEREAS, the Legal Aid Office of the IBP–Misamis prosecutor’s offices and mediation fees collected by In a comment dated December 18, 2008, 6 the IBP, justice by the poor. Its Resolution No. 24, series of
Oriental Chapter has long been operational, the Philippine Mediation Center; through the NCLA, made the following comments: 2008 in fact echoes one of the noteworthy
providing free legal services to numerous indigent recommendations during the Forum on Increasing
NOW THEREFORE, on motion of the Board of (a) Under Section 16-D of RA 7 9406, clients of the
clients, through the chapter’s members who render Access to Justice spearheaded by the Court last
Officers of the IBP–Misamis Oriental Chapter, be it Public Attorneys’ Office (PAO) are exempt from the
volunteer services in the spirit of public service; year. In promulgating Resolution No. 24, the
resolved as it is hereby resolved, to move the IBP payment of docket and other fees incidental to the
Misamis Oriental Chapter of the IBP has effectively
National Legal Aid Office to make the necessary institution of action in court and other quasi-judicial
performed its duty to "participate in the
bodies. On the other hand, clients of legal aid offices

Page 36 of 132
development of the legal system by initiating or ARTICLE VIII under the legal aid program of the IBP. Nonetheless, overseas workers, fisherfolk, farmers, laborers,
supporting efforts in law reform and in the TESTS they may be improved to ensure that any exemption indigenous cultural communities, women, children
administration of justice."11 from the payment of legal fees that may be granted and other disadvantaged groups and marginalized
SEC. 19. Combined tests. – The Chapter Legal Aid to clients of the NCLA and the legal aid offices of the sectors;
We now move on to determine the merits of the Committee or the [NCLA], as the case may be, shall various IBP chapters will really further the right of
request. pass upon the request for legal aid by the combined access to justice by the poor. This will guarantee (b) "Disinterested person" refers to the punong
application of the means test and merit test, and the that the exemption will neither be abused nor barangay having jurisdiction over the place where an
Access to Justice:  consideration of other factors adverted to in the applicant for legal aid or client of the NCLA or
trivialized. Towards this end, the following shall be
Making an Ideal a Reality following sections. chapter legal aid office resides;
observed by the NCLA and the legal aid offices in
Access to justice by all, especially by the poor, is not IBP chapters nationwide in accepting clients and
SEC. 20. Means test. – The means test aims at (c) "Falsity" refers to any material misrepresentation
simply an ideal in our society. Its existence is handling cases for the said clients:
determining whether the applicant has no visible of fact or any fraudulent, deceitful, false, wrong or
essential in a democracy and in the rule of law. As means of support or his income is otherwise misleading statement in the application or affidavits
A.M. No. 08-11-7-SC (IRR): Re: Rule on the
such, it is guaranteed by no less than the insufficient to provide the financial resources submitted to support it or the affidavit of a
Exemption From the Payment of Legal Fees of
fundamental law: necessary to engage competent private counsel disinterested person required to be submitted
the Clients of the National Committee on Legal
owing to the demands for subsistence of his family, Aid and of the Legal Aid Offices in the Local annually under this Rule which may substantially
Sec. 11. Free access to the courts and quasi-
considering the number of his dependents and the Chapters of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines affect the determination of the qualifications of the
judicial bodies and adequate legal
conditions prevailing in the locality. applicant or the client under the means and merit
assistance shall not be denied to any person by
Rule on the Exemption From the Payment of tests;
reason of poverty.12 (emphasis supplied) The means test shall not be applicable to applicants Legal Fees of the Clients of the National
who fall under the Developmental Legal Aid Program Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA) and of the Legal (d) "Legal fees" refers to the legal fees imposed
The Court recognizes the right of access to justice
such as Overseas Filipino Workers, fishermen, Aid Offices in the Local Chapters of the under Rule 141 of the Rules of Court as a necessary
as the most important pillar of legal empowerment
farmers, women and children and other Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) incident of instituting an action in court either as an
of the marginalized sectors of our society.13 Among
disadvantaged groups. original proceeding or on appeal. In particular, it
others, it has exercised its power to "promulgate
ARTICLE I includes filing or docket fees, appeal fees, fees for
rules concerning the protection and enforcement of SEC. 21. Merit test. – The merit test seeks to Purpose issuance of provisional remedies, mediation fees,
constitutional rights"14 to open the doors of justice to ascertain whether or not the applicant’s cause of sheriff’s fees, stenographer’s fees (that is fees for
the underprivileged and to allow them to step inside action or his defense is valid and chances of Section 1. Purpose. – This Rule is issued for the transcript of stenographic notes) and
the courts to be heard of their plaints. In particular, establishing the same appear reasonable. purpose of enforcing the right of free access to commissioner’s fees;
indigent litigants are permitted under Section 21, courts by the poor guaranteed under Section 11,
Rule 315 and Section 19, Rule 141 16 of the Rules of SEC. 22. Other factors. – The effect of the Legal Aid Article III of the Constitution. It is intended to (e) "Means test" refers to the set of criteria used to
Court to bring suits in forma pauperis. Service or of the failure to render the same upon the increase the access to justice by the poor by determine whether the applicant is one who has no
Rule of Law, the proper administration of justice, the exempting from the payment of legal fees incidental money or property sufficient and available for food,
The IBP, pursuant to its general objectives to public interest involved in given cases and the to instituting an action in court, as an original shelter and basic necessities for himself and his
"improve the administration of justice and enable the practice of law in the locality shall likewise be proceeding or on appeal, qualified indigent clients of family;
Bar to discharge its public responsibility more considered. the NCLA and of the legal aid offices in local IBP
effectively,"17 assists the Court in providing the poor (f) "Merit test" refers to the ascertainment of whether
chapters nationwide.
access to justice. In particular, it renders free legal SEC. 23. Private practice. – Care shall be taken that the applicant’s cause of action or his defense is valid
aid under the supervision of the NCLA. the Legal aid is not availed of to the detriment of the ARTICLE II and whether the chances of establishing the same
private practice of law, or taken advantage of by Definition of Terms appear reasonable and
A New Rule, a New Tool anyone for personal ends.
for Access to Justice Section 1. Definition of important terms. – For (g) "Representative" refers to the person authorized
SEC. 24. Denial. – Legal aid may be denied to an purposes of this Rule and as used herein, the to file an application for legal aid in behalf of the
Under the IBP’s Guidelines Governing the applicant already receiving adequate assistance following terms shall be understood to be how they applicant when the said applicant is prevented by a
Establishment and Operation of Legal Aid Offices in from any source other than the Integrated Bar. are defined under this Section: compelling reason from personally filing his
All Chapters of the IBP (Guidelines on Legal Aid), the
application. As a rule, it refers to the immediate
combined "means and merit tests" shall be used to The "means and merit tests" appear to be (a) "Developmental legal aid" means the rendition of family members of the applicant. However, it may
determine the eligibility of an applicant for legal aid: reasonable determinants of eligibility for coverage legal services in public interest causes involving

Page 37 of 132
include any of the applicant’s relatives or any person the NCLA or chapter legal aid office withdrew its (b) The means test shall not be applicable to Requests received by the IBP National Office shall
or concerned citizen of sufficient discretion who has representation because of a falsity in the application applicants who fall under the developmental legal be referred by the NCLA to the proper chapter legal
first-hand knowledge of the personal circumstances or in any of the affidavits supporting the said aid program such as overseas workers, fisherfolk, aid committee of the locality where the cases have
of the applicant as well as of the facts of the application. farmers, laborers, indigenous cultural communities, to be filed or are pending. The chapter president and
applicant’s case. women, children and other disadvantaged groups. the chairman of the chapter’s legal aid committee
Section 3. Cases not covered by the Rule . – The shall be advised of such referral.
ARTICLE III NCLA and the chapter legal aid offices shall not Section 3. Merit test. – A case shall be considered
Coverage handle the following: meritorious if an assessment of the law and (b) Interview – The applicant shall be interviewed by
evidence at hand discloses that the legal service will a member of the chapter legal aid committee or any
Section 1. Persons qualified for exemption from (a) Cases where conflicting interests will be be in aid of justice or in the furtherance thereof, chapter member authorized by the chapter legal aid
payment of legal fees. – Persons who shall enjoy the represented by the NCLA and the chapter legal aid taking into consideration the interests of the party committee to determine the applicant’s
benefit of exemption from the payment of legal fees offices and and those of society. A case fails this test if, after qualifications based on the means and merit tests
incidental to instituting an action in court, as an consideration of the law and evidence presented by and other relevant factors. He shall also be required
original proceeding or on appeal, granted under this (b) Prosecution of criminal cases in court.
the applicant, it appears that it is intended merely to to submit copies of his latest income tax returns
Rule shall be limited only to clients of the NCLA and harass or injure the opposite party or to work and/or current tax declaration, if available, and
ARTICLE IV
the chapter legal aid offices. oppression or wrong. execute an affidavit of indigency printed at the back
Tests of Indigency
of the application form with the supporting affidavit
The said clients shall refer to those indigents Section 4. Other relevant factors that may be
Section 1. Tests for determining who may be clients of a disinterested person attesting to the truth of the
qualified to receive free legal aid service from the considered. – The effect of legal aid or of the failure
of the NCLA and the legal aid offices in local IBP applicant’s affidavit.lawph!l
NCLA and the chapter legal aid offices. Their to render the same upon the rule of law, the proper
chapters. – The NCLA or the chapter legal aid
qualifications shall be determined based on the tests administration of justice, the public interest involved After the interview, the applicant shall be informed
committee, as the case may be, shall pass upon
provided in this Rule. in a given case and the practice of law in the locality that he can follow up the action on his application
requests for legal aid by the combined application of
the means and merit tests and the consideration of shall likewise be considered. after five (5) working days.
Section 2. Persons not covered by the Rule . – The
following shall be disqualified from the coverage of other relevant factors provided for in the following
ARTICLE V (c) Action on the application – The chapter legal aid
this Rule. Nor may they be accepted as clients by sections.
Acceptance and Handling of Cases committee shall pass upon every request for legal
the NCLA and the chapter legal aid offices. aid and submit its recommendation to the chapter
Section 2. Means test; exception. – (a) This test shall
Section 1. Procedure in accepting cases. – The board of officers within three (3) working days after
(a) Juridical persons; except in cases covered by be based on the following criteria: (i) the applicant
following procedure shall be observed in the the interview of the applicant. The basis of the
developmental legal aid or public interest causes and that of his immediate family must have a gross
acceptance of cases for purposes of this Rule: recommendation shall be stated.
involving juridical entities which are non-stock, non- monthly income that does not exceed an amount
profit organizations, non-governmental organizations double the monthly minimum wage of an employee (a) Filing of application – An application shall be The chapter board of officers shall review and act on
and people’s organizations whose individual in the place where the applicant resides and (ii) he made personally by the applicant, unless there is a the recommendation of the chapter legal aid
members will pass the means test provided in this does not own real property with a fair market value compelling reason which prevents him from doing committee within two (2) working days from receipt
Rule; as stated in the current tax declaration of more than so, in which case his representative may apply for thereof; Provided, however, that in urgent matters
Three Hundred Thousand (₱300,000.00) Pesos. him. It shall adhere substantially to the form made requiring prompt or immediate action, the chapter’s
(b) Persons who do not pass the means and merit for that purpose. It shall be prepared and signed by
In this connection, the applicant shall execute an executive director of legal aid or whoever performs
tests; the applicant or, in proper cases, his duly authorized
affidavit of indigency (printed at the back of the his functions may provisionally act on the
representative in at least three copies. application, subject to review by the chapter legal
(c) Parties already represented by a counsel de application form) stating that he and his immediate
parte; family do not earn a gross income abovementioned, aid committee and, thereafter, by the chapter board
Applications for legal aid shall be filed with the NCLA
nor own any real property with the fair value of officers.
or with the chapter legal aid committee.
(d) Owners or lessors of residential lands or aforementioned, supported by an affidavit of a
buildings with respect to the filing of collection or The action of the chapter board of officers on the
disinterested person attesting to the truth of the The NCLA shall, as much as possible, concentrate
unlawful detainer suits against their tenants and application shall be final.
applicant’s affidavit. The latest income tax return on cases of paramount importance or national
and/or current tax declaration, if any, shall be impact. (d) Cases which may be provisionally accepted. – In
(e) Persons who have been clients of the NCLA or
attached to the applicant’s affidavit. the following cases, the NCLA or the chapter legal
chapter legal aid office previously in a case where

Page 38 of 132
aid office, through the chapter’s executive director Section 2. Assignment of cases. – After a case is Where handling of the case will give rise to a conflict (f) Statement in the initiatory pleading – To avail of
of legal aid or whoever performs his functions may given a control number, the chapter board of officers of interest on the part of the chapter member the benefits of the Rule, the initiatory pleading shall
accept cases provisionally pending verification of shall refer it back to the chapter legal aid committee. assigned to the case, the client shall be duly state as an essential preliminary allegation that (i) the
the applicant’s indigency and an evaluation of the The chapter legal aid committee shall assign the informed and advised about it. The handling lawyer party initiating the action is a client of the NCLA or of
merit of his case. case to any chapter member who is willing to handle shall also inform the chapter legal aid committee so the chapter legal aid office and therefore entitled to
the case. that another chapter member may be assigned to exemption from the payment of legal fees under this
(i) Where a warrant for the arrest of the applicant has handle the case. For purposes of choosing the Rule and (ii) a certified true copy of the certification
been issued; In case no chapter member has signified an substitute handling lawyer, the rule in the issued pursuant to Section 1(e), of this Article is
intention to handle the case voluntarily, the chapter immediately preceding section shall be observed. attached or annexed to the pleading.
(ii) Where a pleading has to be filed immediately to legal aid committee shall refer the matter to the
avoid adverse effects to the applicant; chapter board of officers together with the names of (c) Legal aid is purely gratuitous and honorary – No Failure to make the statement shall be a ground for
at least three members who, in the chapter legal aid member of the chapter or member of the staff of the the dismissal of the action without prejudice to its
(iii) Where an appeal has to be urgently perfected or
committee’s discretion, may competently render NCLA or chapter legal aid office shall directly or refiling.
a petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus
legal aid on the matter. The chapter board of officers indirectly demand or request from an applicant or
filed has to be filed immediately; and The same rule shall apply in case the client, through
shall appoint one chapter member from among the client any compensation, gift or present for legal aid
list of names submitted by the chapter legal aid services being applied for or rendered. the NCLA or chapter legal aid office, files an appeal.
(iv) Other similar urgent cases.
committee. The chapter member chosen may not
(d) Same standard of conduct and equal treatment – (g) Attachment of certification in initiatory pleading –
(e) Assignment of control number – Upon approval refuse the appointment except on the ground of
A chapter member who is tasked to handle a case A certified true copy of the certification issued
of the chapter board of officers of a person’s conflict of interest or other equally compelling
accepted by the NCLA or by the chapter legal aid pursuant to Section 1(e), of this Article shall be
application and the applicant is found to be qualified grounds as provided in the Code of Professional
office shall observe the same standard of conduct attached as an annex to the initiatory pleading.
for legal assistance, the case shall be assigned a Responsibility,19 in which case the chapter board of
control number. The numbering shall be consecutive officers shall appoint his replacement from among governing his relations with paying clients. He shall
Failure to attach a certified true copy of the said
starting from January to December of every year. the remaining names in the list previously submitted treat the client of the NCLA or of the chapter legal
certification shall be a ground for the dismissal of the
The control number shall also indicate the region by the chapter legal aid committee. aid office and the said client’s case in a manner that
action without prejudice to its refiling.
and the chapter handling the case. is equal and similar to his treatment of a paying
The chapter legal aid committee and the chapter client and his case. The same rule shall apply in case the client, through
Example: board of officers shall take the necessary measures the NCLA or chapter legal aid office, files an appeal.
to ensure that cases are well-distributed to chapter (e) Falsity in the application or in the affidavits – Any
members. falsity in the application or in the affidavit of (h) Signing of pleadings – All complaints, petitions,
indigency or in the affidavit of a disinterested person answers, replies, memoranda and other important
Section 3. Policies and guidelines in the acceptance shall be sufficient cause for the NCLA or chapter pleadings or motions to be filed in courts shall be
and handling of cases. – The following policies and legal aid office to withdraw or terminate the legal aid. signed by the handling lawyer and co-signed by the
(f) Issuance of a certification – After an application is guidelines shall be observed in the acceptance and For this purpose, the chapter board of officers shall chairperson or a member of the chapter legal aid
approved and a control number duly assigned, the handling of cases: authorize the handling lawyer to file the proper committee, or in urgent cases, by the executive
chapter board of officers shall issue a certification manifestation of withdrawal of appearance of the director of legal aid or whoever performs his
that the person (that is, the successful applicant) is a (a) First come, first served – Where both the chapter legal aid office in the case with a motion for functions.
client of the NCLA or of the chapter legal aid office. complainant/plaintiff/petitioner and defendant/ the dismissal of the complaint or action of the erring
The certification shall bear the control number of the respondent apply for legal aid and both are qualified, client. The court, after hearing, shall approve the Ordinary motions such as motions for extension of
case and shall state the name of the client and the the first to seek assistance shall be given withdrawal of appearance and grant the motion, time to file a pleading or for postponement of
nature of the judicial action subject of the legal aid of preference. without prejudice to whatever criminal liability may hearing and manifestations may be signed by the
the NCLA or the legal aid office of a local IBP have been incurred. handling lawyer alone.
(b) Avoidance of conflict of interest – Where
chapter.
acceptance of a case will give rise to a conflict of Violation of this policy shall disqualify the erring (i) Motions for extension of time or for postponement
The certification shall be issued to the successful interest on the part of the chapter legal aid office, client from availing of the benefits of this Rule in the – The filing of motions for extension of time to file a
applicant free of charge. the applicant shall be duly informed and advised to future. pleading or for postponement of hearing shall be
seek the services of a private counsel or another avoided as much as possible as they cause delay to
legal aid organization. the case and prolong the proceedings.

Page 39 of 132
(j) Transfer of cases – Transfer of cases from one (b) Where the client’s income or resources improve aid office to withdraw if it is satisfied that the ground The said forms, except the certification, shall be in
handling lawyer to another shall be affected only and he no longer qualifies for continued assistance for such withdrawal exists. Filipino. Within sixty (60) days from receipt of the
upon approval of the chapter legal aid committee. based on the means test. For this purpose, on or forms from the NCLA, the chapter legal aid offices
before January 15 every year, the client shall submit Except when the withdrawal is based on paragraphs shall make translations of the said forms in the
Section 4. Decision to appeal. – (a) All appeals must an affidavit of a disinterested person stating that the (b), (d) and (g) of the immediately preceding Section, dominant dialect used in their respective localities.
be made on the request of the client himself. For this client and his immediate family do not earn a gross the court shall also order the dismissal of the case.
purpose, the client shall be made to fill up a request income mentioned in Section 2, Article V, nor own Such dismissal is without prejudice to whatever Section 3. Effect of Rule on right to bring suits in
to appeal. any real property with the fair market value criminal liability may have been incurred if the forma pauperis. – Nothing in this Rule shall be
mentioned in the same Section; withdrawal is based on paragraph (c) of the considered to preclude those persons not covered
(b) Only meritorious cases shall be appealed. If the immediately preceding Section. either by this Rule or by the exemption from the
handling lawyer, in consultation with the chapter (c) When it is shown or found that the client payment of legal fees granted to clients of the Public
legal aid committee, finds that there is no merit to committed a falsity in the application or in the ARTICLE VII Attorney’s Office under Section 16-D of RA 9406 to
the appeal, the client should be immediately affidavits submitted to support the application; Miscellaneous Provisions litigate in forma pauperis under Section 21, Rule 3
informed thereof in writing and the record of the and Section 19 Rule 141 of the Rules of Court.
case turned over to him, under proper receipt. If the (d) When the client subsequently engages a de Section 1. Lien on favorable judgment . – The
client insists on appealing the case, the lawyer parte counsel or is provided with a de oficio counsel; amount of the docket and other lawful fees which Section 4. Compliance with Rule on Mandatory
handling the case should perfect the appeal before the client was exempted from paying shall be a lien Legal Aid Service. – Legal aid service rendered by a
turning over the records of the case to him. (e) When, despite proper advice from the handling on any judgment rendered in the case favorable to lawyer under this Rule either as a handling lawyer or
lawyer, the client cannot be refrained from doing the indigent, unless the court otherwise provides. as an interviewer of applicants under Section 1(b),
Section 5. Protection of private practice . – Utmost things which the lawyer himself ought not do under Article IV hereof shall be credited for purposes of
care shall be taken to ensure that legal aid is neither the ethics of the legal profession, particularly with In case, attorney’s fees have been awarded to the
compliance with the  Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid
availed of to the detriment of the private practice of reference to their conduct towards courts, judicial client, the same shall belong to the NCLA or to the
Service.
law nor taken advantage of by anyone for purely officers, witnesses and litigants, or the client insists chapter legal aid office that rendered the legal aid,
personal ends. on having control of the trial, theory of the case, or as the case may be. It shall form part of a special The chairperson of the chapter legal aid office shall
strategy in procedure which would tend to result in fund which shall be exclusively used to support the issue the certificate similar to that issued by the
ARTICLE VI incalculable harm to the interests of the client; legal aid program of the NCLA or the chapter legal Clerk of Court in Section 5(b) of the Rule on
Withdrawal of Legal Aid and Termination of aid office. In this connection, the chapter board of Mandatory Legal Aid Service.
Exemption (f) When, despite notice from the handling lawyer, officers shall report the receipt of attorney’s fees
the client does not cooperate or coordinate with the pursuant to this Section to the NCLA within ten (10) ARTICLE VIII
Section 1. Withdrawal of legal aid. – The NCLA or handling lawyer to the prejudice of the proper and days from receipt thereof. The NCLA shall, in turn, Effectivity
the chapter legal aid committee may, in justifiable effective rendition of legal aid such as when the include the data on attorney’s fees received by IBP
instances as provided in the next Section, direct the client fails to provide documents necessary to chapters pursuant to this Section in its liquidation Section 1. Effectivity. – This Rule shall become
handling lawyer to withdraw representation of a support his case or unreasonably fails to attend report for the annual subsidy for legal aid.1awphi1 effective after fifteen days following its publication in
client’s cause upon approval of the IBP Board of hearings when his presence thereat is required; and a newspaper of general circulation.
Governors (in the case of the NCLA) or of the Section 2. Duty of NCLA to prepare forms. – The
chapter board of officers (in the case of the chapter (g) When it becomes apparent that the NCLA shall prepare the standard forms to be used in The above rule, in conjunction with Section 21, Rule
legal aid committee) and through a proper motion representation of the client’s cause will result in a connection with this Rule. In particular, the NCLA 3 and Section 19, Rule 141 of the Rules of Court, the
filed in Court. representation of conflicting interests, as where the shall prepare the following standard forms: the Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service and the Rule of
adverse party had previously engaged the services application form, the affidavit of indigency, the Procedure for Small Claims Cases, shall form a solid
Section 2. Grounds for withdrawal of legal aid . – of the NCLA or of the chapter legal aid office and the supporting affidavit of a disinterested person, the base of rules upon which the right of access to
Withdrawal may be warranted in the following subject matter of the litigation is directly related to affidavit of a disinterested person required to be courts by the poor shall be implemented. With these
situations: the services previously rendered to the adverse submitted annually under Section 2(b), Article VI, the rules, we equip the poor with the tools to effectively,
party. certification issued by the NCLA or the chapter efficiently and easily enforce their rights in the
(a) In a case that has been provisionally accepted, judicial system.
board of officers under Section 1(f), Article V and the
where it is subsequently ascertained that the client Section 3. Effect of withdrawal. – The court, after request to appeal.
is not qualified for legal aid; hearing, shall allow the NCLA or the chapter legal A Final Word

Page 40 of 132
Equity will not suffer a wrong to be without a Committee shall be constituted in accordance with Members in the National Capital Region (NCR) or
remedy. Ubi jus ibi remedium . Where there is a right, these Rules. Metro Manila shall be permanently assigned to
there must be a remedy. The remedy must not only Compliance Group 1.
be effective and efficient, but also readily accessible. Section 2. Requirements of completion of MCLE
CANON 5 Section 3. Compliance Group 2.
For a remedy that is inaccessible is no remedy at all.
Members of the IBP not exempt under Rule 7 shall
B.M. No. 850     August 22, 2000 complete, every three (3) years, at least thirty-six (36) Members in Luzon outside NCR shall be
The Constitution guarantees the rights of the poor to
free access to the courts and to adequate legal hours of continuing legal education activities permanently assigned to Compliance Group 2.
MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
assistance. The legal aid service rendered by the approved by the MCLE Committee. Of the 36 hours:
(MCLE) Section 4. Compliance Group 3.
NCLA and legal aid offices of IBP chapters ADOPTING THE RULES ON MANDATORY (a) At least six (6) hours shall be devoted to legal
nationwide addresses only the right to adequate CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION FOR Members in Visayas and Mindanao shall be
ethics.
legal assistance. Recipients of the service of the MEMBERS OF THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE permanently assigned to Compliance Group 3.
NCLA and legal aid offices of IBP chapters may PHILIPPINES (b) At least (4) hours shall be devoted to trial and
enjoy free access to courts by exempting them from pretrial skills. Section 5. Compliance period for members
the payment of fees assessed in connection with the EN BANC admitted or readmitted after establishment of the
filing of a complaint or action in court. With these (c) At least five (5) hours shall be devoted to program.
twin initiatives, the guarantee of Section 11, Article RESOLUTION alternative dispute resolution.
III of Constitution is advanced and access to justice Members admitted or readmitted to the Bar after the
Considering the Rules on Mandatory Continuing (d) At least nine (9) hours shall be devoted to establishment of the program shall be permanently
is increased by bridging a significant gap and
Legal Education (MCLE) for members of the updates on substantive and procedural laws, and assigned to the appropriate Compliance Group
removing a major roadblock.
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), jurisprudence. based on their Chapter membership on the date of
WHEREFORE, the Misamis Oriental Chapter of the recommended by the IBP, endorsed by the admission or readmission.
Integrated Bar of the Philippines is Philippine Judicial Academy, and reviewed and (e) At least four (4) hours shall be devoted to legal
hereby COMMENDED for helping increase the passed upon by the Supreme Court Committee on writing and oral advocacy. The initial compliance period after admission or
access to justice by the poor. The request of the Legal Education, the Court hereby resolves to readmission shall begin on the first day of the month
adopt, as it hereby adopts, the following rules for (f) At least two (2) hours shall be devoted to of admission or readmission and shall end on the
Misamis Oriental Chapter for the exemption from the
proper implementation: international law and international conventions. same day as that of all other members in the same
payment of filing, docket and other fees of the
clients of the legal aid offices of the various IBP Compliance Group.
RULE 1 (g) The remaining six (6) hours shall be devoted to
chapters is GRANTED. The Rule on the Exemption such subjects as may be prescribed by the MCLE
PURPOSE (a) Where four (4) months or less remain of the initial
From the Payment of Legal Fees of the Clients of the Committee. compliance period after admission or readmission,
National Committee on Legal Aid (NCLA) and of the Section 1. Purpose of the MCLE the member is not required to comply with the
Legal Aid Offices in the Local Chapters of the RULE 3
program requirement for the initial compliance.
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) (which shall Continuing legal education is required of members COMPLIANCE PERIOD
be assigned the docket number A.M. No. 08-11-7- of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) to (b) Where more than four (4) months remain of the
ensure that throughout their career, they keep Section 1. Initial compliance period
SC [IRR] provided in this resolution is initial compliance period after admission or
hereby APPROVED. In this connection, the Clerk of abreast with law and jurisprudence, maintain the readmission, the member shall be required to
The initial compliance period shall begin not later
Court is DIRECTED to cause the publication of the ethics of the profession and enhance the standards complete a number of hours of approved continuing
than three (3) months from the constitution of the
said rule in a newspaper of general circulation within of the practice of law. legal education activities equal to the number of
MCLE Committee. Except for the initial compliance
five days from the promulgation of this resolution. period for members admitted or readmitted after the months remaining in the compliance period in which
RULE 2
establishment of the program, all compliance the member is admitted or readmitted. Such
The Office of the Court Administrator is hereby MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION
periods shall be for thirty-six (36) months and shall member shall be required to complete a number of
directed to promptly issue a circular to inform all
Section 1. Constitution of the MCLE Committee begin the day after the end of the previous hours of education in legal ethics in proportion to the
courts in the Philippines of the import of this
compliance period. number of months remaining in the compliance
resolution. Within two (2) months from the approval of these period. Fractions of hours shall be rounded up to the
Rules by the Supreme Court En Banc, the MCLE Section 2. Compliance Group 1. next whole number.
SO ORDERED.

Page 41 of 132
RULE 4 2.4 LEGAL ARTICLE 5-10 PP 11+ PUBLISHED (a) Preparing, as an author or co-author, written (f) The Government Corporate Counsel, Deputy and
COMPUTATION OF CREDIT UNITS ARTICLE SINGLE AUTHOR 6 CU 8 CU materials published or accepted for publication, e.g., Assistant Government Corporate Counsel;
2 AUTHORS 4 CU 6 CU in the form of an article, chapter, book, or book
Section 1. Guidelines 3 OR MORE 2 CU 4 CU review which contribute to the legal education of the (g) The Chairmen and Members of the Constitutional
author member, which were not prepared in the Commissions;
The following are the guidelines for computation of 2.5 LEGAL 3-6 CU PER ISSUE PUBLISHED ordinary course of the member's practice or
credit units (CU): NEWSLETTER/JOURNAL NEWSLETTER/LAW (h) The Ombudsman, the Overall Deputy
employment.
JOURNAL EDITOR Ombudsman, the Deputy Ombudsmen and the
PROGRAMS CREDIT UNITS SUPPORTING Special Prosecutor of the Office of the Ombudsman;
(b) Editing a law book, law journal or legal
DOCUMENTS 3. PROFESSIONAL 6 CU PER CHAIR newsletter.
CERTIFICATION OF LAW DEAN CHAIR/BAR 1 CU (i) Heads of government agencies exercising quasi-
1. SEMINARS, CONVENTIONS, CONFERENCES, judicial functions;
PER LECTURE OR BAR REVIEW DIRECTOR RULE 6
SYMPOSIA, IN-HOUSE EDUCATION PROGRAMS,
REVIEW/ HOUR LECTURE/LAW TEACHING COMPUTATION OF CREDIT HOURS
WORKSHOPS, DIALOGUES, ROUND TABLE (j) Incumbent deans, bar reviews and professors of
DISCUSSIONS BY APPROVED PROVIDERS UNDER Section 2. Limitation on certain credit units Section 1. Computation of credit hours law who have teaching experience for at least 10
RULE 7 AND OTHER RELATED RULES years accredited law schools;
In numbers 2 and 3 of the guidelines in the Credit hours are computed based on actual time
1.1 PARTICIPANT 1 CU PER HOUR CERTIFICATE preceding Section, the total maximum credit units spent in an activity (actual instruction or speaking (k) The Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and members of
OF ATTENDANCE WITH NUMBER OF HOURS shall not exceed twenty (20) hours per three (3) time), in hours to the nearest one-quarter hour. the Corps of Professors and Professorial Lectures of
years. the Philippine Judicial Academy; and
1.2 LECTURER 5 CU PER HOUR PHOTOCOPY OF RULE 7
PLAQUE OR SPONSOR'S CERTIFICATION RULE 5 EXEMPTIONS (l) Governors and Mayors.
CATEGORIES OF CREDIT
1.3 RESOURCE 3 CU PER HOUR PHOTOCOPY OF Section 1. Parties exempted from the MCLE Section 2. Other parties exempted from the MCLE
PLAQUE OR SPONSOR'S SPEAKER Section 1. Classes of credits
CERTIFICATION The following members of the Bar are exempt from The following Members of the Bar are likewise
The credits are either participatory or non- the MCLE requirement: exempt:
1.4 ASSIGNED 2 CU PER HOUR CERTIFICATION participatory.
FROM SPONSORING PENALIST/ ORGANIZATION (a) The President and the Vice President of the (a) Those who are not in law practice, private or
REACTOR/COMMENTATOR Section 2. Claim for participatory credit Philippines, and the Secretaries and public.
Undersecretaries of Executives Departments;
1.5 MODERATOR/ 2 CU PER HOUR Participatory credit may be claimed for: (b) Those who have retired from law practice with
CERTIFICATION FROM SPONSORING (b) Senators and Members of the House of the approval of the IBP Board of Governors.
COORDINATOR/ ORGANIZATION FACILITATOR (a) Attending approved education activities like Representatives;
seminars, conferences, symposia, in-house Section 3. Good cause for exemption from or
2. AUTHORSHIP, EDITING AND REVIEW education programs, workshops, dialogues or round (c) The Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the modification of requirement
table discussions. Supreme Court, incumbent and retired members of
2.1 RESEARCH/ 5-10 CREDIT UNITS DULY A member may file a verified request setting forth
the judiciary, incumbent members of the Judicial
CERTIFIED/PUBLISHED INNOVATIVE TECHNICAL (b) Speaking or lecturing, or acting as assigned good cause for exemption (such as physical
and Bar Council and incumbent court lawyers
REPORT/PAPER PROGRAM/CREATIVE PROJECT panelist, reactor, commentator, resource speaker, disability, illness, post graduate study abroad,
covered by the Philippine Judicial Academy program
moderator, coordinator or facilitator in approved proven expertise in law, etc.) from compliance with
of continuing judicial education;
2.2 BOOK 50-100 PP 101+ PUBLISHED BOOK education activities. or modification of any of the requirements, including
SINGLE AUTHOR 12-16 CU 17-20 CU (d) The Chief State Counsel, Chief State Prosecutor an extension of time for compliance, in accordance
2 AUTHORS 10-12 CU 13-16 CU (c) Teaching in a law school or lecturing in a bar and Assistant Secretaries of the Department of with a procedure to be established by the MCLE
3 OR MORE 5-6 CU 7-11 CU review class. Justice; Committee.

2.3 BOOK EDITOR 1/2 OF THE CU OF PUBLISHED Section 3. Claim for non-participatory credit (e) The Solicitor General and the Assistant Solicitor Section 4. Change of status
BOOK WITH PROOF AUTHORSHIP AS EDITOR General;
CATEGORY Non-participatory credit may be claimed per The compliance period shall begin on the first day of
compliance period for: the month in which a member ceases to be exempt

Page 42 of 132
under Sections 1, 2, or 3 of this Rule and shall end (e) In-house education activities must be scheduled will apply in (legal ethics, etc.), as appropriate to the of Governors, upon recommendation of the MCLE
on the same day as that of all other members in the at a time and location so as to be free from content of the activity; Committee, after notice and hearing and for good
same Compliance Group. interruption like telephone calls and other cause.
distractions. (2) The activity conforms to the standards for
Section 5. Proof of exemption approved education activities prescribed by these RULE 10
RULE 9 Rules and such regulations as may be prescribed by ACTIVITY AND PROVIDER APPROVAL FEE
Applications for exemption from or modification of APPROVAL OF PROVIDERS the IBP pertaining to MCLE.
the MCLE requirement shall be under oath and Section 1. Payment of fees
supported by documents. Section 1. Approval of providers (c) The provider shall issue a record or certificate to
all participants identifying the time, date, location, Application for approval of an education activity or
RULE 8 Approval of providers shall be done by the MCLE subject matter and length of the activity. as a provider requires payment of an appropriate
STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL OF EDUCATION Committee. fee.
ACTIVITIES (d) The provider shall allow in-person observation of
Section 2. Requirements for approval of providers all approved continuing legal education activities by RULE 11
Section 1. Approval of MCLE program members of the IBP Board of Governors, the MCLE GENERAL COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES
Any persons or group may be approved as a
Committee, or designees of the Committee and IBP
Subject to the rules as may be adopted by the provider for a term of two (2) years, which may be Section 1. Compliance card
staff for purposes of monitoring compliance with
MCLE Committee, continuing legal education renewed, upon written application. All providers of
these Rules. Each member shall secure from the MCLE
program may be granted approval in either of two (2) continuing legal education activities, including in-
ways: (1) the provider of the activity is an approved house providers, are eligible to be approved Committee a Compliance Card before the end of his
(e) The provider shall indicate in promotional
provider and certifies that the activity meets the providers. Application for approval shall: compliance period. He shall complete the card by
materials, the nature of the activity, the time devoted
criteria of Section 3 of this Rules; and (2) the attesting under oath that he has complied with the
to each devoted to each topic and identify of the
provider is specially mandated by law to provide (a) Be submitted on a form provided by the IBP; education requirement or that he is exempt,
instructors. The provider shall make available to
continuing legal education. specifying the nature of the exemption. Such
(b) Contain all information requested on the form; each participant a copy of IBP-approved Education
Compliance Card must be returned to the address
Activity Evaluation Form.
Section 2. Standards for all education activities indicated therein not later than the day after the end
(c) Be accompanied by the approval fee;
(f) The provider shall maintain the completed of the member's compliance period.
All continuing legal education activities must meet
Section 3. Requirements of all providers Education Activity Evaluation Forms for a period of
the following standards: Section 2. Member record keeping requirement
not less than one (1) year after the activity, copy
All approved providers shall agree to the following: furnished the IBP.
(a) The activity shall have significant current Each member shall maintain sufficient record of
intellectual or practical content. (a) An official record verifying the attendance at the compliance or exemption, copy furnished the MCLE
(g) Any person or group who conducts an
activity shall be maintained by the provider for at Committee. The record required to be provided to
(b) The activity shall constitute an organized unauthorized activity under this program or issues a
least four (4) years after the completion date. The the members by the provider pursuant to Section
program of learning related to legal subjects and the spurious certificate in violation of these Rules shall
provider shall include the member on the official 3(c) of Rule 9 should be sufficient record of
legal profession, including cross profession activities be subject to appropriate sanctions.
record of attendance only if the member's signature attendance at a participatory activity. A record of
(e.g., accounting-tax or medical-legal) that enhance non-participatory activity shall also be maintained by
was obtained at the time of attendance at the Section 4. Renewal of provider approval
legal skills or the ability to practice law, as well as the member, as referred to in Section 3 of Rule 5.
activity. The official record of attendance shall
subjects in legal writing and oral advocacy. The approval of a provider may be renewed every
contain the member's name and number in the Roll
two (2) years. It may be denied if the provider fails to RULE 12
(c) The activity shall be conducted by a provider with of Attorneys and shall identify the time, date,
comply with any of the requirements of these Rules NON-COMPLIANCE PROCEDURES
adequate professional experience. location, subject matter, and length of the education
activity. A copy of such record shall be furnished the or fails to provide satisfactory education activities for
Section 1. What constitutes non-compliance
(d) Where the activity is more than one (1) hour in IBP. the preceding period.
length, substantive written materials must be The following shall constitute non-compliance
(b) The provider shall certify that: Section 5. Revocation of provider approval
distributed to all participants. Such materials must
be distributed at or before the time the activity is (a) Failure to complete the education requirement
(1) This activity has been approved for MCLE by the The approval of any provider referred to in Rule 9
offered. within the compliance period;
IBP in the amount of ________ hours of which hours may be revoked by a majority vote of the IBP Board

Page 43 of 132
(b) Failure to provide attestation of compliance or A member who, for whatever reason, is in non- nominated by the IBP, the Philippine Judicial "Bar Matter No. 1922. – Re: Recommendation of the
exemption; compliance at the end of the compliance period Academy, a law center designated by the Supreme Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE)
shall pay a non-compliance fee. Court and associations of law schools and/or law Board to Indicate in All Pleadings Filed with the
(c) Failure to provide satisfactory evidence of professors. Courts the Counsel’s MCLE Certificate of
compliance (including evidence of exempt status) Section 2. Listing as delinquent member Compliance or Certificate of Exemption. – The Court
within the prescribed period; The members of the Committee shall be of proven Resolved to NOTE the Letter, dated May 2, 2008, of
Any member who fails to satisfactorily comply with probity and integrity. They shall be appointed by the Associate Justice Antonio Eduardo B. Nachura,
(d) Failure to satisfy the education requirement and Section 2 of Rule 12 shall be listed as a delinquent Supreme Court for a term of three (3) years and shall Chairperson, Committee on Legal Education and Bar
furnish evidence of such compliance within sixty (60) member by the IBP Board of Governors upon the receive such compensation as may be determined Matters, informing the Court of the diminishing
days from receipt of a non-compliance notice; recommendation of the MCLE Committee, in which by the Court. interest of the members of the Bar in the MCLE
case, Rule 139-A of the Rules of Court shall apply.
(e) Any other act or omission analogous to any of the requirement program.
Section 2. Duty of the Committee
foregoing or intended to circumvent or evade RULE 14
The Court further Resolved, upon the
compliance with the MCLE requirements. REINSTATEMENT The MCLE Committee shall administer and adopt
recommendation of the Committee on Legal
such implementing rules as may be necessary
Section 2. Non-compliance notice and 60-day Section 1. Process Education and Bar Matters, to REQUIRE practicing
subject to the approval by the Supreme Court. It
period to attain compliance members of the bar to INDICATE in all pleadings
shall, in consultation with the IBP Board of
The involuntary listing as a delinquent member shall filed before the courts or quasi-judicial bodies, the
Governors, prescribe a schedule of MCLE fees with
A member failing to comply will receive a Non- be terminated when the member provides proof of number and date of issue of their MCLE Certificate
the approval of the Supreme Court.
Compliance Notice stating the specific deficiency compliance with the MCLE requirement, including of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption, as may
and will be given sixty (60) days from the date of payment of non-compliance fee. A member may Section 3. Staff of the IBP be applicable, for the immediately preceding
notification to explain the deficiency or otherwise attain the necessary credit hours to meet the compliance period. Failure to disclose the
show compliance with the requirements. Such requirement for the period of non-compliance during The IBP shall employ such staff as may be required information would cause the dismissal
notice shall contain, among other things, the the period the member is on inactive status. These necessary to perform the record-keeping, auditing, of the case and the expunction of the pleadings
following language in capital letters: credit hours may not be counted toward meeting the reporting, approval and other necessary functions. from the records.
current compliance period requirement. Credit hours
YOUR FAILURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE attained during the period of non-compliance in Section 4. Submission of annual budget The New Rule shall take effect sixty (60) days after
JUSTIFICATION FOR NON-COMPLIANCE OR excess of the number needed to satisfy the prior its publication in a newspaper of general
PROOF OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE MCLE The IBP shall submit to the Supreme Court an circulation." Caprio-Morales Velasco, Jr., Nachura,
compliance period requirement may be counted
REQUIREMENT BY (INSERT DATE 60 DAYS FROM annual budget for a subsidy to establish, operate JJ., on official leave. (adv216a)
toward meeting the current compliance period
THE DATE OF NOTICE), SHALL BE A CAUSE FOR and maintain the MCLE Program.
requirement.lawphil.net
LISTING AS A DELINQUENT MEMBER. Very truly yours,
This resolution shall take effect in October 2000,
Section 2. Termination of delinquent listing
The Member may use this period to attain the following its publication in two (2) newspaper of MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA(sgd)
administrative process
adequate number of credit hours for compliance. general circulation in the Philippines. Clerk of Court
Credit hours earned during this period may only be The termination of listing as a delinquent member is
Adopted this 22nd day of August, 2000. CANON 6
counted toward compliance with the prior administrative in nature but it shall be made with
compliance period requirement unless hours in notice and hearing by the MCLE Committee. B.M. No. 1922             June 3, 2008 A.C. No. 4984            April 1, 2003
excess of the requirement are earned, in which case,
the excess hours may be counted toward meeting RULE 15 RE. NUMBER AND DATE OF MCLE CERTIFICATE ATTY. JULITO D. VITRIOLO, PRECILLANA J.
the current compliance period MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION OF COMPLETION/EXEMPTION REQUIRED IN HONORICA, ARLEEN J. RAMOS, DR. ROGER
requirement.lawphil.net COMMITTEE ALL PLEADINGS/MOTIONS. PEREZ, DR. IMELDA DARAUG, DR. REMIGIA
NATHANIELZ, CELEDONIA CORONACION, and
RULE 13 Section 1. Composition Sirs/Mesdames: JOSE RABALO,complainants, 
CONSEQUENCES OF NON-COMPLIANCE vs.
The MCLE Committee shall be composed of five (5) Quoted hereunder, for your information is a
members, namely: a retired Justice of the Supreme ATTY. FELINA DASIG, respondent.
Section 1. Non-compliance fee resolution of the Court En Banc dated  June 3, 2008
Court, as Chair, and four (4) members, respectively,
RESOLUTION

Page 44 of 132
PER CURIAM: register her birth anew with full knowledge of the (11) CHED Directors calculated to justify her ill a government official and as a member of the Bar,
existence of a prior registration… motive of preventing their re-appointment and with indeed made unlawful demands or attempted to
This is an administrative case for disbarment filed the end view of securing an appointment for herself.9 extort money from certain people who had pending
against Atty. Felina S. Dasig,1 an official of the d) Likewise, sometime in August to September 1998 applications/requests before her office in exchange
Commission on Higher Education (CHED). The and during the effectivity of Respondent’s In our resolution of February 3, 1999, we required for her promise to act favorably on said
charge involves gross misconduct of respondent in designation as Officer-in-Charge of Legal Affairs respondent to file a Comment on the charges. 10 A applications/requests. Clearly, respondent unlawfully
violation of the Attorney’s Oath for having used her Service, CHED, she demanded from Jacqueline N. copy of said resolution was sent to the respondent used her public office in order to secure financial
public office to secure financial spoils to the Ng, a student, a considerable amount which was at her address at Blk. 4, Lot 12, Hobart II spoils to the detriment of the dignity and reputation
detriment of the dignity and reputation of the CHED. subsequently confirmed to be P15,000.00 and initial Subdivision, Novaliches, Quezon City, only to be of the Commission on Higher Education.
fee of P5,000.00 more or less for facilitation of her returned to this Court with the notation
Almost all complainants in the instant case are high- application for correction of name then pending "Unclaimed."11 For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that
ranking officers of the CHED. In their sworn before the Legal Affairs Service, CHED... In addition, respondent be suspended from the practice of law
Complaint-Affidavit filed with this Court on the Respondent even suggested to Ms. Ng to hire a On July 5, 1999, we directed that a copy of the for the maximum period allowable of three (3) years
December 4, 1998, complainants allege that lawyer who shall be chosen by Respondent Dasig to resolution of February 3, 1999, be served by with a further warning that similar action in the future
respondent, while she was OIC of Legal Affairs facilitate the application for correction of name. 3 registered mail to respondent at her office address will be a ground for disbarment of respondent.
Service, CHED, committed acts that are grounds for in CHED.
disbarment under Section 27,2 Rule 138 of the Rules Complainants likewise aver that respondent violated On August 3, 2002, the IBP Board of Governors
of Court, to wit: her oath as attorney-at-law by filing eleven (11) In a letter dated August 28, 2000, the Postmaster of passed Resolution No. XV-2002-393, the full text of
baseless, groundless, and unfounded suits before the Ortigas Center Post Office informed the Court which reads as follows:
a) Sometime in August 1998 and during the the Office of the City Prosecutor of Quezon City, that the said mail matter had been delivered to,
effectivity of Respondent’s designation as Officer-in- which were subsequently dismissed.4 received by, and signed for by one Antonio Molon, RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby
Charge of Legal Affairs Service, CHED, she an authorized agent of respondent on August 27, ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and
demanded from Betty C. Mangohon, a teacher of Further, complainants charge respondent of 1999.12 Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner
Our Lady of Mariazel Educational Center in transgressing subparagraph b (22), Section 36 5 of of the above-entitled case, herein made part of this
Novaliches, Quezon City, the amount of P20,000.00 Presidential Decree No. 807, for her willful failure to On November 22, 2000, we granted complainant’s Resolution/Decision as Annex "A:; and, finding the
and later reduced to P5,000.00 for the facilitation of pay just debts owing to "Borela Tire Supply" and motion to refer the complaint to the Commission on recommendation fully supported by the evidence on
her application for correction of name then pending "Nova’s Lining Brake & Clutch" as evidenced by the Bar Discipline, Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) record and the applicable laws and rules; and
before the Legal Affairs Service, CHED... dishonored checks she issued, 6 the complaint sheet, for investigation, report, and recommendation. considering that respondent unlawfully used her
and the subpoena issued to respondent. 7 public office in order to secure financial spoils to the
b) Likewise, sometime in July to August 1998 and In its order dated February 6, 2001, the IBP
detriment of the dignity and reputation of the
during the effectivity of Respondent’s designation as Complainants also allege that respondent instigated Commission on Bar Discipline directed respondent
Commission on Higher Education, Respondent is
Officer-in-Charge of Legal Affairs Service, CHED, the commission of a crime against complainant to submit her Answer to the Complaint, failing which
hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for
she demanded from Rosalie B. Dela Torre, a Celedonia R. Coronacion and Rodrigo Coronacion, she would be considered in default and the case
three (3) years.13
student, the amount of P18,000.00 to P20,000.00 for Jr., when she encouraged and ordered her son, heard ex parte. Respondent failed to heed said
facilitation of her application for correction of name Jonathan Dasig, a guard of the Bureau of Jail order and on January 8, 2002, the Commission At the threshold is the query of whether respondent
then pending before the Legal Affairs Service, Management and Penology, to draw his gun and directed her anew to file her Answer, but again she attorney-at-law, as Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of Legal
CHED… shoot the Coronacions on the evening of May 14, failed to comply with the directive. As a result, the Services, CHED, may be disciplined by this Court for
1997. As a result of this incident, a complaint for Commission ruled that she had waived her right to her malfeasance, considering that her position, at
c) Likewise, sometime in September 1998 and grave threats against the respondent and her son, file her Comment or Answer to the Complaint and the time of filing of the complaint, was "Chief
during the effectivity of Respondent’s designation as docketed as Criminal Case No. 86052, was lodged the case was mainly resolved on the basis of the Education Program Specialist, Standards
Officer-in-Charge of Legal Affairs Service, CHED, with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, documents submitted and on record. Development Division, Office of Programs and
she demanded from Rocella G. Eje, a student, the Branch 36.8 Standards, CHED."
amount of P5,000.00 for facilitation of her In its report and recommendation, dated April 5,
application for correction of name then pending Finally, complainants allege that respondent 2002, the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline stated Generally speaking, a lawyer who holds a
before the Legal Affairs Service, CHED. . . In authored and sent to then President Joseph Estrada as follows: government office may not be disciplined as a
addition, Respondent even suggested to Ms. Eje to a libelous and unfair report, which maligned the member of the Bar for misconduct in the discharge
From the foregoing evidence on record, it can be
good names and reputation of no less than eleven of his duties as a government official. 14 However, if
concluded that respondent in violation of her oath as

Page 45 of 132
said misconduct as a government official also Lawyers in government are public servants who owe violation of the Attorney’s Oath as well as the Code yet to be tested in the crucible of a full-dress trial on
constitutes a violation of his oath as a lawyer, then the utmost fidelity to the public service. Thus, they of Professional Responsibility, and is hereby ordered the merits.
he may be disciplined by this Court as a member of should be more sensitive in the performance of their DISBARRED.
the Bar.15 professional obligations, as their conduct is subject The indictments are bottomed upon the following
to the ever-constant scrutiny of the public. Let copies of this Resolution be furnished to the Bar alleged pivotal facts:
In this case, the record shows that the respondent, Confidant to be spread on the records of the
on various occasions, during her tenure as OIC, Respondent’s attempts to extort money from respondent, as well as to the Integrated Bar of the On the night of July 29, 1965, the occupants of the
Legal Services, CHED, attempted to extort from persons with applications or requests pending Philippines for distribution to all its chapters, and the home of the spouses Teofilo Mendoza and Valeriana
Betty C. Mangohon, Rosalie B. Dela Torre, Rocella before her office are violative of Rule 1.01 18 of the Office of the Court Administrator for dissemination Bontilao de Mendoza in Pugaan City of Iligan, were
G. Eje, and Jacqueline N. Ng sums of money as Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits to all courts throughout the country. asleep. It was then that guns (rifle, caliber 22)
consideration for her favorable action on their members of the Bar from engaging or participating and paliuntod  (homemade gun) were fired in rapid
pending applications or requests before her office. in any unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful acts. SO ORDERED. succession from outside the house. Teofilo Mendoza
The evidence remains unrefuted, given the Moreover, said acts constitute a breach of Rule fell dead. Thereafter, defendants below destroyed
G.R. No. L-26222             July 21, 1967 the door of the house, entered therein, and let loose
respondent’s failure, despite the opportunities 6.0219 of the Code which bars lawyers in government
afforded her by this Court and the IBP Commission service from promoting their private interests. several shots killing Neceforo Mendoza, — all minor
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, 
on Bar Discipline to comment on the charges. We Promotion of private interests includes soliciting gifts children of the couple — and wounding Valeriana
vs.
find that respondent’s misconduct as a lawyer of the or anything of monetary value in any transaction Bontilao de Mendoza.
HONORABLE JUDGE HERNANDO PINEDA of the
CHED is of such a character as to affect her requiring the approval of his office or which may be Court of First Instance of Lanao del Norte;  Two of the three defendants in the five criminal
qualification as a member of the Bar, for as a lawyer, affected by the functions of his office. Respondent’s and TOMAS NARBASA, TAMBAC ALINDO and cases heretofore listed — Tomas Narbasa and
she ought to have known that it was patently conduct in office falls short of the integrity and good RUFINO BORRES, respondents. Tambak Alindo — moved for a consolidation thereof
unethical and illegal for her to demand sums of moral character required from all lawyers, specially
"into one (1) criminal case." Their plea is that "said
money as consideration for the approval of from one occupying a high public office. For a Dominador L. Padilla for petitioner.
cases arose out of the same incident and motivated
applications and requests awaiting action by her lawyer in public office is expected not only to refrain Narbasa, Tambac Alindo and Borres for
by one impulse."
office. from any act or omission which might tend to lessen respondents.
the trust and confidence of the citizenry in Giving the nod to defendants' claim, respondent
The Attorney’s Oath is the source of the obligations government, she must also uphold the dignity of the SANCHEZ, J.:
Judge, in an order dated May 13, 1966, directed the
and duties of every lawyer and any violation thereof legal profession at all times and observe a high
Respondents Tomas Narbasa, Tambac Alindo and City Fiscal to unify all the five criminal cases, and to
is a ground for disbarment, suspension, or other standard of honesty and fair dealing. Otherwise said,
Rufino Borres stand indicted before the Court of file one single information in Case 1246. He also
disciplinary action. The Attorney’s Oath imposes a lawyer in government service is a keeper of the
First Instance of Lanao del Norte, as principals, in ordered that the other four cases, Nos. 1247, 1248,
upon every member of the bar the duty to delay no public faith and is burdened with high degree of
five (5) separate cases, four for murder, viz: 1249 and 1250 "be dropped from the docket."
man for money or malice. Said duty is further social responsibility, perhaps higher than her
stressed in Rule 1.03 of the Code of Professional brethren in private practice. The City Fiscal balked at the foregoing order, sought
Criminal Case 1246 — murder of Neceforo
Responsibility.16 Respondent’s demands for sums of reconsideration thereof, upon the ground that "more
Mendoza;
money to facilitate the processing of pending For her violation of the Attorney’s Oath as well as of than one gun was used, more than one shot was
applications or requests before her office violates Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.03 of Canon 1 20 and Rule 6.02 Criminal Case 1247 — murder of Epifania Mendoza; fired and more than one victim was killed." The
such duty, and runs afoul of the oath she took when of Canon 6 of the Code of Professional defense opposed.
admitted to the Bar. Such actions likewise run Responsibility, particularly for acts of dishonesty as Criminal Case 1248 — frustrated murder of
contrary to Rule 1.03 of the Code of Professional well as gross misconduct as OIC, Legal Services, Valeriana Bontilao de Mendoza; On May 31, 1966, respondent Judge denied the
Responsibility. CHED, we find that respondent deserves not just the motion to reconsider. He took the position that the
Criminal Case 1249 — murder of Teofilo Mendoza; acts complained of "stemmed out of a series of
penalty of three years’ suspension from membership
A member of the Bar who assumes public office in the Bar as well as the practice of law, as continuing acts on the part of the accused, not by
Criminal Case 1250 — murder of Marcelo Mendoza.
does not shed his professional obligations. Hence, recommended by the IBP Board of Governors, but different and separate sets of shots, moved by one
the Code of Professional Responsibility, outright disbarment. Her name shall be stricken off The five informations were planted upon facts impulse and should therefore be treated as one
promulgated on June 21, 1988, was not meant to the list of attorneys upon finality of this decision. gathered by the prosecuting attorney from his crime though the series of shots killed more than
govern the conduct of private practitioners alone, investigation. Of course, the truth of these facts is one victim;" and that only one information for
but of all lawyers including those in government WHEREFORE, respondent Arty. Felina S. Dasig is
service. This is clear from Canon 617 of said Code. found liable for gross misconduct and dishonesty in

Page 46 of 132
multiple murder should be filed, to obviate the bomb in an airplane and the bomb explodes, with a group of home guards. It was held that there was had reasons for his act. For one thing, there is the
necessity of trying five cases instead of one." the result that a number of persons are killed, that only one complex crime. In that case, however, grave problem of proving the elements of that
single act again produces a complex crime.4 there was no conspiracy to perpetuate the killing. In offense — robbery. For another, the act could have
Primarily to annul respondent Judge's orders of May the case at bar, defendants performed several acts. been but a blind to cover up the real intent to kill.
13, 1966 and May 31, 1966, as having been issued A different rule governs where separate and distinct And the informations charge conspiracy amongst Appropriately to be noted here is that all  the
without or in excess of jurisdiction and/or with grave acts result in a number killed. Deeply rooted is the them. Needless to state, the act of one is the act of informations charged evident premeditation. With
abuse of discretion, the People came to this Court doctrine that when various victims expire from all.10 Not material here, therefore is the finding ponderables and imponderables, we are reluctant to
on certiorari  with a prayer for a writ of preliminary separate shots, such acts constitute separate and in Lawas  that "it is impossible to ascertain the hazard a guess as to the reasons for the Fiscal's
injunction, and for other reliefs. distinct crimes.5 Thus, where the six defendants, individual deaths caused by each and everyone" of action. We are not now to say that, on this point, the
with others (armed with pistols, carbines and also a the accused. It is to be borne in mind, at this point, Fiscal has abused his discretion. A prosecuting
This Court, on July 1, 1966, issued the cease-and- submachine gun and Garand rifles), fired volleys into that apply the first half of Article 48, heretofore attorney, by the nature of his office, is under no
desist order prayed for. a house killing eleven and wounding several others, quoted, there must be singularity of criminal act; compulsion to file a particular criminal information
each of the said accused is "guilty of as many singularity of criminal impulse  is not  written into the where he is not convinced that he has evidence to
The question here presented, simply is this: Should
crimes of murder as there were deaths law.11 prop up the averments thereof, or that the evidence
there be one information, either for the complex
(eleven).6 Again, eleven persons were indicted for at hand points to a different conclusion. This is not
crime of murder and frustrated murder or for the
quadruple murder — with the use of bolos, a pistol, The respondent Judge reasons out in his order of to discount the possibility of the commission of
complex crime of robbery with multiple homicide
a barbed arrow and a piece of bamboo — of a man, May 31, 1966 that consolidation of the five cases abuses on the part of the prosecutor. But we must
and frustrated homicide? Or, should the five
his common-law wife, and their two children in cold into one would have the salutary effect of obviating have to recognize that a prosecuting attorney should
indictments remain as they are?
blood. The accused were found guilty by the trial the necessity of trying five cases instead of one. To not be unduly compelled to work against his
1. The case before us calls into question the court of such offense. This Court, in reversing this save time, indeed, is laudable. Nonetheless, the conviction. In case of doubt, we should give him the
applicability of Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, ruling below, held that "[t]he four victims were not statute confers upon the trial judge the power to try benefit thereof. A contrary rule may result in our
as amended, which reads: killed by a single act but by various acts committed these cases jointly, such that the fear entertained by courts being unnecessarily swamped with
on different occasions and by different parties"; that respondent Judge could easily be remedied. 12 unmeritorious cases. Worse still, a criminal
Art. 48. Penalty for complex crimes. — When a such acts "may not be regarded as constituting one suspect's right to due process — the sporting idea
single act constitutes two or more grave or less single crime"; and that "[t]hey should be held as Upon the facts and the law, we hold that the City
of fair play — may be transgressed. So it is, that
grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary separate and distinct crimes."7 And a third. At the Fiscal of Iligan City correctly presented the five
in People vs. Sope 75 Phil. 810, 815, this Court
means for committing the other, the penalty for the commencement exercises of an elementary school, separate informations — four for murder and one for
made the pronouncement that "[i]t is very logical that
most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to "a shot suddenly rang out" followed by a "series of frustrated murder.
the prosecuting attorney, being the one charged
be applied in its maximum period. shots" — from a pistol. Two persons lay dead and a with the prosecution of offenses, should determine
2. We have not overlooked the suggestion in the
third seriously wounded but who later on also died. the information to be filed and cannot be controlled
Read as it should be, Article 48 provides for two record that, because of an affidavit of one of the
This Court there ruled that there were "three distinct by the off ended party."14
classes of crimes where a single penalty is to be witnesses, possibility exists that the real intent of the
and separate murders" committed by appellant Juan
imposed: first, where a single act constitutes two or culprits was to commit robbery, and that the acts
Mones.8 And finally, in People vs. Gatbunton, L- 3. The impact of respondent Judge's orders is that
more grave or less grave felonies (delito compuesto ); constituting murders and frustrated murder
2435, May 10, 1950, the spouses Mariano Sebastian his judgment is to be substituted for that of the
and, second, when an offense is a necessary means complained of were committed in pursuance
and Maxima Capule — who were asleep — were prosecutor's on the matter of what crime is to be
for committing the other (delito complejo).1 thereof. If true, this would bring the case within the
killed by one burst of machinegun fire; and then, by filed in court. The question of instituting a criminal
coverage of the second portion of Article 48, which
a second burst of machinegun fire, two of the charge is one addressed to the sound discretion of
Best exemplified by the first of the two cases is treats as a complex crime a case where an offense
couple's children — also asleep — were killed. The the investigating Fiscal. The information he lodges in
where one shot from a gun results in the death of is a necessary means for committing the other.
accused, Tomas Gatbunton, was found guilty by the court must have to be supported by facts brought
two or more persons. Jurisprudence teaches that, in
trial court of quadruple murder. On appeal, this A rule of presumption long familiar, however, is that about by an inquiry made by him. It stands to reason
this factual setting, the complex crime defined in the
Court declared that "appellant must be declared official duty has been regularly performed. 13 If the then to say that in a clash of views between the
first part of Article 48 finds application. 2 A similar rule
guilty of four murders."9 Fiscal has not seen fit to give weight to said affidavit judge who did not investigate and the fiscal who did,
obtains where one stabbed another and the weapon
wherein it is alleged that certain personal properties or between the fiscal and the offended party or the
pierced the latter's body through and wounded The present ease is to be differentiated from People
(transistor radio and money) were taken away by the defendant, those of the Fiscal's should normally
another. The first died instantaneously; the second, vs. Lawas, L-7618-20, June 30, 1955. There, on a
culprits after the shooting, we are not to jettison the prevail. In this regard, he cannot ordinarily be
seven days later. This Court convicted the assailant single occasion, about fifty Maranaos were killed by
prosecutor's opinion thereon. The Fiscal could have subject to dictation. We are not to be understood as
of double murder.3 So where a person plants a

Page 47 of 132
saying that criminal prosecution may not be blocked PER CURIAM: Another request was made on February 16, 1987 for documents which have been repeatedly and
in exceptional cases. A relief in equity "may be him to approve or deny registration of the uniform uniformly registered in the Office of the Register of
availed of to stop it purported enforcement of a This complaint for disbarment is related to the deeds of absolute sale with assignment. Still no Deeds of Tacloban City under Attys. Modesto Garcia
criminal law where it is necessary (a) for the orderly administrative case which complainant Attorney action except to require V & G to submit proof of and Pablo Amascual Jr., it is only during the
administration of justice; (b) to prevent the use of the Fernando T. Collantes, house counsel for V & G real estate tax payment and to clarify certain details incumbency of Atty. Vicente C. Renomeron, that the
strong arm of the law in an oppressive and vindictive Better Homes Subdivision, Inc. (V & G for short), about the transactions. very same documents of the same tenor have been
manner; (c) to avoid multiplicity of actions; (d) to filed against Attorney Vicente C. Renomeron, refused or denied registration ... (p. 15, Rollo.)
afford adequate protection to constitutional rights; Register of Deeds of Tacloban City, for the latter's Although V & G complied with the desired
and (e) in proper cases, because the statute relied irregular actuations with regard to the application of requirements, respondent Renomeron suspended On May 27, 1987, respondent elevated the
upon is unconstitutional or was 'held invalid.' V & G for registration of 163 pro forma Deeds of the registration of the documents pending matter en consulta to the Administrator, National
"15 Nothing in the record would as much as intimate Absolute Sale with Assignment of lots in its compliance by V & G with a certain "special Land Titles and Deeds Registration Administration
that the present case fits into any of the situations subdivision. The present complaint charges the arrangement" between them, which was that V & G (NLTDRA) (now the Land Registration Authority
just recited. respondent with the following offenses: should provide him with a weekly round trip ticket [LRA]). In a Resolution dated July 27,1987 (Consulta
from Tacloban to Manila plus P2,000.00 as pocket No. 1579), the NLTDRA ruled that the questioned
And at this distance and in the absence of any 1. Neglecting or refusing inspite (sic) repeated money per trip, or, in lieu thereof, the sale of documents were registrable. Heedless of the
compelling fact or circumstance, we are loathe to requests and without sufficient justification, to act respondent's Quezon City house and lot by V & G or NLTDRA's opinion, respondent continued to sit on V
tag the City Fiscal of Iligan City with abuse of within reasonable time (sic) the registration of 163 GSIS representatives. & Gs 163 deeds of sale with assignment.
discretion in filing separate cases for murder and Deeds of Absolute Sale with Assignment and the
frustrated murder, instead of a single case for the eventual issuance and transfer of the corresponding On May 19, 1987, respondent confided to the Exasperated by respondent's conduct, the
complex crime of robbery with homicide and 163 transfer certificates of titles to the GSIS, for the complainant that he would act favorably on the 163 complainant filed with the NLTDRA on June 4, 1987
frustrated homicide under the provisions of Article purpose of obtaining some pecuniary or material registrable documents of V & G if the latter would administrative charges (docketed as Adm. Case No.
294 (1) of the Revised Penal Code or, for that matter, benefit from the person or persons interested execute clarificatory affidavits and send money for a 87-15), against respondent Register of Deeds.
for multiple murder and frustrated murder. We state therein. round trip plane ticket for him.
Upon receipt of the charges, NLTDRA Administrator
that, here, the Fiscal's discretion should not be
2. Conduct unbecoming of public official. The plane fare amounting to P800 (without the Teodoro G. Bonifacio directed respondent to explain
controlled.
pocket money of P2,000) was sent to respondent in writing why no administrative disciplinary action
3. Dishonesty. through his niece. should be taken against him. Respondent was
Upon the record as it stands, the writ
of certiorari  prayed for is hereby granted; the orders further asked whether he would submit his case on
4. Extortion. Because of V & G's failure to give him pocket money
of respondent Judge of May 13, 1965 and May 31, the basis of his answer, or be heard in a formal
in addition to plane fare, respondent imposed investigation.
1966 are hereby set and declared null and void, and, 5. Directly receiving pecuniary or material benefit for
additional registration requirements. Fed up with the
in consequence, the writ of preliminary injunction himself in connection with pending official
respondent's extortionate tactics, the complainant In his answer dated July 9, 1987, respondent denied
heretofore issued is made permanent insofar as it transaction before him.
wrote him a letter on May 20, 1987 challenging him the charges of extortion and of directly receiving
stops enforcement of the said orders; and the
6. Causing undue injury to a party, the GSIS [or] to act on all pending applications for registration of pecuniary or material benefit for himself in
respondent Judge, or whoever takes his place, is
Government through manifest partiality, evident bad V & G within twenty-four (24) hours. connection with the official transactions awaiting his
hereby directed to reinstate Criminal Cases 1246,
faith or gross inexcusable negligence. action.
1247, 1248, 1249 and 1250 as they were On May 22, 1987, respondent formally denied
commenced, and to take steps towards the final registration of the transfer of 163 certificates of title Although an investigator was appointed by NLTDRA
7. Gross ignorance of the law and procedure. (p. 10,
determination thereof. to the GSIS on the uniform ground that the deeds of Administrator Bonifacio to hear Attorney Collantes'
Rollo.)
absolute sale with assignment were ambiguous as charges against him, Attorney Renomeron waived
Costs against respondents Tomas Narbasa, Tambac
As early as January 15, 1987, V & G had requested to parties and subject matter. On May 26, 1987, his right to a formal investigation. Both parties
Alindo and Rutino Borres. So ordered.
the respondent Register of Deeds to register some Attorney Collantes moved for a reconsideration of submitted the case for resolution based on the
A.C. No. 3056               August 16, 1991 163 deeds of sale with assignment (in favor of the said denial, stressing that: pleadings.
GSIS) of lots of the V & G mortgaged to GSIS by the
FERNANDO T. COLLANTES, complainant,  lot buyers. There was no action from the ... since the year 1973 continuously up to December The investigator, Attorney Leonardo Da Jose,
vs. respondent. 1986 for a period of nearly fifteen (15) years or for a recommended dropping the charges of: (1)
ATTY. VICENTE C. RENOMERON respondent. sum total of more than 2,000 same set of dishonesty; (2) causing undue injury to a party

Page 48 of 132
through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross the Administrator notwithstanding, the respondent for his misconduct as a public official also documents and papers expeditiously (Sec. 5,
inexcusable negligence; and (3) gross ignorance of still refused the registration thereof but demanded constituted a violation of his oath as a lawyer. subpars. [c] and [d] and prohibits them from directly
the law and procedure. He opined that the charge of from the parties interested the submission of or indirectly having a financial or material interest in
neglecting or refusing, in spite repeated requests additional requirements not adverted to in his The lawyer's oath (Rule 138, Section 17, Rules of any transaction requiring the approval of their office,
and without sufficient justification, to act within a previous denial. Court; People vs. De Luna, 102 Phil. 968), imposes and likewise bars them from soliciting gifts or
reasonable time on the registration of the upon every lawyer the duty to delay no man for anything of monetary value in the course of any
documents involved, in order to extort some x x x           x x x          x x x money or malice. The lawyer's oath is a source of transaction which may be affected by the functions
pecuniary or material benefit from the interested his obligations and its violation is a ground for his of their office (See. 7, subpars. [a] and [d]), the Code
In relation to the alleged 'special arrangement,' suspension, disbarment or other disciplinary
party, absorbed the charges of conduct unbecoming of Professional Responsibility forbids a lawyer to
although the respondent claims that he neither action (Legal Ethics, Ruben E. Agpalo, 1983 Edition,
of a public official, extortion, and directly receiving engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful
touched nor received the money sent to him, on pp. 66-67).
some pecuniary or material benefit for himself in conduct (Rule 1.01, Code of Professional
record remains uncontroverted the circumstance
connection with pending official transactions before Responsibility), or delay any man's cause "for any
that his niece, Ms. de la Cruz, retrieved from him the As the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro said:
him. corrupt motive or interest" (Rule 103).
amount of P800.00 earlier sent to him as plane fare,
not in the original denomination of P100.00 bills but A person takes an oath when he is admitted to the
Brushing aside the investigator's recommendation, A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely
in P50.00 bills. The respondent had ample Bar which is designed to impress upon him his
NLTDRA Administrator Teodoro G. Bonifacio on reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he,
opportunity to clarify or to countervail this related responsibilities. He thereby becomes an "officer of
February 22, 1988, recommended to Secretary of whether in public or private life, behave in a
incident in his letter dated 5 September 1987 to the court" on whose shoulders rests the grave
Justice Sedfrey A. Ordoñez that the respondent: (1) scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal
Administrator Bonifacio but he never did so. responsibility of assisting the courts in the proper.
be found guilty of simple neglect of duty: (2) be profession. (Rule 7.03, Code of Professional
fair, speedy, and efficient administration of justice.
reprimanded to act with dispatch on documents Responsibility.)
... We believe that, in this case, the respondent's As an officer of the court he is subject to a rigid
presented to him for registration; and (3) be warned
being new in office cannot serve to mitigate his discipline that demands that in his every exertion the This Court has ordered that only those who are
that a repetition of similar infraction will be dealt with
liability. His being so should have motivated him to only criterion he that truth and justice triumph. This "competent, honorable, and reliable" may practice
more severely.
be more aware of applicable laws, rules and discipline is what as given the law profession its the profession of law (Noriega vs. Sison, 125 SCRA
After due investigation of the charges, Secretary regulations and should have prompted him to do his nobility, its prestige, its exalted place. From a 293) for every lawyer must pursue "only the highest
Ordoñez found respondent guilty of grave best in the discharge of his duties. (pp. 17-18, Rollo.) lawyer, to paraphrase Justice Felix Frankfurter, are standards in the practice of his calling" (Court
misconduct. expected those qualities of truth-speaking, a high Administrator vs. Hermoso, 150 SCRA 269, 278).
Secretary Ordoñez recommended to President sense of honor, full candor, intellectual honesty, and
Our study and consideration of the records of the Corazon C. Aquino that Renomeron be dismissed the strictest observance of fiduciary responsibility— The acts of dishonesty and oppression which
case indicate that ample evidence supports the from the service, with forfeiture of leave credits and all of which, throughout the centuries, have been Attorney Renomeron committed as a public official
Investigating Officer's findings that the respondent retirement benefits, and with prejudice to re- compendiously described as moral character. have demonstrated his unfitness to practice the high
committed grave misconduct. employment in the government service, effective and noble calling of the law (Bautista vs. Judge
immediately. Membership in the Bar is in the category of a Guevarra, 142 SCRA 632; Court Administrator vs.
The respondent unreasonably delayed action on the mandate to public service of the highest Rodolfo G. Hermoso, 150 SCRA 269). He should
documents presented to him for registration and, As recommended by the Secretary of Justice, the order.1âwphi1 A lawyer is an oath-bound servant of therefore be disbarred.
notwithstanding representations by the parties President of the Philippines, by Adm. Order No. 165 society whose conduct is clearly circumscribed by
interested for expeditious action on the said dated May 3, 1990, dismissed the respondent from inflexible norms of law and ethics, and whose WHEREFORE, it is hereby ordered that Attorney
documents, he continued with his inaction. the government service (pp. 1419, Rollo). primary duty is the advancement of the quest of Vicente C. Renomeron be disbarred from the
truth and justice, for which he has sworn to be a practice of law in the Philippines, and that his name
The records indicate that the respondent eventually Less than two weeks after filing his complaint
fearless crusader. (Apostacy in the Legal Profession, be stricken off the Roll of Attorneys
formally denied the registration of the documents against Renomeron in the NLTDRA, Attorney
64 SCRA 784, 789- 790; emphasis supplied.)
involved; that he himself elevated the question on Collantes also filed in this Court on June 16, 1987, a SO ORDERED.
the registrability of the said documents to disbarment complaint against said respondent. The Code of Professional Responsibility applies to
Administrator Bonifacio after he formally denied the lawyers in government service in the discharge of A.C. No. 6707             March 24, 2006
The issue in this disbarment proceeding is whether
registration thereof, that the Administrator then their official tasks (Canon 6). Just as the Code of
the respondent register of deeds, as a lawyer, may GISELA HUYSSEN, Complainant, 
resolved in favor of the registrability of the said Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials
also be disciplined by this Court for his vs.
documents in question; and that, such resolution of requires public officials and employees to process
malfeasances as a public official. The answer is yes, ATTY. FRED L. GUTIERREZ, Respondent.

Page 49 of 132
DECISION complainant five postdated checks with the b) Studying their case and being U.S. Citizen (sic), I but money of World Mission for Jesus, which
assurance that said checks would be honored. advised them that they better secure a permanent therefore is a serious violation of the Immigration
PER CURIAM: Complainant deposited the five postdated checks visa under Section 3 of the Philippine Immigration Law as there was a misrepresentation. This fact was
on their due dates but they were all dishonored for Law otherwise known as Quota Visa and thereafter, confirmed later when the said entity sent their
This treats of a Complaint1 for Disbarment filed by
having been drawn against insufficient funds or provided them with list of the requirements in demand letter to the undersigned affiant and which
Gisela Huyssen against respondent Atty. Fred L.
payment thereon was ordered stopped by obtaining the said visa, one of which is that the is attached to the complaint-affidavit;
Gutierrez.
respondent. After respondent made several applicant must have a $40,000 deposited in the
unfulfilled promises to return the deposited amount, bank. I also inform that her son Marcus Huyssen, 2) That worst, the same amount used by the
Complainant alleged that in 1995, while respondent
complainant referred the matter to a lawyer who who was already of major age, has to have the same complainant, was the very same amount used by her
was still connected with the Bureau of Immigration
sent two demand letters to respondent. The demand amount of show money separate of her money as he son Marcus Huyssen, in obtaining his separate
and Deportation (BID), she and her three sons, who
letters remained unheeded. would be issued separate visa, while her two minor permanent visa. These acts of the complainant and
are all American citizens, applied for Philippine Visas
children would be included as her dependents in her her son could have been a ground for deportation
under Section 13[g] of the Immigration Law.
Thus, a complaint 2 for disbarment was filed by said visa application. I advised them to get a lawyer and likewise constitute criminal offense under the
Respondent told complainant that in order that their
complainant in the Commission on Bar Discipline of (sic), complainant further requested me to refer to Immigration Law and the Revised Penal Code.
visa applications will be favorably acted upon by the
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). her to a lawyer to work for their application, which I These could have been the possible reason why
BID they needed to deposit a certain sum of money
did and contacted the late Atty. Mendoza, an complainant was made to pay for quite huge
for a period of one year which could be withdrawn On 15 November 2000, Victor C. Fernandez,
Immigration lawyer, to do the job for the amount.
after one year. Believing that the deposit was indeed Director for Bar Discipline, required3 respondent to
required by law, complainant deposited with complainant and her family.
submit his answer within 15 days from receipt e) That after they have secured their visas,
respondent on six different occasions from April thereof. complainant and her family became very close to
c) The application was filed, processed and
1995 to April 1996 the total amount of US$20,000. undersigned and my family that I was even invited to
followed-up by the said Atty. Mendoza until the
Respondent prepared receipts/vouchers as proofs In his Counter-Affidavit dated 2 July their residence several times;
same was finished and the corresponding
that he received the amounts deposited by the 2001,4 respondent denied the allegations in the
permanent visa were obtained by the complainant
complainant but refused to give her copies of official complaint claiming that having never physically f) However after three years, complainant demanded
and her family. Her son Marcus Huyssen was given
receipts despite her demands. After one year, received the money mentioned in the complaint, he the return of their money given and surprisingly they
an independent permanent visa while the other two
complainant demanded from respondent the return could not have appropriated or pocketed the same. want to recover the same from me. By twist of fate,
were made as dependents of the complainant. In
of US$20,000 who assured her that said amount He said the amount was used as payment for Atty. Mendoza is no longer around, he died
between the processing of the papers and
would be returned. When respondent failed to return services rendered for obtaining the permanent visas sometime 1997;
becoming very close to the complainant, I became
the sum deposited, the World Mission for Jesus (of in the Philippines. Respondent explained thus:
the intermediary between complainant and their g) That it is unfortunate that the real facts of the
which complainant was a member) sent a demand
a) Through a close-friend, Jovie Galaraga, a Pastor counsel so much that every amount that the latter matter is now being hidden and that the amount of
letter to respondent for the immediate return of the
and likewise a friend of the complainant, the latter would request for whatever purpose was coursed money is now being sought to be recovered from
money. In a letter dated 1 March 1999, respondent
was introduced to me at my office at the Bureau of through me which request were then transmitted to me;
promised to release the amount not later than 9
Immigration with a big problem concerning their stay the complainant and every amount of money given
March 1999. Failing to comply with his promise, the
in the Philippines, herself and three sons, one of by the complainant to their counsel were coursed h) That the fact is I signed the vouchers and being a
World Mission for Jesus sent another demand letter.
which is already of major age while the two others thru me which is the very reason why my signature lawyer I know the consequences of having signed
In response thereto, respondent sent complainant a
were still minors then. Their problem was the fact appears in the vouchers attached in the complaint- the same and therefore I had to answer for it and
letter dated 19 March 1999 explaining the alleged
that since they have been staying in the Philippines affidavit; pay. I tried to raised the fund needed but up to the
reasons for the delay in the release of deposited
for almost ten (10) years as holders of missionary present my standby loan application has not been
amount. He enclosed two blank checks postdated d) That as time goes by, I noticed that the amount
visas (9G) they could no longer extend their said released and was informed that the same would only
to 6 April and 20 April 1999 and authorized appeared to be huge for services of a lawyer that I
status as under the law and related polic[i]es of the be forthcoming second week of August. The same
complainant to fill in the amounts. When myself began to wonder why and, to satisfy my
government, missionary visa holders could only should have been released last March but was
complainant deposited the postdated checks on curiosity, I met Atty. Mendoza and inquired from him
remain as such for ten (10) years after which they aborted due to prevalent condition. The amount to
their due dates, the same were dishonored because regarding the matter and the following facts were
could no longer extend their said status and have to be paid, according to the complainant has now
respondent had stopped payment on the same. revealed to me:
leave the country. become doubled plus attorney’s fees
Thereafter, respondent, in his letter to complainant
of P200,000.00.
dated 25 April 1999, explained the reasons for 1) That what was used by the complainant as her
stopping payment on the checks, and gave show money from the bank is not really her money

Page 50 of 132
Complainant submitted her evidence on 4 going through the normal standard operating Immigration and Deportation, makes it more that that it was needed in complainant’s application
September 2002 and April 2003, and filed her procedure and there is no day since January that I reprehensible as it has caused damage to the for visa with the BID. Respondent denied he
Formal Offer of Evidence on 25 August 2003. do not make any follow – ups on the progress of the reputation and integrity of said office. It is submitted misappropriated the said amount and interposed the
same." that respondent has violated Rule 6.02 of Canon 6 of defense that he delivered it to a certain Atty.
On several occasions, the complaint was set for the Code of Professional Responsibility which reads: Mendoza who assisted complainant and children in
reception of respondent’s evidence but the and his letter dated 19 March 1999 (Annex L of their application for visa in the BID. 11 Such defense
scheduled hearings (11 settings) were all reset at the Complaint) where he stated thus: "A lawyer in the government service shall not use his remains unsubstantiated as he failed to submit
instance of the respondent who was allegedly out of public position to promote or advance his private evidence on the matter. While he claims that Atty.
the country to attend to his client’s needs. "I am sending you my personal checks to cover the interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with his Mendoza already died, he did not present the death
Reception of respondent’s evidence was scheduled refund of the amount deposited by your good self in public duties." certificate of said Atty. Mendoza. Worse, the action
for the last time on 28 September 2004 and again connection with the procurement of your permanent
of respondent in shifting the blame to someone who
respondent failed to appear, despite due notice and visa and that of your family. It might take some more On 4 November 2004, the IBP Board of Governors
has been naturally silenced by fate, is not only
without just cause. time before the Bureau could release the refund as approved6 the Investigating Commissioner’s report
impudent but downright ignominious. When the
some other pertinent papers are being still compiled with modification, thus:
integrity of a member of the bar is challenged, it is
On 5 November 2004, Investigating Commissioner are being looked at the files of the late
RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it hereby not enough that he deny the charges against him; he
Milagros V. San Juan submitted her Commissioner Verceles, who approved your visa
ADOPTED and APPROVED, with modification, the must meet the issue and overcome the evidence
report5 recommending the disbarment of and who died of heart attack. Anyway, I am sure that
Report and Recommendation of the Investigating against him.12 He must show proof that he still
respondent. She justified her recommendation in everything would be fine later as all the documents
Commissioner of the above-entitled case, herein maintains that degree of morality and integrity which
this manner: needed are already intact. This is just a bureaucratic
made part of this Resolution as Annex "A"; and, at all times is expected of him. In the case at bar,
delay."
At the outset it should be noted that there is no finding the recommendation fully supported by the respondent clearly fell short of his duty. Records
question that respondent received the amount of From the above letters, respondent makes it appear evidence on record and applicable laws and rules, show that even though he was given the opportunity
US$20,000 from complainant, as respondent himself that the US$20,000 was officially deposited with the and considering respondent’s violation of Rule 6.02 to answer the charges and controvert the evidence
admitted that he signed the vouchers (Annexes A to Bureau of Immigration and Deportation. However, if of Canon 6 of the Code of Professional against him in a formal investigation, he failed,
F of complainant) showing his receipt of said this is true, how come only Petty Cash Vouchers Responsibility, Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez is hereby without any plausible reason, to appear several
amount from complainant. Respondent however were issued by respondent to complainant to prove DISBARRED from the practice of law and ordered to times whenever the case was set for reception of his
claims that he did not appropriate the same for his receipt of the said sum and official receipts return the amount with legal interest from receipt of evidence despite due notice.
himself but that he delivered the said amount to a therefore were never issued by the said Bureau? the money until payment. This case shall be referred
The defense of denial proferred by respondent is,
certain Atty. Mendoza. This defense raised by Also, why would respondent issue his personal to the Office of the Ombudsman for prosecution for
thus, not convincing. It is settled that denial is
respondent is untenable considering the checks to cover the return of the money to violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Acts
inherently a weak defense. To be believed, it must
documentary evidence submitted by complainant. complainant if said amount was really officially and to the Department of Justice for appropriate
be buttressed by a strong evidence of non-
On record is the 1 March 1999 letter of respondent deposited with the Bureau of Immigration? All these administrative action.
culpability; otherwise, such denial is purely self-
addressed to the World Mission for Jesus (Annex H actions of respondent point to the inescapable
We agree with the IBP Board of Governors that serving and is with nil evidentiary value.
of Complaint) where he stated thus: conclusion that respondent received the money from
complainant and appropriated the same for his respondent should be severely sanctioned.
When respondent issued the postdated checks as
"I really understand your feelings on the delay of the personal use. It should also be noted that
We begin with the veritable fact that lawyers in his moral obligation, he indirectly admitted the
release of the deposit but I repeat, nobody really respondent has failed to establish that the "late Atty.
government service in the discharge of their official charge. Such admissions were also apparent in the
intended that the thing would happen that way. Mendoza" referred to in his Counter-Affidavit really
task have more restrictions than lawyers in private following letters of respondent to complainant:
Many events were the causes of the said delay exists. There is not one correspondence from Atty.
particularly the death of then Commissioner L. practice. Want of moral integrity is to be more
Mendoza regarding the visa application of 1) Letter13 dated 01 March 1992, pertinent portion of
Verceles, whose sudden death prevented us the severely condemned in a lawyer who holds a
complainant and his family, and complainant has which reads:
needed papers for the immediate release. It was responsible public office.7
also testified that she never met this Atty. Mendoza
only from compiling all on the first week of January referred to by respondent. Be that as it may, may I assure you for the last time
It is undisputed that respondent admitted8 having
this year, that all the said papers were recovered, that the said deposit is forthcoming, the latest of
received the US$20,000 from complainant as shown
hence, the process of the release just started though Considering that respondent was able to perpetrate which is 09 March 1999. Should it not be released
by his signatures in the petty cash vouchers 9 and
some important papers were already finished as the fraud by taking advantage of his position with on said date, I understand to pay the same to you
receipts10 he prepared, on the false representation
early as the last quarter of last year. We are just the Board of Special Inquiry of the Bureau of out of my personal money on said date. No more

Page 51 of 132
reasons and no more alibis. Send somebody here at financially but it would set me free from worries and deposit today and I was assured by the bank that it touches the interests of the community at large. The
the office on that day and the amount would be anxieties. would be honored this time. mischief it creates is not only a wrong to the payee
given to you wether (sic) from the Bureau or from my or holder, but also an injury to the public since the
own personal money. I have arranged for a loan from money lenders and Normally, this is not the actuation of one who is circulation of valueless commercial papers can very
was able to secure one last Saturday the releases of falsely accused of appropriating the money of well pollute the channels of trade and commerce,
2) Letter14 dated 19 March 1999, reads in part: which are on the following: another. As correctly observed by the Investigating injure the banking system and eventually hurt the
Commissioner, respondent would not have issued welfare of society and the public interest. Thus,
I am sending you my personal checks to cover the May 4, 1999- 200,000 his personal checks if said amount were officially paraphrasing Black’s definition, a drawer who issues
refund of the amount deposited by your goodself in deposited with the BID. This is an admission of
May 11, 1999 -200,000 an unfunded check deliberately reneges on his
connection with the procurement of your permanent misconduct. private duties he owes his fellow men or society in a
visa and that of your family.
May 20, 1999-200,000 manner contrary to accepted and customary rule of
Respondent’s act of asking money from
It might take some more time before the Bureau right and duty, justice, honesty or good morals."21
June 4, 1999-200,000 complainant in consideration of the latter’s pending
could release the refund as some other pertinent application for visas is violative of Rule 1.01 17 of the Consequently, we have held that the act of a person
papers are still being compiled and are being looked I have given my property (lot situated in the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits in issuing a check knowing at the time of the
at the files of the late Commissioner Verceles, who province) as my collateral. members of the Bar from engaging or participating issuance that he or she does not have sufficient
approved your visa and who died of heart attack. in any unlawful, dishonest, or deceitful acts. funds in, or credit with, the drawee bank for the
Anyway, I am sure that everything would be fine later I am therefore putting an end to this trouble. I am Moreover, said acts constitute a breach of Rule payment of the check in full upon its presentment, is
as all the documents needed are already intact. This issuing four checks which I assure you will be 6.0218 of the Code which bars lawyers in government also a manifestation of moral turpitude. 22
is just a bureaucratic delay. sufficiently funded on their due dates by reason of service from promoting their private interest.
my aforestated loans. Just bear with me for the last Promotion of private interest includes soliciting gifts Respondent’s acts are more despicable. Not only
xxxx time, if any of these checks, is returned, don’t call or anything of monetary value in any transaction did he misappropriate the money of complainant;
me anymore. Just file the necessary action against requiring the approval of his office or which may be worse, he had the gall to prepare receipts with the
As you would see, I have to pay you in peso. I have
me, I just had to put an end to this matter and look affected by the functions of his letterhead of the BID and issued checks to cover up
issued you 2 checks, one dated April 6, 1999 and
forward. x x x office.19 Respondent’s conduct in office betrays the his misdeeds. Clearly, he does not deserve to
the other one dated April 20, 1999. I leave the
amount vacant because I would want you to fill them integrity and good moral character required from all continue, being a member of the bar.
4) Letter16 dated 12 May 1999, which reads:
up on their due dates the peso equivalent to $10,000 lawyers, especially from one occupying a high public
office. A lawyer in public office is expected not only Time and again, we have declared that the practice
respectively. This is to be sure that the peso The other day I deposited the amount of P289,000
to refrain from any act or omission which might tend of law is a noble profession. It is a special privilege
equivalent of your P20,000 would be well to the bank to cover the first check I issued. In fact I
to lessen the trust and confidence of the citizenry in bestowed only upon those who are competent
exchanged. I have postdated them to enable me to stopped all payments to all other checks that are
government; he must also uphold the dignity of the intellectually, academically and morally. A lawyer
raise some more pesos to cover the whole amount becoming due to some of my creditors to give
legal profession at all times and observe a high must at all times conduct himself, especially in his
but don’t worry as the Lord had already provided me preference to the check I issued to you.
standard of honesty and fair dealing. Otherwise said, dealings with his clients and the public at large, with
the means.
This morning when I went to the Bank, I learned that a lawyer in government service is a keeper of the honesty and integrity in a manner beyond reproach.
3) Letter15 dated 25 April 1999 provides: the bank instead of returning the other checks I public faith and is burdened with high degree of He must faithfully perform his duties to society, to
requested for stop payment - instead honored them social responsibility, perhaps higher than his the bar, to the courts and to his clients. A violation of
Anyway, let me apologize for all these troubles. You and mistakenly returned your check. This was a very brethren in private practice. the high standards of the legal profession subjects
are aware that I have done my very best for the early big surprise to me and discouragement for I know it the lawyer to administrative sanctions which
return of your money but the return is becoming would really upset you. In a desperate attempt to put up a smoke or to includes suspension and disbarment.23 More
bleak as I was informed that there are still papers camouflage his misdeed, he went on committing importantly, possession of good moral character
lacking. When I stopped the payment of the checks I In view of this I thought of sending you the amount another by issuing several worthless checks, thereby must be continuous as a requirement to the
issued, I was of the impression that everything is of P200,000 in cash which I initially plan to withdraw compounding his case. enjoyment of the privilege of law practice; otherwise,
fine, but it is not. I guess it is time for me to accept from the Bank. However, I could not entrust the the loss thereof is a ground for the revocation of
the fact that I really have to personally return the same amount to the bearer nor can I bring the same In a recent case, we have held that the issuance of such privilege.24
money out of my own. The issue should stop at my to your place considering that its quite a big amount. worthless checks constitutes gross misconduct, 20 as
end. This is the truth that I must face. It may hurt me I am just sending a check for you to immediately the effect "transcends the private interests of the Indeed, the primary objective of administrative cases
parties directly involved in the transaction and against lawyers is not only to punish and discipline

Page 52 of 132
the erring individual lawyers but also to safeguard the public in the legal profession, respondent hearings. The efforts of the Solicitor General to get of Manila." When asked if he was willing to proceed
the administration of justice by protecting the courts deserves the ultimate penalty of expulsion from the at the bottom of things were thus set at naught. with the hearing' in the absence of his counsel, the
and the public from the misconduct of lawyers, and esteemed brotherhood of lawyers.30 Under the circumstances, the outcome of such complainant declared, apparently without any
to remove from the legal profession persons whose referral was to be expected. For the law is rather prodding, that he wished his complaint withdrawn.
utter disregard of their lawyer’s oath have proven WHEREFORE, Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez is hereby exacting in its requirement that there be competent He explained that he brought the present action in
them unfit to continue discharging the trust reposed DISBARRED from the practice of law and ordered to and adequate proof to make out a case for an outburst of anger believing that the respondent
in them as members of the bar. 25 These return the amount he received from the complainant malpractice. Necessarily, the recommendation was San Juan took active part in the unjust dismissal of
pronouncement gain practical significance in the with legal interest from his receipt of the money until one of the complaints being dismissed, This is one his complaint with the NLRC. The complainant
case at bar considering that respondent was a payment. This case shall be referred to the Office of of those instances then where this Court is left with added that after reexamining his case, he believed
former member of the Board of Special Inquiry of the the Ombudsman for criminal prosecution for hardly any choice. Respondent cannot be found the respondent to be without fault and a truly good
BID. It bears stressing also that government lawyers violation of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Acts guilty of malpractice. person." 2
who are public servants owe fidelity to the public and to the Department of Justice for appropriate
service, a public trust. As such, government lawyers administrative action. Let copies of this Decision be Respondent, as noted in the Report of the Solicitor- The Report of the Solicitor-General did not take into
should be more sensitive to their professional furnished the Bar Confidant to be spread on the General, "admits having appeared as counsel for the account respondent's practice of his profession
obligations as their disreputable conduct is more records of the respondent; the Integrated Bar of the New Cesar's Bakery in the proceeding before the notwithstanding his being a police official, as "this is
likely to be magnified in the public eye.26 Philippines for distribution to all its chapters; and the NLRC while he held office as captain in the Manila not embraced in Section 27, Rule 138 of the Revised
Office of the Court Administrator for dissemination Metropolitan Police. However, he contends that the Rules of Court which provides the grounds for the
As a lawyer, who was also a public officer, to all courts throughout the country. law did not prohibit him from such isolated exercise suspension or removal of an attorney. The
respondent miserably failed to cope with the strict of his profession. He contends that his appearance respondent's appearance at the labor proceeding
demands and high standards of the legal profession. SO ORDERED. as counsel, while holding a government position, is notwithstanding that he was an incumbent police
not among the grounds provided by the Rules of officer of the City of Manila may appropriately be
Section 27, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court A.M. No. 1418 August 31, 1976
Court for the suspension or removal of attorneys. referred to the National Police Commission and the
mandates that a lawyer may be disbarred or The respondent also denies having conspired with Civil Service Commission." 3 As a matter of fact,
JOSE MISAMIN, complainant, 
suspended by this Court for any of the following the complainant Misamin's attorney in the NLRC separate complaints on this ground have been filed
vs.
acts: (1) deceit; (2) malpractice; (3) gross misconduct proceeding in order to trick the complainant into and are under investigation by the Office of the
ATTORNEY MIGUEL A. SAN JUAN, respondent.
in office; (4) grossly immoral conduct; (5) conviction signing an admission that he had been paid his Mayor of Manila and the National Police
of a crime involving moral turpitude ; (6) violation of RESOLUTION separation pay. Likewise, the respondent denies Commission." As for the charges that respondent
the lawyer’s oath; (7) willful disobedience of any giving illegal protection to members of the Chinese conspired with complainant's counsel to mislead
lawful order of a superior court; and (8) willfully FERNANDO, J.: community in Sta. Cruz, Manila." 1 complainant to admitting having' received his
appearing as an attorney for a party without separation pay and for giving illegal protection to
authority to do so.27 It certainly fails to reflect credit on a captain in the Then came a detailed account in such Report of the aliens, it is understandable why the Report of the
Metro Manila Police Force and a member of the bar, proceedings: "Pursuant to the resolution of this Solicitor-General recommended that they be
In Atty. Vitriolo v. Atty. Dasig, 28 we ordered the respondent Miguel A. San Juan, to be charged with Honorable Court of March 21, 1975, the Solicitor dismissed for lack of evidence.
disbarment of a lawyer who, during her tenure as being the legal representative of certain General's Office set the case for investigation on
OIC, Legal Services, Commission on Higher establishments allegedly owned by Filipinos of July 2 and 3, 1975. The counsel for the complainant The conclusion arrived at by the Solicitor-General
Education, demanded sums of money as Chinese descent and, what is worse, with coercing failed to appear, and the investigation was reset to that the complaint cannot prosper is in accordance
consideration for the approval of applications and an employee, complainant Jose Misamin, to agree August 15, 1975. At the latter date, the same with the settled law. As far back as in re
requests awaiting action by her office. In Lim v. to drop the charges filed by him against his counsel for complainant was absent. In both Tionko, 4 decided in 1922, the authoritative doctrine
Barcelona,29 we also disbarred a senior lawyer of the employer Tan Hua, owner of New Cesar's Bakery, instances, the said counsel did not file written was set forth by Justice Malcolm in this wise: "The
National Labor Relations Commission, who was for the violation of the Minimum Wage Law. There motion for postponement but merely sent the serious consequences of disbarment or suspension
caught by the National Bureau of Investigation in the was a denial on the part of respondent. The matter complainant to explain the reason for his absence. should follow only where there is a clear
act of receiving and counting money extorted from a was referred to the Office of the Solicitor-General for When the case was again called for hearing on preponderance of evidence against the respondent.
certain person. investigation, report and recommendation. October 16, 1975, counsel for complainant failed The presumption is that the attorney is innocent of
Thereafter, it would seem there was a change of once more to appear. The complainant who was the charges preferred and has performed his duty as
Respondent’s acts constitute gross misconduct; heart on the part of complainant. That could very present explained that his lawyer was busy an officer of the court in accordance with his
and consistent with the need to maintain the high well be the explanation for the non- appearance of "preparing an affidavit in the Court of First Instance
standards of the Bar and thus preserve the faith of the lawyer employed by him at the scheduled

Page 53 of 132
oath." 5 The Tionko doctrine has been subsequently (d) Accepting or having any member of his family separation from public office, except in the case of the right of government to recruit competent counsel
adhered to. 6 accept employment in a private enterprise which has subparagraph (b) (2) above, but the professional to defend its interests.
pending official business with him during the concerned cannot practice his profession in
This resolution does not in any wise take into pendency thereof or within one year after its connection with any matter before the office he used In 1976, General Bank and Trust Company
consideration whatever violations there might have termination. to be with, in which case the one-year prohibition (GENBANK) encountered financial difficulties.
been of the Civil Service Law in view of respondent shall likewise apply. GENBANK had extended considerable financial
practicing his profession while holding his position Republic Act No. 6713             February 20, 1989 support to Filcapital Development Corporation
of Captain in the Metro Manila police force. That is a G.R. Nos. 151809-12. April 12, 2005 causing it to incur daily overdrawings on its current
matter to be decided in the administrative AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT account with the Central Bank. 1 It was later found by
proceeding as noted in the recommendation of the AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ON GOOD the Central Bank that GENBANK had approved
Solicitor-General. Nonetheless, while the charges OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES, TO UPHOLD THE GOVERNMENT (PCGG), Petitioners,  various loans to directors, officers, stockholders and
have to be dismissed, still it would not be TIME-HONORED PRINCIPLE OF PUBLIC OFFICE vs. related interests totaling ₱172.3 million, of which
inappropriate for respondent member of the bar to BEING A PUBLIC TRUST, GRANTING SANDIGANBAYAN (Fifth Division), LUCIO C. TAN, 59% was classified as doubtful and ₱0.505 million
avoid all appearances of impropriety. Certainly, the INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR EXEMPLARY CARMEN KHAO TAN, FLORENCIO T. SANTOS, as uncollectible.2 As a bailout, the Central Bank
fact that the suspicion could be entertained that far SERVICE, ENUMERATING PROHIBITED ACTS NATIVIDAD P. SANTOS, DOMINGO CHUA, TAN extended emergency loans to GENBANK which
from living true to the concept of a public office AND TRANSACTIONS AND PROVIDING HUI NEE, MARIANO TAN ENG LIAN, ESTATE OF reached a total of ₱310 million.3 Despite the mega
being a public trust, he did make use, not so much PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF AND BENITO TAN KEE HIONG (represented by loans, GENBANK failed to recover from its financial
of whatever legal knowledge he possessed, but the FOR OTHER PURPOSES TARCIANA C. TAN), FLORENCIO N. SANTOS, JR., woes. On March 25, 1977, the Central Bank issued
influence that laymen could assume was inherent in HARRY C. TAN, TAN ENG CHAN, CHUNG POE a resolution declaring GENBANK insolvent and
Section 7. Prohibited Acts and Transactions.  - In KEE, MARIANO KHOO, MANUEL KHOO, MIGUEL
the office held not only to frustrate the beneficent unable to resume business with safety to its
addition to acts and omissions of public officials and KHOO, JAIME KHOO, ELIZABETH KHOO, CELSO
statutory scheme that labor be justly compensated depositors, creditors and the general public,
employees now prescribed in the Constitution and RANOLA, WILLIAM T. WONG, ERNESTO B. LIM,
but also to be at the beck and call of what the and ordering its liquidation.4 A public bidding of
existing laws, the following shall constitute BENJAMIN T. ALBACITA, WILLY CO, ALLIED
complainant called alien interest, is a matter that GENBANK’s assets was held from March 26 to 28,
prohibited acts and transactions of any public BANKING CORP., ALLIED LEASING AND
should not pass unnoticed. Respondent, in his 1977, wherein the Lucio Tan group submitted the
official and employee and are hereby declared to be FINANCE CORPORATION, ASIA BREWERY, INC.,
future actuations as a member of the bar. should winning bid.5 Subsequently, former Solicitor
unlawful: BASIC HOLDINGS CORP., FOREMOST FARMS,
refrain from laying himself open to such doubts and General Estelito P. Mendoza filed a petitionwith
misgivings as to his fitness not only for the position INC., FORTUNE TOBACCO CORP., GRANDSPAN the then Court of First Instance praying for the
(b) Outside employment and other activities related
occupied by him but also for membership in the bar. DEVELOPMENT CORP., HIMMEL INDUSTRIES, assistance and supervision of the court in
thereto. - Public officials and employees during their
He is not worthy of membership in an honorable IRIS HOLDINGS AND DEVELOPMENT CORP., GENBANK’s liquidation as mandated by Section 29
incumbency shall not:
profession who does not even take care that his JEWEL HOLDINGS, INC., MANUFACTURING of Republic Act No. 265.
honor remains unsullied (1) Own, control, manage or accept employment as SERVICES AND TRADE CORP., MARANAW
officer, employee, consultant, counsel, broker, HOTELS AND RESORT CORP., NORTHERN In February 1986, the EDSA I revolution toppled the
WHEREFORE, this administrative complaint against agent, trustee or nominee in any private enterprise TOBACCO REDRYING PLANT, PROGRESSIVE Marcos government. One of the first acts of
respondent Miguel A. San Juan is dismissed for not regulated, supervised or licensed by their office FARMS, INC., SHAREHOLDINGS, INC., SIPALAY President Corazon C. Aquino was to establish the
having been duly proved. Let a copy of this unless expressly allowed by law; TRADING CORP., VIRGO HOLDINGS & Presidential Commission on Good Government
resolution be spread on his record. DEVELOPMENT CORP., and ATTY. ESTELITO P. (PCGG) to recover the alleged ill-gotten wealth of
(2) Engage in the private practice of their profession MENDOZA, Respondents. former President Ferdinand Marcos, his family and
REPUBLIC ACT No. 3019 unless authorized by the Constitution or law, his cronies. Pursuant to this mandate, the PCGG, on
provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend DECISION July 17, 1987, filed with the Sandiganbayan a
ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
to conflict with their official functions; or complaint for "reversion, reconveyance,
PUNO, J.:
Section 3. Corrupt practices of public officers.  In restitution, accounting and damages" against
(3) Recommend any person to any position in a respondents Lucio Tan, Carmen Khao Tan, Florencio
addition to acts or omissions of public officers This case is prima impressiones and it is weighted
private enterprise which has a regular or pending T. Santos, Natividad P. Santos, Domingo Chua, Tan
already penalized by existing law, the following shall with significance for it concerns on one hand, the
official transaction with their office. Hui Nee, Mariano Tan Eng Lian, Estate of Benito Tan
constitute corrupt practices of any public officer and efforts of the Bar to upgrade the ethics of lawyers in
are hereby declared to be unlawful: government service and on the other, its effect on Kee Hiong, Florencio N. Santos, Jr., Harry C. Tan,
These prohibitions shall continue to apply for a
Tan Eng Chan, Chung Poe Kee, Mariano Khoo,
period of one (1) year after resignation, retirement, or

Page 54 of 132
Manuel Khoo, Miguel Khoo, Jaime Khoo, Elizabeth acquired by respondents Tan, et al. and became Fifth Division of the Sandiganbayan denied the I.A. The history of Rule 6.03
Khoo, Celso Ranola, William T. Wong, Ernesto B. Allied Banking Corporation. Respondent Mendoza other PCGG’s motion to disqualify respondent
Lim, Benjamin T. Albacita, Willy Co, Allied Banking allegedly "intervened" in the acquisition of Mendoza.16 It adopted the resolution of its Second A proper resolution of this case necessitates that we
Corporation (Allied Bank), Allied Leasing and GENBANK by respondents Tan, et al. when, in his Division dated April 22, 1991, and observed that the trace the historical lineage of Rule 6.03 of the Code
Finance Corporation, Asia Brewery, Inc., Basic capacity as then Solicitor General, he advised the arguments were the same in substance as the of Professional Responsibility.
Holdings Corp., Foremost Farms, Inc., Fortune Central Bank’s officials on the procedureto bring motion to disqualify filed in Civil Case No. 0005. The
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries,
Tobacco Corporation, Grandspan Development about GENBANK’s liquidation and appeared as PCGG sought reconsideration of the ruling but its
ethical standards for lawyers were pervasive
Corp., Himmel Industries, Iris Holdings and counsel for the Central Bank in connection with its motion was denied in its resolution dated December
in England and other parts of Europe. The early
Development Corp., Jewel Holdings, Inc., petition for assistance in the liquidation of 5, 2001.17
statements of standards did not resemble modern
Manufacturing Services and Trade Corp., Maranaw GENBANK which he filed with the Court of First
Hence, the recourse to this Court by the PCGG codes of conduct. They were not detailed or
Hotels and Resort Corp., Northern Tobacco Instance (now Regional Trial Court) of Manila and
assailing the resolutions dated July 11, 2001 and collected in one source but surprisingly were
Redrying Plant, Progressive Farms, Inc., was docketed as Special Proceeding No. 107812.
December 5, 2001 of the Fifth Division of comprehensive for their time. The principal thrust of
Shareholdings, Inc., Sipalay Trading Corp., Virgo The motions to disqualify invoked Rule 6.03 of the
the Sandiganbayan via a petition for certiorari and the standards was directed towards the litigation
Holdings & Development Corp., (collectively referred Code of Professional Responsibility. Rule
prohibition under Rule 65 of the 1997 Rules of Civil conduct of lawyers. It underscored the central duty
to herein as respondents Tan, et al.), then President 6.03 prohibits former government lawyers from
Procedure.18 The PCGG alleged that the Fifth of truth and fairness in litigation as superior to any
Ferdinand E. Marcos, Imelda R. Marcos, Panfilo O. accepting "engagement or employment in
Division acted with grave abuse of discretion obligation to the client. The formulations of the
Domingo, Cesar Zalamea, Don Ferry and Gregorio connection with any matter in which he had
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction in issuing litigation duties were at times intricate, including
Licaros. The case was docketed as Civil Case No. intervened while in said service."
the assailed resolutions contending that: 1) Rule specific pleading standards, an obligation to inform
0005 of the Second Division of
On April 22, 1991 the Second Division of 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility the court of falsehoods and a duty to explore
the Sandiganbayan.6 In connection therewith, the
the Sandiganbayan issued a prohibits a former government lawyer from settlement alternatives. Most of the lawyer's other
PCGG issued several writs of sequestration on
resolution denying PCGG’s motion to disqualify accepting employment in connection with any basic duties -- competency, diligence, loyalty,
properties allegedly acquired by the above-named
respondent Mendoza in Civil Case No. 0005. 11 It matter in which he intervened; 2) the prohibition in confidentiality, reasonable fees and service to the
persons by taking advantage of their close
found that the PCGG failed to prove the existence of the Rule is not time-bound; 3) that Central Bank poor -- originated in the litigation context, but
relationship and influence with former President
an inconsistency between respondent Mendoza’s could not waive the objection to respondent ultimately had broader application to all aspects of a
Marcos.
former function as Solicitor General and his present Mendoza’s appearance on behalf of the PCGG; and lawyer's practice.
Respondents Tan, et al. repaired to this Court and employment as counsel of the Lucio Tan group. It 4) the resolution in Civil Case No. 0005 was
The forms of lawyer regulation in colonial and early
filed petitions for certiorari, prohibition and injunction noted that respondent Mendoza did not take a interlocutory, thus res judicata does not apply.19
post-revolutionary America did not differ markedly
to nullify, among others, the writs of sequestration position adverse to that taken on behalf of the
The petition at bar raises procedural and substantive from those in England. The colonies and early states
issued by the PCGG.7 After the filing of the parties’ Central Bank during his term as Solicitor General.12 It
issues of law. In view, however, of the import and used oaths, statutes, judicial oversight, and
comments, this Court referred the cases to further ruled that respondent Mendoza’s appearance
impact of Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional procedural rules to govern attorney behavior. The
the Sandiganbayan for proper disposition. These as counsel for respondents Tan, et al. was beyond
Responsibility to the legal profession and the difference from England was in the pervasiveness
cases were docketed as Civil Case Nos. 0096- the one-year prohibited period under Section 7(b) of
government, we shall cut our way and forthwith and continuity of such regulation. The standards set
0099. In all these cases, respondents Tan, et al. Republic Act No. 6713 since he ceased to be
resolve the substantive issue. in England varied over time, but the variation in early
were represented by their counsel, former Solicitor Solicitor General in the year 1986. The said section
America was far greater. The American regulation
General Estelito P. Mendoza, who has then resumed prohibits a former public official or employee from
I fluctuated within a single colony and differed from
his private practice of law. practicing his profession in connection with any
colony to colony. Many regulations had the effect of
matter before the office he used to be with within Substantive Issue
On February 5, 1991, the PCGG filed motions to setting some standards of conduct, but the
one year from his resignation, retirement or
disqualify respondent Mendoza as counsel for regulation was sporadic, leaving gaps in the
separation from public office.13 The PCGG did not The key issue is whether Rule 6.03 of the Code of
respondents Tan, et al. with the Second Division of substantive standards. Only three of the traditional
seek any reconsideration of the ruling.14 Professional Responsibility applies to respondent
the Sandiganbayan in Civil Case Nos. 0005 8 and core duties can be fairly characterized as pervasive
Mendoza. Again, the prohibition states: "A lawyer
0096-0099.9 The motions alleged that respondent It appears that Civil Case Nos. 0096-0099 in the formal, positive law of the colonial and post-
shall not, after leaving government service, accept
Mendoza, as then Solicitor General 10 and counsel to were transferred from revolutionary period: the duties of litigation fairness,
engagement or employment in connection with
Central Bank, "actively intervened" in the the Sandiganbayan’s Second Division to the Fifth competency and reasonable fees.20
any matter in which he had intervened while in the
liquidation of GENBANK, which was subsequently Division.15 In its resolution dated July 11, 2001, the said service."

Page 55 of 132
The nineteenth century has been termed the "dark however, the bar association codes retained some the other hand, "congruent-interest recommended that the canons needed substantial
ages" of legal ethics in the United States. By mid- of the official imprimatur of the statutes and oaths. representation conflicts" are unique to revision, in part because the ABA Canons failed to
century, American legal reformers were filling the Over time, the bar association codes became government lawyers and apply primarily to former distinguish between "the inspirational and the
void in two ways. First, David Dudley Field, the extremely popular that states adopted them as government lawyers.27 For several years, the ABA proscriptive" and were thus unsuccessful in
drafter of the highly influential New York "Field binding rules of law. Critical to the development of attempted to correct and update the canons through enforcement. The legal profession in the United
Code," introduced a new set of uniform standards of the new codes was the re-emergence of bar new canons, individual amendments and States likewise observed that Canon 36 of the ABA
conduct for lawyers. This concise statement of eight associations themselves. Local bar associations interpretative opinions. In 1928, the ABA amended Canons of Professional Ethics resulted in
statutory duties became law in several states in the formed sporadically during the colonial period, but one canon and added thirteen new canons. 28 To deal unnecessary disqualification of lawyers for negligible
second half of the nineteenth century. At the same they disbanded by the early nineteenth century. In with problems peculiar to former government participation in matters during their employment with
time, legal educators, such as David Hoffman and the late nineteenth century, bar associations began lawyers, Canon 36 was minted which disqualified the government.
George Sharswood, and many other lawyers were to form again, picking up where their colonial them both for "adverse-interest conflicts" and
working to flesh out the broad outline of a lawyer's predecessors had left off. Many of the new bar "congruent-interest representation conflicts." 29 The The unfairness of Canon 36 compelled ABA to
duties. These reformers wrote about legal ethics in associations, most notably the Alabama State Bar rationale for disqualification is rooted in a concern replace it in the 1969 ABA Model Code of
unprecedented detail and thus brought a new level Association and the American Bar Association, that the government lawyer’s largely discretionary Professional Responsibility.33 The basic ethical
of understanding to a lawyer's duties. A number of assumed on the task of drafting substantive actions would be influenced by the temptation to principles in the Code of Professional Responsibility
mid-nineteenth century laws and statutes, other than standards of conduct for their members.22 take action on behalf of the government client that were supplemented by Disciplinary Rules that
the Field Code, governed lawyer behavior. A few later could be to the advantage of parties who might defined minimum rules of conduct to which the
forms of colonial regulations – e.g., the "do no In 1887, Alabama became the first state with a later become private practice clients. 30 Canon lawyer must adhere. 34 In the case of Canon 9, DR 9-
falsehood" oath and the deceit prohibitions -- comprehensive bar association code of ethics. The 36 provides, viz.: 101(b)35 became the applicable supplementary norm.
persisted in some states. Procedural law continued 1887 Alabama Code of Ethics was the model for The drafting committee reformulated the canons into
to directly, or indirectly, limit an attorney's litigation several states’ codes, and it was the foundation for 36. Retirement from judicial position or public the Model Code of Professional Responsibility, and,
behavior. The developing law of agency recognized the American Bar Association's (ABA) 1908 Canons employment in August of 1969, the ABA House of Delegates
basic duties of competence, loyalty and of Ethics.23 approved the Model Code.36
A lawyer should not accept employment as an
safeguarding of client property. Evidence law started
In 1917, the Philippine Bar found that the oath and advocate in any matter upon the merits of which he Despite these amendments, legal practitioners
to recognize with less equivocation the attorney-
duties of a lawyer were insufficient to attain the full has previously acted in a judicial capacity. remained unsatisfied with the results and indefinite
client privilege and its underlying theory of
measure of public respect to which the legal standards set forth by DR 9-101(b) and the Model
confidentiality. Thus, all of the core duties, with the A lawyer, having once held public office or
profession was entitled. In that year, the Philippine Code of Professional Responsibility as a
likely exception of service to the poor, had some having been in the public employ should not,
Bar Association adopted as its own, Canons 1 to 32 whole. Thus, in August 1983, the ABA adopted
basis in formal law. Yet, as in the colonial and early after his retirement, accept employment in
of the ABA Canons of Professional Ethics. 24 new Model Rules of Professional Responsibility.
post-revolutionary periods, these standards were connection with any matter he has investigated The Model Rules used the "restatement format,"
isolated and did not provide a comprehensive As early as 1924, some ABA members have or passed upon while in such office or employ. where the conduct standards were set-out in rules,
statement of a lawyer's duties. The reformers, by questioned the form and function of the canons. with comments following each rule. The new format
contrast, were more comprehensive in their Among their concerns was the "revolving door" or Over the next thirty years, the ABA continued to
was intended to give better guidance and clarity for
discussion of a lawyer's duties, and they actually "the process by which lawyers and others amend many of the canons and added Canons 46
enforcement "because the only enforceable
ushered a new era in American legal ethics.21 temporarily enter government service from private and 47 in 1933 and 1937, respectively.31
standards were the black letter Rules." The Model
life and then leave it for large fees in private practice, Rules eliminated the broad canons altogether and
Toward the end of the nineteenth century, a new In 1946, the Philippine Bar Association again
where they can exploit information, contacts, and reduced the emphasis on narrative discussion, by
form of ethical standards began to guide lawyers in adopted as its own Canons 33 to 47 of the ABA
influence garnered in government service." 25 These placing comments after the rules and limiting
their practice — the bar association code of legal Canons of Professional Ethics.32
concerns were classified as adverse-interest comment discussion to the content of the black
ethics. The bar codes were detailed ethical
conflicts" and "congruent-interest By the middle of the twentieth century, there was letter rules. The Model Rules made a number of
standards formulated by lawyers for lawyers. They
conflicts." "Adverse-interest conflicts" exist growing consensus that the ABA Canons needed substantive improvements particularly with regard to
combined the two primary sources of ethical
where the matter in which the former government more meaningful revision. In 1964, the ABA conflicts of interests.37 In particular, the ABA did
guidance from the nineteenth century. Like the
lawyer represents a client in private practice is President-elect Lewis Powell asked for the creation away with Canon 9, citing the hopeless
academic discourses, the bar association codes
substantially related to a matter that the lawyer dealt of a committee to study the "adequacy and dependence of the concept of impropriety on the
gave detail to the statutory statements of duty and
with while employed by the government and the effectiveness" of the ABA Canons. The committee
the oaths of office. Unlike the academic lectures,
interests of the current and former are adverse. 26 On

Page 56 of 132
subjective views of anxious clients as well as the lawyer on the "matter." The American Bar Immediately after said meeting, we had a Monetary Board, dated March 25, 1977, containing
norm’s indefinite nature.38 Association in its Formal Opinion 342, defined conference with the Solicitor General and he advised a report on the current situation of Genbank;
"matter" as any discrete, isolatable act as well as that the following procedure should be taken:
In cadence with these changes, the Integrated Bar identifiable transaction or conduct involving a 2. Aide Memoire on the Antecedent Facts Re:
of the Philippines (IBP) adopted a proposed particular situation and specific party, and not 1. Management should submit a memorandum to General Bank and Trust Co., dated March 23, 1977;
Code of Professional Responsibility in 1980 merely an act of drafting, enforcing or interpreting the Monetary Board reporting that studies and
which it submitted to this Court for approval. The evaluation had been made since the last 3. Memorandum of the Director, Department of
government or agency procedures, regulations or
Code was drafted to reflect the local customs, examination of the bank as of August 31, 1976 and it Commercial and Savings Bank, to the Monetary
laws, or briefing abstract principles of law.
traditions, and practices of the bar and to conform is believed that the bank can not be reorganized or Board, dated March 24, 1977, submitting, pursuant
with new realities. On June 21, 1988, this Court Firstly, it is critical that we pinpoint placed in a condition so that it may be permitted to to Section 29 of R.A. No. 265, as amended by P.D.
promulgated the Code of Professional the "matter" which was the subject of intervention resume business with safety to its depositors and No. 1007, a repot on the state of insolvency of
Responsibility.39 Rule 6.03 of the Code of by respondent Mendoza while he was the Solicitor creditors and the general public. Genbank, together with its attachments; and
Professional Responsibility deals particularly with General. The PCGG relates the following acts of
2. If the said report is confirmed by the Monetary 4. Such other documents as may be necessary or
former government lawyers, and provides, viz.: respondent Mendoza as constituting
Board, it shall order the liquidation of the bank and needed by the Solicitor General for his use in then
the "matter" where he intervened as a Solicitor
Rule 6.03 – A lawyer shall not, after leaving indicate the manner of its liquidation and approve a CFI-praying the assistance of the Court in the
General, viz:40
government service, accept engagement or liquidation plan. liquidation of Genbank.
employment in connection with any matter in which The PCGG’s Case for Atty. Mendoza’s
3. The Central Bank shall inform the principal Beyond doubt, therefore, the "matter" or the act of
he had intervened while in said service. Disqualification
stockholders of Genbank of the foregoing decision respondent Mendoza as Solicitor General involved in
Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility The PCGG imputes grave abuse of discretion on the to liquidate the bank and the liquidation plan the case at bar is "advising the Central Bank,
retained the general structure of paragraph 2, Canon part of the Sandiganbayan (Fifth Division) in issuing approved by the Monetary Board. on how to proceed with the said bank’s liquidation
36 of the Canons of Professional Ethics the assailed Resolutions dated July 11, 2001 and and even filing the petition for its liquidation with the
but replaced the expansive phrase "investigated December 5, 2001 denying the motion to disqualify 4. The Solicitor General shall then file a petition in CFI of Manila." In fine, the Court should resolve
and passed upon" with the word "intervened." It Atty. Mendoza as counsel for respondents Tan, et al. the Court of First Instance reciting the proceedings whether his act of advising the Central Bank on
is, therefore, properly applicable to both "adverse- The PCGG insists that Atty. Mendoza, as then which had been taken and praying the assistance of the legal procedure to liquidate GENBANK is
interest conflicts" and "congruent-interest Solicitor General, actively intervened in the closure the Court in the liquidation of Genbank. included within the concept of "matter" under Rule
conflicts." of GENBANK by advising the Central Bank on how 6.03. The procedure of liquidation is given in black
The PCGG further cites the Minutes No. 13 dated and white in Republic Act No. 265, section 29, viz:
to proceed with the said bank’s liquidation and even
The case at bar does not involve the "adverse March 29, 1977 of the Monetary Board where it was
filing the petition for its liquidation with the CFI of
interest" aspect of Rule 6.03. Respondent shown that Atty. Mendoza was furnished copies of The provision reads in part:
Manila.
Mendoza, it is conceded, has no adverse interest pertinent documents relating to GENBANK in order
to aid him in filing with the court the petition for SEC. 29. Proceedings upon insolvency. – Whenever,
problem when he acted as Solicitor General in Sp. As proof thereof, the PCGG cites the Memorandum
assistance in the bank’s liquidation. The pertinent upon examination by the head of the appropriate
Proc. No. 107812 and later as counsel of dated March 29, 1977 prepared by certain key
portion of the said minutes reads: supervising or examining department or his
respondents Tan, et al. in Civil Case No. 0005 and officials of the Central Bank, namely, then Senior
examiners or agents into the condition of any bank
Civil Case Nos. 0096-0099 before Deputy Governor Amado R. Brinas, then Deputy
The Board decided as follows: or non-bank financial intermediary performing quasi-
the Sandiganbayan. Nonetheless, there remains Governor Jaime C. Laya, then Deputy Governor and
banking functions, it shall be disclosed that the
the issue of whether there exists a "congruent- General Counsel Gabriel C. Singson, then Special ... condition of the same is one of insolvency, or that its
interest conflict"sufficient to disqualify respondent Assistant to the Governor Carlota P. Valenzuela,
continuance in business would involve probable loss
Mendoza from representing respondents Tan, et al. then Asistant to the Governor Arnulfo B. Aurellano E. To authorize Management to furnish the Solicitor
to its depositors or creditors, it shall be the duty of
and then Director of Department of Commercial and General with a copy of the subject memorandum of
I.B. The "congruent interest" aspect of Rule 6.03 the department head concerned forthwith, in writing,
Savings Bank Antonio T. Castro, Jr., where they the Director, Department of Commercial and
to inform the Monetary Board of the facts, and the
averred that on March 28, 1977, they had a Savings Bank dated March 29, 1977, together with
The key to unlock Rule 6.03 lies in comprehending Board may, upon finding the statements of the
conference with the Solicitor General (Atty. copies of:
first, the meaning of "matter" referred to in the rule department head to be true, forbid the institution to
Mendoza), who advised them on how to proceed
and, second, the metes and bounds of 1. Memorandum of the Deputy Governor, do business in the Philippines and shall designate an
with the liquidation of GENBANK. The pertinent
the "intervention" made by the former government Supervision and Examination Sector, to the official of the Central Bank or a person of recognized
portion of the said memorandum states:

Page 57 of 132
competence in banking or finance, as receiver to appropriate court to collect and recover accounts The appointment of a conservator under Section 28- is far removed from the issue of the dissolution and
immediately take charge of its assets and liabilities, and assets of such institution. A of this Act or the appointment of a receiver under liquidation of GENBANK. GENBANK was liquidated
as expeditiously as possible collect and gather all this Section shall be vested exclusively with the by the Central Bank due, among others, to the
the assets and administer the same for the benefit of The provisions of any law to the contrary Monetary Board, the provision of any law, general or alleged banking malpractices of its owners and
its creditors, exercising all the powers necessary for notwithstanding, the actions of the Monetary Board special, to the contrary notwithstanding. (As officers. In other words, the legality of the liquidation
these purposes including, but not limited to, bringing under this Section and the second paragraph of amended by PD Nos. 72, 1007, 1771 & 1827, Jan. of GENBANK is not an issue in the sequestration
suits and foreclosing mortgages in the name of the Section 34 of this Act shall be final and executory, 16, 1981) cases. Indeed, the jurisdiction of the PCGG does not
bank or non-bank financial intermediary performing and can be set aside by the court only if there is include the dissolution and liquidation of banks. It
quasi-banking functions. convincing proof that the action is plainly arbitrary We hold that this advice given by respondent goes without saying that Code 6.03 of the Code of
and made in bad faith. No restraining order or Mendoza on the procedure to liquidate GENBANK Professional Responsibility cannot apply to
... injunction shall be issued by the court enjoining the is not the "matter"contemplated by Rule 6.03 of respondent Mendoza because his alleged
Central Bank from implementing its actions under the Code of Professional Responsibility. ABA intervention while a Solicitor General in Sp. Proc.
If the Monetary Board shall determine and confirm this Section and the second paragraph of Section 34 Formal Opinion No. 342 is clear as daylight in No. 107812 is an intervention on a matter
within the said period that the bank or non-bank of this Act, unless there is convincing proof that the stressing that the "drafting, enforcing or different from the matter involved in Civil Case
financial intermediary performing quasi-banking action of the Monetary Board is plainly arbitrary and interpreting government or agency procedures, No. 0096.
functions is insolvent or cannot resume business made in bad faith and the petitioner or plaintiff files regulations or laws, or briefing abstract principles of
with safety to its depositors, creditors and the with the clerk or judge of the court in which the law" are acts which do not fall within the scope of Thirdly, we now slide to the metes and bounds of
general public, it shall, if the public interest requires, action is pending a bond executed in favor of the the term "matter" and cannot disqualify. the "intervention" contemplated by Rule 6.03.
order its liquidation, indicate the manner of its Central Bank, in an amount to be fixed by the court. "Intervene" means, viz.:
liquidation and approve a liquidation plan. The The restraining order or injunction shall be refused Secondly, it can even be conceded for the sake of
Central Bank shall, by the Solicitor General, file a or, if granted, shall be dissolved upon filing by the argument that the above act of respondent Mendoza 1: to enter or appear as an irrelevant or extraneous
petition in the Court of First Instance reciting the Central Bank of a bond, which shall be in the form of falls within the definition of matter per ABA Formal feature or circumstance . . . 2: to occur, fall, or come
proceedings which have been taken and praying the cash or Central Bank cashier(s) check, in an amount Opinion No. 342. Be that as it may, the said act of in between points of time or events . . . 3: to come in
assistance of the court in the liquidation of such twice the amount of the bond of the petitioner or respondent Mendoza which is the "matter" involved or between by way of hindrance or modification:
institution. The court shall have jurisdiction in the plaintiff conditioned that it will pay the damages in Sp. Proc. No. 107812 is entirely different from INTERPOSE . . . 4: to occur or lie between two
same proceedings to adjudicate disputed claims which the petitioner or plaintiff may suffer by the the "matter" involved in Civil Case No. 0096. Again, things (Paris, where the same city lay on both sides
against the bank or non-bank financial intermediary refusal or the dissolution of the injunction. The the plain facts speak for themselves. It is given that of an intervening river . . .)41
performing quasi-banking functions and enforce provisions of Rule 58 of the New Rules of Court respondent Mendoza had nothing to do with the
individual liabilities of the stockholders and do all decision of the Central Bank to liquidate GENBANK. On the other hand, "intervention" is defined as:
insofar as they are applicable and not inconsistent
that is necessary to preserve the assets of such with the provisions of this Section shall govern the It is also given that he did not participate in the sale
1: the act or fact of intervening: INTERPOSITION; 2:
institution and to implement the liquidation plan issuance and dissolution of the restraining order or of GENBANK to Allied Bank. The "matter" where
interference that may affect the interests of others. 42
approved by the Monetary Board. The Monetary injunction contemplated in this Section. he got himself involved was in informing Central
Board shall designate an official of the Central Bank, Bank on the procedure provided by law to liquidate There are, therefore, two possible interpretations of
or a person of recognized competence in banking or Insolvency, under this Act, shall be understood to GENBANK thru the courts and in filing the necessary the word "intervene." Under the first interpretation,
finance, as liquidator who shall take over the mean the inability of a bank or non-bank financial petition in Sp. Proc. No. 107812 in the then Court of "intervene" includes participation in a proceeding
functions of the receiver previously appointed by the intermediary performing quasi-banking functions to First Instance. The subject "matter" of Sp. Proc. even if the intervention is irrelevant or has no effect
Monetary Board under this Section. The liquidator pay its liabilities as they fall due in the usual and No. 107812, therefore, is not the same nor is or little influence. 43 Under the second
shall, with all convenient speed, convert the assets ordinary course of business. Provided, however, related to but is different from the subject interpretation, "intervene" only includes an act of a
of the banking institution or non-bank financial That this shall not include the inability to pay of an "matter" in Civil Case No. 0096. Civil Case No. person who has the power to influence the subject
intermediary performing quasi-banking functions to otherwise non-insolvent bank or non-bank financial 0096 involves the sequestration of the proceedings.44 We hold that this second meaning is
money or sell, assign or otherwise dispose of the intermediary performing quasi-banking functions stocks owned by respondents Tan, et al., in Allied more appropriate to give to the word "intervention"
same to creditors and other parties for the purpose caused by extraordinary demands induced by Bank on the alleged ground that they are ill-gotten. under Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional
of paying the debts of such institution and he may, financial panic commonly evidenced by a run on the The case does not involve the liquidation of Responsibility in light of its history. The evils sought
in the name of the bank or non-bank financial bank or non-bank financial intermediary performing GENBANK. Nor does it involve the sale of to be remedied by the Rule do not exist where the
intermediary performing quasi-banking functions, quasi-banking functions in the banking or financial GENBANK to Allied Bank. Whether the shares of government lawyer does an act which can be
institute such actions as may be necessary in the community. stock of the reorganized Allied Bank are ill-gotten considered as innocuous such as "x x x drafting,

Page 58 of 132
enforcing or interpreting government or agency II tactical use of motions to disqualify counsel in order official positions when he or she believes them to be
procedures, regulations or laws, or briefing abstract to delay proceedings, deprive the opposing party of in error, and resist illegal demands by superiors. An
principles of law." Balancing Policy Considerations counsel of its choice, and harass and embarrass the employee who lacks this assurance of private
opponent," and observed that the tactic was "so employment does not enjoy such freedom." 53 He
In fine, the intervention cannot be insubstantial To be sure, Rule 6.03 of our Code of Professional
prevalent in large civil cases in recent years as to adds: "Any system that affects the right to take a
and insignificant. Originally, Canon 36 provided Responsibility represents a commendable effort on
prompt frequent judicial and academic new job affects the ability to quit the old job and any
that a former government lawyer "should not, after the part of the IBP to upgrade the ethics of lawyers
commentary."48 Even the United States Supreme limit on the ability to quit inhibits official
his retirement, accept employment in connection in the government service. As aforestressed, it is a
Court found no quarrel with the Court of Appeals’ independence." 54 The case at bar involves the
with any matter which he has investigated or take-off from similar efforts especially by the ABA
description of disqualification motions as "a position of Solicitor General, the office once
passed upon while in such office or employ." As which have not been without difficulties. To date, the
dangerous game."49 In the case at bar, the new occupied by respondent Mendoza. It cannot be
aforediscussed, the broad sweep of the phrase legal profession in the United States is still fine
attempt to disqualify respondent Mendoza is overly stressed that the position of Solicitor
"which he has investigated or passed upon" resulted tuning its DR 9-101(b) rule.
difficult to divine. The disqualification of respondent General should be endowed with a great degree
in unjust disqualification of former government Mendoza has long been a dead issue. It was of independence. It is this independence that
In fathoming the depth and breadth of Rule 6.03 of
lawyers. The 1969 Code restricted its latitude, resuscitated after the lapse of many years and only allows the Solicitor General to recommend acquittal
our Code of Professional Responsibility, the Court
hence, in DR 9-101(b), the prohibition extended only after PCGG has lost many legal incidents in the of the innocent; it is this independence that gives
took account of various policy considerations to
to a matter in which the lawyer, while in the hands of respondent Mendoza. For a fact, the him the right to refuse to defend officials who violate
assure that its interpretation and application to the
government service, had "substantial recycled motion for disqualification in the case at the trust of their office. Any undue dimunition of the
case at bar will achieve its end without necessarily
responsibility." The 1983 Model Rules further bar was filed more than four years after the filing of independence of the Solicitor General will have a
prejudicing other values of equal importance. Thus,
constricted the reach of the rule. MR 1.11(a) the petitions for certiorari, prohibition and injunction corrosive effect on the rule of law.
the rule was not interpreted to cause a chilling
provides that "a lawyer shall not represent a private with the Supreme Court which were subsequently
effect on government recruitment of able legal
client in connection with a matter in which the remanded to the Sandiganbayan and docketed as No less significant a consideration is the
talent. At present, it is already difficult for
lawyer participated personally and Civil Case Nos. 0096-0099. 50 At the very least, the deprivation of the former government lawyer of
government to match compensation offered by the
substantially as a public officer or employee." circumstances under which the motion to disqualify the freedom to exercise his profession. Given the
private sector and it is unlikely that government will
in the case at bar were refiled put petitioner’s motive current state of our law, the disqualification of a
It is, however, alleged that the intervention of be able to reverse that situation. The observation is
as highly suspect. former government lawyer may extend to all
respondent Mendoza in Sp. Proc. No. 107812 is not inaccurate that the only card that the
members of his law firm.55 Former government
significant and substantial. We disagree. For one, government may play to recruit lawyers is have them
Similarly, the Court in interpreting Rule 6.03 was lawyers stand in danger of becoming the lepers of
the petition in the special proceedings is defer present income in return for the experience
not unconcerned with the prejudice to the the legal profession.
an initiatory pleading, hence, it has to be signed by and contacts that can later be exchanged for higher
client which will be caused by its misapplication. It
respondent Mendoza as the then sitting Solicitor income in private practice.45 Rightly, Judge Kaufman It is, however, proffered that the mischief sought to
cannot be doubted that granting a disqualification
General. For another, the record is arid as to warned that the sacrifice of entering government be remedied by Rule 6.03 of the Code of
motion causes the client to lose not only the law firm
the actual participation of respondent Mendoza in service would be too great for most men to endure Professional Responsibility is the possible
of choice, but probably an individual lawyer in whom
the subsequent proceedings. Indeed, the case was should ethical rules prevent them from engaging in appearance of impropriety and loss of public
the client has confidence. 51 The client with a
in slumberville for a long number of years. None of the practice of a technical specialty which they confidence in government. But as well observed, the
disqualified lawyer must start again often without the
the parties pushed for its early termination. devoted years in acquiring and cause the firm with accuracy of gauging public perceptions is a highly
benefit of the work done by the latter. 52 The effects
Moreover, we note that the petition filed merely which they become associated to be speculative exercise at best56 which can lead to
of this prejudice to the right to choose an effective
seeks the assistance of the court in the liquidation disqualified.46 Indeed, "to make government service untoward results.57 No less than Judge Kaufman
counsel cannot be overstated for it can result in
of GENBANK. The principal role of the court in this more difficult to exit can only make it less appealing doubts that the lessening of restrictions as to former
denial of due process.
type of proceedings is to assist the Central Bank in to enter."47 government attorneys will have any detrimental
determining claims of creditors against the The Court has to consider also the possible effect on that free flow of information between the
In interpreting Rule 6.03, the Court also cast a harsh
GENBANK. The role of the court is not strictly as a adverse effect of a truncated reading of the rule government-client and its attorneys which the
eye on its use as a litigation tactic to harass
court of justice but as an agent to assist the Central on the official independence of lawyers in the canons seek to protect.58 Notably, the appearance
opposing counsel as well as deprive his client of
Bank in determining the claims of creditors. In such government service. According to Prof. Morgan: of impropriety theory has been rejected in the
competent legal representation. The danger that the
a proceeding, the participation of the Office of the "An individual who has the security of knowing he or 1983 ABA Model Rules of Professional
rule will be misused to bludgeon an opposing
Solicitor General is not that of the usual court she can find private employment upon leaving the Conduct59 and some courts have
counsel is not a mere guesswork. The Court of
litigator protecting the interest of government. government is free to work vigorously, challenge abandoned per sedisqualification based on Canons
Appeals for the District of Columbia has noted "the

Page 59 of 132
4 and 9 when an actual conflict of interest exists, occur during the period of employment through the Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
and demand an evaluation of the interests of the dampening of aggressive administration of should be subject to a prescriptive period. Mr.
defendant, government, the witnesses in the case, government policies."63 Prof. Morgan, however, Justice Tinga opines that the rule cannot apply
and the public.60 considers this concern as "probably excessive." 64 He retroactively to respondent Mendoza. Obviously,
opines "x x x it is hard to imagine that a private firm and rightly so, they are disquieted by the fact that (1)
It is also submitted that the Court should apply Rule would feel secure hiding someone who had just when respondent Mendoza was the Solicitor
6.03 in all its strictness for it correctly disfavors been disloyal to his or her last client – the General, Rule 6.03 has not yet adopted by the IBP
lawyers who "switch sides." It is claimed that government. Interviews with lawyers consistently and approved by this Court, and (2) the bid to
"switching sides" carries the danger that former confirm that law firms want the ‘best’ government disqualify respondent Mendoza was made after the
government employee may compromise lawyers – the ones who were hardest to beat – not lapse of time whose length cannot, by any standard,
confidential official information in the process. But the least qualified or least vigorous advocates." 65 But qualify as reasonable. At bottom, the point they
this concern does not cast a shadow in the case at again, this particular concern is a non factor in make relates to the unfairness of the rule if applied
bar. As afore-discussed, the act of respondent the case at bar. There is no charge against without any prescriptive period and retroactively, at
Mendoza in informing the Central Bank on the respondent Mendoza that he advised Central Bank that. Their concern is legitimate and deserves to be
procedure how to liquidate GENBANK is a different on how to liquidate GENBANK with an eye in later initially addressed by the IBP and our Committee on
matter from the subject matter of Civil Case No. defending respondents Tan, et al. of Allied Bank. Revision of the Rules of Court.
0005 which is about the sequestration of the shares Indeed, he continues defending both the interests of
of respondents Tan, et al., in Allied Bank. Central Bank and respondents Tan, et al. in the IN VIEW WHEREOF, the petition assailing the
Consequently, the danger that confidential official above cases. resolutions dated July 11, 2001 and December 5,
information might be divulged is nil, if not inexistent. 2001 of the Fifth Division of the Sandiganbayan in
To be sure, there are no inconsistent "sides" to be Likewise, the Court is nudged to consider the need Civil Case Nos. 0096-0099 is denied.
bothered about in the case at bar. For there is no to curtail what is perceived as the "excessive
question that in lawyering for respondents Tan, et influence of former officials" or their No cost.
al., respondent Mendoza is not working against the "clout."66 Prof. Morgan again warns against
SO ORDERED.
interest of Central Bank. On the contrary, he is extending this concern too far. He explains the
indirectly defending the validity of the action of rationale for his warning, viz: "Much of what appears
Central Bank in liquidating GENBANK and selling it to be an employee’s influence may actually be the
later to Allied Bank. Their interests coincide power or authority of his or her position, power that
instead of colliding. It is for this reason that Central evaporates quickly upon departure from government
Bank offered no objection to the lawyering of x x x."67 More, he contends that the concern can
respondent Mendoza in Civil Case No. 0005 in be demeaning to those sitting in government. To
defense of respondents Tan, et al. There is no quote him further: "x x x The idea that, present
switching of sides for no two sides are involved. officials make significant decisions based on
friendship rather than on the merit says more about
It is also urged that the Court should consider that the present officials than about their former co-
Rule 6.03 is intended to avoid conflict of worker friends. It implies a lack of will or talent, or
loyalties, i.e., that a government employee might be both, in federal officials that does not seem justified
subject to a conflict of loyalties while still in or intended, and it ignores the possibility that the
government service.61 The example given by the officials will tend to disfavor their friends in order to
proponents of this argument is that a lawyer who avoid even the appearance of favoritism."68
plans to work for the company that he or she is
currently charged with prosecuting might be III
tempted to prosecute less vigorously. 62 In the
cautionary words of the Association of the Bar The question of fairness
Committee in 1960: "The greatest public risks
Mr. Justices Panganiban and Carpio are of the view,
arising from post employment conduct may well
among others, that the congruent interest prong of

Page 60 of 132
REPUBLIC ACT No. 6397 Court en banc, exercising its power of supervision absence by her husband, the Labor Secretary)
over the Integrated Bar, resolved to suspend the campaigning for her. Jurado's informants alleged
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE INTEGRATION OF oath-taking of the IBP officers-elect and to inquire that there was rampant vote-buying by some
THE PHILIPPINE BAR, AND APPROPRIATING into the veracity of the reports. members of the U.P. Sigma Rho Fraternity
FUNDS THEREFOR. (Secretary Drilon's fraternity), as well as by some
It should be stated at the outset that the election lawyers of ACCRA (Angara, Concepcion, Cruz,
Section 1. Within two years from the approval of process itself (i.e. the voting and the canvassing of Regala and Abello Law Office) where Mrs. Drilon is
this Act, the Supreme Court may adopt rules of votes on June 3, 1989) which was conducted by the employed, and that government positions were
court to effect the integration of the Philippine Bar "IBP Comelec," headed by Justice Reynato Puno of promised to others by the office of the Labor
under such conditions as it shall see fit in order to the Court of Appeals, was unanimously adjudged by Secretary.
raise the standards of the legal profession, improve the participants and observers to be above board.
the administration of justice, and enable the bar to For Justice Puno took it upon himself to device Mr. Mauricio in his column wrote about the same
discharge its public responsibility more effectively. safeguards to prevent tampering with, and marking matters and, in addition, mentioned "talk of
of, the ballots. personnel of the Department of Labor, especially
Section 2. The sum of five hundred thousand pesos
conciliators and employers, notably Chinese
is hereby appropriated, out of any funds in the What the Court viewed with considerable concern Filipinos, giving aid and comfort to her (Atty. Drilon's)
National Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to was the reported electioneering and extravagance candidacy," the billeting of out-of-town delegates in
carry out the purposes of this Act. Thereafter, such that characterized the campaign conducted by the plush hotels where they were reportedly "wined and
sums as may be necessary for the same purpose three candidates for president of the IBP. dined continuously, womened and subjected to
shall be included in the annual appropriations for the
endless haggling over the price of their votes x x x"
Supreme Court. I. MEDIA ACCOUNT OF THE ELECTION
which allegedly "ranged from Pl5,000 to P20,000,
CAMPAIGN.
Section 3. This Act shall take effect upon its and, on the day of the election, some twelve to
approval. Emil Jurado, in his column "IBP Group Questions twenty votes which were believed crucial,
Drilon Election" (Manila Standard, Sunday, June 17, appreciated to P50,000."
Approved: September 17, 1971 1989), Luis Mauricio, in two successive columns:
In his second column, Mr. Mauricio mentioned "how
"The Invertebrated Bar" (Malaya, June 10, 1989) and
A.M. No. 491 October 6, 1989 a top official of the judiciary allegedly involved
"The Disintegrating Bar" (Malaya, June 20, 1989),
himself in IBP politics on election day by closeting
IN THE MATTER OF THE INQUIRY INTO THE and Teodoro Locsin Jr. in an article, entitled "Pam-
himself with campaigners as they plotted their
1989 ELECTIONS OF THE INTEGRATED BAR OF Pam" (The Philippines Free Press, July 8,1989), and
election strategy in a room of the PICC (the
THE PHILIPPINES. the editorial, entitled 'Wrong Forum" of the Daily
The newly-elected officers were set to take the their Philippine International Convention Center where the
Globe (June 8, 1989), were unanimously critical of
oath of office on July 4,1989, before the Supreme convention/election were held) during a recess x x
PER CURIAM: the "vote-buying and pressure tactics" allegedly
Court en banc. However,disturbed by the x."
employed in the campaign by the three principal
In the election of the national officers of the widespread reports received by some members of candidates: Attys. Violeta C. Drilon, Nereo Paculdo Mr. Locsin in his column and editorial substantially
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (hereafter "IBP") the Court from lawyers who had witnessed or and Ramon Nisce who reportedly "poured heart, re-echoed Mauricio's reports with some
held on June 3, 1989 at the Philippine International participated in the proceedings and the adverse soul, money and influence to win over the 120 IBP embellishments.
Convention Center (or PICC), the following were comments published in the columns of some delegates."
elected by the House of Delegates (composed of newspapers about the intensive electioneering and II. THE COURT'S DECISION TO INVESTIGATE.
120 chapter presidents or their alternates) and overspending by the candidates, led by the main Mr. Jurado mentioned the resentment of Atty.
proclaimed as officers: protagonists for the office of president of the Drilon's rivals who felt at a disadvantage because Responding to the critical reports, the Court, in
association, namely, Attorneys Nereo Paculdo, Atty. Drilon allegedly used PNB helicopters to visit its en banc resolution dated June 15, 1989, directed
Ramon Nisce, and Violeta C. Drilon, the alleged use far-flung IBP chapters on the pretext of distributing the outgoing and incoming members of the IBP
of government planes, and the officious intervention Bigay Puso donations, and she had the added Board of Governors, the principal officers and
of certain public officials to influence the voting, all advantage of having regional directors and labor Chairman of the House of Delegates to appear
of which were done in violation of the IBP By-Laws arbiters of the Department of Labor and before it on Tuesday, June 20, 1989, at 2:00 o'clock
which prohibit such activities. The Supreme Employment (who had been granted leaves of p.m., and there to inform the Court on the veracity of

Page 61 of 132
the aforementioned reports and to recommend, for Sarmiento, and Carolina C. Griño-Aquino, as Article I, Section 4 of the IBP By-Laws emphasizes prosecutory office in the Government or any political
the consideration of the Court, appropriate members, to conduct the inquiry. The Clerk of Court, the "strictly non-political" character of the Integrated subdivision, agency or instrumentality thereof;
approaches to the problem of confirming and Atty. Daniel Martinez, acted as the committee's Bar of the Philippines, thus:
strengthening adherence to the fundamental Recording Secretary. (d) Formation of tickets, single slates, or
principles of the IBP. "SEC. 4. Non-political Bar. — The Integrated Bar is combinations of candidates, as well as the
A total of forty-nine (49) witnesses appeared and strictly non-political, and every activity tending to advertisement thereof;
In that resolution the Court "call[ed] to mind that a testified in response to subpoenas issued by the impair this basic feature is strictly prohibited and
basic postulate of the Integrated Bar of the Court to shed light on the conduct of the elections. shall be penalized accordingly. No lawyer holding an (e) For the purpose of inducing or influencing a
Philippines (IBP), heavily stressed at the time of its The managers of three five-star hotels the Philippine elective, judicial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office member to withhold his vote, or to vote for or
organization and commencement of existence, is Plaza, the Hyatt, and the Holiday Inn where the three in the Government or any political subdivision or against a candidate, (1) payment of the dues or other
that the IBP shall be non-political in character and protagonists (Drilon, Nisce and Paculdo) allegedly instrumentality thereof shall be eligible for election or indebtedness of any member; (2) giving of food,
that there shall be no lobbying nor campaigning in set up their respective headquarters and where they appointment to any position in the Integrated Bar or drink, entertainment, transportation or any article of
the choice of members of the Board of Governors billeted their supporters were summoned. The any Chapter thereof. A Delegate, Governor, officer or value, or any similar consideration to any person; or
and of the House of Delegates, and of the IBP officer of the Philippine National Bank and the Air employee of the Integrated Bar, or an officer or (3) making a promise or causing an expenditure to
officers, national, or regional, or chapter. The Transport Office were called to enlighten the Court employee of any Chapter thereof shall be be made, offered or promised to any person."
fundamental assumption was that officers, delegates on the charge that an IBP presidential candidate and considered ipso facto  resigned from his position as
Section 12(d) of the By-Laws prescribes sanctions
and governors would be chosen on the basis of the members of her slate used PNB planes to ferry of the moment he files his certificate of candidacy
for violations of the above rules:
professional merit and willingness and ability to them to distant places in their campaign to win the for any elective public office or accepts appointment
serve." votes of delegates. The Philippine Airlines officials to any judicial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office in (d) Any violation of the rules governing elections or
were called to testify on the charge that some the Government or any political subdivision or commission of any of the prohibited acts and
The resolution went on to say that the "Court is candidates gave free air fares to delegates to the instrumentality thereof. "' practices defined in Section 14 prohibited Acts and
deeply disturbed to note that in connection with the convention. Officials of the Labor Department were Practices relative to elections) of the by-laws of the
election of members of the Board of Governors and also called to enable the Court to ascertain the truth Section 14 of the same By-Laws enumerates the
Integrated Bar shall be a ground for the
of the House of Delegates, there is a widespread of the reports that labor officials openly campaigned prohibited acts relative to IBP elections:
disqualification of a candidate or his removal from
belief, based on reports carried by media and or worked for the election of Atty. Drilon.
SEC. 14. Prohibited acts and practices relative to office if elected, without prejudice to the imposition
transmitted as well by word of mouth, that there was
elections. — The following acts and practices of sanctions upon any erring member pursuant to
extensive and intensive campaigning by candidates The newspaper columnists, Messrs. Luis Mauricio,
relative to election are prohibited, whether the By-laws of the Integrated Bar.
for IBP positions as well as expenditure of Jesus Bigornia and Emil Jurado were subpoenaed to
considerable sums of money by candidates, determine the nature of their sources of information committed by a candidate for any elective office in
At the formal investigation which was conducted by
including vote-buying, direct or indirect." relative to the IBP elections. Their stories were the Integrated Bar or by any other member, directly
the investigating committee, the following violations
based, they said, on letters, phone calls and or indirectly, in any form or manner, by himself or
were established:
The venerable retired Supreme Court Justice and personal interviews with persons who claimed to through another person:
IBP President Emeritus, Jose B.L. Reyes, attended have knowledge of the facts, but whom they, (1) Prohibited campaigning and solicitation of votes
the dialogue, upon invitation of the Court, to give (a) Distribution, except on election day, of election
invoking the Press Freedom Law, refused to identify. by the candidates for president, executive vice-
counsel and advice. The meeting between the campaign material;
president, the officers of candidate the House of
Court en banc on the one hand, and the outgoing The Committee has since submitted its Report after Delegates and Board of Governors.
(b) Distribution, on election day, of election
and in coming IBP officers on the other, was an receiving, and analyzing and assessing evidence
campaign material other than a statement of the
informal one. Thereafter, the Court resolved to given by such persons as were perceived to have The three candidates for IBP President Drilon, Nisce
biodata of a candidate on not more than one page of
conduct a formal inquiry to determine whether the direct and personal knowledge of the relevant facts; and Paculdo began travelling around the country to
a legal-size sheet of paper; or causing distribution of
prohibited acts and activities enumerated in the IBP and the Court, after deliberating thereon, has solicit the votes of delegates as early as April 1989.
such statement to be done by persons other than
By-Laws were committed before and during the Resolved to accept and adopt the same. Upon the invitation of IBP President, Leon Garcia, Jr.
those authorized by the officer presiding at the
1989 elections of IBP's national officers. (t.s.n., July 13,1989, p. 4), they attended the Bench
III. PROHIBITED ACTS AND PRACTICES UNDER elections;
and Bar dialogues held in Cotabato in April 1989
The Court en banc formed a committee and IBP BY-LAWS. (t.s.n., June 29, 1989, p. 123), in Tagaytay City,
(c) Campaigning for or against any candidate, while
designated Senior Associate Justice Andres R. Pampanga, and in Baguio City (during the
holding an elective, judicial, quasi-judicial or
Narvasa, as Chairman, and Associate Justices conference of chapter presidents of Northern Luzon
Teodoro R. Padilla, Emilio A. Gancayco, Abraham F. (t.s.n., July 3,1989, p. 113; t.s.n., July 10, p. 41;

Page 62 of 132
t.s.n., July 13, p. 47) where they announced their Jose S. Buban, Diosdado Z. Reloj, Jr., Cesar C. Fulgencio Factoran and that he would be taking a The Drilon ticket consisted of. Violeta C. Drilon for
candidacies and met the chapter presidents. Viola, Oscar C. Fernandez, Ricardo B. Teruel PNB plane. As Assistant Secretary Tria is his President, Arturo Tiu for Executive Vice President,
Rodrigo R. Flores, Sixto Marella, Jr., Arsenio C. fraternity brother, he asked if he, together with the Salvador Lao for Chairman of the House of
Atty. Nisce admitted that he went around the Villalon, Renato F. Ronquillo, Antonio G. Nalapo Drilon group, could hitch a ride on the plane to Bicol. Delegates, and, for Governors: Basil Rupisan
country seeking the help of IBP chapter officers, Romualdo A. Din Jr., Jose P. Icaonapo Jr., and His request was granted. Their purpose in going to (Northern 'Luzon), Acong Atienza (Central Luzon),
soliciting their votes, and securing their written Manuel S. Person. Bicol was to assess their chances in the IBP Amy Wong (Metro Manila), Jose Grapilon (Southern
endorsements. He personally hand-carried elections. The Drilon company talked with the IBP Tagalog), Teodoro Almine (Bicolandia), Baldomero
nomination forms and requested the chapter Atty. Nisce admitted that he reserved rooms at the chapter presidents in Daet, Naga, and Legaspi, and Estenzo (Eastern Visayas), Joelito Barrera (Western
presidents and delegates to fill up and sign the Hyatt Hotel based on the commitments he had asked for their support (t.s.n., July 10, 1989, pp. Visayas), Gladys Tiongco (Eastern Mindanao),
forms to formalize their commitment to his obtained (t.s.n., June 29, 1989, pp. 82-85). 549). Simeon Datumanong (Western Mindanao) (Exhibit
nomination for IBP President. He started Unfortunately, despite those formal commitments, M-1-Nisce).
campaigning and distributing the nomination forms he obtained only 14 votes in the election (t.s.n., June Assistant Secretary Antonio S. Tria confirmed the
in March 1989 after the chapter elections which 29, 1 989, p. 86). The reason, he said, is that. some use of a PNB plane by Atty. Drilon and her group. He Atty. Ramon N. Nisce's line-up listed himself and
determined the membership of the House of of those who had committed their votes to him were recalled that on May 23,1989, DENR Secretary Confessor B. Sansano Benjamin B. Bernardino,
Delegates composed of the 120 chapter presidents "manipulated, intimidated, pressured, or Factoran instructed him to go to Bicol to monitor Antonio L. Nalapo Renato F. Ronquillo, Gloria C.
(t.s.n., June 29, 1989, pp. 82-86). He obtained forty remunerated" (t.s.n., June 29,1989, pp. 8695; Exhibit certain regional development projects there and to Agunos, Mario Valderrama, Candido P. Balbin Jr.,
(40) commitments. He submitted photocopies of his "M-4-Nisce," t.s.n., July 4, 1989, pp. 100-1 04). survey the effect of the typhoon that hit the region in Oscar C. Fernandez, Cesar G. Viola, Leo C.
nomination forms which read: the middle of May. On the same day, Atty. Tiu, a Medialdea, Jr., Vicente P. Tordilla, Jr., Jose S.
(2) Use of PNB plane in the campaign. fraternity brother (meaning that Tiu belongs to the Buban, Joel A. Llosa, Jesus T. Albacite and Oscar V.
"Nomination Form Sigma Rho fraternity) went to the DENR office and Badelles.
The records of the Philippine National Bank (Exhibit
requested the Secretary (Factoran) if he (Tiu) could
C-1-Crudo and Exhibit C-2-Crudo) show that (4) Giving free transportation to out-of-town
be allowed to hitch a ride on the plane. Assistant
Secretary Fulgencio S. Factoran, Jr. of the delegates and alternates.
I Join in Nominating Secretary Tria, together with the Drilon group which
Department of Environment & Natural Resources
included Attorneys Drilon, Grapilon, Amy Wong,
(DENR) borrowed a plane from the Philippine Atty. Nisce admitted having bought plane tickets for
RAMON M. NISCE Gladys Tiongco, and Tiu, took off at the Domestic
National Bank for his Bicol CORD (Cabinet Officers some delegates to the convention. He mentioned
Airport bound for Naga, Daet and Legaspi. In
as for Regional Development) Assistant, Oscar Badelles to whom he gave four round-trip
Legaspi the Drilon group had lunch with Atty.
Undersecretary Antonio Tria. The plane manifest tickets (worth about P10,000) from Iligan City to
Vicente Real, Jr., an IBP chapter president (t.s.n.,
National President of the (Exh. C-2-Crudo) listed Atty. Violeta Drilon, Arturo Manila and back. Badelles was a voting delegate.
July 10, 1989, pp. 54-69).
Tusi (Tiu), Assistant Secretary for Environment and Nisce, however, failed to get a written commitment
Integrated Bar of the Philippines Natural Resources (DENR) Tony Tria, Atty. Gladys from him because Atty. Medialdea assured him
(3) Formation of tickets and single slates.
Tiongco, and Amy Wong. Except for Tony Tria, the (Nisce) "sigurado na 'yan, h'wag mo nang
______________ _______________
rest of the passengers were IBP candidates. The three candidates, Paculdo, Nisce and Drilon, papirmahin." Badelles won as sergeant-at-arms, not
Chapter Signature" admitted having formed their own slates for the in Nisce's ticket, but in that of Drilon.
Atty. Drilon admitted that she "hitched" a ride on a election of IBP national officers on June 3, 1989.
Among those who signed the nomination forms PNB plane. She said that she was informed by Atty. Badelles admitted that Nisce sent him three airplane
were: Onofre P. Tejada, Candido P. Balbin, Jr., Tiu about the availability of a PNB plane (t.s.n., July Atty. Paculdo's slate consisted of — himself for tickets, but he Badelles said that he did not use
Conizado V. Posadas, Quirico L. Quirico Ernesto S. 3,1989, pp. 116-118). President; Bella D. Tiro, for Executive Vice- them, because if he did, he would be committed to
Salun-at, Gloria C. Agunos, Oscar B. Bernardo, President; and for Governors: Justiniano P. Cortez Nisce, and he Badelles did not want to be
Atty. Tiu, who ran for the position of IBP executive (Northern Luzon), Oscar C. Fernandez (Central committed (t.s.n., July 4,1989, pp. 77-79, 95-96).
Feliciano F. Wycoco, Amor L. Ibarra, Jose M.
vice-president in the Drilon ticket, testified that Luzon), Mario C.V. Jalandoni (Greater Manila),
Atienza, Jose N. Contreras, Romeo T. Mendoza, Leo
sometime in May 1989 he failed to obtain booking Petronilo A. de la Cruz (Southern Luzon), Teodorico Nisce also sent a plane ticket to Atty. Atilano, who
C. Medialdea, Jr., Paulino G. Clarin, Julius Z. Neil,
from the Philippine Airlines for the projected trip of C. Almine, Jr. (Bicolandia), Ricardo B. Teruel was his candidate, and another ticket to Mrs. Linda
Roem J. Arbolado Democrito M. Perez, Abelardo
his group to Bicol. He went to the DENR allegedly to (Western Visayas), Porfirio P. Siyangco (Eastern Lim of Zamboanga. Records of the Philippine
Fermin, Diosdado B. Villarin, Jr., Daniel C.
follow up some papers for a client. While at the Visayas), Jesus S. Anonat (Western Mindanao), Airlines showed that Atty. Nisce paid for the plane
Macaraeg, Confesor R. Sansano Dionisio E. Bala,
DENR, he learned that Assistant Secretary Tria was Guerrero A. Adaza, Jr. (Eastern Mindanao) (Exhibit tickets of Vicente Real, Jr. (Exh. D-1-Calica), Romeo
Jr., Emesto A. Amores, Romeo V. Pefianco, Augurio
going on an official business in Bicol for Secretary M-Nisce). Fortes (Exh. D-1-Calica), Cesar Batica (Exh. D-2-
C. Pamintuan, Atlee T. Viray, Ceferino C. Cabanas,

Page 63 of 132
Calica), Jose Buban of Leyte (Exh. D-2-Calica), rooms, including the presidential suite, which was Teodoro Palma, Gil Palma, Danilo Deen, Delsanto,
Delsanto Resuello (Exh. D-3- Calica), and Ceferino used as the Secretariat. The group bookings were Resuello, Araneta, Vicente Real, Sylvio Casuncad
Cabanas (Exh. D-3-Calica). made by Atty. Gloria Paculdo, the wife of Nereo Espina, Guerrero, Julius Neri, Linda Lim, Ben Lim, C.
Paculdo (t.s.n. June 28, 1989, pp. 63-68). The total Batica, Luis Formilleza, Felix Macalag Mariano
In spite of his efforts and expense, only one of sum of P227,114.89 was paid to Holiday Inn for the Benedicto, Atilano, Araneta, Renato Callanta.
Nisce's candidates won: Renato Ronquillo of Manila use of the rooms.
4, as Secretary of the House of Delegates (t.s.n. July Atty. Nilo Pena admitted that the Quasha Law Office
3, p. 161). (b) ATTY. VIOLETA C. DRILON of which he is a senior partner, gave P25,000 to
Callanta for rooms at the Philippine Plaza so that
(5) Giving free hotel accommodations, food, drinks, The delegates and supporters of Atty. Drilon were some members of his law firm could campaign for
entertainment to delegates. billeted at the Philippine Plaza Hotel where her the Drilon group (t.s.n. July 5,1989, pp. 7678) during
campaign manager, Atty. Renato Callanta, booked the legal aid seminar and the IBP convention. Most
(a) ATTY. NEREO PACULDO 40 rooms, 5 of which were suites. According to Ms. of the members of his law firm are fraternity brothers
Villanueva, Philippine Plaza banquet and of Secretary Drilon (meaning, members of the Sigma
Atty. Paculdo alleged that he booked 24 regular
conventions manager, the contract that Atty. Rho Fraternity). He admitted being sympathetic to
rooms and three suites at the Holiday Inn, which
Callanta signed with the Philippine Plaza was made the candidacy of Atty. Drilon and the members of
served as his headquarters. The 24 rooms were to
in the name of the "IBP c/o Atty. Callanta." her slate, two of whom Jose Grapilon and Simeon
be occupied by his staff (mostly ladies) and the IBP
delegates. The three suites were to be occupied by Datumanong — are Sigma Rhoans. They consider
Mrs. Lourdes Juco, a sales manager of the
himself, the officers of the Capitol Bar Association, (t.s.n. July 4, 1 989, pp. 3-4) Atty. Drilon as a "sigma rho sister," her husband
Philippine Plaza, recalled that it was Mr. Mariano
and Atty. Mario Jalandoni. He paid P150,000 for the being a sigma rhoan.
Benedicto who first came to book rooms for the IBP Atty. Callanta explained that the above listed
hotel bills of his delegates at the Holiday Inn, where delegates. She suggested that he obtain a group (or persons have been contributing money every time Atty. Antonio Carpio, also a Sigma Rhoan, reserved
a room cost P990 per day with breakfast. discounted) rate. He gave her the name of Atty. the IBP embarks on a project. This time, they a room for the members of his own firm who
Callanta who would make the arrangements with contributed so that their partners or associates attended the legal aid seminar and the convention.
Those listed as guests of Atty. Paculdo at the
her. Mr. Benedicto turned out to be the Assistant could attend the legal aid seminar and the IBP He made the reservation through Atty. Callanta to
Holiday Inn were: Emesto C. Perez, Tolomeo Ligutan
Secretary of the Department of Labor and convention too. whom he paid P20,000 (t.s.n. July 6,1989, pp. 30-
Judge Alfonso Combong, Ricardo Caliwag, Antonio
Employment (DOLE). 34).
Bisnar, Benedicto Balajadia, Jesus Castro, Restituto
Atty. Drilon alleged that she did not know that Atty.
Villanueva, Serapio Cribe Juanita Subia, Teodorico The total sum of P316,411.53 was paid by Atty. Callanta had billeted her delegates at the Philippine Atty. Carpio assisted Atty. Drilon in her campaign
J. Almine, Rudy Gumban, Roem Arbolado, Ricardo Callanta for the rooms, food, and beverages Plaza. She allegedly did not also know in whose during the convention, by soliciting the votes of
Teruel, Shirley Moises, Ramon Roco, Alberto consumed by the Drilon group, with an unpaid name the room she occupied was registered. But delegates he knew, like Atty. Albacite his former
Trinidad, Teodoro Quicoy Manito Lucero, Fred balance of P302,197.30. Per Attorney Daniel she did ask for a room where she could rest during teacher (but the latter was already committed to
Cledera Vicente Tordilla, Julian Ocampo, Francisco Martinez's last telephone conversation with Ms. the convention. She admitted, however, that she Nisce), and Atty. Romy Fortes, a classmate of his in
Felizmenio Marvel Clavecilla, Amador Capiral, Villanueva, Atty. Callanta still has an outstanding paid for her hotel room and meals to Atty. Callanta, the U.P. College of Law (t. t.s.n. July 6, 1989, pp. 22,
Eufronio Maristela, Porfirio Siyangco, William Llanes, account of P232,782.65 at Philippine Plaza. through Atty. Loanzon (t.s.n. July 3,1989). 29, 39).
Jr., Marciano Neri, Guerrero Adaza, Diosdado
Peralta, Luis C. Formilleza, Jr., Democrito Perez, Atty. Callanta admitted that he signed the contract The following were listed as having occupied the (c) ATTY. RAMON NISCE.
Bruno Flores, Dennis Rendon, Judge Ceferino Chan, for 40 rooms at the Philippine Plaza. He made a rooms reserved by Atty. Callanta at the Philippine
Mario Jalandoni, Kenneth Siruelo Bella Tiro, Antonio downpayment of P123,000. His "working sheet' Plaza: Violeta Drilon, Victoria A. Verciles, Victoria C. Atty. Nisce, through his brother-in-law, Ricardo
Santos, Tiburcio Edano James Tan, Cesilo A. Adaza, showed that the following persons contributed for Loanzon, Leopoldo A. Consulto Ador Lao, Victoria Paras, entered into a contract with the Hyatt Hotel
Francisco Roxas, Angelita Gacutan, Jesse Pimentel, that down payment: Borra, Aimee Wong, Callanta, Pena, Tiu, Gallardo, for a total of 29 rooms plus one (1) seventh-floor
Judge Jaime Hamoy, Jesus Anonat, Carlos Egay, Acong Atienza, D. Bernardo, Amores, Silao Caingat, room. He made a downpayment of P20,000 (t.s.n.
Judge Carlito Eisma, Judge Jesus Carbon, Joven Manuel Yuson, Simeon Datumanong, Manuel June 28, 1989, p. 58) on April 20, 1989, and
Zach, and Benjamin Padon. Pecson, Sixto Marella, Joselito Barrera, Radon P37,632.45 on May 10, or a total of P57,632.45.
Macalalag, Oscar Badelles, Antonio Acyatan,
Noel de Guzman, Holiday Inn's credit manager, Ms. Cecile Flores, Ms. Milagros Ocampo, and Mr.
Ildefonso C. Puerto, Nestor Atienza, Gil Batula Array
testified that Atty. Paculdo booked 52 (not 24) Ramon Jacinto, the sales department manager,
Corot, Dimakuta Corot Romeo Fortes Irving Petilla,

Page 64 of 132
credit manager, and reservation manager, weaknesses of the other groups The group had as, the lists of his slate. Attys. Drilon and Nisce available for her. Atty. Paculdo also tried to enlist her
respectively of the Hyatt, testified that Atty. Nisce's sessions as early as the later part of May. similarly distributed their tickets and bio-data. support during the chapter presidents' meeting to
bill amounted to P216,127.74 (t.s.n. June 28, 1989, choose their nominee for governor for the Northern
pp. 57-58; Exhibits E-Flores, F-Jacinto G-Ocampo). Room 114, the suite listed in the name of Assistant The campaign materials of Atty. Paculdo cost from Luzon region (t.s.n. July 13,1989, pp. 43-54).
Secretary Benedicto toted up a bill of P23,110 P15,000 to P20,000. They were printed by his own
As earlier mentioned, Atty. Nisce admitted that he during the 2-day IBP convention/election. A total of printing shop. Atty. Nisce testified that a Manila Chapter 4
reserved rooms for those who committed 113 phone calls (amounting to Pl,356) were delegate, Marcial Magsino, who had earlier
themselves to his candidacy. recorded as emanating from his room. (9) Causing distribution of such statement to be committed his vote to Nisce changed his mind when
done by persons other than those authorized by the he was offered a judgeship (This statement,
The hotel guests of Atty. Nisce were: Gloria Agunos Opposite Room 114, was Room 112, also a suite, officer presiding at the election (Sec. 14[b], IBP By- however, is admittedly hearsay). When Nisce
Dennis Habanel B. Batula, John E. Asuncion, listed in the names of Mrs. Drilon, Gladys Tiongco Laws). confronted Magsino about the alleged offer, the
Reynaldo Cortes, Lourdes Santos, Elmer Datuin, (candidate for Governor, Eastern Mindanao) and latter denied that there was such an offer. Nisce's
Romualdo Din, Antonio Nalapo, Israel Damasco, Amy Wong (candidate for Governor, Metro Manila). Atty. Paculdo employed uniformed girls to distribute
informant was Antonio G. Nalapo an IBP candidate
Candido Balbin, Serrano Balot, Ibarra, Joel Llosa, These two rooms served as the "action center' or his campaign materials on the convention floor. Atty.
who also withdrew.
Eltanal, Ruperto, Asuncion, Q. Pilotin Reymundo P. "war room" where campaign strategies were Carpio noted that there were more campaign
Guzman, Zoilo Aguinaldo, Clarin, R. Ronquillo, discussed before and during the convention. It was materials distributed at the convention site this year Another Nisce candidate, Cesar Viola, withdrew from
Dominador Carillo, Filomeno Balinas, Ernesto in these rooms where the supporters of the Drilon than in previous years. The election was more the race and refused to be nominated (t.s.n. June
Sabulan, Yusop Pangadapun, A. Viray, Icampo, group, like Attys. Carpio, Callanta, Benedicto, the heated and expensive (t.s.n. July 6,1989, p. 39). 29, 1989, p. 104). Vicente P. Tordilla who was
Abelardo Fermin, C. Quiaoit, Augurio Pamintuan, Quasha and the ACCRA lawyers met to plot their Nisce's candidate for Governor became Paculdo's
Atty. Benjamin Bernardino, the incumbent President
Daniel Macaraeg, Onofre Tejada. moves. candidate instead (t.s.n. June 29, 1989, p. 104).
of the IBP Rizal Chapter, and a candidate for
(6) Campaigning by labor officials for Atty. Violeta (7) Paying the dues or other indebtedness of any chairman of the House of Delegates on Nisce's Nisce recalled that during the Bench and Bar
Drilon number (Sec. 14[e], IBP BY-Laws). ticket, testified that campaign materials were Dialogue in Cotabato City, Court Administrator Tiro
distributed during the convention by girls and by went around saying, "I am not campaigning, but my
In violation of the prohibition against "campaigning Atty. Teresita C. Sison, IBP Treasurer, testified that lawyers. He saw members of the ACCRA law firm wife is a candidate." Nisce said that the presidents
for or against a candidate while holding an elective, she has heard of candidates paying the IBP dues of campaigning for Atty. Drilon (t.s.n. July 3,1989, pp. of several IBP chapters informed him that labor
judicial, quasi-judicial, or prosecutory office in the lawyers who promised to vote for or support them, 142-145). officials were campaigning for Mrs. Drilon (t.s.n.
Government' (Sec. 14[c], Art. I, IBP By-Laws), but she has no way of ascertaining whether it was a June 29,1989, pp. 109-110). He mentioned Ciony de
Mariano E. Benedicto II, Assistant Secretary, candidate who paid the delinquent dues of another, (10) Inducing or influencing a member to withhold
la Cerna, who allegedly campaigned in La Union
Department of Labor and Employment, testified that because the receipts are issued in the name of the his vote, or to vote for or against a candidate (Sec.
(t.s.n. June 29,1989,p.111)
he took a leave of absence from his office to attend member for whom payment is made (t.s.n. June 28, 14[e], IBP BY-Laws).
the IBP convention. He stayed at the Philippine 1989, pp. 24-28). Atty. Joel A. Llosa, Nisce's supporter and candidate
Atty. Bernardino disclosed that his cousin, Atty.
Plaza with the Drilon group admittedly to give "some for governor of the Western Visayas, expressed his
She has noticed, though, that there is an upsurge of Romeo Capulong, urged him to withdraw his
moral assistance" to Atty. Violeta Drilon. He did so disappointment over the IBP elections because
payments in March, April, May during any election candidacy for chairman of the House of Delegates
because he is a member of the Sigma Rho some delegates flip-flopped from one camp to
year. This year, the collections increased by and to run as vice-chairman in Violy Drilon's slate,
Fraternity. When asked about the significance of another. He testified that when he arrived at the
P100,000 over that of last year (a non-election year but he declined (t.s.n. July 3,1989, pp. 137, 149).
Sigma Rho, Secretary Benedicto explained: "More Manila Domestic Airport he was met by an assistant
than the husband of Mrs. Drilon being my boss, the from Pl,413,425 to Pl,524,875 (t.s.n. June 28, 1989, regional director of the DOLE who offered to bring
Atty. Gloria Agunos personnel director of the Hyatt
significance there is that the husband is my brother p. 25). him to the Philippine Plaza, but he declined the offer.
Terraces Hotel in Baguio and president of the
in the Sigma Rho." Baguio-Benguet IBP Chapter, recalled that in the During the legal aid seminar, Atty. Drilon invited him
(8) Distribution of materials other than bio-data of
third week of May 1989, after the Tripartite meet of to transfer to the Philippine Plaza where a room had
He cheered up Mrs., Drilon when her spirits were not more than one page of legal size sheet of paper
the Department of Labor & Employment at the Green been reserved for him. He declined the invitation
low. He talked to her immediate circle which (Sec. 14[a], IBP By-Laws).
Valley Country Club in Baguio City, she met Atty. (t.s.n. July 4,1989, pp. 102-106).
included Art Tiu, Tony Carpio, Nilo Pena, Amy
On the convention floor on the day of the election, Drilon, together with two labor officers of Region 1,
Wong, Atty. Grapilon, Victor Lazatin, and Boy Atty. Llosa said that while he was still in Dumaguete
Atty. Paculdo caused to be distributed his bio-data Attys. Filomeno Balbin and Atty. Mansala Atty. Drilon
Reyno. They assessed the progress of the City, he already knew that the three candidates had
and copies of a leaflet entitled "My Quest," as wen solicited her (Atty. Agunos') vote and invited her to
campaign, and measured the strengths and their headquarters in separate hotels: Paculdo, at
stay at the Philippine Plaza where a room would be

Page 65 of 132
the Holiday Inn; Drilon, at the Philippine Plaza; and her campaign rang up over P600,000 in hotel bills. paid plane tickets and hotel accommodations to It has been mentioned with no little insistence that
Nisce, at the Hyatt. He knew about this because a Atty. Callanta paid P316,411.53 for the rooms, food, delegates (and some families who accompanied the provision in the 1987 Constitution (See. 8, Art.
week before the elections, representatives of Atty. and beverage consumed by Atty. Drilon's them) in exchange for their support; the pirating of VIII) providing for a Judicial and Bar Council
Drilon went to Dumaguete City to campaign. He supporters, but still left an unpaid bill of P302,197.30 some candidates by inducing them to "hop" or composed of seven (7) members among whom is "a
mentioned Atty. Rodil Montebon of the ACCRA Law at convention's end. "flipflop" from one ticket to another for some representative of the Integrated Bar," tasked to
Office, accompanied by Atty. Julve the Assistant rumored consideration; all these practices made a participate in the selection of nominees for
Regional Director of the Department of Labor in FINDINGS. political circus of the proceedings and tainted the appointment to vacant positions in the judiciary, may
Dumaguete City. These two, he said, offered to give whole election process. be the reason why the position of IBP president has
From all the foregoing, it is evident that the manner
him two PAL tickets and accommodations at the attracted so much interest among the lawyers. The
in which the principal candidates for the national The candidates and many of the participants in that
Philippine Plaza (t.s.n. July 4,1989, pp. 101-104). much coveted "power" erroneously perceived to be
positions in the Integrated Bar conducted their election not only violated the By-Laws of the IBP but
But he declined the offer because he was already inherent in that office might have caused the
campaign preparatory to the elections on June 3, also the ethics of the legal profession which imposes
committed to Atty. Nisce. corruption of the IBP elections. To impress upon the
1989, violated Section 14 of the IBP By-Laws and on all lawyers, as a corollary of their obligation to participants in that electoral exercise the
Atty. Llosa also revealed that before he left for made a travesty of the idea of a "strictly non- obey and uphold the constitution and the laws, the seriousness of the misconduct which attended it and
Manila on May 31, 1989, a businessman, Henry Dy, political" Integrated Bar enshrined in Section 4 of the duty to "promote respect for law and legal the stern disapproval with which it is viewed by this
approached him to convince him to vote for Atty. By-Laws. processes" and to abstain from 'activities aimed at Court, and to restore the non-political character of
Paculdo. But Llosa told Dy that he was already defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the the IBP and reduce, if not entirely eliminate,
The setting up of campaign headquarters by the
committed to Nisce. legal system" (Rule 1.02, Canon 1, Code of expensive electioneering for the top positions in the
three principal candidates (Drilon, Nisce and
Professional Responsibility). Respect for law is organization which, as the recently concluded
He did not receive any plane tickets from Atty. Nisce Paculdo) in five-star hotels: The Philippine Plaza, the
gravely eroded when lawyers themselves, who are elections revealed, spawned unethical practices
because he and his two companions (Atty. Eltanal Holiday Inn and The Hyatt the better for them to
supposed to be millions of the law, engage in which seriously diminished the stature of the IBP as
and Atty. Ruperto) had earlier bought their own corral and entertain the delegates billeted therein;
unlawful practices and cavalierly brush aside the an association of the practitioners of a noble and
tickets for Manila (t.s.n. July 4, 1989, p. 101). the island hopping to solicit the votes of the chapter
very rules that the IBP formulated for their honored profession, the Court hereby ORDERS:
presidents who comprise the 120-member House of
observance.
SUMMARY OF CAMPAIGN EXPENSES INCURRED Delegates that elects the national officers and
1. The IBP elections held on June3,1989 should be
regional governors; the formation of tickets, slates, The unseemly ardor with which the candidates
BY THE CANDIDATES as they are hereby annulled.
or line-ups of candidates for the other elective pursued the presidency of the association detracted
positions aligned with, or supporting, either Drilon, from the dignity of the legal profession. The 2. The provisions of the IBP By-Laws for the direct
Atty. Paculdo admitted having spent some P250,000
Paculdo or Nisce; the procurement of written spectacle of lawyers bribing or being bribed to vote election by the House of Delegates (approved by
during his three weeks of campaigning. Of this
commitments and the distribution of nomination one way or another, certainly did not uphold the this Court in its resolution of July 9, 1985 in Bar
amount, the Capitol Bar Association (of which he
forms to be filled up by the delegates; the honor of the profession nor elevate it in the public's Matter No. 287) of the following national officers:
was the chapter president) contributed about
reservation of rooms for delegates in three big esteem.
P150,000. The Capitol Bar Association is a voluntary
hotels, at the expense of the presidential (a) the officers of the House of Delegates;
bar association composed of Quezon City lawyers.
candidates; the use of a PNB plane by Drilon and The Court notes with grave concern what appear to
some members of her ticket to enable them to be the evasions, denials and outright prevarications (b) the IBP president; and
He spent about P100,000 to defray the expenses of
his trips to the provinces (Bicol provinces, "assess their chances" among the chapter that tainted the statements of the witnesses,
(c) the executive vice-president,
Pampanga, Abra, Mountain Province and Bulacan) presidents in the Bicol provinces; the printing and including tome of the candidates, during the initial
(t.s.n. June 29,1989, pp. 9-14). distribution of tickets and bio-data of the candidates hearing conducted by it before its fact-finding be repealed, this Court being empowered to amend,
which in the case of Paculdo admittedly cost him committee was created. The subsequent modify or repeal the By-Laws of the IBP under
Atty. Nisce's hotel bills at the Hyatt amounted to some P15,000 to P20,000; the employment of investigation conducted by this Committee has Section 77, Art. XI of said By-Laws.
P216,127.74. This does not include the expenses for uniformed girls (by Paculdo) and lawyers (by Drilon) revealed that those parties had been less than
his campaign which began several months before to distribute their campaign materials on the candid with the Court and seem to have conspired 3. The former system of having the IBP President
the June 3rd election, and his purchases of airplane convention floor on the day of the election; the among themselves to deceive it or at least withhold and Executive Vice-President elected by the Board
tickets for some delegates. giving of assistance by the Undersecretary of Labor vital information from it to conceal the irregularities of Governors (composed of the governors of the
to Mrs. Drilon and her group; the use of labor committed during the campaign. nine [91 IBP regions) from among themselves (as
The records of the Philippine Plaza Hotel, arbiters to meet delegates at the airport and escort provided in Sec. 47, Art. VII, Original IBP By-Laws)
headquarters of Atty. Drilon's camp, showed that them to the Philippine Plaza Hotel; the giving of pre- CONCLUSIONS. should be restored. The right of automatic

Page 66 of 132
succession by the Executive Vice-President to the 8. Section 37, Article VI is hereby amended to read vice-president. In these special elections, the Annex A — "Ex-Parte Manifestation and
presidency upon the expiration of their two-year as follows: candidates in the election of the national officers Submission" dated December 1, 1995 in Civil Case
term (which was abolished by this Court's resolution held on June 3,1989, particularly identified in Sub- No. Q-95-25253, RTC, Br. 224, QC.
dated July 9,1985 in Bar Matter No. 287) should be Section 37. Composition of the Board. — The Head 3 of this Resolution entitled "Formation of
as it is hereby restored. Integrated Bar of the Philippines shall be governed Tickets and Single Slates," as well as those Annex B — "Urgent Ex-Parte Manifestation Motion"
by a Board of Governors consisting of nine (9) identified in this Resolution as connected with any of dated November 13, 1996 in Sp. Proc. No. 95-030,
4. At the end of the President's two-year term, the Governors from the nine (9) regions as delineated in the irregularities attendant upon that election, are RTC Br. 259 (not 257), Parañaque, MM.
Executive Vice-President shall automatically Section 3 of the Integration Rule, on the ineligible and may not present themselves as
succeed to the office of president. The incoming representation basis of one (1) Governor for each Annex C — "An Urgent and Respectful Plea for
candidate for any position.
board of governors shall then elect an Executive region to be elected by the members of the House extension of Time to File Required Comment and
Vice-President from among themselves. The of Delegates from that region only. The position of 13. Pending such special elections, a caretaker Opposition" dated January 17, 1997 in CA-G.R. SP
position of Executive Vice-President shall be rotated Governor should be rotated among the different board shall be appointed by the Court to administer (not Civil Case) No. 42286, CA 6th Div.
among the nine (9) IBP regions. One who has served Chapters in the region. the affairs of the IBP. The Court makes clear that the
This matter is being brought in the context of Rule
as president may not run for election as Executive dispositions here made are without prejudice to its
9. Section 39, Article V is hereby amended as 138, Section 1 which qualifies that only a duly
Vice-President in a succeeding election until after adoption in due time of such further and other
follows: admitted member of the bar "who is in good and
the rotation of the presidency among the nine (9) measures as are warranted in the premises.
regular standing, is entitled to practice law". There is
regions shall have been completed; whereupon, the
Section 39. Nomination and election of the SO ORDERED. also Rule 139-A, Section 10 which provides that
rotation shall begin anew.
Governors at least one (1) month before the national "default in the payment of annual dues for six
5. Section 47 of Article VII is hereby amended to convention the delegates from each region shall Adm. Case No. 4749           January 20, 2000 months shall warrant suspension of membership in
read as follows: elect the governor for their region, the choice of the Integrated Bar, and default in such payment for
which shall as much as possible be rotated among SOLIMAN M. SANTOS, JR., complainant,  one year shall be a ground for the removal of the
Section 47. National Officers. — The Integrated Bar the chapters in the region. vs. name of the delinquent member from the Roll of
of the Philippines shall have a President and ATTY. FRANCISCO R. LLAMAS, respondent. Attorneys."
Executive Vice-President to be chosen by the Board 10. Section33(a), Article V hereby is amended by
addingthe following provision as part of the first MENDOZA, J.: Among others, I seek clarification (e.g. a certification)
of Governors from among nine (9) regional
governors, as much as practicable, on a rotation paragraph: and appropriate action on the bar standing of Atty.
This is a complaint for misrepresentation and non-
basis. The governors shall be ex oficio Vice- Francisco R. Llamas both with the Bar Confidant
No convention of the House of Delegates nor of the payment of bar membership dues filed against
President for their respective regions. There shall and with the IBP, especially its Rizal Chapter of
general membership shall be held prior to any respondent Atty. Francisco R. Llamas.
also be a Secretary and Treasurer of the Board of which Atty. Llamas purports to be a member.
election in an election year.
Governors to be appointed by the President with the In a letter-complaint to this Court dated February 8,
Please note that while Atty. Llamas indicates "IBP
consent of the Board. 11. Section 39, (a), (b), (1), (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), and (7) 1997, complainant Soliman M. Santos, Jr., himself a
Rizal 259060" sometimes, he does not indicate any
of Article VI should be as they are hereby deleted. member of the bar, alleged that:
6. Section 33(b), Art. V, IBP By-Laws, is hereby PTR for payment of professional tax.
amended as follows: All other provisions of the By-Laws including its On my oath as an attorney, I wish to bring to your
Under the Rules, particularly Rule 138, Sections 27
amendment by the Resolution en banc of this Court attention and appropriate sanction the matter of
(b) The President and Executive Vice President of and 28, suspension of an attorney may be done not
of July 9, 1985 (Bar Matter No. 287) that are Atty. Francisco R. Llamas who, for a number of
the IBP shall be the Chairman and Vice-Chairman, only by the Supreme Court but also by the Court of
inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed or years now, has not indicated the proper PTR and
respectively, of the House of Delegates. The Appeals or a Regional Trial Court (thus, we are also
modified. IBP O.R. Nos. and data (date & place of issuance) in
Secretary, Treasurer, and Sergeant-at-Arms shall be copy furnishing some of these courts).
his pleadings. If at all, he only indicates "IBP Rizal
appointed by the President with the consent of the 12. Special elections for the Board of Governors 259060" but he has been using this for at least three Finally, it is relevant to note the track record of Atty.
House of Delegates.' shall be held in the nine (9) IBP regions within three years already, as shown by the following attached Francisco R. Llamas, as shown by:
(3) months, after the promulgation of the Court's sample pleadings in various courts in 1995, 1996
7. Section 33(g) of Article V providing for the
resolution in this case. Within thirty (30) days and 1997: (originals available). 1. his dismissal as Pasay City Judge per Supreme
positions of Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretary-
thereafter, the Board of Governors shall meet at the Court Admin. Matter No. 1037-CJ En Banc Decision
Treasurer and Sergeant-at- Arms of the House of
IBP Central Office in Manila to elect from among on October 28, 1981 (in SCRA).
Delegates is hereby repealed
themselves the IBP national president and executive

Page 67 of 132
2. his conviction for estafa per Decision dated June The complainant's basis in claiming that the Nonetheless, if despite such honest belief of being xxx     xxx     xxx
30, 1994 in Crim. Case No. 11787, RTC Br. 66, undersigned was no longer in good standing, were covered by the exemption and if only to show that
Makati, MM (see attached copy of the Order dated as above cited, the October 28, 1981 Supreme he never in any manner wilfully and deliberately The above cited provision of law is not applicable in
February 14, 1995 denying the motion for Court decision of dismissal and the February 14, failed and refused compliance with such dues, he is the present case. In fact, respondent admitted that
reconsideration of the conviction which is 1995 conviction for Violation of Article 316 RPC, willing at any time to fulfill and pay all past dues he is still in the practice of law when he alleged that
purportedly on appeal in the Court of Appeals). concealment of encumbrances. even with interests, charges and surcharges and the "undersigned since 1992 have publicly made it
penalties. He is ready to tender such fulfillment or clear per his Income tax Return up to the present
Attached to the letter-complaint were the pleadings As above pointed out also, the Supreme Court payment, not for allegedly saving his skin as again time that he had only a limited practice of law." (par.
dated December 1, 1995, November 13, 1996, and dismissal decision was set aside and reversed and irrelevantly and frustratingly insinuated for vindictive 4 of Respondent's Memorandum).
January 17, 1997 referred to by complainant, respondent was even promoted from City Judge of purposes by the complainant, but as an honest act
bearing, at the end thereof, what appears to be Pasay City to Regional Trial Court Judge of Makati, Therefore respondent is not exempt from paying his
of accepting reality if indeed it is reality for him to
respondent's signature above his name, address Br. 150. yearly dues to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
pay such dues despite his candor and honest belief
and the receipt number "IBP Rizal 259060." 1 Also in all food faith, to the contrary.
Also as pointed out, the February 14, 1995 decision On the second issue, complainant claims that
attached was a copy of the order, 2 dated February
in Crim. Case No. 11787 was appealed to the Court respondent has misled the court about his standing
14, 1995, issued by Judge Eriberto U. Rosario, Jr. of On December 4, 1998, the IBP Board of Governors
of Appeals and is still pending. in the IBP by using the same IBP O.R. number in his
the Regional Trial Court, Branch 66, Makati, denying passed a resolution6 adopting and approving the
pleadings of at least six years and therefore liable for
respondent's motion for reconsideration of his report and recommendation of the Investigating
Complainant need not even file this complaint if his actions. Respondent in his memorandum did not
conviction, in Criminal Case No. 11787, for violation Commissioner which found respondent guilty, and
indeed the decision of dismissal as a Judge was discuss this issue.
of Art. 316, par. 2 of the Revised Penal Code. recommended his suspension from the practice of
never set aside and reversed, and also had the
law for three months and until he pays his IBP dues. First. Indeed, respondent admits that since 1992, he
On April 18, 1997, complainant filed a decision of conviction for a light felony, been
Respondent moved for a reconsideration of the has engaged in law practice without having paid his
certification3 dated March 18, 1997, by the then affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Undersigned
decision, but this was denied by the IBP in a IBP dues. He likewise admits that, as appearing in
president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, himself would surrender his right or privilege to
resolution,7 dated April 22, 1999. Hence, pursuant to the pleadings submitted by complainant to this
Atty. Ida R. Macalinao-Javier, that respondent's "last practice law.
Rule 139-B, §12(b) of the Rules of Court, this case is Court, he indicated "IBP-Rizal 259060" in the
payment of his IBP dues was in 1991. Since then he here for final action on the decision of the IBP
4. That complainant capitalizes on the fact that pleadings he filed in court, at least for the years
has not paid or remitted any amount to cover his ordering respondent's suspension for three months.
respondent had been delinquent in his dues. 1995, 1996, and 1997, thus misrepresenting that
membership fees up to the present."
such was his IBP chapter membership and receipt
Undersigned since 1992 have publicly made it clear The findings of IBP Commissioner Alfredo Sanz are
On July 7, 1997, respondent was required to number for the years in which those pleadings were
per his Income Tax Return, up to the present, that as follows:
comment on the complaint within ten days from filed. He claims, however, that he is only engaged in
he had only a limited practice of law. In fact, in his a "limited" practice and that he believes in good faith
receipt of notice, after which the case was referred On the first issue, Complainant has shown
Income Tax Return, his principal occupation is a that he is exempt from the payment of taxes, such
to the IBP for investigation, report and "respondent's non-indication of the proper IBP O.R.
farmer of which he is. His 30 hectares orchard and as income tax, under R.A. No. 7432, §4 as a senior
recommendation. In his comment- and PTR numbers in his pleadings (Annexes "A", "B"
pineapple farm is located at Calauan, Laguna. citizen since 1992.
memorandum4 dated June 3, 1998, respondent and "C" of the letter complaint, more particularly his
alleged:5 Moreover, and more than anything else, respondent use of "IBP Rizal 259060 for at least three years."
Rule 139-A provides:
being a Senior Citizen since 1992, is legally exempt
3. That with respect to the complainant's absurd The records also show a "Certification dated March
under Section 4 of Rep. Act 7432 which took effect Sec. 9. Membership dues. — Every member of the
claim that for using in 1995, 1996 and 1997 the 24, 1997 from IBP Rizal Chapter President Ida R.
in 1992, in the payment of taxes, income taxes as an Integrated Bar shall pay such annual dues as the
same O.R. No. 259060 of the Rizal IBP, respondent Makahinud Javier that respondent's last payment of
example. Being thus exempt, he honestly believe in Board of Governors shall determine with the
is automatically no longer a member in good his IBP dues was in 1991."
view of his detachment from a total practice of law, approval of the Supreme Court. A fixed sum
standing.
but only in a limited practice, the subsequent While these allegations are neither denied nor equivalent to ten percent (10%) of the collections
Precisely, as cited under the context of Rule 138, payment by him of dues with the Integrated Bar is categorically admitted by respondent, he has from each Chapter shall be set aside as a Welfare
only an admitted member of the bar who is in good covered by such exemption. In fact, he never invoked and cited that "being a Senior Citizen since Fund for disabled members of the Chapter and the
standing is entitled to practice law. exercised his rights as an IBP member to vote and 1992, he is legally exempt under Section 4 of compulsory heirs of deceased members thereof.
be voted upon. Republic Act No. 7432 which took effect in 1992 in
Sec. 10. Effect of non-payment of dues. — Subject
the payment of taxes, income taxes as an example.
to the provisions of Section 12 of this Rule, default in

Page 68 of 132
the payment of annual dues for six months shall law or until he has paid his IBP dues, whichever is On 16 November 2004, the IBP submitted its derived from his law practice. He adds that his
warrant suspension of membership in the Integrated later, is appropriate. comment3 stating inter alia: that membership in the removal from nonpayment of annual membership
Bar, and default in such payment for one year shall IBP is not based on the actual practice of law; that a dues would constitute deprivation of property right
be a ground for the removal of the name of the WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Francisco R. Llamas lawyer continues to be included in the Roll of without due process of law. Lastly, he claims that
delinquent member from the Roll of Attorneys. is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for ONE (1) Attorneys as long as he continues to be a member non-practice of law by a lawyer-member in inactive
YEAR, or until he has paid his IBP dues, whichever of the IBP; that one of the obligations of a member is status is neither injurious to active law practitioners,
In accordance with these provisions, respondent is later. Let a copy of this decision be attached to the payment of annual dues as determined by the to fellow lawyers in inactive status, nor to the
can engage in the practice of law only by paying his Atty. Llamas' personal record in the Office of the Bar IBP Board of Governors and duly approved by the community where the inactive lawyers-members
dues, and it does not matter that his practice is Confidant and copies be furnished to all chapters of Supreme Court as provided for in Sections 9 and 10, reside.
"limited." While it is true that R.A. No. 7432, §4 the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and to all courts Rule 139-A of the Rules of Court; that the validity of
grants senior citizens "exemption from the payment in the land.1âwphi1.nêt imposing dues on the IBP members has been Plainly, the issue here is: whether or nor petitioner is
of individual income taxes:  provided, that their upheld as necessary to defray the cost of an entitled to exemption from payment of his dues
annual taxable income does not exceed the poverty SO ORDERED. during the time that he was inactive in the practice
Integrated Bar Program; and that the policy of the
level as determined by the National Economic and IBP Board of Governors of no exemption from of law that is, when he was in the Civil Service from
B.M. No. 1370             May 9, 2005
Development Authority (NEDA) for that year," the payment of dues is but an implementation of the 1962-1986 and he was working abroad from 1986-
exemption does not include payment of membership LETTER OF ATTY. CECILIO Y. AREVALO, JR., Court's directives for all members of the IBP to help 2003?
or association dues. REQUESTING EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT OF in defraying the cost of integration of the bar. It
We rule in the negative.
IBP DUES. maintained that there is no rule allowing the
Second. By indicating "IBP-Rizal 259060" in his
exemption of payment of annual dues as requested An "Integrated Bar" is a State-organized Bar, to
pleadings and thereby misrepresenting to the public DECISION by respondent, that what is allowed is voluntary which every lawyer must belong, as distinguished
and the courts that he had paid his IBP dues to the
termination and reinstatement of membership. It from bar association organized by individual lawyers
Rizal Chapter, respondent is guilty of violating the CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
asserted that what petitioner could have done was themselves, membership in which is voluntary.
Code of Professional Responsibility which provides:
This is a request for exemption from payment of the to inform the secretary of the IBP of his intention to Integration of the Bar is essentially a process by
Rule 1.01 — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) dues filed by stay abroad, so that his membership in the IBP which every member of the Bar is afforded an
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. petitioner Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo, Jr. could have been terminated, thus, his obligation to opportunity to do his shares in carrying out the
pay dues could have been stopped. It also alleged objectives of the Bar as well as obliged to bear his
CANON 7 — A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES In his letter,1 dated 22 September 2004, petitioner that the IBP Board of Governors is in the process of portion of its responsibilities. Organized by or under
UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE sought exemption from payment of IBP dues in the discussing proposals for the creation of an inactive the direction of the State, an Integrated Bar is an
LEGAL PROFESSION, AND SUPPORT THE amount of P12,035.00 as alleged unpaid status for its members, which if approved by the official national body of which all lawyers are
ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR. accountability for the years 1977-2005. He alleged Board of Governors and by this Court, will exempt required to be members. They are, therefore, subject
that after being admitted to the Philippine Bar in inactive IBP members from payment of the annual to all the rules prescribed for the governance of the
CANON 10 — A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, 1961, he became part of the Philippine Civil Service dues. Bar, including the requirement of payment of a
FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT. from July 1962 until 1986, then migrated to, and reasonable annual fee for the effective discharge of
worked in, the USA in December 1986 until his In his reply4 dated 22 February 2005, petitioner
Rule 10.01 — A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, the purposes of the Bar, and adherence to a code of
retirement in the year 2003. He maintained that he contends that what he is questioning is the IBP
nor consent to the doing of any court; nor shall he professional ethics or professional responsibility,
cannot be assessed IBP dues for the years that he Board of Governor's Policy of Non-Exemption in the
mislead or allow the court to be misled by any breach of which constitutes sufficient reason for
was working in the Philippine Civil Service since the payment of annual membership dues of lawyers
artifice. investigation by the Bar and, upon proper cause
Civil Service law prohibits the practice of one's regardless of whether or not they are engaged in
appearing, a recommendation for discipline or
profession while in government service, and neither active or inactive practice. He asseverates that the
Respondent's failure to pay his IBP dues and his disbarment of the offending member.5
can he be assessed for the years when he was Policy of Non-Exemption in the payment of annual
misrepresentation in the pleadings he filed in court
working in the USA. membership dues suffers from constitutional The integration of the Philippine Bar means the
indeed merit the most severe penalty. However, in
infirmities, such as equal protection clause and the official unification of the entire lawyer population.
view of respondent's advanced age, his express
On 05 October 2004, the letter was referred to the due process clause. He also posits that compulsory This requires membership and financial support of
willingness to pay his dues and plea for a more
IBP for comment.2 payment of the IBP annual membership dues would every attorney as condition sine qua non to the
temperate application of the law, 8 we believe the
indubitably be oppressive to him considering that he practice of law and the retention of his name in the
penalty of one year suspension from the practice of
has been in an inactive status and is without income Roll of Attorneys of the Supreme Court.6

Page 69 of 132
Bar integration does not compel the lawyer to does not impose an unconstitutional burden. The be and is a matter subject to regulation and inquiry. Melanio L. Mauricio, Jr., popularly known as "Batas
associate with anyone. He is free to attend or not to public interest promoted by the integration of the And, if the power to impose the fee as a regulatory Mauricio" (respondent), a writer/columnist of
attend the meetings of his Integrated Bar Chapter or Bar far outweighs the slight inconvenience to a measure is recognize[d], then a penalty designed to tabloids including Balitang Patas BATAS, Bagong
vote or refuse to vote in its elections as he chooses. member resulting from his required payment of the enforce its payment, which penalty may be avoided TIKTIK, TORO and HATAW!, and a host of a
The only compulsion to which he is subjected is the annual dues. altogether by payment, is not void as unreasonable television program KAKAMPI MO ANG BATAS
payment of his annual dues. The Supreme Court, in or arbitrary. telecast over UNTV and of a radio program Double
order to foster the State's legitimate interest in Thus, payment of dues is a necessary consequence B-BATAS NG BAYAN aired over DZBB, for (1)
elevating the quality of professional legal services, of membership in the IBP, of which no one is But we must here emphasize that the practice of law grossly immoral conduct; (2) violation of lawyer’s
may require that the cost of improving the exempt. This means that the compulsory nature of is not a property right but a mere privilege, and as oath and (3) disrespect to the courts and to
profession in this fashion be shared by the subjects payment of dues subsists for as long as one's such must bow to the inherent regulatory power of investigating prosecutors.
and beneficiaries of the regulatory program – the membership in the IBP remains regardless of the the Court to exact compliance with the lawyer's
lawyers.7 lack of practice of, or the type of practice, the public responsibilities. The facts that spawned the filing of the complaint
member is engaged in. are as follows:
Moreover, there is nothing in the Constitution that As a final note, it must be borne in mind that
prohibits the Court, under its constitutional power There is nothing in the law or rules which allows membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with On June 22, 2004, a certain Alberto Cordero
and duty to promulgate rules concerning the exemption from payment of membership dues. At conditions,11 one of which is the payment of (Cordero) purportedly bought from a grocery in
admission to the practice of law and in the most, as correctly observed by the IBP, he could membership dues. Failure to abide by any of them Valenzuela City canned goods including a can of
integration of the Philippine Bar8 - which power have informed the Secretary of the Integrated Bar of entails the loss of such privilege if the gravity thereof CDO Liver spread. On June 27, 2004, as Cordero
required members of a privileged class, such as his intention to stay abroad before he left. In such warrants such drastic move. and his relatives were eating bread with the CDO
lawyers are, to pay a reasonable fee toward case, his membership in the IBP could have been Liver spread, they found the spread to be sour and
terminated and his obligation to pay dues could WHEREFORE, petitioner's request for exemption soon discovered a colony of worms inside the can.
defraying the expenses of regulation of the
have been discontinued. from payment of IBP dues is DENIED. He is ordered
profession to which they belong. It is quite apparent
to pay P12,035.00, the amount assessed by the IBP Cordero’s wife thus filed a complaint with the
that the fee is, indeed, imposed as a regulatory
As abovementioned, the IBP in its comment stated as membership fees for the years 1977-2005, within Bureau of Food and Drug Administration (BFAD).
measure, designed to raise funds for carrying out
that the IBP Board of Governors is in the process of a non-extendible period of ten (10) days from receipt Laboratory examination confirmed the presence of
the noble objectives and purposes of integration.
discussing the situation of members under inactive of this decision, with a warning that failure to do so parasites in the Liver spread.
The rationale for prescribing dues has been status and the nonpayment of their dues during will merit his suspension from the practice of law.
such inactivity. In the meantime, petitioner is duty Pursuant to Joint DTI-DOH-DA Administrative Order
explained in the Integration of the Philippine
bound to comply with his obligation to pay SO ORDERED. No. 1, Series of 1993, the BFAD conducted a
Bar,9 thus:
membership dues to the IBP. conciliation hearing on July 27, 2004 during which
A.C. No. 7199               July 22, 2009 the spouses Cordero demanded ₱150,000 as
For the court to prescribe dues to be paid by the
Petitioner also contends that the enforcement of the [Formerly CBD 04-1386] damages from complainant. Complainant refused to
members does not mean that the Court is
attempting to levy a tax. penalty of removal would amount to a deprivation of heed the demand, however, as being in
FOODSPHERE, INC., Complainant, 
property without due process and hence infringes contravention of company policy and, in any event,
vs.
A membership fee in the Bar association is an on one of his constitutional rights. "outrageous."
ATTY. MELANIO L. MAURICIO, JR., Respondent.
exaction for regulation, while tax purpose of a tax is
a revenue. If the judiciary has inherent power to This question has been settled in the case of In re Complainant instead offered to return actual medical
DECISION
regulate the Bar, it follows that as an incident to Atty. Marcial Edillon,10 in this wise: and incidental expenses incurred by the Corderos as
regulation, it may impose a membership fee for that CARPIO MORALES, J.: long as they were supported by receipts, but the
. . . Whether the practice of law is a property right, in offer was turned down. And the Corderos threatened
purpose. It would not be possible to put on an
the sense of its being one that entitles the holder of Foodsphere, Inc. (complainant), a corporation to bring the matter to the attention of the media.
integrated Bar program without means to defray the
a license to practice a profession, we do not here engaged in the business of meat processing and
expenses. The doctrine of implied powers
pause to consider at length, as it [is] clear that under manufacture and distribution of canned goods and Complainant was later required by the BFAD to file
necessarily carries with it the power to impose such
the police power of the State, and under the grocery products under the brand name "CDO," filed its Answer to the complaint. In the meantime or on
exaction.
necessary powers granted to the Court to a Verified Complaint1 for disbarment before the August 6, 2004, respondent sent complainant via fax
The only limitation upon the State's power to perpetuate its existence, the respondent's right to Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD) of the a copy of the front page of the would-be August 10-
regulate the privilege of law is that the regulation practice law before the courts of this country should Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) against Atty. 16, 2004 issue of the tabloid Balitang Patas BATAS,

Page 70 of 132
Vol. 1, No. 122 which complainant found to contain On August 28, 2004, respondent, in his radio Blg.281);17 (g) "Kasong Kidnapping laban sa CDO 2.R. Can an ordinary person like Villarez simply be
articles maligning, discrediting and imputing vices program Double B- Batas ng Bayan at radio station guards," Setyembre 14, 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.284); 18 (h) tossed around, waiting for miracles to happen?
and defects to it and its products. Respondent DZBB, announced the holding of a supposed "Brutalidad ng CDO guards," Setyembre 15, 2004
threatened to publish the articles unless complainant contest sponsored by said program, which (Taon 7, Blg.285); 19 (i) "CDO guards pinababanatan 2.S. Why? How much miracle is needed to happen
gave in to the ₱150,000 demand of the Corderos. announcement was transcribed as follows: sa PNP," Setyembre 17, 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.287); 20 (j) here before this Office would ever act on his
Complainant thereupon reiterated its counter-offer "May uod na CDO liver spread sa Puregold binili," complaint?
earlier conveyed to the Corderos, but respondent "OK, at meron akong pa-contest, total magpapasko Setyembre 18, 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.288); 21 (k)
na o ha, meron pa-contest si Batas Mauricio ang xxxx
turned it down. "Desperado na ang CDO," Setyembre 20, 2004
Batas ng Bayan. Ito yung ating pa-contest, hulaan (Taon 7, Blg.290); 22 (l) "Atty. Rufus Rodriguez 8. With a City Prosecutor acting the way he did in
Respondent later proposed to settle the matter for ninyo, tatawag kayo sa telepono, 433-7549 at 433- pumadrino sa CDO," Setyembre 21, 2004 (Taon the case filed by Villarez, and with an investigating
₱50,000, ₱15,000 of which would go to the 7553. Ang mga premyo babanggitin po natin sa 7,Blg. 291);23 (m) "Kasunduan ng CDO at Pamilya prosecutor virtually kowtowing to the wishes of his
Corderos and ₱35,000 to his Batas Foundation. And susunod pero ito muna ang contest, o, ‘aling liver Cordero," Setyembre 22, 2004 (Taon 7,Blg. boss, the Chief Prosecutor, can Respondents
respondent directed complainant to place paid spread ang may uod?’ Yan kita ninyo yan, ayan 292);24 (n) "Bakit nagbayad ng P50 libo ang CDO," expect justice to be meted to them?
advertisements in the tabloids and television malalaman ninyo yan. Pagka-nahulaan yan ah, at Setyembre 23, 2004 (Taon 7,Blg. 293).25
program. sasagot kayo sa akin, aling liver spread ang may 9. With utmost due respect, Respondents have
uod at anong companya ang gumagawa In his September 8, 2004 column "Anggulo ng reason to believe that justice would elude them in
The Corderos eventually forged a nyan? Itawag po ninyo sa 433-7549 st 433-7553. Batas" published in Hataw!, respondent wrote an this Office of the City Prosecutor of Valenzuela City,
KASUNDUAN3 seeking the withdrawal of their Open po an[g] contest na ito sa lahat ng ating article "Reaksyon pa sa uod ng CDO Liver not because of the injustice of their cause, but, more
complaint before the BFAD. The BFAD thus tagapakinig. Pipiliin natin ang mananalo, kung tama Spread."26 importantly, because of the injustice of the system;
dismissed the complaint. 4 Respondent, who affixed ang inyong sagot. Ang tanong, aling liver spread
his signature to the KASUNDUAN as a witness, later sa Pilipinas an[g] may uod? 8 (Emphasis and italics And respondent, in several episodes in September 10. Couple all of these with reports that many a
wrote in one of his articles/columns in a tabloid that in the original; underscoring supplied) 2004 of his television program Kakampi Mo ang government office in Valenzuela City had been the
he prepared the document. Batas aired over UNTV, repeatedly complained of willing recipient of too many generosities in the past
And respondent wrote in his columns in the tabloids what complainant claimed to be the "same baseless of the Complainant, and also with reports that a top
On August 11, 2004, respondent sent complainant articles which put complainant in bad light. Thus, in and malicious allegations/issues" against it.27 official of the City had campaigned for his much
an Advertising Contract5 asking complainant to the August 31- September 6, 2004 issue of Balitang coveted position in the past distributing products of
advertise in the tabloid Balitang Patas BATAS for its Patas BATAS, he wrote an article captioned "KADIRI Complainant thus filed criminal complaints against
the Complainant, what would one expect the
next 24 weekly issues at ₱15,000 per issue or a total ANG CDO LIVER SPREAD!" In another article, he respondent and several others for Libel and
Respondents to think?
amount of ₱360,000, and a Program Profile6 of the wrote "IBA PANG PRODUKTO NG CDO Threatening to Publish Libel under Articles 353 and
television program KAKAMPI MO ANG BATAS also SILIPIN!"9 which appeared in the same publication in 356 of the Revised Penal Code before the Office of 11. Of course, not to be lost sight of here is the
asking complainant to place spot advertisements its September 7-13, 2004 issue. And still in the same the City Prosecutor of Quezon City and Valenzuela attitude and behavior displayed even by mere staff
with the following rate cards: (a) spot buy 15-second publication, its September 14-20, 2004 issue, he City. The complaints were pending at he time of the and underlings of this Office to people who dare
TVC at ₱4,000; (b) spot buy 30-second TVC at wrote another article entitled "DAPAT BANG PIGILIN filing of the present administrative complaint. 28 complain against the Complainant in their respective
₱7,700; and (c) season buy [13 episodes, 26 spots] ANG CDO."10 turfs. Perhaps, top officials of this Office should
of 30-second TVC for ₱130,000. In the criminal complaints pending before the Office
investigate and ask their associates and relatives
Respondent continued his tirade against of the City Prosecutor of Valenzuela City, docketed
incognito to file, even if on a pakunwari basis only,
As a sign of goodwill, complainant offered to buy complainant in his column LAGING HANDA as I.S. Nos. V-04-2917-2933, respondent filed his
complaints against the Complainant, and they would
three full-page advertisements in the tabloid published in another tabloid, BAGONG TIKTIK, with Entry of Appearance with Highly Urgent Motion to
surely be given the same rough and insulting
amounting to ₱45,000 at ₱15,000 per the following articles:11 (a) "Uod sa liver spread," Elevate These Cases to the Department of
treatment that Respondent Villarez got when he filed
advertisement, and three spots of 30-second TVC in Setyembre 6, 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.276); 12 (b) "Uod, Justice,29 alleging:
his kidnapping charge here;30
the television program at ₱7,700 each or a total of itinanggi ng CDO," Setyembre 7, 2004 (Taon 7,
₱23,100. Acting on complainant’s offer, respondent xxxx
Blg.277);13 (c) "Pagpapatigil sa CDO," Setyembre 8, And in a Motion to Dismiss [the case] for Lack of
relayed to it that he and his Executive Producer were 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.278); 14 (d) "Uod sa liver spread Jurisdiction31 which respondent filed, as counsel for
2.N. The question here is this: What gives,
disappointed with the offer and threatened to kumpirmado," Setyembre 9, 2004 (Taon 7, his therein co-respondents-staffers of the
Honorable (???) Prosecutors of the Office of the City
proceed with the publication of the Blg.279);15 (e) "Salaysay ng nakakain ng uod," newspaper Hataw!, before the Office of the City
Prosecutor of Valenzuela City?
articles/columns.7 Setyembre 10, 2004 (Taon 7, Blg.280); 16 (f) "Kaso Prosecutor of Valenzuela City, respondent alleged:
VS. CDO itinuloy," Setyembre 11, 2004 (Taon 7, xxxx

Page 71 of 132
xxxx any matter subject of the Complaint in the instant said Office in handling cases filed before it and did motive to the actions of respondent. Complainant
case more specifically the imputation of vices and/or not even design to submit any evidence to avers that respondent retaliated for complainant’s
5. If the Complainant or its lawyer merely used defects on plaintiff and its products." substantiate said wild allegations. The use by failure to give in to respondent’s "request" that
even a little of whatever is inside their thick respondent of the above-quoted language in his complainant advertise in the tabloids and television
skulls, they would have clearly deduced that this Complainant alleged that the above-quoted Order pleadings is manifestly violative of Canon 11 of the programs of respondent. Complainant’s explanation
Office has no jurisdiction over this was served on respondent by the Branch Sheriff on Code of Professional Responsibility which provides: is more credible. Nevertheless, whatever the true
action.32 (Emphasis supplied) 13 December 2004. Respondent has not denied the "A lawyer [s]hall [o]bserve and [m]aintain [t]he motive of respondent for his barrage of articles
issuance of the Order dated 10 December 2004 or [re]spect [d]ue [t]o [t]he [c]ourts [a]nd [t]o [j]udicial against complainant does not detract from the fact
xxxx his receipt of a copy thereof on 13 December 2004. [o]fficers [a]nd [s]hould [i]nsist [o]n [s]imilar [c]onduct that respondent consciously violated the spirit
Meanwhile, on October 26, 2004, complainant filed a [b]y [o]thers." behind the "Kasunduan" which he himself prepared
Despite his receipt of the Order dated 10 December
civil case against respondent and several others, and signed and submitted to the BFAD for approval.
2004, and the clear directive therein addressed to III.
docketed as Civil Case No. 249-V-04, 33 before the Respondent was less than forthright when he
him to desists [sic] from "further publishing,
Regional Trial Court, Valenzuela City and raffled to prepared said "Kasunduan" and then turned around
televising and/or broadcasting any matter subject of The "Kasunduan" entered into by the Spouses
Branch 75 thereof. and proceeded to lambaste complainant for what
the Complaint in the instant case more specifically Cordero and herein complainant (Annex C of the
was supposedly already settled in said agreement.
the imputation of vices and/or defects on plaintiff Complaint) was admittedly prepared, witnessed and
The pending cases against him and the issuance of Complainant would have been better of with the
and its products", respondent in clear defiance of signed by herein respondent. …
a status quo order notwithstanding, respondent BFAD case proceeding as it could have defended
this Order came out with articles on the prohibited
continued to publish articles against xxxx itself against the charges of the Spouses Cordero.
subject matter in his column "Atty. Batas", 2004 in
complainant34 and to malign complainant through his Complainant was helpless against the attacks of
the December 16 and 17, 2004 issues of the tabloid
television shows. In its Order dated 16 August 2004, the Bureau of respondent, a media personality. The actuations of
"Balitang Bayan –Toro" (Annexes Q and Q-1 of the
Food and Drugs recognized that the said respondent constituted, to say the least, deceitful
Acting on the present administrative complaint, the Complaint).
"Kasunduan" was not contrary to law, morals, good conduct contemplated under Rule 1.01 of Canon 1
Investigating Commissioner of the Integrated Bar of customs, public order and policy, and this of the Code of Professional
The above actuations of respondent are also in
the Philippines (IBP) came up with the following accordingly dismissed the complaint filed by the Responsibility.36(Underscoring supplied)
violation of Rule 13.03 of the Canon of Professional
findings in his October 5, 2005 Report and Spouses Cordero against herein complainant.
Responsibilitywhich reads: "A lawyer shall not make
Recommendation:35 The IBP Board of Governors, by Resolution No.
public statements in the media regarding a pending
However, even after the execution of the XVIII-2006-114 dated March 20, 2006, adopted the
I. case tending to arouse public opinion for or against
"Kasunduan" and the consequent dismissal of the findings and recommendation of the Investigating
a party."
complaint of his clients against herein complainant, Commissioner to suspend respondent from the
xxxx
II. respondent inexplicably launched a media offensive practice of law for two years.
In Civil Case No. 249-V-04 entitled "Foodsphere, intended to disparage and put to ridicule herein
xxxx complainant. On record are the numerous articles of The Court finds the findings/evaluation of the IBP
Inc. vs. Atty. [Melanio] Mauricio, et al.", the Order
respondent published in 3 tabloids commencing well-taken.
dated 10 December 2004 (Annex O of the
In I.S. No. V.04-2917-2933, then pending before the from 31 August to 17 December 2004 (Annexes G to
Complaint) was issued by Presiding Judge Dionisio The Court, once again, takes this occasion to
Office of the City Prosecutor of Valenzuela City, Q-1). As already above-stated, respondent
C. Sison which in part reads: emphasize the necessity for every lawyer to act and
respondent filed his "Entry of Appearance with continued to come out with these articles against
Highly Urgent Motion to Elevate These Cases To the comport himself in a manner that promotes public
"Anent the plaintiff’s prayer for the issuance of a complainant in his tabloid columns despite a
Department of Justice". In said pleading, respondent confidence in the integrity of the legal
temporary restraining order included in the instant temporary restraining order issued against him
made the following statements: profession,37 which confidence may be eroded by
plaintiff’s motion, this Court, inasmuch as the expressly prohibiting such actions. Respondent did
the irresponsible and improper conduct of a member
defendants failed to appear in court or file an not deny that he indeed wrote said articles and
xxxx of the bar.
opposition thereto, is constrained to GRANT the submitted them for publication in the tabloids.
said plaintiff’s prater, as it is GRANTED, in order to The above language employed by respondent By the above-recited acts, respondent violated Rule
maintain STATUS QUO, and that all the defendants, Respondent claims that he was prompted by his
undoubtedly casts aspersions on the integrity of the 1.01 of the Code of Professional
their agents, representatives or any person acting for sense of public service, that is, to expose the
Office of the City Prosecutor and all the Responsibility which mandates lawyers to refrain
and in behalf are hereby restrained/enjoined from defects of complainant’s products to the consuming
Prosecutors connected with said Office. Respondent from engaging in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
further publishing, televising and/or broadcasting public. Complainant claims that there is a baser
clearly assailed the impartiality and fairness of the deceitful conduct. For, as the IBP found, he engaged

Page 72 of 132
in deceitful conduct by, inter alia, taking advantage strong language in pursuit of their duty to advance of the fact that respondent was motivated by Llantino, as counsel for accused, filed a
of the complaint against CDO to advance his the interests of their clients. vindictiveness when he filed falsification charges Manifestation with Motion for Bail, alleging that
interest – to obtain funds for his Batas Foundation against the therein complainant.43 the "accused has voluntarily surrendered to a
and seek sponsorships and advertisements for the However, while a lawyer is entitled to present his person in authority. As such, he is now under
tabloids and his television program. case with vigor and courage, such enthusiasm does To the Court, suspension of respondent from the detention."2 Upon personal verification with the
not justify the use of offensive and abusive practice of law for three years is, in the premises, National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) where
He also violated Rule 13.02 of the Code of language. Language abounds with countless sufficient. accused Arana allegedly surrendered, complainant
Professional Responsibility, which mandates: possibilities for one to be emphatic but respectful, learned that he surrendered only on December 14,
convincing but not derogatory, illuminating but not WHEREFORE, Atty. Melanio Mauricio is, for
2000, as shown by the Certificate of Detention
A lawyer shall not make public statements in the offensive.1awphi1 violation of the lawyer’s oath and breach of ethics of
executed by Atty. Rogelio M. Mamauag, Chief of the
media regarding a pending case tending to arouse the legal profession as embodied in the Code of
Security Management Division of the NBI.
public opinion for or against a party. On many occasions, the Court has reminded Professional Responsibility, SUSPENDED from the
members of the Bar to abstain from all offensive practice of law for three years effective upon his Respondent Susa, the Branch Clerk of Court of RTC
For despite the pendency of the civil case against personality and to advance no fact prejudicial to the receipt of this Decision. He is warned that a of Manila, Branch 27, calendared the motion on
him and the issuance of a status quo order honor and reputation of a party or witness, unless repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt December 15, 2000 despite the foregoing irregularity
restraining/enjoining further publishing, televising required by the justice of the cause with which he is with more severely. and other formal defects, namely, the lack of notice
and broadcasting of any matter relative to the charged. In keeping with the dignity of the legal of hearing to the private complainant, violation of the
complaint of CDO, respondent continued with his profession, a lawyer’s language even in his Let a copy of this Decision be attached to his
three-day notice rule, and the failure to attach the
attacks against complainant and its products. At the pleadings must be dignified.39 (Underscoring personal record and copies furnished the Integrated
Certificate of Detention which was referred to in the
same time, respondent violated Canon 1 also of the supplied) Bar of the Philippines and the Office of the Court
Motion as Annex "1".
Code of Professional Responsibility, which Administrator for dissemination to all courts.
mandates lawyers to "uphold the Constitution, obey By failing to live up to his oath and to comply with Respondents filed their respective comments,
the laws of the land and promote respect for law the exacting standards of the legal profession, SO ORDERED.
declaring that on December 13, 2000, upon learning
and legal processes." For he defied said status quo respondent also violated Canon 7 of the Code of that a warrant of arrest was issued against their
A.C. No. 5379            May 9, 2003
order, despite his (respondent’s) oath as a member Professional Responsibility, which directs a lawyer client, they filed the Manifestation with Motion for
of the legal profession to "obey the laws as well as to "at all times uphold the integrity and the dignity of WALTER T. YOUNG, complainant,  Bail with the trial court. Then they immediately
the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities." the legal profession."401avvph!1 vs. fetched the accused in Cavite and brought him to
CEASAR G. BATUEGAS, MIGUELITO NAZARENO the NBI to voluntarily surrender. However, due to
Further, respondent violated Canon 8 and Rule 8.01 The power of the media to form or influence public
V. LLANTINO and FRANKLIN Q. heavy traffic, they arrived at the NBI at 2:00 a.m. the
of the Code of Professional Responsibility which opinion cannot be underestimated. In Dalisay v.
SUSA, respondents. next day; hence, the certificate of detention
mandate, viz: Mauricio, Jr.,41the therein complainant engaged
indicated that the accused surrendered on
therein-herein respondent’s services as "she was RESOLUTION
CANON 8 - A lawyer shall conduct himself with December 14, 2000. They argued that there was
impressed by the pro-poor and pro-justice advocacy
courtesy, fairness and candor toward his neither unethical conduct nor falsehood in the
of respondent, a media personality," 42 only to later YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
professional colleagues, and shall avoid harassing subject pleading as their client has voluntarily
find out that after he demanded and the therein
tactics against opposing counsel. On December 29, 2000, Atty. Walter T. Young filed a surrendered and was detained at the NBI. As
complainant paid an exorbitant fee, no action was
Verified Affidavit-Complaint for disbarment against regards the lack of notice of hearing, they contend
taken nor any pleadings prepared by him.
Rule 8.01 – A lawyer shall not, in his professional Attys. Ceasar G. Batuegas, Miguelito Nazareno V. that complainant, as private prosecutor, was not
Respondent was suspended for six months.
dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive Llantino and Franklin Q. Susa for allegedly entitled to any notice. Nevertheless, they furnished
or otherwise improper, by using intemperate On reading the articles respondent published, not to committing deliberate falsehood in court and the State and City prosecutors copies of the motion
language. mention listening to him over the radio and watching violating the lawyer's oath.1 with notice of hearing thereof. Moreover, the hearing
him on television, it cannot be gainsaid that the of a motion on shorter notice is allowed under Rule
Apropos  is the following reminder in Saberon v. Complainant is the private prosecutor in Criminal 15, Sec. 4(2) of the Rules of Court.3
same could, to a certain extent, have affected the
Larong:38 Case No. 00-187627 for Murder, entitled " People of
sales of complainant.
the Philippines versus Crisanto Arana, Jr.", pending For his part, respondent Susa argues in his
To be sure, the adversarial nature of our legal comment that he was no longer in court when his
Back to Dalisay, this Court, in denying therein-herein before the Regional Trial Court of Manila, Branch 27.
system has tempted members of the bar to use co-respondents filed the Manifestation with Motion
respondent’s motion for reconsideration, took note On December 13, 2000, respondents Batuegas and
for Bail. Ms. Teofila A. Peña, Clerk III, received the

Page 73 of 132
said Motion and noticed that it was set for hearing We agree with the findings and recommendations of ultimate fact which still had to be proved by act or conduct on the part of lawyers which are
on December 15, 2000 and the Certificate of the Investigating Commissioner. Respondents evidence at the hearing of the Motion. That they contrary to the established rules of procedure.
Detention was not attached. However, the presiding Batuegas and Llantino are guilty of deliberate were able to show that their client was already under
judge instructed her to receive the Motion subject to falsehood. the custody of the NBI at the hearing held on WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, respondent
the presentation of the Certificate of Detention December 15, 2000 does not exonerate them. The Attys. Ceasar G. Batuegas, Miguelito Nazareno V.
before the hearing. Thus, the inclusion of the Motion A lawyer must be a disciple of truth. 7 He swore upon fact remains that the allegation that the accused was Llantino are found guilty of committing deliberate
in the court's calendar on December 15, 2000 was his admission to the Bar that he will "do no in the custody of the NBI on December 13, 2000 falsehood. Accordingly, they are SUSPENDED from
authorized by the presiding judge and, thus, was falsehood nor consent to the doing of any in court" was false. the practice of law for a period of six (6) months with
done by respondent Susa in faithful performance of and he shall "conduct himself as a lawyer according a warning that a repetition of the same or similar act
his ministerial duty. to the best of his knowledge and discretion with all In Comia vs. Antona,  we held: will be dealt with more severely.
good fidelity as well to the courts as to his
In a Resolution dated August 13, 2001, 4 the instant clients."8 He should bear in mind that as an officer of It is of no moment that the accused eventually Let a copy of this Resolution be attached to the
case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the the court his high vocation is to correctly inform the surrendered to the police authorities on the same personal records of Attys. Ceasar G. Batuegas and
Philippines for investigation, report and court upon the law and the facts of the case and to date "tentatively" scheduled for the hearing of the Miguelito Nazareno V. Llantino in the Office of the
recommendation or decision. aid it in doing justice and arriving at correct application for bail. To our mind, such supervening Bar Confidant and copies thereof be furnished the
conclusion.9 The courts, on the other hand, are event is of no bearing and immaterial; it does not Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
On December 7, 2001, the Investigating entitled to expect only complete honesty from absolve respondent judge from administrative
Commissioner, Rebecca Villanueva-Maala, liability considering that he should not have SO ORDERED.
lawyers appearing and pleading before them. 10 While
submitted her report and recommendation as a lawyer has the solemn duty to defend his client's accorded recognition to the application for bail filed
December 3, 1948
follows: rights and is expected to display the utmost zeal in on behalf of persons who, at that point, were devoid
defense of his client's cause, his conduct must of personality to ask such specific affirmative relief In re Investigation of ANGEL J. PARAZO for
WHEREFORE, the foregoing premises considered, it from the court.13
never be at the expense of truth. 11 alleged leakage of questions in some subjects in
is respectfully recommended that Atty. Ceasar G.
the 1948 Bar Examinations.
Batuegas and Atty. Miguelito Nazareno V. Llantino The Court may disbar or suspend a lawyer for In this jurisdiction, whether bail is a matter of right or
be suspended from the practice of their profession misconduct, whether in his professional or private discretion, reasonable notice of hearing is required MONTEMAYOR, J.:
as a lawyer/member of the Bar for a period of six (6) capacity, which shows him to be wanting in moral to be given to the prosecutor or fiscal, or at least, he
months from receipt hereof. The complaint against character, in honesty, probity, and good demeanor, must be asked for his recommendation. 14 The present case had its origin in a story or news
Atty. Franklin Q. Susa, upon the other hand, is thus proving unworthy to continue as an officer of item prepared and written by the defendant, Angel J.
hereby recommended dismissed for lack of merit. 5 In the case at bar, the prosecution was served with Parazo, a duly accredited reporter of the Star
the court.12
notice of hearing of the motion for bail two days Reporter, a local daily of general circulation, that
The foregoing Report and Recommendation was Evidently, respondent lawyers fell short of the duties prior to the scheduled date. Although a motion may appeared on the front page of the issue of
adopted and approved by the IBP-Commission on and responsibilities expected from them as be heard on short notice, respondents failed to September 14, 1948. The story was preceded by the
Bar Discipline in Resolution No. XV-2002-400, to wit: members of the bar. Anticipating that their Motion show any good cause to justify the non-observance headline in large letters — "CLAIM 'LEAK' IN LAST
for Bail will be denied by the court if it found that it of the three-day notice rule. Verily, as lawyers, they BAR TESTS," followed by another in slightly smaller
RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby are obliged to observe the rules of procedure and
had no jurisdiction over the person of the accused, letters — "Applicants In Uproar, Want Anomaly
ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and not to misuse them to defeat the ends of justice. 15
they craftily concealed the truth by alleging that Probed; One School Favored," under the name —
Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner
accused had voluntarily surrendered to a person in "By Angel J. Parazo of the Star Reporter Staff." For
of the above-entitled case, herein made part of this Finally, we are in accord with the Investigating
authority and was under detention. Obviously, such purposes of reference we quote the news item in
Resolution/Decision as Annex "A"; and, finding the Commissioner that respondent clerk of court should
artifice was a deliberate ruse to mislead the court full:
recommendation fully supported by the evidence on not be made administratively liable for including the
and thereby contribute to injustice. To knowingly
record and the applicable laws and rules, and in Motion in the calendar of the trial court, considering Leakage in some subjects in the recent bar
allege an untrue statement of fact in the pleading is
view of respondents' commission of deliberate that it was authorized by the presiding judge. examinations were denounced by some of the law
a contemptuous conduct that we strongly condemn.
falsehood, Atty. Batuegas and Atty. Llantino are However, he is reminded that his administrative graduates who took part in the tests, to the Star
They violated their oath when they resorted to
hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for six functions, although not involving the discretion or Reporter this morning.
deception.
(6) months. The complaint against Atty. Susa is judgment of a judge, are vital to the prompt and
hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.6 Respondents contend that their allegation of the sound administration of justice.16 Thus, he should These examinees claim to have seen mimeograph
accused's detention was merely a statement of an not hesitate to inform the judge if he should find any copies of the questions in one subject, days before

Page 74 of 132
the tests were given, in the Philippine Normal under which rule, this Court conducts the Bar In relation with the news item that appeared in the regularity and cleanliness of the bar examinations;
School. Examinations yearly, appoints a Committee of Bar front page of the Star Reporter, issue of September that it also involves the good name and reputation of
Examiners to be presided by one of the Justices, to 14, 1948, regarding alleged leakage in some bar the bar examiners who are appointed by this Court
Only students of one private university in Sampaloc serve for one year, acts on the report of the examination questions, which examinations were to prepare the bar examinations questions and later
had those mimeographed questions on said subject committee and finally, admits to the Bar and to the held in August 1948, Mr. Jose de la Cruz, as pass upon and correct the examinations questions
fully one week before the tests. practice of law, the candidates and examinees who Commissioner, and Mr. E. Soriano, as Clerk of and last but not least, it also involves and is bound
have passed the examinations. Court, were authorized by Mr. Justice Sabino Padilla to affect the confidence of the whole country in the
The students who made the denunciation to the Star
then chairman of the committee of bar examiners to very Supreme Court which is conducting the bar
Reporter  claim that the tests actually given were The investigation of Mr. Parazo was conducted on conduct an investigation thereof, particularly to examinations. It was further explained to him that
similar in every respect to those they had seen September 18, 1948, on which occasion he testified receive the testimony of Mr. Angel J. Parazo, the the Supreme Court is keenly interested in
students of this private university holding proudly under oath and, answering questions directed to him reporter responsible for and author of said news investigating the alleged anomaly and leakage of the
around the city. by Messrs. Cruz and Soriano admitted that he was item. An investigation was conducted on September examination questions and is determined to punish
the author of the news item; that he wrote up the 18, 1948; stenographic notes were taken of the the party or parties responsible therefor but that
The students who claim to have seen the tests
story and had it published, in good faith and in a testimony of Mr. Parazo, and Mr. Justice Marcelino without his help, specially the identities of the
which leaked are demanding that the Supreme
spirit of public service; and that he knew the persons R. Montemayor, the new chairman of the committee persons who furnished him the information and who
Court institute an immediate probe into the matter,
who gave him the information which formed the of bar examiners, has submitted the transcript of could give the court the necessary data and
to find out the source of the leakage, and annul the
basis of his publication but that he declined to reveal said notes for the consideration of this Court. evidence, the Court could not even begin the
test papers of the students of the particular
their names because the information was given to investigation because there would be no basis from
university possessed of those tests before the
him in confidence and his informants did not wish to From the record of said investigation, it is clear that which to start, not even a clue from which to
examinations.
have their identities revealed. The investigators Mr. Parazo has deliberately and consistently formulate a theory. Lastly, Parazo was told that
The discovery of the alleged leakage in the tests of informed Parazo that this was a serious matter declined and refused to reveal the identity of the under the law he could be punished if he refused to
the bar examinations came close on the heels of the involving the confidence of the public in the persons supposed to have given him the data and make the revelation, punishment which may even
revelations in the Philippine Collegian, official organ regularity and cleanliness of the Bar Examinations information on which his news item was based, involve imprisonment.
of the student body of the University of the and also in the Supreme Court which conducted despite the repeated appeals made to his civic spirit,
Philippines, on recent government tests wherein the said examinations, and repeatedly appealed to his and for his cooperations, in order to enable this Because of the seriousness of the matter, Parazo
questions had come into the possession of nearly all civic spirit and sense of public service, pleading with Court to conduct a thorough investigation of the was advised to think it over and consider the
the graduates of some private technical schools. and urging him to reveal the names of his informants alleged bar examination anomaly, Resolved, to consequences, and if he need time within which to
so that the Supreme Court may be in a position to authorize Mr. Justice Montemayor to cite Mr. Parazo do this and so that he might even consult the editor
To the publication, evidently, the attention of the start and conduct the necessary investigation in before him, explain to him that the interests of the and publisher of his paper, the Star Reporter, he
Supreme Court must have been called, and Mr. order to verify their charge and complaint and take State demand and so this Court requires that he could be given an extension of time, and at his
Justice Padilla, who had previously been designated action against the party or parties responsible for the reveal the source or sources of his information and request, the investigation was postponed to October
Chairman of the Committee of Bar Examiners for alleged irregularity and anomaly, if found true, but of his news item, and to warn him that his refusal to 15, 1948. On that date he appeared, accompanied
this year, by authority of the Court, instructed Mr. Parazo consistently refused to make the revelation. make the revelation demanded will be regarded as by his counsel, Atty. Felixberto M. Serrano. The
Jose de la Cruz as Commissioner with the contempt of court and penalized accordingly. Mr. writer of this opinion in the presence of his counsel,
assistance of Mr. E. Soriano, Clerk of Court to cite In the meantime, the writer of this opinion who was Justice Montemayor will advise the Court of the several newspapermen, Clerk of Court Soriano,
Mr. Parazo for questioning and investigation. In this appointed to the Supreme Court as associate result. Deputy Clerk of Court Cruz, and Mr. Chanliongco
connection, and for purposes of showing the interest Justice in the latter part of August, 1948, was made a formal demand on Mr. Parazo to reveal the
of the Supreme Court in the news item and its designated to succeed Mr. Justice Padilla as Acting upon this resolution, the writer of this opinion identities of his informants, under oath, but he
implications, it may here be stated that this Court is Chairman of the Committee of Bar Examiners when cited Mr. Parazo to appear before him on October declined and refused to make the revelation. At the
and for many years has been, in charge of the Bar the said Justice was appointed Secretary of Justice. 13, 1948. He appeared on the date set and it was request of his counsel, that before this Court take
Examinations held every year, including that of this The writer of this opinion was furnished a copy of clearly explained to him that the interest of the State action upon his refusal to reveal, he be accorded a
year, held in August, 1948. Section 13, Article VIII of the transcript of the investigation conducted on demands and this court requires that he reveal the hearing, with the consent of the Court first obtained,
the Constitution of the Philippines authorizes this September 18, 1948, and he made a report thereof source of sources of his information and of his news a public hearing was held on the same day, October
Court to promulgate rules concerning admission to to the Court in banc, resulting in the issuance of the item; that this was a very serious matter involving 15, 1948 in the course of which, Attorney Serrano
the practice of law, and pursuant to that authority, resolution of this Court dated October 7, 1948, the confidence of the people in general and the law extensively and ably argued the case of his client,
Rule 127 of the Rules of Court was promulgated, which reads as follows: practitioners and bar examinees in particular, in the

Page 75 of 132
invoking the benefits of Republic Act No. 53, the first author of the original bill proposed an amendment on and discussion of the bill in the Senate that the habeas corpus, in case of invasion, insurrection,
section of which reads as follows: by eliminating the clause added by the committee — phrase "public interest" was used interchangeably etc., when thepublic safety requires it.
"unless the court finds that such revelation is by some Senators with the phrase "interest of the
SECTION 1. The publisher, editor or duly accredited demanded by the public interest," claiming that said state." For instance, although the bill, as amended The phrase "National Security" is used at the
reporter of any newspaper, magazine or periodical clause would kill the purposed of the bill. This by the Committee presided by Senator Cuenco, beginning of Book II of the Revised Penal Code,
of general circulation cannot be compelled to reveal amendment of Senator Sotto was discussed. used the words "public interest, "when Senator thus: Title I, — Crimes against National Security and
the source of any news-report or information Various Senators objected to the elimination of the Cuenco sponsored the bill before the Senate he the law of Nations, Chapter I, — Crimes
appearing in said publication which was related in clause already referred to on the ground that without used in his speech or remarks the phrase "interest of against National Security. Then, more recently, the
confidence to such publisher, editor or reporter, such exception and by giving complete immunity to the State" (interes del Estado). Again, although the phrase "National Security" was used in section 2,
unless the court or a House or committee of editors, reporters, etc., many abuses may be bill, as sponsored by the Cuenco Committee and and the phrase  "public security" was equally used in
Congress finds that such revelation is demanded by committed. Senator Cuenco, Committee chairman, discussed by the Senate, used the words "public section 19, of Commonwealth Act No. 682 creating
the interest of the state. in advocating the disapproval of the Sotto interest, "Senator Sebastian referred to the the People's Court, promulgated on September 25,
amendment, and in defending the exception exception by using the phrase "interest of the state." 1945. If, as contended, the Philippine Congress,
This Court has given this case prolonged, careful particularly the Philippine Senate, had meant to limit
embodied in the amendment introduced by the This understanding of at least two of the Senators,
and mature consideration, involving as it does the exception to the immunity of newspapermen
Committee, consisting in the clause: "unless the who took part in the discussion, about the similarity
interesting and important points of law as well as only to cases where the "security of the state," i.e.,
court finds that such revelation is demanded by the or interchangeability of the two phrases "public
questions of national importance. Counsel contends "National Security" is involved, it could easily and
public interest," said that the Committee could not interest" and "interest of the estate," may account
that the phrase "interest of the state" found at the readily have used such phrase or any one of similar
accept the Sotto amendment because there may be for the readiness or lack of objection on the part of
end of section 1 of Republic Act No. 53 means and phrases like  "public safety," "National Security,"
cases, perhaps few, in which the interest of the the Senate, after it had rejected the first Sotto
refers only to the security of the state, that is to say or  "public security" of which it must have been
public or the interest of the state  required that the amendment, to accept the second Sotto
— that only when National Security or public familiar. Since it did not do so, there is valid reason
names of the informants be published or known. He amendment, changing the phrase "public interest"
safety is involved, may this Court compel the to believe that that was not in the mind and intent of
gave as one example a case of a newspaperman to "interest of the state."
defendant to reveal the source or sources of his the legislators, and that, in using the phrase "interest
publishing information referring to a theft of the
news report or information. We confess that it was In referring to a case wherein the security of the of the state," it extended the scope and the limits of
plans of forts or fortifications. He argued that if the
not easy to decide this legal question on which the state or public safety was involved, such as the theft the exception when a newspaperman or reporter
immunity accorded a newspaperman should be
conviction or acquittal of Parazo hinges. As a matter of the plans of fortifications, Senator Cuenco was may be compelled to reveal the sources of his
absolute, as sought by the Sotto amendment, the
of facts, the vote of the Justice is not unanimous. obviously giving it only as an example of what he information.
author of the theft might go scott-free. When the
Sotto amendment was put to a vote, it was meant by "interest of the state;" it was not meant to
In an effort to determine the intent of the Legislature The phrase "interest of the state" is quite broad and
disapproved. Finally, Senator Sotto proposed be the only case or example. We do not propose to
that passed Republic Act No. 53, particularly the extensive. It is of course more general and broader
another amendment by changing the phrase "public define or fix the limits or scope of the phrase
Senate were it originated, we examined the record than "security of the state." Although not as broad
interest" at the end of section 1 as amended by the "interest of the state;" but we can say that the
of the proceedings in said legislative body when this and comprehensive as "public interest" which may
Committee be changed to and substituted by the phrase "interest of the state" can not be confined
Act, then Senate Bill No. 6 was being discussed. We include most anything though of minor importance,
phrase "interest of the state," claiming that the and limited to the "security of the state" or
gathered from the said record that the original bill but affecting the public, such as for instance, the
phrase public interest was too elastic. Without much to  "public safety"  alone. These synonymous
prepared by Senator Sotto provided that the establishment and maintenance of barrio roads,
discussion this last amendment was approved, and phrases, — "security of the state" and  "public
immunity to be accorded a publisher, editor, or electric light and ice plants, parks, markets, etc., the
this phrase is now found in the Act as finally safety," — are not uncommon terms and we can
reporter of any newspaper was absolute and that phrase "interest of the estate" even under a
approved. well presume that the legislators were familiar with
under no circumstance could he be compelled to conservative interpretation, may and does include
them. The phrase "public safety," is used in Article
reveal the source of his information or news report. cases and matters of national importance in which
In view of the contention now advanced, that the III, section 1(5) of the Constitution of the Philippines,
The committee, however, under the chairmanship of the whole state and nations, not only a branch or
phrase "interest of the state" is confined to cases where it says that "the privacy of communications
Senator Cuenco inserted an amendment or change, instrumentality thereof such as a province, city or
involving the "security of the state" or  "public and correspondence shall be inviolable except upon
by adding to the end of section 1 of the clause town, or a part of the public, is interested or would
safety," one might wonder or speculate on why the lawful order of the court or when public safety and
"unless the court finds that such revelation is be affected, such as the principal functions of
last amendment proposed by Senator Sotto, order require otherwise;" and Article VII, section
demanded by the public interest." Government like administration of justice, public
changing the phrase "public interest" to "interest of 10(2) of the same Constitution provided that the
the state," was approved without much discussion. President may suspend the privileges of the writ of school system, and such matters like social justice,
When the bill as amended was recommended for
But we notice from the records of the deliberations scientific research, practice of law or of medicine,
approval on second reading, Senator Sotto, the

Page 76 of 132
impeachment of high Government officials, treaties those of other learned professions, attest to this for in them may be born the idea that there is no specially of the Supreme Court as representative of
with other nations, integrity of the three coordinate fact. And one important thing to bear in mind is that need of much law study and preparation inasmuch the Judicial Department, to adopt proper and
branches of the Government, their relations to each the Judiciary, from the Supreme Court down to the as it is possible and not difficult to obtain copies of adequate measures to preserve their integrity, and
other, and the discharge of their functions, etc. Justice of the Peace Courts, provincial fiscalships questions before the examinations and pass them render possible and facilitate the exercise of their
and other prosecuting attorneys, and the legal and be admitted to the Bar. functions, including, as in the present case, the
We are satisfied that the present case easily comes departments of the Government, draw exclusively investigation of charges of error, abuse or
under the phrase "interest of the state." Under from the Bar to fill their positions. Consequently, any The cloud of suspicion would, equally, hang over the misconduct of their officials and subordinates,
constitutional provision, article VIII, section 13, charge or insinuation of anomaly in the conduct of Bar examiners themselves, eight eminent lawyers including lawyers, who are officers of the Court.
Constitution of the Philippines, the Supreme Court Bar Examinations, of necessity is imbued with wide who in a spirit of public service and civic spirit, have (Province of Tarlac vs. Gale, 26 Phil., 350; 21 C.J.S.
takes charge of the admission of members to the and general interest and national importance. consented to serve on the Committee of Examiners 41, 138.) As we have previously stated, the
Philippine Bar. By its Rules of Court, it has at the request and designation of this Court. They revelation demanded of the respondent, of the
prescribed the qualifications of the candidates to the If it is true that Bar Examination questions, for some would be suspected, — one or two or more of them identity of his informants, is essential and necessary
Bar Examinations, and it has equally prescribed the reason or another, find their way out and get into the — that through negligence, or connivance, or to the investigation of the charge contained in the
subject of the said Bar Examinations. Every year, the hands of Bar examinees before the examinations are downright corruption, they have made possible the publication already mentioned.
Supreme Court appoints the Bar examiners who actually given, and as a result thereof some release if they have not themselves actually
prepare the questions, then correct the examination examinees succeed in illegally and improperly released, before examination day, the questions It will be noticed from Parazo's news item as quoted
papers submitted by the examinees, and later make obtaining passing grades and are later admitted to they had prepared. The employees of the Supreme in the first part of this decision, that, informants, law
their report to the Supreme Court. Only those Bar the Bar and to the practice of law, when otherwise Court in charge of the Bar Examinations, specially graduates and bar examinees, were denouncing the
Examination candidates who are found to have they should not be, then the present members of the those who copy or mimeograph the original copies supposed anomaly — consisting of the alleged
obtained to passing grade are admitted to the Bar legal profession would have reason to resent and be furnished by the Bar examiners, would all be under leakage of the Bar Examination questions — to the
and licensed to practice law. There are now alarmed; and if this is continued it would not be long suspicion. And, lastly, and more important still, the Supreme Court for due investigation. If those
thousands of members of the Philippine Bar, before the legal profession will have fallen into Supreme Court itself which has to overall persons really meant and intended to make a bona
scattered all over the Philippines, practicing law or disrepute. The public would naturally lose supervision and control over the examinations, fide and effective denunciation, with expectation of
occupying important Government posts requiring confidence in the lawyers, specially in the new ones, would share the suspicion, as a result of which the results, the right place to air their grievance was the
membership in the Bar as a prerequisite, and every because a person contemplating to go to court to confidence of the people in this High Tribunal, which Supreme Court itself, not a newspaper; and if they
year, quite a number, sometimes several hundreds, seek redress or to defend himself before it would not public confidence, the members of this Court like to truly wanted an investigation, they should have
are added to the legal fold. The Supreme Court and know whether a particular lawyer to whom he is think and believe, it still enjoys, might be affected come forward and furnished or stood ready to
the Philippine Bar have always tried to maintain a entrusting his case has legally passed the Bar and shaken. All these considerations of vital furnish the facts on which to base and from which to
high standard for the legal profession, both in Examinations because of sufficient and adequate importance, in our opinion, can and will sufficiently start an investigation, instead of concealing
academic preparation and legal training, as well as preparation and training, and that he is honest, or cause the present case to fall and be included within themselves behind the curtain of press immunity.
in honesty and fair dealing. The Court and the whether he was one of those who had succeeded in the meaning of the phrase "interest of the state,"
licensed lawyers themselves are vitally interested in getting hold of Bar Examination questions in involving as it does, not only the interests of Examining the news item in question, it is therein
keeping this high standard; and one of the ways of advance, passed the Bar Examinations illegally, and students and graduates of the law schools and claimed and assured that Bar Examination questions
achieving this end is to admit to the practice of this then started his legal career with this act of colleges, and of the entire legal profession of this in at least one subject had been obtained and used
noble profession only those persons who are known dishonesty. Particularly, the Bar examinees who, by country as well as the good name and reputation of by bar examinees coming from a certain university,
to be honest, possess good moral character, and intense study and conscientious preparations, have the members of the Committee of Bar Examiners, one week before the examinations were actually
show proficiency in and knowledge of the law by the honestly passed the Bar Examinations and are including the employees of the Supreme Court held. Parazo in his statements and answers during
standard set by this Court by passing the Bar admitted to practice law, would be affected by this having charge of and connections with said the investigation said that examination questions in
Examinations honestly and in the regular and usual anomaly, because they would ever be under a cloud examinations, but also the highest Tribunal of the several subjects were involved in the anomaly. But
manner. It is of public knowledge that perhaps by of suspicion, since from the point of view of the land itself which represents one of the three no copy or copies of said examination questions
general inclination or the conditions obtaining in this public, they might be among those who had made coordinate and independent branches or were furnished us. No one is willing to testify that he
country, or the great demand for the services of use of Bar Examination questions obtained before departments of the Philippine Government. actually saw said alleged copies of examination
licensed lawyers, law as compared to other hand. And, incidentally, the morale of the hundreds questions; that they were actually and carefully
professions, is the most popular in these islands. of students and graduates of the different law In support of if not in addition to the power granted compared with the legitimate examination questions
The predominantly greater number of members of schools, studying law and later preparing for the Bar by section 1 of Republic Act. No. 53 to this Court, given out on the day of the examination and found to
the Bar, schools and colleges of law as compared to Examinations, would be affected, even disastrously, we have the inherent power of courts in general, be identical; no one is ready and willing to reveal the

Page 77 of 132
identity of the persons or bar examinees said to herein reveals the identities of his informants, and correction of many or all of the examination papers, it is advisable or necessary to mete out severe
have been seen with the said Bar Examination those informants and or others with facts and it is found that only very few have passed it, the penalties to meet a situation of an alarming number
questions, although they as well as the university reliable evidence, aid and cooperate with the Court examiner might reasonably think that the questions of cases of a certain offense or a crime wave, and,
where they came from, was known; and even the in its endeavor to further examine and probe into the he gave were unduly difficult or hard to understand, considering further the youthful age of the
law subjects to which the questions pertained are charges contained in the news items, said charges or too long, as a result of which he may be more respondent, the majority of the members of this
not disclosed; and, lastly, we are not allowed to are considered and held to be without basis, proof liberal and be more lenient and make allowances. Court have decided to order, as it hereby orders, his
know even the identity of respondent Parazo's or foundation. On the hand, if too many obtain passing grade, the immediate arrest and confinement in jail for a period
informants who claim to have seen all these things. examiner may think that the examination questions of one (1) month, unless, before the expiration of
When the Supreme Court decided to demand of the were too easy and constitute an inadequate that period he makes to this Court the revelation
In this connection it may be stated that in the las Bar respondent herein that he reveal the names of his measure of the legal knowledge and training demanded of him. So ordered.
Examinations held in August, 1948, approximately informants, it was not impelled or motivated by mere required to be a lawyer, and so he may raise his
nine hundred candidates took them, each candidate idle curiosity. It truly wanted information on which to standard and become more strict in his correction of A.C. No. 4921            March 6, 2003
writing his answers in a book for each subject. There start an investigation because it is vitally interested the papers and his appreciation of the answers. So,
were eight subjects, each belonging to and in keeping the Bar Examinations clean and above CARMELITA I. ZAGUIRRE, complainant, 
in a case where examinees, especially if many,
corresponding to each one of the eight bar board and specially, not only to protect the vs.
succeed in getting hold of questions long before
examiners. There were therefore eight sets of bar members of the Bar and those aspiring for ATTY. ALFREDO CASTILLO, respondent.
examinations day, and study and prepare the
examination questions, and multiplying these eight membership therein and the public dealing with the answers to those questions, it may result that when PER CURIAM:
sets of questions by nine hundred candidates, gives members thereof and the Bar Examiners who the examiner finds that many of the examinees have
a total of seven thousand two hundred (7,200) cooperate with and act as agents of this Court in easily and correctly answered the questions, he may Before this Court is a Petition for Disbarment filed by
examination papers involved, in the hand of eight preparing the examination questions and correcting think that said questions were too easy, raise the Carmelita I. Zaguirre against Atty. Alfredo Castillo on
different examiners. The examination books or the examination papers, but also, as already stated, standard by being strict in his correction of the the ground of Gross Immoral Conduct.
papers bear no names or identifications of their to keep the confidence of the people in this High papers, thereby giving a grade below passing to a
writers or owners and said ownership and Tribunal as regards the discharge of its function number of examinees who otherwise would have The facts as borne by the records are as follows:
identification will not be known until the books or relative to the admission to the practice of law. validly passed the examinations.
papers are all corrected and graded. Without definite These, it can only do by investigating any Bar Complainant and respondent met sometime in 1996
assurance based on reliable witnesses under oath Examination anomaly, fixing responsibility and In conclusion, we find that the interest of the state in when the two became officemates at the National
that the alleged anomaly had actually been punishing those found guilty, even annulling the present case demands that the respondent Bureau of Investigation (NBI).1 Respondent courted
committed, — evidence on the identity of the examinations already held, or else declaring the Angel J. Parazo reveal the source or sources of his complainant and promised to marry her while
persons in possession of the alleged copies of charges as not proven, if, as a result of the information which formed the basis of his news representing himself to be single.2 Soon they had an
questions prematurely released or illegally obtained investigation, it is found that there is insufficiency or items or story in the September 14, 1948 issue of intimate relationship that started sometime in 1996
and made use of, the law subjects or subjects lack of evidence. In demanding from the respondent the Star Reporter, quoted at the beginning of his and lasted until 1997.3 During their affair, respondent
involved, the university from which said persons that he reveal the sources of his information, this decision, and that, in refusing to make the revelation was preparing for the bar examinations which he
come, this Court does not feel capable of or Court did not intend to punish those informants or which this Court required of him, he committed passed. On May 10, 1997, he was admitted as a
warranted in taking any step, such as blindly and hold them liable. It merely wanted their help and contempt of Court. The respondent repeatedly member of the Philippine Bar.4 It was only around
desperately revising each and every one of the 7,200 cooperation. In this Court's endeavor to probe stated during the investigation that he knew the the first week of May 1997 that complainant first
examination books with the fond but forlorn hope of thoroughly the anomaly, or irregularity allegedly names and identities of the persons who furnished learned that respondent was already married when
finding any similarity or identity in the answers of any committed, it was its intention not only to adopt the him the information. In other words, he omitted and his wife went to her office and confronted her about
group of examinees and basing thereon any definite necessary measures to punish the guilty parties, if still refuses to do an act commanded by this Court her relationship with respondent. 5 On September 10,
finding or conclusion. Apart from the enormity of the the charges are found to be true, but also even to which is yet in his power to perform. (Rule 64, 1997, respondent, who by now is a lawyer, executed
task and its hopelessness, this Court may not and annul the examinations themselves, in justice to the section 7, Rules of Court.)Ordinarily, in such cases, an affidavit, admitting his relationship with the
cannot base its findings and conclusions, especially innocent parties who had taken but did not pass the he can and should be imprisoned indefinitely until he complainant and recognizing the unborn child she
in any serious and delicate matter as is the present, examinations. We say this because in every complied with the demand. However, considering was carrying as his.6 On December 9, 1997,
on that kind of evidence. Under these examination, whether conducted by the Government that case like the present are not common or complainant gave birth to a baby girl, Aletha
circumstances, this Court, for lack of basis, data and or by a private institution, certain standards are frequent, in this jurisdiction, and that there is no Jessa.7 By this time however, respondent had
information, is unable to conduct, nay, even start, an unconsciously adopted on which to base the reason and immediate necessity for imposing a started to refuse recognizing the child and giving her
investigation; and, unless and until the respondent passing grade. For instance, if, as a result of the heavy penalty, as may be done in other cases where any form of support.8

Page 78 of 132
Respondent claims that: he never courted the Furthermore, such conduct must not only be monthly support of your daughter. However it shall knowing full well his marital status, still it does not
complainant; what transpired between them was immoral, but grossly immoral. That is, it must be so not be less than P500 but not more than P1,000." 15 absolve him of gross immorality for what is in
nothing but mutual lust and desire; he never corrupt as to constitute a criminal act or so question in a case like this is respondent's fitness to
represented himself as single since it was known in unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree In the recent case of Luguid vs. Judge Camano, be a member of the legal profession. It is not
the NBI that he was already married and with or committed under such scandalous or revolting Jr., the Court in castigating a judge stated that: dependent whether or not the other party knowingly
children;9 complainant is almost 10 years older than circumstances as to shock the common sense of engaged in an immoral relationship with him.
". . . even as an ordinary lawyer, respondent has to
him and knew beforehand that he is already decency."13
conform to the strict standard of conduct demanded We agree with the IBP that the defense of in pari
married;10 the child borne by complainant it not his,
In his affidavit dated September 10, 1997, duly of members of the profession. Certainly, fathering delicto is not feasible. The Court held in Mortel vs.
because the complainant was seeing other men at
acknowledged before a notary public, he declared children by a woman other than his lawful wife fails Aspiras:
the time they were having an affair. 11 He admits that
explicitly: to meet these standards." 16
he signed the affidavit dated September 10, 1997
"In a disbarment proceeding, it is immaterial that the
but explains that he only did so to save complainant Siring a child with a woman other than his wife is a
"1. That I had a relationship with one Carmelita complainant is in pari delicto because this is not a
from embarrassment. Also, he did not know at the conduct way below the standards of morality
Zaguirre, my officemate; proceeding to grant relief to the complainant, but
time that complainant was seeing other men.12 required of every lawyer.17 one to purge the law profession of unworthy
"2. That as a result of that relationship, she is members, to protect the public and the courts."22
After due haring, the IBP Commission on Bar Moreover, the attempt of respondent to renege on
presently pregnant with my child;
Discipline found Atty. Alfredo Castillo guilty of gross his notarized statement recognizing and undertaking The illicit relationship with Carmelita took place while
immoral conduct and recommends that he be meted "3. That I hereby voluntarily recognize the child now to support his child by Carmelita demonstrates a respondent was preparing to take the bar
the penalty of indefinite suspension from the under (sic) her womb to be my own; certain unscrupulousness on his part which is highly examinations. Thus, it cannot be said that it is
practice of law. censurable, unbecoming a member of a noble unknown to him that an applicant for admission to
"4. That I am willing to support the said child profession, tantamount to self-stultification. 18
The Court agrees with the findings and membership in the bar must show that he is
henceforth, including his/her personal and medical
recommendation of the IBP. possessed of good moral character, a requirement
needs, education, housing, food, clothing and other This Court has repeatedly held:
which is not dispensed with upon admission to
necessities for living, which I will give through his/her
The Code of Professional Responsibility provides: "as officers of the court, lawyers must not only in membership of the bar.23 This qualification is not
mother, Carmelita Zaguirre, until he/she becomes of
fact be of good moral character but must also be only a condition precedent to admission to the legal
"Rule 1.01 — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, legal age and capable to live on his/her own;
seen to be of good moral character and leading lives profession, but its continued possession is essential
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct." to maintain one's good standing in the
"5. That I undertake to sign the birth certificate as an in accordance with the highest moral standards of
additional proof that he/she is my child; however, the community. More specifically, a member of the profession;24 it is a continuing requirement to the
xxx           xxx           xxx
my failure to sign does not negate the recognition Bar and officer of the court is not only required to practice of law25 and therefore admission to the bar
"CANON 7 — A lawyer shall at all times uphold the and acknowledgement already done herein; refrain from adulterous relationships or the keeping does not preclude a subsequent judicial inquiry,
integrity and dignity of the legal profession, and of mistresses but must also so behave himself as to upon proper complaint, into any question
support the activities of the Integrated Bar." "6. That I am executing this affidavit without avoid scandalizing the public by creating the belief concerning his mental or moral fitness before he
compulsion on my part and being a lawyer, I have that he is flouting those moral standards." 19 became a lawyer. This is because his admission to
xxx           xxx           xxx full knowledge of the consequence of such practice merely creates a rebuttable presumption
acknowledgment and recognition."14 While respondent does not deny having an extra- that he has all the qualifications to become a lawyer.
"Rule 7.03 — A lawyer shall not engage in conduct marital affair with complainant he seeks
that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, More incriminating is his handwritten letter dated understanding from the Court, pointing out that The Court held:
nor should he, whether in public or private life, March 12, 1998 which states in part: "men by nature are polygamous," 20 and that what
behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of "The practice of law is not a right but a privilege
happened between them was "nothing but mutual
the legal profession." "Ayoko ng umabot tayo sa kung saan-saan pa. All bestowed by the State on those who show that they
lust and desire."21 The Court is not convinced. In
your officemates, e.g., Ate Ging, Glo, Guy and possess, and continue to possess, the qualifications
fact, it is appalled at the reprehensible, amoral
Immoral conduct has been defined as: others (say) that I am the look like(sic) of your required by law for the conferment of such privilege.
attitude of the respondent.
daughter. We must stress that membership in the bar is a
"x x x that conduct which is so willful, flagrant, or privilege burdened with conditions. A lawyer has the
Respondent claims that he did not use any
shameless as to show indifference to the opinion of "Here's my bargain. I will help you in supporting your privilege to practice law only during good behavior.
deception to win her affection. Granting arguendo
good and respectable members of the community. daughter, but I cannot promise fix amount for He can be deprived of his license for misconduct
that complainant entered into a relationship with him

Page 79 of 132
ascertained and declared by judgment of the court and ordered to suffer INDEFINITE SUSPENSION to Dadiangas, Cotabato (now Gen. Santos City), of the misery they allegedly suffered because of their
after giving him the opportunity to be heard." 26 from the practice of law. where his last three children were born and where father's acts, including deception and intrigues
he practiced his profession until his appointment as against them. Thus, despite having previously
and in Dumadag vs. Lumaya: Let a copy of this Decision be attached to Atty. a CFI Judge in Butuan City on January 30, 1976. withdrawn a similar case which she filed in 1976,
Castillo's personal record in the Office of the Bar complainant was forced to file the present petition
"The practice of law is a privilege burdened with Confidant and a copy thereof be furnished the IBP In August, 1976, shortly after being appointed as CFI for disbarment under the compulsion of the maternal
conditions. Adherence to the rigid standards of and all courts throughout the country. Judge, respondent began cohabiting with a certain impulse to shield and protect her children from the
mental fitness, maintenance of the highest degree of Elena (Helen) Peña, in Nasipit, Agusan del Norte. On despotic and cruel acts of their own father.
morality and faithful compliance with the rules of the SO ORDERED. December 28, 1977, Elena gave birth to their first Complainant secured the assistance of her eldest
legal profession are the conditions required for child, named Ofelia Sembrano Peña.
A.C. No. 4148               July 30, 1998 daughter, Atty. Ma. Susana Tapucar-Baua, to
remaining a member of good standing of the bar and
represent her in this case.
for enjoying the privilege to practice law."27 In view of this cohabitation, a certain Atty.
REMEDIOS RAMIREZ TAPUCAR, complainant, 
Tranquilino Calo filed an administrative complaint Consistent with Section 20, Rule 139-B of the Rules
Respondent repeatedly engaged in sexual congress vs.
against respondent for immorality. After of Court, the matter was referred to the Commission
with a woman not his wife and now refuses to Atty. LAURO L. TAPUCAR, respondent.
investigation, the penalty of suspension from office on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the
recognize and support a child whom he previously for a period of six months without pay was meted by
PER CURIAM: Philippines for investigation, report and
recognized and promised to support. Clearly this Court upon respondent. 5 recommendation. After conducting a thorough
therefore, respondent violated the standards of In a letter-complaint dated November 22, 1993, investigation, the Commission through
morality required of the legal profession and should complainant Remedios Ramirez Tapucar sought the Despite this penalty, respondent still continued to
Commissioner Victor C. Fernandez recommended
be disciplined accordingly. disbarment of her husband, Atty. Lauro L. Tapucar, cohabit with Elena, giving rise to another charge of
that respondent be disbarred, and his name be
on the ground of continuing grossly immoral immorality and other administrative cases, such as:
As consistently held by this Court, disbarment shall stricken off the roll of attorneys. Mainly, this was
conduct for cohabiting with a certain Elena (Helen) conduct unbecoming an officer of the court, and
not be meted out if a lesser punishment could be premised on the ground that, notwithstanding
Peña under scandalous circumstances. 1 grossly immoral conduct. These cases were
given.28Records show that from the time he took his sanctions previously imposed upon him by the
consolidated and after investigation, this Court
oath in 1997, he has severed his ties with Honorable Supreme Court, respondent continued
Prior to this complaint, respondent was already ordered his dismissal and separation from the
complainant and now lives with his wife and children the illicit liaison with Elena. 7
administratively charged four times for conduct service. 6
in Mindoro. As of now, the Court does not perceive unbecoming an officer of the court. In Administrative In his report Commissioner Fernandez noted that,
this fact as an indication of respondent's effort to Matter No. 1740, resolved on April 11, 1980, But his dismissal as a judge did not impel
instead of contradicting the charges against him,
mend his ways or that he recognizes the impact of respondent, at that time the Judge of Butuan City, respondent to mend his ways. He continued living
respondent displayed arrogance, and even made a
his offense on the noble profession of law. was meted the penalty of six months suspension with Elena, which resulted in the birth on September
mockery of the law and the Court, as when he said:
Nevertheless, the Court deems it more appropriate without pay, 2 while in Administrative Matters Nos. 20, 1989, of their second child named Laella Peña
under the circumstances that indefinite suspension 1720, 1911 and 2300-CFI, which were Tapucar. Moreover, he completely abandoned I have been ordered suspended by Supreme Court
should be meted out than disbarment. The consolidated, 3 this Court on January 31, 1981 complainant and his children by her. for two months without pay in 1980 for having a
suspension shall last until such time that respondent ordered the separation from the service of mistress, the same girl Ms. Elena (Helen) Peña, now
is able to show, to the full satisfaction of the Court, Respondent later moved from Nasipit, Agusan del
respondent. 4 my wife. Being ordered separated in later
that he has instilled in himself a firm conviction of Norte back to Antipolo, Rizal, bringing along Elena
administrative case constitute double jeopardy. If
maintaining moral integrity and uprightness required Now he faces disbarment. and their two children. And on March 5, 1992,
now disbarred for marrying Ms. Elena Peña will
of every member of the profession. respondent contracted marriage with Elena in a
constitute triple jeopardy. If that's the law so be it. 8
The records reveal the following facts: ceremony solemnized by MTC Judge Isagani A.
The rule is settled that a lawyer may be suspended Geronimo of Antipolo, Rizal. This was done while the Based on said report, the Board of Governors of the
or disbarred for any misconduct, even if it pertains From the Report and Recommendation of the respondent's marriage to complainant subsists, as Integrated Bar of the Philippines, passed on May 17,
to his private activities, as long as it shows him to be Commission on Bar Discipline, it appears that nothing on record shows the dissolution thereof. 1997, a Resolution adopting the Commissioner's
wanting in moral character, honesty, probity or good complainant and respondent married on October 29,
recommendation, as follows:
demeanor.29 1953 at the Sacred Heart Roman Catholic Church in Complainant, in the meanwhile, had migrated to
Quezon City. They established their residence in United States of America upon her retirement from RESOLUTION NO. XII-97-97
ACCORDINGLY, in view of the foregoing, the Court Antipolo, Rizal, where eight of their eleven children the government service in 1990. However, her
finds respondent GUILTY of Gross Immoral Conduct were born. In 1962 respondent relocated his family children, who remained in Antipolo, kept her posted Adm. Case No. 4148

Page 80 of 132
Remedios Ramirez Tapucar vs. Professional Responsibility always. Lawyers must times to honor and maintain the dignity of his against him. The IBP Board of Governors, tasked to
maintain a high standard of legal proficiency, as well profession, and thus improve not only the public determine whether he still merited the privileges
Atty. Lauro L. Tapucar as morality including honesty, integrity and fair regard for the Bar but also the administration of extended to a member of the legal profession,
dealing. For they are at all times subject to the justice. resolved the matter against him. For indeed,
RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby
scrutinizing eye of public opinion and community evidence of grossly immoral conduct abounds
ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and On these considerations, the Court may disbar or
approbation. Needless to state, those whose against him and could not be explained away.
Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner suspend a lawyer for misconduct, whether in his
conduct — both public and private — fails this Keeping a mistress, entering into another marriage
in the above-entitled case, herein made part of the professional or private capacity, which shows him to
scrutiny would have to be disciplined and, after while a prior one still subsists, as well as abandoning
Resolution/Decision as Annex "A"; and, finding the be wanting in moral character, in honesty, probity,
appropriate proceedings, penalized accordingly. and/or mistreating complainant and their children,
recommendation therein to be fully supported by the and good demeanor, thus proving unworthy to show his disregard of family obligations, morality
evidence on record and the applicable laws and Moreover, it should be recalled that respondent here continue as an officer of the court. 17 and decency, the law and the lawyer's oath. Such
rules, Respondent Atty. Lauro L. Tapucar is hereby was once a member of the judiciary, a fact that gross misbehavior over a long period of time clearly
DISBARRED and that his name be stricken off the aggravates his professional infractions. For having The power to disbar, however, is one to be
shows a serious flaw in respondent's character, his
roll of attorneys. occupied that place of honor in the Bench, he knew exercised with great caution, and only in a clear
moral indifference to scandal in the community, and
a judge's actuations ought to be free from any case of misconduct which seriously affects the
We find the Report and Recommendation of his outright defiance of established norms. All these
appearance of impropriety. 11 For a judge is the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of
Commissioner Fernandez, as approved and adopted could not but put the legal profession in disrepute
visible representation of the law and, more the Court and member of the bar. 18 For disbarment
by the Board of Governors of IBP, more than and place the integrity of the administration of
importantly, of justice. Ordinary citizens consider proceedings are intended to afford the parties
sufficient to justify and support the foregoing justice in peril, hence the need for strict but
him as a source of strength that fortifies their will to thereto full opportunity to vindicate their cause
Resolution, herein considered as the appropriate disciplinary action.
obey the law. 12 Indeed, a judge should avoid the before disciplinary action is taken, to assure the
recommendation to this Court by said Board general public that those who are tasked with the
slightest infraction of the law in all of his actuations, IN VIEW THEREOF, respondent Atty. Lauro L.
pursuant to Rule 139-B, Sec. 12 (b), of the Rules of duty of administering justice are competent,
lest it be a demoralizing example to others. 13 Surely, Tapucar is hereby DISBARRED. The Clerk of Court
Court. * We are in agreement that respondent's honorable, trustworthy men and women in whom the
respondent could not have forgotten the Code of is directed to strike out his name from the Roll of
actuations merit the penalty of disbarment. Courts and the clients may repose full confidence.
Judicial Conduct entirely as to lose its moral Attorneys.
Well settled is the rule that good moral character is imperatives. 14
In the case of Obusan vs. Obusan, Jr., 19 a complaint SO ORDERED.
not only a condition precedent for admission to the for disbarment was filed against a member of the
Like a judge who is held to a high standard of
legal profession, but it must also remain intact in bar by his wife. She was able to prove that he had A.C. No. 4807             March 22, 2000
integrity and ethical conduct, 15 an attorney-at-law is
order to maintain one's good standing in that abandoned his wife and their son; and that he had
also invested with public trust. Judges and lawyers
exclusive and honored fraternity. 9 There is perhaps adulterous relations with a married but separated MANUEL N. CAMACHO, complainant, 
serve in the administration of justice. Admittedly, as
no profession after that of the sacred ministry in woman. Respondent was not able to overcome the vs.
officers of the court, lawyers must ensure the faith
which a high-toned morality is more imperative than evidence presented by his wife that he was guilty of ATTYS. LUIS MEINRADO C. PANGULAYAN,
and confidence of the public that justice is
that of law. 10 The Code of Professional grossly immoral conduct. In another case, 20 a REGINA D. BALMORES, CATHERINE V. LAUREL
administered with dignity and civility. A high degree
Responsibility mandates that: lawyer was disbarred when he abandoned his lawful and HUBERT JOAQUIN P. BUSTOS of
of moral integrity is expected of a lawyer in the
wife and cohabited with another woman who had PANGULAYAN AND ASSOCIATES LAW
Rule 1.01. A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, community where he resides. He must maintain due
borne him a child. The Court held that respondent OFFICES, respondents.
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. regard for public decency in an orderly society.
failed to maintain the highest degree of morality
VITUG, J.:
Rule 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that A lawyer is expected at all times to uphold the expected and required of a member of the bar.
adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor integrity and dignity of the legal profession by Respondent lawyers stand indicted for a violation of
faithfully performing his duties to society, to the bar, In the present case, the record shows that despite
should he, whether in public or private life, behave in the Code of Professional Ethics, specifically Canon 9
to the courts and to his clients. 16 Exacted from him, previous sanctions imposed upon him by this Court,
a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal thereof, viz:
as a member of the profession charged with the respondent continued his illicit liaison with a woman
profession. (Emphasis supplied.)
responsibility to stand as a shield in the defense of other than his lawfully-wedded wife. The report of A lawyer should not in any way communicate upon
As this Court often reminds members of the Bar, what is right, are such positive qualities of decency, the Commissioner assigned to investigate the subject of controversy with a party represented
they must live up to the standards and norms truthfulness and responsibility that have been thoroughly the complaint found respondent far from by counsel, much less should he undertake to
expected of the legal profession, by upholding the compendiously described as "moral character." To contrite; on the contrary, he exhibited a cavalier negotiate or compromise the matter with him, but
ideals and tenets embodied in the Code of achieve such end, every lawyer needs to strive at all attitude, even arrogance, in the face of charges should only deal with his counsel. It is incumbent

Page 81 of 132
upon the lawyer most particularly to avoid everything Ejercito, and Cleo B. Villareiz, were all members of On 19 June 1999, the Board of Governors of the acknowledging guilt for violating the AMA
that may tend to mislead a party not represented by the Editorial Board of DATALINE, who apparently Integrated Bar of the Philippines ("IBP") passed COMPUTER COLLEGE MANUAL FOR
counsel and he should not undertake to advise him had caused to be published some objectionable Resolution No. XIII-99-163, thus: DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS and agreed among others
as to law. features or articles in the paper. The 3-member to terminate all civil, criminal and administrative
Student Disciplinary Tribunal was immediately RESOLVED to ADOPT and APPROVE, as it is hereby proceedings which they may have against the
Atty. Manuel N. Camacho filed a complaint against convened, and after a series of hearings, it found the ADOPTED and APPROVED, the Report and AMACC arising from their previous dismissal.
the lawyers comprising the Pangulayan and students guilty of the use of indecent language and Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner
Associates Law Offices, namely, Attorneys Luis unauthorized use of the student publication funds. in the above-entitled case, herein made part of this x x x           x x x          x x x
Meinrado C. Pangulayan, Regina D. Balmores, The body recommended the penalty of expulsion Resolution/Decision as Annex "A", and, finding the
Catherine V. Laurel, and Herbert Joaquin P. Bustos. recommendation fully supported by the evidence on 3. Consequently, as soon as possible, an Urgent
against the erring students.
Complainant, the hired counsel of some expelled record and the applicable laws and rules, with an Motion to Withdraw from Civil Case No. Q-97-30549
students from the AMA Computer College The denial of the appeal made by the students to Dr. amendment Atty. Meinrado Pangulayan is will by filed them. 1âwphi1
("AMACC"), in an action for the Issuance of a Writ of Amable R. Aguiluz V, AMACC President, gave rise to suspended from the practice of law for SIX (6)
The Court can only thus concur with the IBP
Preliminary Mandatory Injunction and for Damages, the commencement of Civil Case No. Q-97-30549 MONTHS for being remiss in his duty and
Investigating Commission and the IBP Board of
docketed Civil Case No. Q-97-30549 of the Regional on 14th March 1997 before the Regional Trial Court, DISMISSAL of the case against the other
Governors in their findings; nevertheless, the
Trial Court, Branch 78, of Quezon City, charged that Branch 78, of Quezon City. While the civil case was Respondents for they did not take part in the
recommended six-month suspension would appear
respondents, then counsel for the defendants, still pending, letters of apology and Re-Admission negotiation of the case.
to be somewhat too harsh a penalty given the
procured and effected on separate occasions, Agreements were separately executed by and/or in
It would appear that when the individual letters of circumstances and the explanation of respondent.
without his knowledge, compromise agreements behalf of some of the expelled students, to wit:
("Re-Admission Agreements") with four of his clients Letter of Apology, dated 27 May 1997, of Neil Jason apology and Re-Admission Agreements were
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Luis Meinrado C.
in the aforementioned civil case which, in effect, Salcedo, assisted by his mother, and Re-Admission formalized, complainant was by then already the
Pangulayan is ordered SUSPENDED from the
required them to waive all kinds of claims they might Agreement of 22 June 1997 with the AMACC retained counsel for plaintiff students in the civil
practice of law for a period of THREE (3) MONTHS
have had against AMACC, the principal defendant, President; letter of apology, dated 31 March 1997, case. Respondent Pangulayan had full knowledge of
effective immediately upon his receipt of this
and to terminate all civil, criminal and administrative of Mrs. Veronica B. De Leon for her daughter Melyda this fact. Although aware that the students were
decision. The case against the other respondents is
proceedings filed against it. Complainant averred B. De Leon and Re-Admission Agreement of 09 May represented by counsel, respondent attorney
DISMISSED for insufficiency of evidence.
that such an act of respondents was unbecoming of 1997 with the AMACC President; letter of apology, proceeded, nonetheless, to negotiate with them and
any member of the legal profession warranting either dated 22 May 1997, of Leila Joven, assisted by her their parents without at the very least Let a copy of this decision be entered in the
disbarment or suspension from the practice of law. mother, and Re-Admission Agreement of 22 May communicating the matter to their lawyer, herein personal record of respondent as an attorney and as
1997 with the AMACC President; letter or apology, complainant, who was counsel of record in Civil a member of the Bar, and furnished the Bar
In his comment, Attorney Pangulayan acknowledged dated 22 September 1997, of Cleo Villareiz and Re- Case No. Q-97-30549. This failure of respondent, Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and
that not one of his co-respondents had taken part in Admission Agreement of 10 October 1997 with the whether by design or because of oversight, is an the Court Administrator for circulation to all courts in
the negotiation, discussion, formulation, or AMACC President; and letter of apology, dated 20 inexcusable violation of the canons of professional the country.1âwphi1.nêt
execution of the various Re-Admission Agreements January 1997, of Michael Ejercito, assisted by his ethics and in utter disregard of a duty owing to a
complained of and were, in fact, no longer parents, and Re-Admission Agreement of 23 colleague. Respondent fell short of the demands SO ORDERED.
connected at the time with the Pangulayan and January 1997 with the AMACC President. required of him as a lawyer and as a member of the
Associates Law Offices. The Re-Admission Bar. A.C. No. 5148            July 1, 2003
Agreements, he claimed, had nothing to do with the Following the execution of the letters of apology and
The allegation that the context of the Re-Admission ATTY. RAMON P. REYES, complainant, 
dismissal of Civil Case Q-97-30549 and were Re-Admission Agreements, a Manifestation, dated
Agreements centers only on the administrative vs.
executed for the sole purpose of effecting the 06 June 1997, was filed with the trial court where the
aspect of the controversy is belied by the ATTY. VICTORIANO T. CHIONG JR., respondent.
settlement of an administrative case involving nine civil case was pending by Attorney Regina D.
students of AMACC who were expelled therefrom Balmores of the Pangulayan and Associates Law Manifestation1 which, among other things, explicitly
PANGANIBAN, J.:
upon the recommendation of the Student Offices for defendant AMACC. A copy of the contained the following stipulation; viz:
Disciplinary Tribunal. The students, namely, Ian manifestation was furnished complainant. In his Lawyers should treat each other with courtesy,
1. Among the nine (9) signatories to the complaint,
Dexter Marquez, Almira O. Basalo, Neil Jason R. Resolution, dated 14 June 1997, Judge Lopez of the dignity and civility. The bickering and the hostility of
four (4) of whom assisted by their parents/guardian
Salcedo, Melissa F. Domondon, Melyda B. De Leon, Quezon City Regional Trial Court thereupon their clients should not affect their conduct and
already executed a Re-Admission Agreement with
Leila D. Joven, Signorelli A. Santiago, Michael dismissed Civil Case No. Q-97-30549.
AMACC President, AMABLE R. AGUILUZ V

Page 82 of 132
rapport with each other as professionals and Xu, through herein complainant, filed a Complaint for filing the estafa case, which the former knew fully recommendation for his suspension from the
members of the bar. estafa against Pan, who was represented by well was baseless. According to respondent, the practice of law for two (2) years.
respondent. The Complaint, docketed as IS 98J- irregularities committed by Prosecutor Salanga in
The Case 51990, was assigned to Assistant Manila City the criminal investigation and complainant’s This Court’s Ruling
Prosecutor Pedro B. Salanga, who then issued a connivance therein were discovered only after the
Before us is a Sworn Complaint 1 filed by Atty. We agree with the IBP’s recommendation.
subpoena for Pan to appear for preliminary institution of the collection suit.
Ramon P. Reyes with the Office of the Bar Confidant
investigation on October 27 and 29, 1998. The latter Lawyers are licensed officers of the courts who are
of this Court, seeking the disbarment of Atty. The Third Division of this Court referred the case to
neither appeared on the two scheduled hearings nor empowered to appear, prosecute and defend; and
Victoriano T. Chiong Jr. for violation of his lawyer’s the IBP for investigation, report and
submitted his counter-affidavit. Hence, Prosecutor upon whom peculiar duties, responsibilities and
oath and of Canon 8 of the Code of Professional recommendation.12Thereafter, the Board of
Salanga filed a Criminal Complaint 4 for estafa liabilities are devolved by law as a
Responsibility. After the Third Division of this Court Governors of the IBP passed its June 29, 2002
against him before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of consequence.15 Membership in the bar imposes
referred the case to the Integrated Bar of the Resolution.13
Manila.5 On April 8, 1999, the Manila RTC issued a upon them certain obligations. Mandated to maintain
Philippines (IBP), the IBP Commission on Bar
Warrant of Arrest6 against Pan. the dignity of the legal profession, they must
Discipline resolved to suspend him as follows: Report and Recommendation of the IBP
conduct themselves honorably and fairly. Moreover,
Thereafter, respondent filed an Urgent Motion to
"x x x [C]onsidering that respondent is bound by his In her Report and Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
Quash the Warrant of Arrest.7 He also filed with the
oath which binds him to the obligation that he will Recommendation,14 Commissioner Milagros V. San provides that "[a] lawyer shall conduct himself with
RTC of Zamboanga City a Civil Complaint for the
not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any Juan, to whom the case was assigned by the IBP for courtesy, fairness and candor towards his
collection of a sum of money and damages as well
groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give aid nor investigation and report, averred that complainant professional colleagues, and shall avoid harassing
as for the dissolution of a business venture against
consent to the same. In addition, Canon 8 of the and Prosecutor Salanga had been impleaded in Civil tactics against opposing counsel."
complainant, Xu and Prosecutor Salanga.
Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a Case No. 4884 on the sole basis of the Criminal
lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness Complaint for estafa they had filed against Respondent’s actions do not measure up to this
When confronted by complainant, respondent
and candor towards his professional colleagues, and respondent’s client. In his Comment, respondent Canon. Civil Case No. 4884 was for the "collection
explained that it was Pan who had decided to
shall avoid harassing tactics against opposing himself claimed that "the reason x x x was x x x the of a sum of money, damages and dissolution of an
institute the civil action against Atty. Reyes.
counsel. In impleading complainant and Prosecutor irregularities of the criminal investigation/connivance unregistered business venture." It had originally
Respondent claimed he would suggest to his client
Salanga in Civil Case No. 4884, when it was and consequent damages." been filed against Spouses Xu, but was later
to drop the civil case, if complainant would move for
apparent that there was no legal ground to do so, modified to include complainant and Prosecutor
the dismissal of the estafa case. However, the two
respondent violated his oath of office as well as the Commissioner San Juan maintained that the Salanga.
lawyers failed to reach a settlement.
above-quoted Canon of the Code of Professional collection suit with damages had been filed
purposely to obtain leverage against the estafa case, The Amended and Supplemental
Responsibility, [r]espondent is hereby SUSPENDED In his Comment 8 dated January 27, 2000,
in which respondent’s client was the defendant. Complaints16 alleged the following:
from the practice of law for two (2) years."2 respondent argued that he had shown no disrespect
in impleading Atty. Reyes as co-defendant in Civil There was no need to implead complainant and
"27. The investigating prosecutor defendant Pedro
The Facts Case No. 4884. He claimed that there was no basis Prosecutor Salanga, since they had never
Salanga knowingly and deliberately refused and
to conclude that the suit was groundless, and that it participated in the business transactions between
In his Complaint, Atty. Reyes alleges that sometime failed to perform his duty enjoined by the law and
had been instituted only to exact vengeance. He Pan and Xu. Improper and highly questionable was
in January 1998, his services were engaged by one the Constitution to afford plaintiff Chia Hsien Pan
alleged that Prosecutor Salanga was impleaded as the inclusion of the prosecutor and complainant in
Zonggi Xu,3a Chinese-Taiwanese, in a business due process by violating his rights under the Rules
an additional defendant because of the irregularities the civil case instituted by respondent on the alleged
venture that went awry. Xu invested P300,000 on a on preliminary investigations; he also falsely made a
the latter had committed in conducting the criminal prodding of his client. Verily, the suit was filed to
Cebu-based fishball, tempura and seafood products Certification under oath that preliminary investigation
investigation. Specifically, Prosecutor Salanga had harass complainant and Prosecutor Salanga.
factory being set up by a certain Chia Hsien Pan, was duly conducted and plaintiff [was] duly informed
resolved to file the estafa case despite the pendency of the charges against him but did not answer; he
another Chinese-Taiwanese residing in Zamboanga Commissioner San Juan held that respondent had
of Pan’s Motion for an Opportunity to Submit maliciously and x x x partially ruled that there was
City. Eventually, the former discovered that the latter no ground to implead Prosecutor Salanga and
Counter-Affidavits and Evidence,9 of the appeal10 to probable cause and filed a Criminal Information for
had not established a fishball factory. When Xu complainant in Civil Case No. 4884. In so doing,
the justice secretary, and of the Motion to estafa against plaintiff Chia Hsien Pan, knowing fully
asked for his money back, Pan became hostile, respondent violated his oath of office and Canon 8
Defer/Suspend Proceedings.11 [well] that the proceedings were fatally defective and
making it necessary for the former to seek legal of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The IBP
assistance. adopted the investigating commissioner’s null and void; x x x;
On the other hand, complainant was impleaded,
because he allegedly connived with his client (Xu) in

Page 83 of 132
"28. Said assistant prosecutor, knowing also that of every lawsuit should be to render justice to the SO ORDERED. administratrix and, taking advantage of her goodwill,
plaintiff Chia Hsien Pan filed said appeal and motion parties according to law, not to harass them.18 intrigued against the preparation of the final
to defer for the valid grounds stated therein A.M. No. 219             September 29, 1962 inventory and accounting and prodded Mrs. Barrera
deliberately refused to correct his errors and Lawyers should treat their opposing counsels and not to consent to petitioner's decision to close the
other lawyers with courtesy, dignity and civility. A CASIANO U. LAPUT, petitioner, 
consented to the arrest of said plaintiff under an administration proceedings; that before their
great part of their comfort, as well as of their vs.
invalid information and warrant of arrest. appearance, they brought petitioner's client to their
success at the bar, depends upon their relations ATTY. FRANCISCO E.F. REMOTIGUE and ATTY.
law office and there made her sign four documents
"29. Defendant Atty. Ramon Reyes, knowing that the with their professional brethren. Since they deal FORTUNATO P. PATALINGHUG, respondents.
captioned "Revocation of Power of Attorney" and
suit of defendant Zongoi Xu is baseless connived constantly with each other, they must treat one sent the same by mail to several corporations and
LABRADOR, J.:
with the latter to harass and extort money from another with trust and respect. Any undue ill feeling establishments where the Estate of Macario Barrera
plaintiff Chia Hsien Pan by said criminal prosecution between clients should not influence counsels in This is an original complaint filed with this Court is owner of certificates of stocks and which
in the manner contrary to law, morals and public their conduct and demeanor toward each other. charging respondents with unprofessional and documents purported to disauthorize the petitioner
policy, resulting to the arrest of said plaintiff and Mutual bickering, unjustified recriminations and unethical conduct in soliciting cases and intriguing from further collecting and receiving the dividends of
causing plaintiffs grave irreparable damages[.]" 17 offensive behavior among lawyers not only detract against a brother lawyer, and praying that the estate from said corporations, when in fact and
from the dignity of the legal profession, 19 but also respondents be dealt with accordingly. in truth the respondents fully knew that no power of
We concur with the IBP that the amendment of the constitute highly unprofessional conduct subject to attorney or authority was given to the petitioner by
Complaint and the failure to resort to the proper disciplinary action. The facts which led to the filing of this complaint are his client, the respondents motive being to
remedies strengthen complainant’s allegation that as follow: In May, 1952, petitioner was retained by embarrass petitioner to the officials, lawyers and
the civil action was intended to gain leverage against Furthermore, the Lawyer’s Oath exhorts law Nieves Rillas Vda. de Barrera to handle her case (Sp. employees of said corporations, picturing him as a
the estafa case. If respondent or his client did not practitioners not to "wittingly or willingly promote or Proc. No. 2-J) in the Court of First Instance of Cebu, dishonest lawyer and no longer trusted by his client
agree with Prosecutor Salanga’s resolution, they sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, nor give entitled "Testate Estate of Macario Barrera". By — all with the purpose of straining the relationship of
should have used the proper procedural and aid nor consent to the same." January, 1955, petitioner had contemplated the the petitioner and his client, Nieves Rillas Vda. de
administrative remedies. Respondent could have closing of the said administration proceedings and
Respondent claims that it was his client who insisted Barrera; and that Atty. Patalinghug entered his
gone to the justice secretary and filed a Motion for prepared two pleadings: one, to close the
in impleading complainant and Prosecutor Salanga. appearance without notice to petitioner.
Reconsideration or a Motion for Reinvestigation of proceedings and declare Nieves Rillas Vda. de
Prosecutor Salanga’s decision to file an information Such excuse is flimsy and unacceptable. While
Barrera as universal heir and order the delivery to In answer, respondent Atty. Patalinghug stated that
for estafa. lawyers owe entire devotion to the interests of their
her of the residue of the estate and, second, a notice when he entered his appearance on January 11,
clients, their office does not permit violation of the
for the rendition of final accounting and partition of 1955 the administratrix Nieves Rillas Vda. de Barrera
In the trial court, a Motion to Dismiss was available law or any manner of fraud or chicanery. 20 Their
estate. At this point, however, the administratrix had already lost confidence in her lawyer, the herein
to him if he could show that the estafa case was rendition of improper service invites stern and just
Nieves Rillas Vda. de Barrera refused to countersign petitioner, and had in fact already with her a
filed without basis. Moreover, he could have condemnation. Correspondingly, they advance the
these two pleadings and instead advised petitioner pleading dated January 11, 1955, entitled
instituted disbarment proceedings against honor of their profession and the best interests of
not to file them. Some weeks later, petitioner found "Discharge of Counsel for the Administration and
complainant and Prosecutor Salanga, if he believed their clients when they render service or give advice
in the records of said proceedings that respondent Motion to Cite Atty. Casiano Laput", which she
that the two had conspired to act illegally. As a that meets the strictest principles of moral law.21
Atty. Fortunato Patalinghug had filed on January 11, herself had filed with the court.1awphîl.nèt
lawyer, respondent should have advised his client of
The highest reward that can be bestowed on 1955 a written appearance as the new counsel for
the availability of these remedies. Thus, the filing of In answer, respondent Atty. Remotigue stated that
lawyers is the esteem of their professional brethren. Nieves Rillas Vda. de Barrera. On February 5, 1955
the civil case had no justification. when he filed his appearance on February 7, 1955,
This esteem cannot be purchased, perfunctorily petitioner voluntarily asked the court to be relieved
as counsel for Mrs. Barrera. On February 7, 1955, the petitioner has already withdrawn as counsel.
The lack of involvement of complainant and created, or gained by artifice or contrivance. It is
Prosecutor Salanga in the business transaction born of sharp contests and thrives despite the other respondent, Atty. Francisco E. F.
After separate answers were filed by the
subject of the collection suit shows that there was conflicting interests. It emanates solely from Remotigue, entered his appearance, dated February
respondents, the Supreme Court referred the case
no reason for their inclusion in that case. It appears integrity, character, brains and skill in the honorable 5, 1955.
to the Solicitor General for investigation, report and
that respondent took the estafa case as a personal performance of professional duty.22 recommendation. The Solicitor General
Complainant here alleges that the appearances of
affront and used the civil case as a tool to return the recommended the complete exoneration of
WHEREFORE, respondent is found guilty as respondents were unethical and improper for the
inconvenience suffered by his client. His actions respondents.
charged and is hereby SUSPENDED for two (2) reason that they had nursed the desire to replace
demonstrate a misuse of the legal process. The aim
years from the practice of law, effective immediately. the petitioner as attorney for the estate and the

Page 84 of 132
It appears and it was found by the Solicitor General With respect to the preparation by Atty. Patalinghug
that before respondent Atty. Fortunato Patalinghug of the revocations of power of attorney as
entered his appearance, the widow administratrix complained of by petitioner, the Solicitor General
had already filed with the court a pleading found that the same does not appear to be
discharging the petitioner Atty. Casiano Laput. If she prompted by malice or intended to hurt petitioner's
did not furnish Atty. Laput with a copy of the said feelings, but purely to safeguard the interest of the
pleading, it was not the fault of Atty. Patalinghug but administratrix. Evidently, petitioner's pride was hurt
that of the said widow. It appears that the reason by the issuance of these documents, and felt that he
why Mrs. Barrera dismissed petitioner as her lawyer had been pictured as a dishonest lawyer; for he filed
was that she did not trust him any longer, for one a case before the City Fiscal of Cebu against Atty.
time she found out that some dividend checks which Patalinghug and the widow for libel and falsification.
should have been sent to her were sent instead to It was shown, however, that the case was
petitioner, making her feel that she was being dismissed.
cheated by petitioner. Moreover, she found that
withdrawals from the Philippine National Bank and No sufficient evidence having been submitted to
Bank of the Philippine Islands have been made by sustain the charges, these are hereby dismissed and
petitioner without her prior authority. the case closed.

We see no irregularity in the appearance of


respondent Atty. Fortunato Patalinghug as counsel
for the widow; much less can we consider it as an
actual grabbing of a case from petitioner. The
evidence as found by the Solicitor General shows
that Atty. Patalinghug's professional services were
contracted by the widow, a written contract having
been made as to the amount to be given him for his
professional services.

Petitioner's voluntary withdrawal on February 5,


1955, as counsel for Mrs. Barrera after Atty.
Patalinghug had entered his appearance, and his
(petitioner's) filing almost simultaneously of a motion
for the payment of his attorney's fees, amounted to
an acquiescence to the appearance of respondent
Atty. Patalinghug as counsel for the widow. This
should estop petitioner from now complaining that
the appearance of Atty. Patalinghug was
unprofessional.

Much less could we hold respondent Atty.


Remotigue guilty of unprofessional conduct
inasmuch as he entered his appearance, dated
February 5, 1955, only on February 7, same year,
after Mrs. Barrera had dispensed with petitioner's
professional services on January 11, 1955, and after
petitioner had voluntarily withdrawn his appearance
on February 5, 1955.

Page 85 of 132
A.M. No. P-99-1287       January 26, 2001 On December 8, 1998, the Court issued a Resolution complainant, Lisa Payoyo Andres, whose only in said case was without the previous permission of
denying respondent's request for authorization to purpose in filing the said criminal case was to "seek the Court.
OFFICE OF THE COURT appear as counsel and directing the Office of the vengeance" on her cousin. He explained that his
ADMINISTRATOR, complainant,  Court Administrator to file formal charges against cousin's discord with Ms. Andres started when the An examination of the records shows that during the
vs. him for appearing in court without the required latter's husband, SPO4 Pedro Andres, left the occasions that the respondent appeared as such
ATTY. MISAEL M. LADAGA, Branch Clerk of Court, authorization from the Court.5 On January 25, 1999, conjugal home to cohabit with Ms. Ladaga. During counsel before the METC of Quezon City, he was on
Regional Trial Court, Branch 133, Makati City, the Court Administrator filed the instant the course of their illicit affair, SPO4 Andres and Ms. official leave of absence. Moreover, his Presiding
respondent. administrative complaint against respondent for Ladaga begot three (3) children. The birth certificate Judge, Judge Napoleon Inoturan was aware of the
violating Sec. 7(b)(2) of Republic Act No. 6713, of their eldest child is the subject of the falsification case he was handling. That the respondent
KAPUNAN, J.: appeared as pro bonocounsel likewise cannot be
otherwise known as the "Code of Conduct and charge against Ms. Ladaga. Respondent stated that
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and since he is the only lawyer in their family, he felt it to denied. His cousin-client Narcisa Ladaga herself
In a Letter, dated August 31, 1998, respondent Atty.
Employees," which provides: be his duty to accept Ms. Ladaga's plea to be her positively declared that the respondent did not
Misael M. Ladaga, Branch Clerk of Court of the
counsel since she not have enough funds to pay for receive a single centavo from her. Helpless as she
Regional Trial Court of Makati, Branch 133,
Sec. 7. Prohibited Acts and Transactions . – In the services of a lawyer. Respondent also pointed was and respondent being the only lawyer in the
requested the Court Administrator, Justice Alfredo L.
addition to acts and omissions of public officials and out that in his seven (7) years of untainted family, he agreed to represent her out of his
Benipayo, for authority to appear as pro
employees now prescribed in the Constitution and government service, initially with the Commission on compassion and high regard for her.
bono counsel of his cousin, Narcisa Naldoza
existing laws, the following shall constitute Human Rights and now with the judiciary, he had
Ladaga, in Criminal Case No. 84885, entitled It may not be amiss to point out, this is the first time
prohibited acts and transactions of any public performed his duties with honesty and integrity and
"People vs. Narcisa Naldoza Ladaga " for that respondent ever handled a case for a member
official and employee and are hereby declared to be that it was only in this particular case that he had
Falsification of Public Document pending before the of his family who is like a big sister to him. He
unlawful: been administratively charged for extending a
Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch appeared for free and for the purpose of settling the
40.1 While respondent's letter-request was pending helping hand to a close relative by giving a free legal
x      x      x case amicably. Furthermore, his Presiding Judge
action, Lisa Payoyo Andres, the private complainant assistance for "humanitarian purpose." He never
was aware of his appearance as counsel for his
in Criminal Case No. 84885, sent a letter to the (b) Outside employment and other activities related took advantage of his position as branch clerk of
cousin. On top of this, during all the years that he
Court Administrator, dated September 2, 1998, thereto. – Public officials and employees during their court since the questioned appearances were made
has been in government service, he has maintained
requesting for a certification with regard to incumbency shall not: in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City and
his integrity and independence.
respondent's authority to appear as counsel for the not in Makati where he is holding office. He stressed
accused in the said criminal case.2 On September 7, x      x      x that during the hearings of the criminal case, he was RECOMMENDATION
1998, the Office of the Court Administrator referred on leave as shown by his approved leave
(2) Engage in the private practice of their profession applications attached to his comment. In the light of the foregoing, it appearing that the
the matter to respondent for comment. 3
unless authorized by the Constitution or law, respondent appeared as counsel for his cousin
In his Comment,4 dated September 14, 1998, Provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend In our Resolution, dated June 22, 1999, we noted without first securing permission from the Court, and
respondent admitted that he had appeared in to conflict with their official functions; respondent's comment and referred the considering that this is his first time to do it coupled
Criminal Case No. 84885 without prior authorization. administrative matter to the Executive Judge of the with the fact that said appearance was not for a fee
In our Resolution, dated February 9, 1999, we Regional Trial Court of Makati, Judge Josefina
He reasoned out that the factual circumstances and was with the knowledge of his Presiding Judge,
required respondent to comment on the Guevarra-Salonga, for investigation, report and
surrounding the criminal case compelled him to it is hereby respectfully recommended that he be
administrative complaint. recommendation.
handle the defense of his cousin who did not have REPRIMANDED with a stern warning that any
enough resources to hire the services of a In his Comment, respondent explained that he and repetition of such act would be dealt with more
In her Report, dated September 29, 1999, Judge
counsel de parte; while, on the other hand, private Ms. Ladaga are "close blood cousins" who belong severely.6
Salonga made the following findings and
complainant was a member of a powerful family who to a "powerless family" from the impoverished town recommendation: We agree with the recommendation of the
was out to get even with his cousin. Furthermore, he of Bacauag, Surigao del Norte. From childhood until
rationalized that his appearance in the criminal case investigating judge.
he finished his law degree, Ms. Ladaga had always There is no question that Atty. Misael Ladaga
did not prejudice his office nor the interest of the supported and guided him while he looked up to her appeared as counsel for and in behalf of his cousin, Respondent is charged under Sec. 7(b)(2) of the
public since he did not take advantage of his as a mentor and an adviser. Because of their close Narcisa Naldoza Ladaga, an accused in Criminal Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
position. In any case, his appearances in court were relationship, Ms. Ladaga sought respondent's help Case No. 84-885 for "Falsification of Public Officials and Employees which prohibits civil
covered by leave applications approved by the and advice when she was charged in Criminal Case Documents" before the METC of Quezon City. It is servants from engaging in the private practice of
presiding judge.1âwphi1.nêt No. 84885 for falsification by the private also denied that the appearance of said respondent

Page 86 of 132
their profession. A similar prohibition is found under the public for a compensation, as a source of his 4-15, 1998, June 18, 1998, July 13, 1998 and the punishment as provided for by law would be
Sec. 35, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court livelihood or in consideration of his said services." August 5, 1998, as borne out by his own admission. imposed upon him and he answered "Yes, sir." The
which disallows certain attorneys from engaging in It is true that he filed leave applications Court asked him if he insisted on his plea of guilty
the private practice of their profession. The said For one thing, it has never been refuted that City corresponding to the dates he appeared in court. and he answered "Yes, sir." At this juncture the
section reads: Attorney Fule had been given permission by his However, he failed to obtain a prior permission from fiscal recommended that a fine of P200 be imposed
immediate superior, the Secretary of Justice, to the head of the Department. The presiding judge of upon the defendant. Thereupon, the Court
SEC. 35. Certain attorneys not to practice . – No represent the complainant in the case at bar, who is the court to which respondent is assigned is not the sentenced him to suffer 6 months and 1 day
judge or other official or employee of the superior a relative.8 head of the Department contemplated by law. of prision correccional and to pay the
courts or of the Office of the Solicitor General, shall costs.lawphi1.net
engage in private practice as a member of the bar or Based on the foregoing, it is evident that the isolated WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, respondent
give professional advise to clients. instances when respondent appeared as pro Atty. Misael M. Ladaga is What transpired when the appellant was arraigned
bono counsel of his cousin in Criminal Case No. hereby REPRIMANDED with a stern warning that shows that his rights were fully protected and
However, it should be clarified that "private practice" 84885 does not constitute the "private practice" of any repetition of such act would be dealt with more safeguarded. The Court complied with its duly when
of a profession, specifically the law profession in this the law profession contemplated by law. severely. it informed the appellant that it was his right to have
case, which is prohibited, does not pertain to an the aid of counse. And before pronouncing the
isolated court appearance; rather, it contemplates a Nonetheless, while respondent's isolated court SO ORDERED. sentence the Court took pains to ascertain whether
succession of acts of the same nature habitually or appearances did not amount to a private practice of
he was aware of the consequences of the plea he
customarily holding one's self to the public as a law, he failed to obtain a written permission therefor G.R. No. L-8320        December 20, 1955
had entered. Notwithstanding this precaution and
lawyer. from the head of the Department, which is this Court
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff- warning, he waived his right to have the aid of
as required by Section 12, Rule XVIII of the Revised
appellee,  counsel and entered a plea of guilty to the
In the case of People vs. Villanueva,  we explained
7
Civil Service Rules, thus:
vs. information.
the meaning of the term "private practice" prohibited
by the said section, to wit: Sec 12. No officer or employee shall engage SIM BEN, defendant-appellant.
Appellant claims that he entered the plea of guilty
directly in any private business, vocation,
PADILLA, J.: because the fiscal promised him that only a fine
We believe that the isolated appearance of City or profession or be connected with any commercial,
would be imposed. The recommendation of the
Attorney Fule did not constitute private practice, credit, agricultural, or industrial undertaking without
Sim Ben appeals from a judgment of the Court of fiscal that only a fine be imposed upon the appellant
within the meaning and contemplation of the Rules. a written permission from the head of the
First Instance of Cebu finding him guilty of violating seems to bear out his claim; but such
Practice is more than an isolated appearance, for it Department: Provided, That this prohibition will be
paragraph 3, Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code, recommendation or one of leniency does not mean
consists in frequent or customary action, a absolute in the case of those officers and employees
for having exhibit cinematographic films of indecent that the appellant is not guilty of the crime charged
succession of acts of the same kind. In other words, whose duties and responsibilities require that their
or immoral scenes inside his establishment, a against him. A promise to recommend a specific
it is frequent habitual exercise (State vs. Cotner, entire time be at the disposal of the
restaurant which is a place open to public view in penalty such as fine does not render the sentence
127, p. 1, 87 Kan. 864, 42 LRA, N.S. 768). Practice Government; Provided, further, That if an employee
the City of Cebu, on the sole ground that he entered void if the Court ignores the recommendation and
of law to fall within the prohibition of statute has is granted permission to engage in outside activities,
a plea of guilty to the information without the aid of metes out to the defendant a penalty which is
been interpreted as customarily or habitually holding time so devoted outside of office hours should be
counsel. provided by law.
one's self out to the public, as a lawyer and fixed by the agency to the end that it will not impair
demanding payment for such services (State vs. in any way the efficiency of the officer or The minutes of the session of the Court on 31 The sentence appealed from is affirmed, with cost
Bryan, 4 S. E. 522, 98 N. C. 644, 647). The employee: And provided, finally, That no permission January 1953 disclose that when the case was against the appellant.
appearance as counsel on one occasion, is not is necessary in the case of investments, made by an called for trial, the appellant was informed by the
conclusive as determinative of engagement in the officer or employee, which do not involve real or Court of his right to have counsel and asked if he G.R. No. L-46537 July 29, 1977
private practice of law. The following observation of apparent conflict between his private interests and desired the aid of one. He replied that he did not.
the Solicitor General is noteworthy: public duties, or in any way influence him in the JOSE GUBALLA, petitioner, 
Then the Court asked if he was agreeable to have
discharge of his duties, and he shall not take part in vs.
the information read to him even without the
"Essentially, the word private practice of law implies the management of the enterprise or become an THE HON. EDUARDO P. CAGUIOA, RICARDO G.
assistance of counsel. His answer was in the
that one must have presented himself to be in the officer of the board of directors.9 CARLOS and DOMINGO FORTEZA,
affirmative. The court interpreter translated the
active and continued practice of the legal profession JR., respondents.
information to him in the local dialect and after the
and that his professional services are available to Respondent entered his appearance and attended
translation he entered a plea of guilty. He was asked
court proceedings on numerous occasions, i.e., May
whether he knew that because of the plea of guilty

Page 87 of 132
SANTOS, J: c. Award of damages in favor of plaintiff, more Respondent Judge's forthright denial of the Petition Solicitor Dominador Quiros for appellees Sec. of
particularly award of moral damages is contrary to for Relief to frustrate a dilatory maneuver is well- Agriculture and Natural Resources and Director of
In this petition for certiorari with Preliminary law; and taken; and this Petition must be denied for lack of Forestry.
Injunction, petitioner seeks to set aside the Order of merit. The alleged fact that the person who
respondent Judge dated July 12, 1977, denying his d. Defendant has valid, legal and justiciable represented petitioner at the initial stage of the BARRERA, J.:
Petition for Relief from Judgment and allowing a writ defenses.2 litigation, i.e., the filing of an Answer and the pretrial
of execution to issue in Civil Case No. 680-V of the In a petition for certiorari  filed in the Court of First
proceedings, turned out to be not a member of the
Court of First Instance of Bulacan. The appealed case was handled by Atty. Benjamin Instance of Manila (Civil Case No. 33674) on
Bar 8 did not amount to a denial of petitioner's day in
Bautista, an associate of the same law firm. The September 11, 1957, Felipe Eco sought annulment
court. It should be noted that in the subsequent
The factual antecedents may be recited as follows: decision appealed from was affirmed in toto by the of the proceeding, orders, and decisions rendered
stages of the proceedings, after the rendition of the
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. 52610R. A Motion by the respondents Secretary of Agriculture &
Petitioner is an operator of a public utility vehicle judgment by default, petitioner was duly represented
for Reconsideration was filed by petitioner, through Natural Resources and Director of Forestry, claiming
which was involved, on October 1, 1971, in an by bona fide members of the Bar in seeking a
a different counsel, Atty. Isabelo V.L. Santos II. that the latter committed an abuse of discretion in
accident resulting to injuries sustained by private reversal of the judgment for being contrary to law
However the same was denied and the decision suspending his certificate of Private Wood-land
respondent Domingo Forteza Jr. As a consequence and jurisprudence and the existence of valid, legal
became final on June 29, 1977 and was then Registration No. 1329, covering a tract of land with
thereof, a complaint for damages was filed by and justifiable defenses. In other words, petitioner's
remanded to the lower Court, presided by an area of 700 hectares, 290 hectares of which were
Forteza against petitioner with the Court of First rights had been amply protected in the proceedings
respondent Judge for execution. 3 forestal, and the former, in dismissing petitioner's
Instance of Bulacan (Branch VIII), docketed as Civil before the trial and appellate courts as he was
appeal.
Case No. 680-V. An Answer thereto was filed on A Motion for Execution was thereafter filed by subsequently assisted by counsel. Moreover,
behalf of petitioner by Irineo W. Vida Jr., of the law private respondent with the lower Court which was petitioner himself was at fault as the order of After the respondents had duty filed their answer
firm of Vida Enriquez, Mercado & Associates. 1 granted by respondent Judge. 4 treatment as in default was predicated, not only on justifying the controverted act, the case was heard.
the alleged counsel's failure to attend the pretrial
Because petitioner and counsel failed to appear at On July 6, 1977, petitioner, through Atty. Isabelo conference on April 6, 1972, but likewise on his own On April 30, 1958, the court rendered judgment
the pretrial conference on April 6, 1972, despite due V.L. Santos 11, filed a Petition for Relief from failure to attend the same, without justifiable reason. finding, inter alia  that on January 17, 1956, petitioner
notice, petitioner was treated as in default and Judgment alleging his discovery that Irineo W. Vida To allow this petition due course is to countenance Eco obtained from the Bureau of Forestry a
private respondent was allowed to present his Jr., who prepared his Answer to the Complaint is not further delay in a proceeding which has already certificate of private wood-land registration under
evidence ex parte. A decision was thereafter a member of the Philippine Bar and that taken well over six years to resolve, Section 1829 of the Revised Administrative Code, on
rendered by the trial court in favor of private consequently, his rights had not been adequately the strength of a possessory information title
respondent Forteza Jr. A Motion for Reconsideration protected and his properties are in danger of being WHEREFORE, for lack of merit, the Petition for covering 700 hectares but which was made to
was then filed by petitioner seeking the lifting of the confiscated and/or levied upon without due process certiorari with Preliminary Injunction is hereby appear later on a sketch to contain 290 hectares of
order of default, the reopening of the case for the of law. 5 dismissed. The law firm "Vida, Enriquez, Mercado & forest land, 99 hectares of are logged area and 811
presentation of his evidence and the setting aside of Associates" of 209 Sampaguita Bldg., Cubao, hectares cultivated area; TigMan Lumber Co.,
the decision. Said Motion for Reconsideration was In an Order dated July 12, 1977, respondent Judge Quezon City, is hereby ordered to explain, within ten another timber licensee, protested against this
signed by Ponciano Mercado, another member of denied the Petition and directed the issuance of a (10) days from notice this Resolution, why Irineo W. registration and filed a petition for reconsideration
the law firm. The same was denied by the lower writ of execution for the reasons that said Petition is Vida Jr. was permitted to sign the Answer in Civil which was apparently granted because the Director
Court and petitioner appealed to the Court of ". . a clear case of dilatory tactic on the part of Case No. 680-V of CFI, Bulacan, when he is not a of Forestry suspended the operation of Eco's
Appeals assigning the following alleged errors, to counsel for defendant-appellant ..." herein petitioner, member of the Bar. certificate; that likewise, it was found that portions of
wit: and, that the grounds relied upon ". . . could have the area released from the forest zone were under
been ventilated in the appeal before the Court of G.R. No. L-16731             March 30, 1960
occupancy by some 80 oppositors; that after a
a. That the Hon. Court erred in denying defendant Appeals ... " 6 series of protests and counter-protests, objections
FFLIPE ECO, petitioner-appellant, 
Jose Guballa his day in Court by declaring him in and counter-objections between the parties, the
On July 19, 1977, respondent Deputy Sheriff Ricardo vs.
default, it being contrary to applicable law and Director of Forestry recommended cancellation of
G. Carlos, acting upon the writ of execution, issued JUAN DE G. RODRIGUEZ, ET AL., respondents-
jurisprudence on the matter; Eco's certificate of private woodland and the
by respondent Judge, levied on three motor appellees.
Secretary of Agriculture & Natural Resources
b. That this Hon. Court has no jurisdiction to hear vehicles, of petitioner for the satisfaction of the
A. Vicente and B. Zapata for appellant. approved the recommendation; that upon the appeal
and decide the case; judgment. 7
Ramon Marfori and Vicente Bonot for appellees. of Eco, the Secretary reopened the case and
Hence the instant Petition. Asst. Solicitor General Esmeraldo Umali and ordered a formal investigation of the whole

Page 88 of 132
controversy to give the parties "ample opportunity to institute compulsory registration proceedings actions instead of 15 days as provided in Section 17 Agriculture & Natural Resources gravely abused his
formally present their respective sides of the pursuant to Sec. 53 of the Public Land Law in of Rule 41. The motion for relief was denied for lack discretion in dismissing Eco's appeal?
controversy and (be) given their 'day in court'"; that conjunction with Act 496. of merit. Petitioner interposed an appeal to the Court
petitioner Eco refused to submit to this, of Appeals but this court certified the case to us, the Furthermore, in his questioned order of June 11,
reinvestigation, insisting that it was not necessary; So Ordered. question involved herein being one of law. 1957, the respondent Secretary of Agriculture &
that in the face of this attitude of Eco, the Secretary Natural Resources provides:
On the basis of the foregoing findings, the trial court, In support of his view, petitioner-appellant cites our
of Agriculture & Natural Resources issued a
Judge Magno S. Gatmaitan presiding, dismissed the ruling in the cases of Coombs vs.  Santos, 24 Phil., HOWEVER, and in order to quiet title to the land in
decision, the pertinent part of which reads:
petition for certiorari, stating: 446,1 and Herrera vs.  Far Eastern Air Transport, Inc., dispute once and for all, the appellant (Eco) herein is
In the light of the above findings and circumstances, G. R. No. L-2587, promulgated on September 19, hereby given a period of ninety (90) days from the
xxx     xxx     xxx date hereof within which to institute voluntary
this Office is of opinion, and so holds that the 1950.2 The aforecited ruling has no application to the
dismissal of the appeal of Felipe Eco is perfectly in one at bar. The delay in the filing of the pleadings in registration proceedings covering the said land;
The Court believes and so holds that there was
order. This is because of his adamant stand (not) to those cases was brought about by the inability to file otherwise, this Office will take the necessary steps
nothing inherently wrong in the actuations of the
submit to the formal investigation duly ordered by the same due to the illness either of the clerk or of to bring the land under operation of Sec. 53 of the
Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources and
this Office. A clear indication of this attitude is the attorney. It is quite different in the instant case. Public Land Law (Commonwealth Act 141) in
of the Director of the Bureau of Foresty; the Court
shown by his failure to appear at the investigation on Evidently, what was delegated by petitioner's conjunction with Act No. 496. For this purpose,
concurs with their opinion that in order to terminate
May 2, 1957, when he was duly notified thereof thru counsel to his clerk was the computation itself of the steps shall be taken by this Office to gather
the litigation between all the parties here, the most
his counsel. period within which the appropriate pleading may be evidence for the Government with a view to
proper procedure was for petitioners to institute
filed. This act is hardly prudent or wise.As the lower supporting its opposition to the voluntary
voluntary registration proceedings; nor can
WHEREFORE, and as the forested portion of the court aptly said: "the duty to compute theperiod to registration proceedings that the appellant herein
petitioners claim that equity is with him in the
land in controversy is actually occupied by the appeal is a duty that devolves upon the attorney may institute, or to sustain the move of the
meantime since as already stated above, much can
TigMan Lumber Co., Ltd., the appellee herein, and which he can not and should not delegate unto an Government in the event that it will be compelled to
be said about the excess in his area. The result will
the remaining area which was released from the employee because it concerns a question of study institute compulsory registration proceedings
be dismissal. . . .
forest zone is under actual occupation and of the law and its application, and this Court pursuant to Sec. 53 of the Public Land Law in
cultivation by public land applicants who had duly Copy of this decision was actually received by considers this to be a delicate matter that should not conjunction with Act 496.
filed their respective public land applications counsel for the petitioner on May 5, 1958. be delegated." The negligence here cannot,
therefore, the instant appeal of Felipe Eco should SO ORDERED.
therefore, be considered excusable.
be, as hereby it is, DISMISSED. Conformably On  June 3, 1958  or 28 days thereafter, petitioner
Apparently, instead of taking this course and thus
herewith, the TigMan Lumber Co., Ltd., is hereby filed a motion for reconsideration of the decision, Even considering it on the merits, appellant's cause
proving his alleged right over the property, appellant
authorized to resume its operation inside the land in which was denied on June 14, 1958, for lack of must also fail. The petition for relief was predicated
elected to institute certiorari proceedings against the
question. merit. On June 21, 1958, petitioner filed a notice of principally on the ground that the court a quo  erred
abovementioned officials in the Court of First
appeal and appeal bond. Respondents registered in not holding that the ruling of the respondent
HOWEVER, and in order to quiet title to the land in Instance of Manila. Underthe circumstances, it is
opposition thereto for the reason that the filing of Director of Forestry, affirmed by the respondent
dispute once and for all, the appellant herein is evident that appellant's action has no foundation at
said notice of appeal and appeal bond was made Secretary of Agriculture & Natural Resources,
hereby given a period of ninety(90) days from the all.
out of time. Sustaining this allegation, the court, by suspending his Private Woodland Registration
date hereof within which to institute order of July 5, 1950, disapproved petitioner's certificate was made in abuse of discretion, because Wherefore, finding no error in the appealed order
voluntaryregistration proceedings covering the land; appeal bond and notice of appeal. said officials allegedly deprived him of his day in denying petitioner's motion for relief, the same is
otherwise, this Office will take the necessary steps court. It is noteworthy to mention, however, that it is hereby affirmed, with costs against the petitioner-
to bring the land under the operation of Sec. 53 of On September 6 of the same year, petitioner filed a precisely for this reason that the Secretary of appellant. It is so ordered.
the Public Land Law (Commonwealth Act 141) in motion for relief under Rule 38, praying for the Agriculture & Natural Resources ordered a formal
conjunction, with Act No. 496. For this purpose, setting aside of the decision on the ground of investigation of the matter to enable the parties to G.R. No. L-5346            January 3, 1911
steps shall be taken by this Office to gather excusable negligence. The alleged negligence present their respective evidence. Yet, appellant Eco
evidence for the Government with a view to consisted of the erroneous computation by refused to submit to such investigation. Naturally, W. W. ROBINSON, plaintiff-appellee, 
supporting its opposition to the voluntary counsel's clerk of the period within which an appeal the ruling of the respondent Director was affirmed. vs.
registration proceedings that the appellant herein may be made, said clerk being of the impression How can it be claimed then that the Secretary of MARCELINO VILLAFUERTE Y
may institute, or to sustain the move of the that the prescriptive period to appeal RAÑOLA, defendant-appellant.
Government in the event that it will be compelled to in certiorari cases is also 30 days like in ordinary civil

Page 89 of 132
R. Diokno for appellant. containing an area of 2 hectares, 57 ares, and 73 K., p. 79. A rural estate, No. 916, consisting of Estate letter K, liability P130, costs
Haussermann, Cohn and Fisher for appellee. centares. improved land, planted with 200 coconut trees and P40 ............................................................... 170.00 
situated in the same barrio and pueblo, of 13 ares Total ............................................................................
TORRES, J.: B., p. 73. A rural estate, No. 434, consisting of and 4 centares in area. .............................. 4,352.50
coconut land in the barrio of Canlorang Mayao,
On April 30, 1908, W. W. Robinson entered suit in Lucena, 2 hectare, 4 ares, and 78 centares in area. The respective bounderies of each one of the It was stated further, as an express condition, that
the Court of First Instance of Tayabas against estates above enumerated were set fourth in the default of payment of any of the installments
Marcelino Villafuerte y Rañola, alleging as a first C., p. 73. A rural estate, No 435, consisting of said instrument of mortgage, which was duly specified in the fourth preceding paragraph would
cause of action: That the plaintiff was engaged, in unirrigated land containing 1,200 coconut trees, in inscribed in the property registry of Tayabas. This cause the entire obligation to mature and would
the city of Manila and at the time specified further the same barrio of Lucena, and with and are of 7 deed does not appear to have been canceled, and entitle the plaintiff (it says "defendant") to require the
on, in the importation and sale of flour and other hectares, 81 ares, and 4 centares. constitutes an encumbrance on the properties payment of the same in its totality and forthwith to
products from abroad, with an office in the city of described in favor of the plaintiff. It was stated in the institute foreclosure proceedings against any and all
Manila, a business which he still continued, through D., p. 74. A rural estate, No 436, consisting of
instrument referred to, that the liability of the of the mortgage properties.
the agency of Castle Brothers, Wolf & Sons, coconut land containing 700 coconut trees, in the
property mortgaged was distributed in the following
established therein; that the defendant, a resident of barrio of Silangan Mayao, Lucena, and with and area The complaint further alleged, as a first cause of
manner:
Lucena, Tayabas, by an instrument duly executed of 1 hectare and 84 centares. action, that, notwithstanding the repeated demands
on October 19, 1906, by his attorney in fact and The estate described under letter A responded for made upon the defendant, the latter had not paid his
E., p. 74. back. A rural estate, No 438, consisting of
legal representative, Vicente Marcelo Concepcion, P800 of the debt nor the interest thereon, excepting the sum of
land planted with 300 coconut trees, in the barrio of
who was fully empowered and authorized for the P550, paid on different dates on account of the debt
Cotta, Lucena, and measuring 52 ares and 66 debt and for the sum of P75 as
purpose, and ratified on the same date before the and interest due, wherefore the defendant owed the
centares in area. costs .......................................................... P 875.00
notary public of Manila, D. R. Williams, plaintiff the sum of P3,302.50, the remainder of his
acknowledged and confessed that he owed the F., p. 75. A rural estate, No. 439, consisting of debt and besides P385.57 as interest due from
Estate letter B, liability P200, costs
plaintiff the net sum of P3,852.50; that by the said coconut land containing 500 coconut trees, in the December 6, 1906, to the date of the filling of the
P40 ............................................................... 240.00
instrument duly executed the defendant bound and same barrio and pueblo, with an area of 98 ares and complaint; that the plaintiff was then the legal owner
pledged himself to pay to the plaintiff the said sum 66 centares. Estate letter C, liability P160, costs of the mortgage, and that he had not been paid the
of P3,852.50 in four monthly installments from that P40 ............................................................... 200.00 whole nor any part of the sum expressed in the
date, at the rate of P1,000 for each of the first three G., p. 75, back. A rural estate, No. 440, consisting of preceding paragraph.
installments and P852.50 for the last one, and coconut land containing 800 coconut trees, in the Estate letter D, liability P130, costs
likewise the interest thereon at the rate of 8 per cent same barrio and pueblo, with an area of 36 ares and P40 ............................................................... 170.00 As a second cause of action against the defendant,
per annum, to be adjusted and paid at the time of 5 centares. the complaint alleged, among other things: That the
paying each of the installments fixed; that in the said Estate letter E, liability P92.50, costs defendant, by means of an instrument duly executed
instrument the defendant moreover bound himself to H., p. 75, back. A rural estate, No. 441, consisting of P30 ............................................................. 122.50 on December 21, 1906, by his attorney in fact and
pay to the plaintiff the sum of P500 for costs and coconut land containing 300 coconut trees, in the legal representative, Vicente Marcelo Concepcion,
same barrio and pueblo, measuring 50 ares and 73 Estate letter F, liability P150, costs who was fully empowered and authorized — an
expenses, in case the latter should recur to judicial
centares. P40 ................................................................ 190.00 instrument ratified on the same date before the
process for the collection of the aforementioned
debt; and that, as security for the payment of the notary Daniel R. Williams — and in consideration of
I., p. 73. A rural estate, No. 914, consisting of Estate letter G, liability P280, costs
said debt, of the interest thereon and of the amount the credit which the plaintiff agreed to allow the said
improved land, planted with 1,000 coconut trees P40 ............................................................... 320.00
for costs and expenses, the defendant voluntarily defendant up to the sum of P3,560, executed a
situated in the barrio of Dumacaa, Lucena, of 7 special voluntary mortgage of the properties of his
executed, by means of the said instrument and in Estate letter H, liability P250, costs
hectares, 12 ares, and 60 centares in area. absolute ownership and control which are described
favor of the plaintiff, a special mortgage upon the P40 ............................................................... 290.00
properties of his absolute ownership and control, as follows:
J., p. 75. A rural estate, No. 915, consisting of
Estate letter I, liability P1,400, costs
which are: improved land, planted with 100 coconut trees and
P75 .............................................................. 1,475.00 No. 1, p. 72. Estate No. 432, first inscription, volume
situated in the barrio Cotta, Lucena, of 93 ares and 28, general register; coconut land containing 1,000
A., p. 72, back. A rural estate, No. 433, consisting of
22 centares in area. Estate letter J, liability P260, costs coconut trees, 26 hectares, 56 ares, and 87 centares
land planted in coconut trees, in the barrio of
P40 ................................................................. 300.00 in area, situated in the barrio of Dumacaa, Lucena. A
Dumacaa of the municipality of Lucena, and

Page 90 of 132
part of this land is planted with coconut and nipa centares in are, containing 300 coconut trees and written duebills or orders signed by the defendant or security for the obligation, the fulfillment of which is
palm trees and the rest is arable. located in the same barrio and pueblo. by his attorney in fact. demanded in the first cause of action; that, by
clause 14 of the said instrument of December 21,
No. 2, p. 72, back. Estate No. 433, first inscription of No. 11, p. 73. Estate No. 914, consisting of 2. That the said written duebills or orders should be 1906, it was stipulated that in case W. W. Robinson,
the same volume; coconut land containing 1,000 improved land planted with 1,000 coconut trees, paid within thirty days from their date, and it was the plaintiff, should have to institute foreclosure
coconut trees, 2 hectares, 57 ares, and 73 centares located in the barrio of Dumacaa, Lucena, with an stipulated that the amount or value of each one of proceedings against the property above described,
in area, situated in the same barrio and pueblo. area of 7 hectares, 12 ares, and 60 centares. them should bear an annual interest of 8 per cent either by reason of the mortgage hereby placed on
from the date of their maturity, if not paid before. the same, or of the obligation affecting the said
No. 3, p. 71, back. Estate No. 431, first inscription of No. 12, p. 76. Estate No. 915, volume 106 general
property, in his favor, by virtue of the said instrument
the same volume; coconut land containing 1,500 register; an improved piece of land, 93 ares and 22 3. That total amount of what the defendant might be
of October 19 of the present year, Robinson should
coconut trees, 16 hectares, 2 ares, and 27 centares centares in area, containing 800 coconut trees and owing, by reason of the said credit, should be
be entitled to take charge of the management of all
in area, situated in the same barrio and pueblo. situated in the barrio of Cotta, Lucena. settled and entirely paid, together with the interest
or any of the said realities until they should be sold,
thereon, by the 20th of May, 1907, on which date all
No. 4, p. 73, back. Estate No. 434, first inscription of No. 13, p. 79. Estate No. 916, volume 106 general and to collect their revenues, rentals, fruits, and
the orders or duebills issued by the defendant
the same volume; coconut land containing 1,000 register; an improved piece of land, 13 ares and 4 products for the purpose of applying the same to the
against the said credit should be considered as
coconut trees, 2 hectares, 4 ares, and 78 centares in centares in area, containing 200 coconut trees and payment of the judgment; that, by clause 15 of the
matured, even though the extension above
area, situated in the barrio of Canlorang Mayao, situated in the same barrio and pueblo. said instrument of December 21, 1906, it was also
mentioned should not have expired.
Lucena. stipulated that it was expressly covenanted that, in
No. 14, p. 127. Estate No. 932, volume 106 general 4. That it should be optional be optical on the part of case Robinson should have to proceed judicial
No. 5, p. 73, back. Estate No. 435, first inscription of register; an improved piece of coconut land, 2 the plaintiff to honor the duebills or orders which the against the property therein mentioned in order to
the same volume; coconut land containing 1,200 hectares, 79 ares, and 49 centares in area, defendant Marcelino Villafuerte might issue against collect any amount to the payment of which they
coconut trees, 7 hectares, 81 ares, and 4 centares in containing 2,000 coconut trees and located in the the said credit, in the event that the latter should fail were subject, all the orders or duebills issued on
area, situated in the same barrio and pueblo. barrio of Dumacaa, Lucena. to pay the amount of his previous duebills or orders account of the credit granted in the said instrument
at the time they should respectively fall due, or should be considered as matured and payable, and
No. 6, p. 74. Estate No. 436, first inscription of the The respective boundaries of each of the estates Robinson should be entitled forthwith to demand the
should fail to comply with and observe any of the
same volume; coconut land containing 7,000 above enumerate were set forth in the said payment of any balance found to be due him by
conditions and stipulations contained in the said
coconut trees, 1 hectare, 88 ares, and 54 centares in instrument of mortgage, which was duly inscribed in Marcelino Villafuerte y Rañola, with the privilege of
instrument of October 19, 1906, ratified before
area, situated in the barrio of Silangan Mayao, the property registry of Tayabas, and does not levying upon all or any of the realities comprised
notary Williams; that the defendant should be bound
Lucena. appear to have been cancelled, and constitutes an with the mortgage mentioned in the said instrument;
to pay to the plaintiff P600, in case of litigation, and
encumbrance on the properties described, in favor that the amount credited for the expenses referred
No. 7 p. 74, back. Estate No. 438, first inscription of also to pay all the expenses that might be
of the plaintiff. It was stated, in the instrument to in No. 7 of the fifth paragraph of this cause of
the volume aforesaid; coconut land, 52 ares and 66 occasioned by the execution of the said instrument
referred to, that the liability of the property action reached P174.95; that the defendant, availing
centares in area, containing 300 coconut trees and of December 21, 1906, those of its inscription in the
mortgaged was distributed in the following manner: himself of the credit granted in the aforementioned
situated in the barrio of Cotta, Lucena. registry, cancellation, and release, as well as the
expenses incurred by the plaintiff on account of the instrument of December 21, 1906, took and
xxx
No. 8, p. 75. Estate No. 439, first inscription of the instrument of October 19, 1906, referred to in the withdrew from the plaintiff's warehouses, on
same volume; coconut land, 98 ares and 66 That the aforementioned mortgage was executed as first cause of action, together with those of its different dates between the 20th of November and
centares in area, containing 500 coconut trees and security for the payment to the plaintiff of the sum or inscription in the registry; provided, moreover, that the 19th of December, 1906, inclusive, various
situated in the same barrio and pueblo. sums which the defendant might owe him by reason the aforementioned instrument of December 21, quantities of flour, the total value of which amounted
of the said credit, which was granted under the 1906, should be retroactive in its effect from the to P5,588.15; that the defendant had not paid any
No. 9, p. 75, back. Estate No. 440, first inscription of following terms and conditions: 20th of November of the same year, and that the part of this amount, except the sum of P375.00, and
the volume mentioned; coconut land, 36 ares and 5 flour which the said defendant, through his attorney was owing a balance of P5,213.15; that at the time
centares are, containing 500 coconut trees and also 1. That the said credit should not exceed the sum of in fact, Vicente Marcelo Concepcion, had withdrawn of the complaint the said defendant owed the
located in the same barrio and pueblo. P3,560 and was granted for the period of six months from the plaintiff's warehouses since the 20th of plaintiff the sums of P174.95 and P5,213.15, in
from the 20th of November, 1906, and defendant November, 1906, should be include in the credit addition to P503.79 as interest due up to the date of
No. 10, p. 75, back. Estate No. 441, first inscription was to make use of it in taking flour from the opened; that the estates described under the Nos. 2, the complaint; that the plaintiff was then the legal
of the said volume; coconut land, 50 ares and 73 plaintiff's warehouse, at current prices, by means of 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13, bore a first owner of the mortgage above referred to, and that
mortgage in favor of the plaintiff executed as none of the sums mentioned nor any part thereof

Page 91 of 132
had been paid to him: wherefore the plaintiff asked to mortgage, pledge, or otherwise dispose of, to the both parties, the documentary evidence being The purpose of the suit filed by the plaintiff, W. W.
that judgement be rendered in his favor against the plaintiff or to any person whatever, any of the attached to the record, the court, on December 15 Robinson, is the collection of various sums owed by
defendant, for the following amounts: (1) For the properties mentioned in the complaint, nor to accept of the same year, rendered judgment whereby it the defendant, Marcelino Villafuerte y Rañola, the
sum of P3,302.50, the principal demanded in the from and open with the plaintiff any credit nor directed that the plaintiff should recover from the payment of which is secured by a mortgage on the
first course of action, and interest thereon at 8 per establish with him any business in flour; nor execute defendant the sum specified in the first instrument of real properties set out in the two notarial documents
cent per annum from date until its payment; (2) for any power of attorney nor grant any authority mortgage, P3,302.50, as principal, the additional evidencing the debt, exhibited under letter A and B,
the sum of P385.57, as interest due on the principal whatever in favor of the said Concepcion so that the sum of P385.57 as interest up to April 30, 1908, and inscribed in the property registry of the Province
mentioned in the preceding paragraph and latter might represent him and accept in his name besides the interest on the said principal, at the rate of Tayabas.
remaining unpaid, and, in addition, the interest on credit, or moneys whatsoever from any person; nor of 8 percent per annum from the date just above
this sum at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from dispose of, mortgage, or encumber any of the mentioned until its complete payment, also the P500 The mortgage action brought by the creditor, based
the date of the complaint until paid; (3) for the sum properties described in the complaint; that the stipulated in the said instrument as payable by the upon the two aforementioned notarial documents is
of P5,213.15, the amount of the debt claimed in the defendant received no sum whatever from the defendant as costs and expenses in case of proper, inasmuch as it is sought to collect certain
second cause of action, together with the interest plaintiff nor was he in the latter's debt for the litigation; and the sum mentioned in the second sums specified in the said instruments on account of
thereon at the rate of 8 per cent per annum from amount claimed in the complaint, nor for any other instrument of mortgage, P5,213.15 as principal, their not having been paid within the periods therein
date until it's payment; (4) for the sum of P503.79, sum of money; that he did not give his consent to all besides P503.79, as interest up to the 30th day of stipulated, and consequently the real properties
the interest due on the principal mentioned in the of to any one of the mortgages alleged in the April, 1908, in addition to the interest on the said offered as security for the solvency of the debts
preceding paragraph, with interest thereon at 6 per complaint, and that all the said mortgages on the principal at the rate of 8 per cent per annum, form contracted by the debtor are duly liable for the
cent per annum from date until payment; (5) for the properties therein mentioned were founded on a the date just of P174.95, as expenses for the satisfaction of the same; and although the credit of
sum of P174.95, claimed in paragraph 9 of the supposed power of attorney said to have been execution of the instrument, for its inscription, P3,852.50, the value of the flour furnished to Camilio
second cause of action, with interest thereon at 6 executed by the defendant in favor of Vicente cancellation, and acquaintance, as provided for in C. Gomez, in account with the defendant, and
per cent per annum from the date of the complaint Marcelo Concepcion, which power of attorney was clause 17 of the said instrument, and the additional referred to in the instrument lettered A, was to have
until payment; and, (6) for the sum of 1,000 for costs fictitious, false, fraudulent, null and void, that it was sum of P600, which it was stipulated in the second been paid in four installments from October 19,
and attorney's fees. not executed by the defendant, nor did the latter instrument the defendant should pay for costs and 1906, at the rate of P1,000 in each one of the three
intervene therein and that the said power of attorney expenses in case of litigation. The judgment further first months and P852.50 in the fourth and last
The plaintiff further prayed that an order be issued had no true reason for existence; wherefore the ordered that the defendant should pay the several month, yet since the debtor, notwithstanding the
directing the delivery to the plaintiff of the properties defendant asked that judgment be rendered amounts above mentioned, with the interest and demands made upon him, did not comply with his
described in the complaint, in order that he might absolving him from the complaint with the costs costs, on or before the first day of the sitting of the obligation nor pay his debt in conformity with the
administer them during the course of this suit and against the plaintiff, by annulling each and all of the court in April, 1909, and that, in case such order tenor of the said instrument, letter A, for he only paid
until they should ultimately be sold, and authorizing mortgages alleged in the complaint and the should not be compiled with, the mortgages should the creditor the sum of P550 delivered partially on
him to collect and receive the revenues, rentals, inscription of each of them in the office of the be foreclosed and a final writ should be issued different dates, the default of payment of any of the
fruits, and other products of the said estates and to register of property of Tayabas, and by ordering the directing that all the properties before described the installments agreed upon produces the effect that all
retain them in his possession in order to satisfy the cancellation of all the inscriptions of the said sold, the proceeds of the sale to pay the principal, of these must be deemed to have matured and
judgment that would be rendered in this case, and mortgages and encumbrances of the interest, and costs. The defendant, when notified of entitles the creditor to demand the payment of his
that in case the said judgment be not satisfied aforementioned properties. this judgement, took exception thereto, announced entire credit and to proceed against the mortgaged
thereby, the sale of the said properties be ordered that he would file a bill of exceptions, and moved for properties for the purpose of collecting his credit,
and the proceeds thereof be applied to the purpose. The plaintiff, in answering to the counter complaint, a new trial on the ground that the evidence was which amounts to P3,302.50, after the deduction of
set up a general and specific denial of each and all insufficient to warrant the judgment rendered and the said P550 from the principal, with the interest
The defendant, in his answer, made a general and of the allegations of the defendant with respect to due from the 6th of December, 1906, amounting to
that the latter was contrary to law. This motion was
specific denial of each and all of the allegations of each and all of the actions brought by him in each P385.57.
denied and exception was taken by the appellant,
the plaintiff for each and all of the actions instituted and all of the paragraphs of the counter complaint, who filed the proper bill of exceptions, which was
by him in each and all of the paragraphs of the and prayed that judgment be pronounced in his With respect to the credit mentioned in the
certified to, approved, and forwarded to the clerk of
complaint, and as a special defense, and in his favor, and against the defendant, in conformity with instrument, Exhibit B, and granted by the plaintiff to
this court. By an order of March 1, 1909, it was
crosscomplaint, alleged: That the defendant did not the petitions made in his complaint. the defendant Villafuerte under agreement that the
provided that the execution of the aforesaid
execute, consent to, nor authorize the execution of a latter should make use of the said credit by taking
judgment should not be suspended pending the
power of attorney of any kind whatsoever in favor of The case came up for hearing on November 30, flour from the creditor's warehouse by means of
appeal, unless the defendant, for the reasons stated
Vicente Marcelo Concepcion, empowering the latter 1908, and after the presentation of oral evidence by written duebills or orders signed by the debtor, or
in the said order, should give a bond for P10,000.

Page 92 of 132
his attorney in fact, under condition that the value or were false, and likewise denied that he owed the that he had executed it freely and voluntarily and The defendant debtor having been requested by
amount of the said duebills should be paid within plaintiff any of the amounts claimed in the complaint, exhibited for the purpose his cedula, No. 453963, letter, in the beginning of the year 1907, to pay his
thirty days from their date and that these or that he had authorized the said Concepcion to issued in Lucena, Tayabas, on January 15, 1906. debt, were it true that he had not contracted the
acknowledgments of debts should bear interest of 8 mortgage the realties described in the said obligations contained in the instruments lettered A
per cent per annum from the date of their maturity, it complaint, and in asking for his release, he prayed In order to establish the conclusion, as the logical and B, nor executed in favor of Vicente Marcelo the
was also a condition that the aforesaid instrument that the aforementioned mortgages and the result of the evidence, that the said two notaries, powers of attorney lettered C and D, would have at
should be deemed to be retroactive in its effect, inscriptions of the same in the property registry be falsely, and entirely irrespective of the truth, issued that time made the proper investigations and taken
from November 20, 1906, that the quantities of flour declared null and void. the certificates which appear under their respective the necessary steps for the annulment or invalidation
which were taken from the plaintiff's warehouse signatures and seals at the foot of the powers of of the said instruments. The defendant did not even
since the said November 20, 1906, should be If it is true, as it appears to be, that the defendant attorney, letters C and D, it is not sufficient to prove, attempt to do anything of the kind, and we do not
considered as included, and that the total amount of Marcelino Villafuerte y Rañola executed, on July 11 by means of the testimony of witnesses, (mostly find any just reason nor any legal ground whatever
whatever the defendant might owe, by reason of the and October 29, 1906, in this city, the powers of relatives) and by unauthenticated documents, that to warrant a discussion of the conclusion arrived at
credit mentioned together with the interest thereon, attorney, Exhibits C and D, in favor of Vicente on the dates of the execution of the powers of by the evidence presented in this suit.
should be settled and entirely paid on May 20, 1907, Marcelo Concepcion, before the notaries Eugenio de attorney the persons executing them was not here in
on which date all the orders or duebills issued Lara and Daniel R. Williams, respectively, it not Manila, where the instruments were certified to, but Were it true that on the dates of the 11th of July and
against the said credit should be deemed to have having been proved at trial that the said powers of in Lucena, Tayabas; clear, strong, and irrefutable the 29th of October, 1906, the defendant Villafuerte
matured, even though the thirty days' delay attorney were false or null and void, the mortgages proof must be adduced to prove that the said was in Lucena, Tayabas, and not in Manila, it is not
stipulated should not have expired. upon the real properties, executed by the attorney in notaries could not have averred that the said person understood how two notaries who attested that they
fact, duly authorized for the purpose, in the was actually in their presence, that they heard him personally knew him could have certified that, on the
In view of the fact that the defendant succeeded in instruments designated under letter A and B, the ratify the contents of the respective documents, and respective dates aforementioned, the said defendant
withdrawing flour to the value of P5,078.15, without first of them ratified in the notarial record, letter G, could have certified to the number of his cedula, the appeared in person before them, ratified the
his having paid the amount due therefor, except by the debtor before the same notary, Williams, only one exhibited to both notaries, without having instrument of power of attorney which he had
P375, it can not be denied that there still remains a must be accepted as valid and in force, inasmuch as ostensibly perverted the truth. The defendant executed, and, to identify his personality, exhibited
balance to be paid of P4,703.15 (pp. 5 and 88 of the the said mortgage deeds appear to have been himself, who averred that he was in Lucena on July to the said notaries his certificate of registration, the
record). ratified in due form by contracting or interested 11, 1906, the date of the first power of attorney, said only one and the same one which he presented at
parties before the said notary in Manila, it not having that he was not sure whether on October 29 of the each of his appearances on the said dates. Without
In the account, Exhibit E, there appears a statement been proven at trial that they contained any flaw or same year, the date of the second, he was in the proof, nor rational, acceptable explanation, it is
of the sacks of flour which were taken on account of defect which might operate to annul them. said pueblo or in this city of Manila. impossible to believe that the personal certificate of
the said credit by means of the nine duebills, Exhibit registration, which identifies a citizen, was for some
F, attached to the aforementioned account, in which The evidence adduced by the defendant in his Public instruments authenticated by a notary or by a four months in the possession of another person
it also appears that the value of the said sacks of attempt to prove that, on the two dates before competent public official, with the formalities residing in a distant place. It was not proved in a
flour was P4,703.15, after the deduction of P375. mentioned, when the said two powers of attorney required by law, are evidence, even against a third satisfactory manner at the trial how or why the said
appear to have been executed, he was in Lucena, person, of the fact which gives rise to their execution cedula, or registration certificate, came to remain for
The complaint which gave rise to the present suit is Tayabas, and not in this city of Manila, has not and of the date of the latter. They shall also be so long a time in the possession of the Chinaman Sy
in accordance with the provisions of section 255 of resulted in defeating the validity, authenticity, and evidence against the contracting parties and their Chuy Chim or of Vicente Marcelo, as averred by the
the Code of Civil Procedure, and the mortgages force of the said powers of attorney, for the truth of legal representatives with regard to the declarations defendant or his counsel, and under this
constituted in the two instruments aforementioned their contents as well as their ratification by the the former may have therein. (Arts. 1216 and 1218, supposition, so strange, anomalous, and out of the
fulfill the conditions and requirements prescribed in person executing them was certified to by notaries Civil Code.) ordinary rule that every citizen should necessarily
articles 1857, 1874, and 1875 of the Civil Code; before whom they were exhibited respectively in the keep his certificate of identification in his
wherefore judgment should be rendered favorable to presence of two witnesses; the oral testimony The force of proof of depositions of witnesses shall
possession, no explanation whatever was given by
the mortgage creditor, in accordance with section presented by the defendant was insufficient to prove be weighed by the courts in accordance with the
the defendant's counsel as to the purpose for which
256, and following, of the Code of Civil Procedure. that the notaries Lara and Williams untruthfully provisions of the law of civil procedure, taking care
the defendant parted with his cedula and sent it to
certified that Marcelino Villafuerte, whom they to avoid that, by the simple coincidence of some
The defendant debtor denied the existence of the either the said Chinaman or Marcelo. The Chinaman
attested under oath that they knew, personally depositions, unless their truthfulness be evident, the
obligations contained in the said instruments; he was not examined in this litigation and the attorney
appeared before them and ratified in its totality the affairs may be finally decided in which instruments,
asserted that the latter, and the powers of attorney in fact, Marcelo, denied that he had received the
contents of the aforementioned document, declaring private documents, or any basis of written evidence
executed in favor of Vicente Marcelo Concepcion said cedula sent by his constituent. So that for the
are usually made use of. (Art. 1248, Civil Code.)

Page 93 of 132
reasons hereinbefore stated, it is evident that the the judgment are devoid of reason and legal However, even though the questions addressed by invalidated and annulled, and this suit would have
defendant Villafuerte personally exhibited the said foundation. With respect to the third error alleged we Lacalle to the plaintiff's witnesses and the had a different ending.
cedula to the two aforementioned notaries, on his hold that the admission of the documents presentation of documents of various kinds
ratification of the respective instrument of power of designated by the letters L and M was proper for the exhibited at the trial be stricken out for the reason For the foregoing reasons, it is proper, in our
attorney before each one of them, and it is not purpose for which they were presented, because that they were made by a person who was neither a opinion, to affirm the judgment appealed from, as we
permissible to conclude that the instruments of that of letter L is an original and one of the triplicates party to the suit nor counsel for the plaintiff, yet we hereby do, with the costs against the appellant, and
power of attorney executed by the defendant, as drawn up for a single purpose, as stated therein, and do not find any reason, based upon any positive in consequence thereof we acquit the plaintiff from
well as the certifications subscribed by the notaries that of letter M is also an original ratified before a prohibition of the law, to authorize the striking out to the cross complaint relative to the declaration of
Lara and Williams, are false, because of the absolute notary, in the certificate of which, dated July 13, the answers given by the witnesses interrogated by nullity of the mortgages and inscriptions, as
absence of proof as a foundation for such a charge; 1906, there certainly appears an annotation of the Lacalle, even though the said answers may have requested by the defendant. The first day of the term
for a notarial document, guaranteed by public dame number 453963 of the cedula of the defendant been evoked by questions addressed by a person of court immediately following the date on which the
attestation in accordance with the law, must be Villafuerte which he exhibited to the notaries who not authorized by law, and there is much less reason fulfillment of this judgment is ordered shall be set for
sustained in full force and affect so long as he who authenticated the powers of attorney Exhibits C and for rejecting the cross-questions addressed to the the payment of the amounts due and the foreclosure
impugns it shall not have presented strong, D. same witnesses by the defendant's attorney, and of the said mortgages. So ordered.
complete, and conclusive proof of its falsity or nullity the answers thereto.
With regard to the first two alleged errors, relative to G.R. No. L-23467             March 27, 1968
on account of some flaw or detect provided against
by law. Jose Moreno Lacalle being permitted to address Although the presentation of the documents which
AMALGAMATED LABORERS' ASSOCIATION
questions to some of the witnesses during the support the claims of the plaintiff party be deemed
and/or FELISBERTO M. JAVIER for himself and
Although the documents exhibited by the hearing of the case, notwithstanding the presence of to be improper, on account of their having been
as General President, 
defendant's counsel could not, for lack of proof of Attorney Agustin Alvarez, who represented the made by a person who had not the qualifications of
ATTY. JOSEUR. CARBONELL, ET AL., petitioners, 
their authenticity, destroy or impair the value and plaintiff, it is unquestionable that the intervention of a practicing attorney it is nevertheless true that their
vs.
force of the notarial documents or instruments on the said law clerk and employee of Messrs. presentation was authorized by the attorney Alvarez
HON. COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS AND
which the plaintiff's claim is based, it is, however, to Haussermann, Cohn & Williams, the plaintiff's and the documents exhibited continued to be united
ATTY. LEONARDO C. FERNANDEZ, respondents.
be noted that Pedro Cantero, whose signature attorneys in this suit, was improperly admitted; it to the record and were not stricken out therefrom on
appears attached to the papers found on pages 159, was not authorized by any law, for the reason that motion by the other side, but, on the contrary, the Jose Ur. Carbonell for and in his own behalf as
162, and 170, of the record, was not examined the said Lacalle did not have the capacity and attorney for the defendant or his counsel discussed petitioner.
either, even for the purpose of identifying his qualifications of a lawyer admitted under oath to the authenticity and validity of the said documents, Leonardo C. Fernandez for and in his own behalf as
signature, he being a Spaniard and an attorney it is practice his profession before the courts of these made allegations against the same and concluded respondent.
not possible to believe that he wrote the Islands, and therefore, on objection being made to by asking that these documents, and also the
aforementioned documents in the form and style in his present at the hearing of the case, the judge inscription of those designated under letters A and SANCHEZ, J.:
which they appear to have been drawn up; should have sustained such objection and should B, be declared null and void.
wherefore, on account of these circumstances, it is have excluded Lacalle and not permitted him to           Controversy over attorneys' fees for legal
reasonable to presume that the documents of pages address questions to the plaintiff's witnesses, From the preceding statements it is concluded that services rendered in CIR Case No. 70-ULP-Cebu.
159 and 170, and the note of page 162, of the notwithstanding the fact that Attorney Agustin the intervention of Jose Moreno Lacalle in the
present suit has in no manner prejudiced the rights           The background facts are as follows:
record, were not authentic. Alvares, designated in substitution of the said
Haussermann, Cohn & Williams as the plaintiff's and interests of the defendant and that, if judgment
          On May 30, 1956, Florentino Arceo and 47
It is also to be observed, in the document or letter representative in the Court of First Instance of was rendered against him and in favor of the
others together with their union, Amalgamated
found on page 136 of the record, and which also Tayabas, was present. plaintiff, it was in consequence of the merits of the
Laborers' Association, and/or Felisberto Javier,
was unauthenticated, that the aforementioned dates evidence adduced by the plaintiff and of the
general president of said union, lodged a
of the 11th of July, 1906, appear therein with a Notwithstanding this, the acts performed in the inefficacy and worthlessness of the testimony given
complaint 1 in the Court of Industrial Relations (CIR),
correction, made in the proper place, of the figures course of some of the proceedings under the by the defendant.
for unfair labor practices specified in Sec. 4(a) 1, 2, 3
11 and 6 of the first date, a repetition and details direction of Jose Moreno Lacalle are not subject to
If the defendant Marcelino Villafuerte had presented and 4 of the Industrial Peace Act. Made respondents
which induce the presumption that the said letter annulment, as no positive detriment was caused to
substantial, strong and convincing evidence of the were their former employer, Binalbagan Sugar
was written on a different date. the defendant, although such intervention is in no
falsity of the two powers of attorney executed in Central Company, Inc. (Biscom), Rafael Jalandoni,
manner permitted by the law of procedure.
By the foregoing it has been duly shown that the favor of Vicente Marcelo Concepcion, the plaintiff's its president and general manager; Gonzalo Guillen,
fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh errors attributed to documentary evidence would have been totally its chief engineer and general factory

Page 94 of 132
superintendent; and Fraternal Labor Organization reconsideration of CIR's decision of November 13, may be adjudicated by this Honorable Court, copy           (b) Respondent company is further directed to
and/or Roberto Poli, its president. 1962. The judgment became final. of said Agreement, in the local Visayan dialect and a deposit the amount representing 25% of P79,755.22
translation of the same in the English language are with the Cashier of this Court, as attorney's fees;
          Failing in their attempts to dismiss the           Upon the ten complainants' motion to name hereto attached as annexes "A" "A-1" hereof;
complaint (motions to dismiss dated June 30, 1956 an official computer to determine the actual money xxx     xxx     xxx
and July 6, 1956),  2respondents Biscom, Jalandoni, due them, CIR, on June 4, 1963, directed the Chief 4. That subsequently thereafter, when the above-
and Guillen, on July 9, 1957, answered and Examiner of its Examining Division to go to the entitled Case was already decided in their favor,           (d) The amount representing attorney's fees to
counterclaimed. Respondents Fraternal Labor Union premises of Biscom and compute the back wages Arsenio Reyes, in behalf of his co-laborers who are be deposited by the respondent company is hereby
and Poli also filed their answer dated July 12, 1957. due the ten complainants. also Complainants in this Case begged from the awarded and granted to Atty. Leonardo C.
Undersigned Counsel herein that he reduce his Fernandez, and he may collect the same from the
          With the issues joined, the case on the merits           On August 9, 1963, the Chief Examiner attorney's fees to Twenty-Five Per Cent (25%) only Cashier of the Court upon the finality of this order,
was heard before a trial commissioner. reported that the total net back wages due the ten for the reason that they have to share and satisfy subject to existing auditing procedures; ....
complainants were P79,755.22. Biscom and the also Atty. Jose Ur. Carbonell in the equivalent
          At the hearings, only ten of the forty-eight complainants moved for reconsideration: Biscom on           Biscom complied with the order of deposit. 4
amount of Five Per Cent (5%) although the latter's
complainant laborers appeared and testified. Two of August 17, 1963; complainants on September 24, actual services rendered was so insignificant           On April 10, 1964, Atty. Carbonell moved to
these ten were permanent (regular) employees of 1963. thereof; reconsider the March 19, 1964 order with respect to
respondent company; the remaining eight were
seasonal workers. The regular employees were           In the interim, Atty. Leonardo C. Fernandez (a the award of attorneys' fees. Amongst his grounds
5. That because of the pleadings of said Arsenio
Arsenio Reyes and Fidel Magtubo. Seasonal workers respondent herein) filed on July 15, 1963 in the are that CIR has no jurisdiction to determine the
Reyes, who is the President of said Union, the
were Catalino Bangoy, Juan Fernandez, Jose same case — CIR Case No. 70-ULP-Cebu — a matter in question, and that the award of 25% as
Undersigned Counsel herein finally agreed and
Garlitos, Dionisio Pido, Santiago Talagtag, "Notice of Attorney's Lien." He alleged therein that attorneys' fees to Atty. Fernandez is excessive,
consented that his attorney's fees be reduced to
Dominador Tangente, Felimon Villaluna and Brigido he had been the attorney of record for the laborers unfair and illegal. This motion was denied on April
only Twenty-Five Per Cent (25%) instead of Thirty
Casas. in CIR Case No. 70-ULP-Cebu "since the inception 28, 1964 by CIR en banc.
Per Cent (30%) as originally agreed upon in 1956.
of the preliminary hearings of said case up to the
          On November 13, 1962, CIR, thru Associate           On June 9, 1964, a motion for reconsideration
Supreme Court on appeal, as chief counsel thereof";           On October 7, 1963, Atty. Jose Ur. Carbonell
Judge Arsenio I. Martinez, rendered judgment, of the April 28, 1964 resolution was filed by Atty.
that he "had actually rendered legal services to the (a petitioner herein) filed in court a document
which provides, inter alia, that the two regular Carbonell. This was amplified by a similar motion
laborers who are subject of this present litigation labelled "Discharge" informing CIR of the discharge,
employees (Reyes and Magtubo) be reinstated "to filed on June 11, 1964.
[CIR Case No. 70-ULP-Cebu] since the year 1956, release and dismissal — thru a union board
their former positions, without loss of seniority and more or less"; that the laborers "have voluntarily resolution (attached thereto as Annex A thereof) —           On June 25, 1964, two things happened: First.
other benefits which should have accrued to them agreed to give [him], representing his attorney's fees of Atty. Leonardo C. Fernandez as one of the CIR en banc denied the motion of June 11, 1964.
had they not been illegally dismissed, with full back on contingent basis such amounts equivalent to lawyers of the complainants in CIR Case No. 70- Second. On Atty. Fernandez' motion, Judge
wages from the time of their said dismissals up to 25% thereof which agreement is evidenced by a ULP-Cebu, effective February 28, 1963. Martinez authorized the Cashier of the court to
the time of their actual reinstatements, minus what Note"; and that the 25% attorney's fee so disburse to Fernandez the amount of P19,938.81
they have earned elsewhere in the meantime" and contracted is "reasonable and proper taking into           On October 14, 1963, Atty. Fernandez replied.
representing attorneys' fees and deducting
that the eight seasonal workers "be readmitted to consideration the length of services he rendered and He averred that the grounds for his discharge
therefrom all legal fees incident to such deposit.
their positions as seasonal workers of respondent the nature of the work actually performed by him." specified in the board resolution were "malicious
company (Biscom), with back wages as seasonal and motivated by greed and ungratefulness" and           Petitioners herein, Atty. Carbonell,
workers from the time they were not rehired at the           On September 25, 1963, Atty. Fernandez filed that the unjustifiable discharge did not affect the Amalgamated Laborers' Association, and the ten
start of the 1955-1956 milling season on October 1, an "Amended Notice of Attorney's Lien," which in already stipulated contract for attorneys' fees. employees, appealed from the June 25, 1964
1955 up to the time they are actually reinstated, less part reads: resolution of CIR, direct to this Court.
the amount earned elsewhere during the period of           On March 19, 1964, CIR Judge Arsenio I.
their lay-off." 3. That the laborers, subject of this present litigation, Martinez resolved Biscom's and complainants'           1. Petitioners press upon this Court the view
sometime on February 3, 1956, had initially motions for resonsideration objecting to the Chief that CIR is bereft of authority to adjudicate
          Respondents Biscom, Jalandoni and Guillen voluntarily agreed to give Undersigned Counsel Examiner's Report and also respondent Fernandez' contractual disputes over attorneys' fees. Their
appealed direct to this Court.  3 On March 28, 1963, herein, representing his Attorney's fees on Amended Notice of Attorney's Lien. Judge Martinez' reasons: (1) a dispute arising from contracts for
this Court dismissed the appeal, without costs. contingent basis, such amounts as equivalent to order reads in part: attorneys' fees is not a labor dispute and is not one
Ground: Petitioners therein did not seek Thirty Per Cent (30%) of whatever money claims that among the cases ruled to be within CIR's authority;

Page 95 of 132
and (2) to consider such a dispute to be a mere principal matter, even though the Court may thus explains that upon the plea of Arsenio Reyes, union whereby a union president is allowed to share in
incident to a case over which CIR may validly be, called on to consider and decide matters, which president and one of the 10 successful attorneys' fees is immoral. Such a contract we
assume jurisdiction is to disregard the special and as original causes of action, would not be within its complainants, he had to reduce his fees to 25% emphatically reject. It cannot be justified.
limited nature of said court's jurisdiction. cognizance (Bartholomew vs. Shipe, 251 S.W. since "they have to share and satisfy also Atty. Jose
1031), (21 C.J.S. pp. 136-138.) Ur. Carbonell in the equivalent amount of Five Per           4. A contingent fee contract specifying the
          These arguments are devoid of merit. Cent (5%)." Atty. Fernandez exhibited a contract percentage of recovery an attorney is to receive in a
          Thus, in Gomez vs. North Camarines Lumber purportedly dated February 3, 1956 — before the 48 suit "should be reasonable under all the
          The present controversy over attorneys' fees Co., L-11945, August 18, 1958, and Serrano vs. circumstances of the case, including the risk and
employees have even filed their complaint in CIR.
is but an epilogue or a tail-end feature of the main Serrano, L-19562, May 23, 1964, we held that the uncertainty of the compensation, but should always
The stipulated fee is 30% of whatever amount the
case, CIR No. 70-ULP-Cebu, which undoubtedly is court having jurisdiction over the main cause of be subject to the supervision of a court, as to its
ten  might recover. Strange enough, this contract
within CIR's jurisdiction. And, it has been held that action, may grant the relief incidental thereto, even if reasonableness." 11
was signed only  by 8 of the 10 winning claimants.
"once the Court of Industrial Relations has acquired they would otherwise, be outside its competence.  6 What happened to the others? Why did not the
jurisdiction over a case under the law of its creation,           Lately, we said: 12
union intervene in the signing of this contract?
it retains that jurisdiction until the case is completely           To direct that the present dispute be lodged in
Petitioners dispute said contract. They say that Atty.           The principle that courts should reduce
decided, including all the incidents related another court as petitioners advocate would only
Fernandez required the ten to sign the contract stipulated attorney's fees whenever it is found under
thereto." 5 Expressive of the rule on this point is this result in multiplicity of suits,  7 a situation abhorred by
only after  the receipt of the decision. the circumstances of the case that the same is
— the rules. Thus it is, that usually the application to fix
the attorneys' fees is made before the court which unreasonable, is now deeply rooted in this
          Petitioners, on the other hand, contend that
          4. It is well settled that: renders the judgment. 8 And, it has been observed jurisdiction....
the verbal agreement entered into by the union and
that "[a]n approved procedure, where a charging lien its officers thru its President Javier and said two
          A grant of jurisdiction implies the necessary xxx     xxx     xxx
has attached to a judgment or where money has lawyers, Atty. Carbonell and Atty. Fernandez, is that
and usual incidental powers essential to effectuate
been paid into court, is for the attorney to file an the 30% attorneys' fees, shall be divided equally           Since then this Court has invariably fixed
it, and every regularly constituted court has power to
intervening petition and have the amount and extent ("share and share alike") amongst Atty. Carbonell, counsel fees on a quantum meruit  basis whenever
do all things reasonably necessary for the
of his lien judicially determined." 9 Appropriately to Atty. Fernandez and Felisberto Javier, the union the fees stipulated appear excessive,
administration of justice within the scope of its
be recalled at this point, is the recent ruling president. unconscionable, or unreasonable, because a lawyer
jurisdiction, and for the enforcement of its
in Martinez vs. Union de Maquinistas , 1967A Phild. is primarily a court officer charged with the duty of
judgments and mandates, even though the court
142, 144, January 30, 1967, where, speaking thru           After hearing, CIR Associate Judge Arsenio I. assisting the court in administering impartial justice
may thus be called upon to decide matters which
Mr. Justice Arsenio P. Dizon, explicit Martinez awarded 25% attorneys' fees to between the parties, and hence, the fees should be
would not be within its cognizance as original
pronouncement was made by this Court that: "We respondent Atty. Fernandez. CIR noted that "the subject to judicial control. Nor should it be ignored
causes of action.
are of the opinion that since the Court of Industrial active conduct and prosecution of the above- that sound public policy demands that courts
          While a court may be expressly granted the Relations obviously had jurisdiction over the main entitled case was done by Atty. Fernandez up to the disregard stipulations for counsel fees, whenever
incidental powers necessary to effectuate its cases, ... it likewise had full jurisdiction to consider appeal in the Supreme Court," and that petitioner they appear to be a source of speculative profit at
jurisdiction, a grant of jurisdiction, in the absence of and decide all matters collateral thereto, such as Atty. Carbonell manifested that "Atty. Leonardo C. the expense of the debtor or mortgagor.
prohibitive legislation, implies the necessary and claims for attorney's fees  made by the members of Fernandez was the counsel mainly responsible for See, Gorospe, et al. v. Gochangco , L-12735,
usual incidental powers essential to effectuate it (In the bar who appeared therein." 10 the conduct of the case." It noted, too, that October 30, 1959. And it is not material that the
re Stinger's Estate, 201 P. 693), and, subject to petitioner Atty. Carbonell did not file any notice of present action is between the debtor and the
          2. The parties herein join hands in one point - Attorney's Lien.
existing laws and constitutional provisions, every creditor, and not between attorney and client. As
the ten (10) successful complainants in C.I.R Case
regularly constituted court has power to do all things courts have power to fix the fee as between attorney
No. 70-ULP-Cebu should pay as attorneys' fees           3. We strike down the alleged oral agreement
that are reasonably necessary for the administration and client, it must necessarily have the right to say
30% of the amount adjudicated by the court in the that the union president should share in the
of justice within the scope of its jurisdiction, and for whether a stipulation like this, inserted in a mortgage
latter's favor (P79,755.22). attorneys' fees. Canon 34 of Legal Ethics condemns
the enforcement of its judgments and mandates. So contract, is valid. Bachrach v. Golingco, 39 Phil. 138.
this arrangement in terms clear and explicit. It says:
demands, matters, or questions ancillary or           They are at odds, however, on how to split the "No division of fees for legal services is proper,           In the instant case, the stipulated 30%
incidental to, or growing out of, the main action, and fees. except with another lawyer, based upon a division of attorneys' fee is excessive and unconscionable. With
coming within the above principles, may be taken
service or responsibility." The union president is not the exception of Arsenio Reyes who receives a
cognizance of by the court and determined, since           Respondent Atty. Fernandez claims twenty-
the attorney for the laborers. He may seek monthly salary of P175, the other successful
such jurisdiction is in aid of its authority over the five per cent (25%) of the 30% attorneys' fees. He
compensation only as such president. An agreement

Page 96 of 132
complainants were mere wage earners paid a daily most of those pleadings up to judgment were signed           6. We note that CIR's cashier was authorized held that the said agreement is void because it was
rate of P4.20 to P5.00. 13 Considering the long period for Fernandez & Carbonell by respondent on June 25, 1964 to disburse to Atty. Leonardo C. tantamount to malpractice which is "the practice of
of time that they were illegally and arbitrarily Fernandez. Fernandez the sum of P19,938.81 which is 25% of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either
deprived of their just pay, these laborers looked up the amount recovered. In the event payment actually personally or through paid agents or brokers" (Sec.
to the favorable money judgment as a serum to their           We note that a break-up in the professional was made, he should be required to return whatever 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court). Malpractice ordinarily
pitiful economic malaise. A thirty per cent (30%) tie-up between Attorneys Fernandez and Carbonell is in excess of the amount to which he is entitled in refers to any malfeasance or dereliction of duty
slice therefrom immensely dilutes the palliative began when petitioner Atty. Carbonell, on November line with the opinion expressed herein. 15 committed by a lawyer. Section 27 gives a special
ingredient of this judicial antidote. 26, 1962, complained to CIR that respondent Atty. and technical meaning to the term "malpractice"
Fernandez "failed to communicate with him nor to           IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the award of (Act No. 2828, amending Sec. 21 of Act No. 190).
          The ten complainants involved herein are inform him about the incidents of this case." He twenty five per cent (25%) attorneys' fees solely to That meaning is in consonance with the elementary
mere laborers. It is not far-fetched to assume that there requested that he be furnished "separately respondent Atty. Fernandez contained in CIR's order notion that the practice of law is a profession, not a
they have not reached an educational attainment copies of the decision of the court and other of March 19, 1964 and affirmed by said court's en business. "The lawyer may not seek or obtain
comparable to that of petitioner Carbonell or pleadings and subsequent orders as well as motions banc resolutions of April 28, 1964 and June 25, employment by himself or through others for to do
respondent Fernandez who, on the other hand, are in connection with the case." 1964, is hereby set aside; and the case is hereby so would be unprofessional" (2 R.C.L. 1097 cited in
lawyers. Because of the inequality of the situation remanded to the Court of Industrial Relations with In re Tagorda, 33 Phil. 37, 42).
between laborers and lawyers, courts should go           Subsequent pleadings filed in the case instructions to conduct a hearing on, and determine,
slow in awarding huge sums by way of attorneys' unmistakably show the widening rift in their the respective shares of Attorney Leonardo C. 2. ID.; ID.; ID.; UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT;
fees based solely on contracts. 14 For, as in the professional relationship. Thus, on May 23, 1963, a Fernandez and Attorney Jose Ur. Carbonell in the CAUSE FOR CENSURE. — The commercialization
present case, the real objective of the CIR judgment "Motion to Name and Authorize Official Computer" amount of P19,938.81 herein awarded as attorneys' of law practice is condemned in certain canons of
in CIR Case No. 70-ULP-Cebu is to benefit the was filed with CIR. On the same day, a "Motion to fees or both. No costs. So ordered. professional ethics adopted by the American Bar
complaint laborers who were unjustifiedly dismissed Issue Writ of Execution" was also registered in the
Association. "Unprofessional conduct in an attorney
from the service. While it is true that laborers should same court. Although filed under the name of SECOND DIVISION
is that which violates the rules or ethical code of his
not be allowed to develop that atavistic proclivity to "Carbonell & Fernandez," these pleadings were
profession or which is unbecoming a member of that
bite the hands that fed them, still lawyers should not signed solely by petitioner Atty. Carbonell. [A.C. No. 1261. December 29, 1983.]
profession" (Note 14, 7 C.J.S. 743). We censure
be permitted to get a lion's share of the benefits due lawyer David for having entered and acted upon
          On September 16, 1963, an "Opposition to TAN TEK BENG, Complainant, v. TIMOTEO A.
by reason of a worker's labor. What is to be paid to such void and unethical agreement. We
respondent Biscom's Motion for Reconsideration" DAVID, Respondent.
the laborers is not windfall but a product of the discountenance his conduct, not because of the
was filed by petitioner Atty. Carbonell. On
sweat of their brow. Contracts for legal services complaint of Tan Tek Beng (who did not know legal
September 24, 1963, he filed a "Motion for Basilio Lanoria for complainant.
between laborer and attorney should then be ethics) but because David should have known
Clarification" of the November 13, 1962 judgment of
zealously scrutinized to the end that a fair share of better.
CIR regarding the basic pay of Arsenio Reyes and Timoteo A. David for and in his own behalf.
the benefits be not denied the former.
Fidel Magtubo. On September 24, 1963, he also
          5. An examination of the record of the case filed a "Motion to Reconsider Report of Chief
will readily show that an award of twenty-five per Examiner." These, and other pleadings that were
cent (25%) attorneys' fees reasonably compensates filed later were signed solely by petitioner Atty.
DECISION
the whole of the legal services rendered in CIR Case Carbonell, not in the name of "Carbonell & SYLLABUS
No. 70-ULP-Cebu. This fee must be shared by Fernandez." While it was correctly observed by CIR
petitioner Atty. Carbonell and respondent Atty. that a good portion of the court battle was fought by
Fernandez. For, after all, they are the counsel of respondent Atty. Fernandez, yet CIR cannot close its
record of the complainants. Respondent Atty. eyes to the legal services also rendered by Atty.
AQUINO, J.:
Fernandez cannot deny this fact. The pleadings filed Carbonell. For, important and numerous, too, were 1. LEGAL ETHICS; MEMBER OF THE BAR;
even at the early stages of the proceedings reveal his services. And, they are not negligible. The SOLICITING CASES AT LAW FOR THE PURPOSE
the existence of an association between said conclusion is inevitable that petitioner Atty. OF GAIN; CONSTITUTES MALPRACTICE. — Where
attorneys. The pleadings were filed under the name Carbonell must have a share in the twenty-five per in the agreement lawyer David not only agreed to
of "Fernandez & Carbonell." This imports a common cent (25%) attorneys' fees awarded herein. As to give one-half of his professional fees to an The issue in this case is whether disciplinary action
effort of the two. It cannot be denied though that how much, this is a function pertaining to CIR. intermediary or commission agent but he also bound should be taken against lawyer Timoteo A. David
himself not to deal directly with the clients, the Court

Page 97 of 132
(admitted to the bar in 1945) for not giving Tan Tek Likewise you must be sincere, honest and fair with Tek Beng should also invest some money or based upon a division of service or
Beng, a nonlawyer (alleged missionary of the me. shoulder a part of the business expenses but Tan responsibility."cralaw virtua1aw library
Seventh Day Adventists), one-half of the attorney’s Tek Beng refused.
fees received by David from the clients supplied by Very truly yours, "35. Intermediaries. — The professional services of a
Tan Tek Beng. Their agreement This case was referred to the Solicitor General for lawyer should not be controlled or exploited by any
reads:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph (Sgd.) Illegible investigation, report and recommendation. Hearings law agency, personal or corporate, which intervenes
were scheduled from 1974 to 1981. It was proposed between client and lawyer. A lawyer’s
"December 3, 1970 TIMOTEO A. DAVID that respondent should submit a stipulation of facts responsibilities and qualifications are individual. He
but that did not materialize because the scheduled should avoid all relations which direct the
"Mr. Tan Tek Beng "P.S. hearings were not held due to the nonavailability of performance of his duties by or in the interest of
Tan Tek Beng and his counsel. such intermediary. A lawyer’s relation to his client
"Manila I will be responsible for all documents entrusted me should be personal, and the responsibility should be
by our clients. On September 16, 1977 Tan Tek Beng died at the direct to the client.
"Dear Mr. Tan:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library Philippine Union Colleges Compound, Baesa,
(Sgd.) Initial Caloocan City but it was only in the manifestation of "38. Compensation, Commissions and Rebates. —
In compliance with your request, I am now putting his counsel dated August 10, 1981 that the Solicitor A lawyer should accept no compensation,
into writing our agreement which must be followed "CONFORME to the above and likewise will General’s Office was informed of that fact. A report commissions, rebates or other advantages from
in connection with the accounts that you will entrust reciprocate my sincerity to Atty. David as stated in on this case dated March 21, 1983 was submitted others without the knowledge and consent of his
to me for collection. Our terms and conditions shall the last paragraph of this letter. by the Solicitor General to this Court. client after full disclosure." (Appendix, Malcolm,
be as follows:jgc:chanrobles.com.ph Legal Ethics).
(Sgd.) Tan Tek Beng We hold that the said agreement is void because it
"1. On all commission or attorney’s fees that we was tantamount to malpractice which is "the We censure lawyer David for having entered and
shall receive from our clients by virtue of the MR. TAN TEK BENG"  practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of acted upon such void and unethical agreement. We
collection that we shall be able to effect on their gain, either personally or through paid agents or discountenance his conduct, not because of the
accounts, we shall divide fifty-fifty. Likewise you are The foregoing was a reiteration of an agreement brokers" Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court). complaint of Tan Tek Beng (who did not know legal
entitled to commission, 50/50 from domestic, dated August 5, 1969. Note that in said agreement Malpractice ordinarily refers to any malfeasance or ethics) but because David should have known
inheritance and commercial from our said clients or lawyer David not only agreed to give one-half of his dereliction of duty committed by a lawyer. Section better.
in any criminal cases where they are involved. professional fees to an intermediary or commission 27 gives a special and technical meaning to the term
agent but he also bound himself not to deal directly "malpractice" (Act No. 2828, amending sec. 21 of "Unprofessional conduct in an attorney is that which
"2. I shall not deal directly with our clients without with the clients. Act No. 190). violates the rules or ethical code of his profession or
your consent. which is unbecoming a member of that profession"
The business relationship between David and Tan That meaning is in consonance with the elementary (Note 14, 7 C.J.S. 743).
"3. You shall take care of collecting our fees as well Tek Beng did not last. There were mutual notion that the practice of law is a profession, not a
as advances for expenses for the cases referred to accusations of doublecross. For allegedly not living business. "The lawyer may not seek or obtain WHEREFORE, respondent is reprimanded for being
us by our clients and careful in safeguarding our up to the agreement, Tan Tek Beng in 1973 employment by himself or through others for to do guilty of malpractice. A copy of this decision should
interest. denounced David to Presidential Assistant Ronaldo so would be unprofessional" (2 R.C.L. 1097 cited in be attached to his record in the Bar Confidant’s
B. Zamora, to the Office of Civil Relations at Camp In re Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37, 42; Malcolm, J., Jayme v. office.
"4. It is understood that legal expenses that we shall Crame and to this Court. He did not file any civil Bualan, 58 Phil. 422; Arce v. Philippine National
recover from the debtors shall be turned over to our action to enforce the agreement. Bank, 62 Phil. 569). The commercialization of law SO ORDERED.
clients. Other clients who directly or indirectly have practice is condemned in certain canons of
been approached or related (sic) to you as a result of In his 1974 comment, David clarified that the professional ethics adopted by the American Bar G.R. No. L-24864 April 30, l985
your labor are your clients. partnership was composed of himself as manager, Association:
FORTUNATO HALILI, doing business under the
Tan Tek Beng as assistant manager and lawyer
name and style HALILI TRANSIT (substituted by
"I hereby pledge in the name of God, our Heavenly Pedro Jacinto as president and financier. When
"34. Division of Fees. — No division of fees for legal EMILIA DE VERA DE HALILI), petitioner 
Father, that I will be sincere, honest and fair with you Jacinto became ill and the costs of office
services is proper, except with another lawyer, vs.
in connection with our transactions with our clients. maintenance mounted, David suggested that Tan

Page 98 of 132
COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS and HALILI orders of September 23, 1982 and February 9, 1983
BUS DRIVERS and CONDUCTORS UNION issued by Labor Arbiter Raymundo Valenzuela in
(PTGWO), respondents. Case No. 1099-V before the NLRC which orders
respectively allowed the sale of the property
G.R. No. L-27773 April 30, l985 awarded to satisfy or answer for the claims of the
union members in these four cases and authorized
EMILIA DE VERA VDA. DE HALILI, petitioner, 
the distribution of the proceeds of the purchase.
vs.
COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS and HALILI For a better appreciation of the aforesaid motion for
BUS DRIVERS AND CONDUCTORS UNION contempt, We must recall certain prefatory facts
(PTGWO), respondents. which the Solicitor General has so aptly summed up.
Thus:
G.R. No. L-38655 April 30, l985
The above-entitled cases involve disputes regarding
FELICIDAD M. TOLENTINO, et al., petitioners, 
claims for overtime of more than five hundred bus
vs.
drivers and conductors of Halili Transit. Litigation
COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, et
initially commenced with the filing of a complaint for
al., respondents.
overtime with the defunct Court of Industrial
G.R. No. L-30110 April 30, l985 Relations on August 20, 1958 docketed as CIR Case
No. 1099-V. The disputes were eventually settled
EMILIA DE VERA VDA. DE HALILI petitioner,  when the contending parties reached an Agreement
vs. on December 23, 1974, the pertinent portions of
HALILI BUS DRIVERS AND CONDUCTORS which are as follows:
UNION-PTGWO and COURT OF INDUSTRIAL
RELATIONS, respondents. WHEREAS, in the face of this strong urging on the
part of the Supreme Court Justices upon the parties
RESOLUTION to put an immediate end to this case by amicable
settlement, the parties repeatedly came to
  conference, conscientiously explored all avenues of
settlement, and finally arrived at the tentative
MAKASIAR, J.:
agreement (tentative because of the condition that
Before Us for resolution is the urgent motion to cite the same be sanctioned by the court in the estate
Atty. Benjamin C. Pineda, Ricardo Capuno and case) whereby the Administratrix would transfer to
Manila Bank (Cubao Branch) in contempt for the the employees title to that tract of land, covered by
alleged continued failure of aforenamed parties to TCT No. 36389, containing an area of approximately
comply with the temporary mandatory restraining 33,952 square meters, situated in the Barrio of San
order issued by this Court on September 1, 1983 Bartolome, Municipality of Caloocan, Province of
and with the resolution dated September 13, 1983 Rizal, and pay in addition the cash amount of
which again directed Atty. Pineda and union P25,000.00 in full and final satisfaction of all the
administrator Capuno to comply with the aforesaid claims and causes of action of all of the employees
mandatory restraining order and which ordered the against the estate of Fortunato F. Halili subject of
Manila Bank to transfer the funds allocated for the CIR Case No. 1099-V.
workers to the NLRC (p. 376, L-24864, rec.; p. 301,
xxx xxx xxx
L027773 rec.).
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the
The issuance of the temporary mandatory
foregoing and of the covenants, stipulations and
restraining order stemmed from the questioned

Page 99 of 132
G.R. No. L-22320 July 29, 1968 deliberation and patient reprobing into the records of Judge Eulogio Mencias of the Court of First Instance Branch which issued the controverted writ of
the case, however, we are of the firmer conviction of Rizal, looking to Acosta vs. Alvendia (L-14598, execution), in connection with civil case 7532, then
MERCEDES RUTH COBB-PEREZ and DAMASO that the protracted litigation, alluded to in the above- October 31, 1960), which held that courts of first still pending in the Court of First Instance of Rizal. As
P. PEREZ, petitioners, quoted portion of our decision, was designed to instance have no power to restrain acts outside their most probably anticipated anew by the Perez
cause delay, and the active participation of the territorial jurisdictions, lifted on October 4, 1963 the spouses and their counsels, Judge Alikpala,
vs.
petitioners' counsels in this adventure is patent. ex parte writ which he previously issued enjoining presiding judge of Branch XXII, on November 8,
HON. GREGORIO LANTIN, Judge of the Court of the respondent sheriff from carrying out the 1963 denied the preliminary injunction sought, on
After November 15, 1962 when the Court of Appeals execution sale. It is clear, however, that Mrs. Perez the ground, among others, that he had no power to
First Instance of Manila,
rendered judgment sustaining Damaso Perez' and her counsels, the movants, knew or ought to interfere by injunction with the judgment or decree of
RICARDO P. HERMOSO and the CITY SHERIFF position with respect to the extent of the levy, the have known beforehand that the Court of First a court of concurrent or coordinate jurisdiction. On
OF MANILA, respondents. subsequent proceedings interposed alternatingly by Instance of Rizal did not have jurisdiction to issue the very day the injunction was denied, Damaso
the petitioner spouses were obviously quixotic the writ which Mrs. Perez herself sought, and, Perez, as if expecting the reversal from Judge
Crispin D. Baizas and Associates for petitioners. maneuvers expected to be overthrown by the courts anticipating the recall of the writ improvidently Alikpala, was already prepared with another
but calculated to delay an execution long overdue. issued, on September 3, 1963, a month before the "remedy," as in fact on that day, November 8, 1963,
Isidro T. Almeda for respondents.
said writ was actually lifted, filed in the basic civil he filed in the basic civil case 39407 an "Urgent
Had the petitioners and their counsels seriously
CASTRO, J.: case 39407 an urgent motion to lift the writ of Motion for Reconsideration" of the order of October
believed that the levied shares of stock were
execution issued on August 15, 1961, alleging as 19, 1963, which denied his wife's above-mentioned
conjugal property, why did they not adopt this
This is a motion for partial reconsideration of this justification the conjugal nature of the levied shares motion to recall the controverted writ of execution.
position from the very start, or, at the latest, in CA-
Court's decision of May 22, 1968, specifically of stock and the personal nature of Damaso Perez'
G.R. 29962-R, wherein Damaso Perez challenged The foregoing motion, far from seriously seeking the
directed against the following observation therein judgment debt, the very same reasons advanced in
the legality of the levy's coverage, in order to end reconsideration of the order of October 19, 1963,
made: civil case 7532 which was then still pending in the
the litigation with reasonable dispatch? They chose, which in the first place Damaso Perez could not
Court of First Instance of Rizal. Incidentally, Mrs.
We feel compelled to observe that during the however, to attack the execution in a piecemeal legally do for he was not even a party to the denied
Perez failed to adduce any evidence in support of
protracted litigation below, the petitioners resorted fashion, causing the postponement of the projected "Urgent Motion to Recall Writ of Execution" (filed by
her aforesaid urgent motion, as in fact neither she
to a series of actions and petitions, at some stages execution sale six times. More than eight years after his wife alone), was merely an offer to replace the
nor her counsels appeared during the scheduled
alternatingly, abetted by their counsel, for the sole the finality of the judgment have passed, and the levied stocks with supposed cash dividends due to
hearing, prompting the respondent judge to issue
purpose of thwarting the execution of a simple same has yet to be satisfied. the Perez spouses as stockholders in the Republic
the following order:
money judgment which has long become final and Bank.1 As a matter of fact, when the motion was set
In a determined effort to prolong the litigation, the
executory. Some of the actions were filed, only to be When the urgent motion to recall or lift writ of for hearing on December 21, 1963, the counsels for
Perez spouses, as represented by their counsels,
abandoned or withdrawn. The petitioners and their execution was called this morning for hearing, Damaso Perez promised to produce the said cash
sought the issuance of preliminary injunctions to
counsel, far from viewing courts as sanctuaries for counsel for the movant did not appear despite the dividends within five days, but the promise was
restrain the execution of the final judgment in civil
those who seek justice, have tried to use them to fact that he had been duly notified of the motion for never fulfilled.2 Consequently, the respondent Judge
case 39407 from courts which did not have
subvert the very ends of justice. hearing. In view thereof the court assumes that he is on January 4, 1964, denied the said motion for
jurisdiction and which would, as expected, initially or
waiving his right to present evidence in support of reconsideration.
Corollarily, this Court assessed treble costs against ultimately deny their prayer. For instance, after
his urgent motion to recall or lift writ of execution.
the petitioners, to "be paid by their counsel.". Damaso Perez bowed out temporarily from the The above exposition of the circumstances relative
Said urgent motion is therefore deemed submitted
scene following the rendition of the aforementioned to the protracted litigation clearly negates the
The herein movants, Attys. Crispin D. Baizas and A. for resolution.
Court of Appeals decision, his wife, Mercedez, Ruth avowal of the movants that "in none of the various
N. Bolinas, counsels for the petitioners, while Cobb-Perez, intruded into the controversy and Despite the recall of the aforementioned writ of incidents in the case at bar has any particular
submitting to the judgment on the merits, seek asked for an ex parte writ of preliminary injunction injunction by Judge Mencias on a disclaimer of counsel of petitioners acted with deliberate
reconsideration of the decision in so far as it reflects from the Court of First Instance of Rizal in jurisdiction (since the execution sought to be aforethought to delay the enforcement of the
adversely upon their "professional conduct" and connection with civil case 7532 which she filed with enjoined was ordered by another tribunal), Mrs. judgment in Civil Case No. 39407." From the
condemns them to pay the treble costs adjudged the said court, knowing fully well that the basic civil Perez, now assisted by her husband who had chronology of antecedent events, the fact becomes
against their clients. case 39407 was decided by the Court of First staged a comeback, prayed for the issuance of inescapable that the Perez spouses, coached by
Instance of Manila (Branch VII presided by the another injunction, this time from Branch XXII of the their counsels, had sallied forth on a strategem of
At first blush, the motion for reconsideration
respondent Judge Lantin), which latter court was the Court of First Instance of Manila (not the same "remedies" projected to foil the lawful execution of a
presents a semblance of merit. After mature
proper forum for any action relative to the execution.

Page 100 of 132


simple money judgment. It is equally obvious that writs of preliminary injunction from the Court of First he finds that his client's cause is defenseless, then it 1968 is hereby modified in the sense that Attys.
they foreshadowed their own reversals in the Instance of Rizal and the Court of First Instance of is his bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce Crispin D. Baizas and A.N. Bolinao, Jr. shall pay
"remedies" they ventured to adopt, such that even Manila (Branch XXII) where civil cases 7532 and and submit, rather than traverse the incontrovertible. jointly and severally the treble costs assessed
before, one remedy had been exhausted, they 55292 were filed respectively, for the said courts did A lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his against the petitioners.
interposed another until the case reached this Court not have jurisdiction to restrain the enforcement of client, and temper his client's propensity to litigate.
for the second time. 3 Meanwhile, justice was the writ of execution issued by the Court of First A lawyer's oath to uphold the cause of justice is G.R. No. 132365 July 9, 1998
delayed, and more than one member of this Court Instance of Manila (Branch VII) under the settled superior to his duty to his client; its primacy is
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, petitioner,
are persuaded that justice was practically waylaid. doctrines that Courts are without power to restrain indisputable.
acts outside of their territorial jurisdiction 4 or vs.
The movants also contend that even this Court interfere with the judgment or decree of a court of The movants finally state that the "Petitioners have
sanctions the aforesaid civil cases 7532 and 55292 concurrent or coordinate jurisdiction. 5 However, the several counsel in this case but the participation of HON. TOMAS B. NOYNAY, Acting Presiding
as the "proper remedy" when we said that. recall and the denial of the writs of preliminary each counsel was rather limited implying that the Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch 23, Allen,
injunction in civil cases 7532 and 55292 did not decision of this Court ordering that "treble costs are Northern Samar, and DIOSDADA F. AMOR,
In reality, what they attacked is not the writ of assessed against the petitioners, which shall be paid
amount to the termination or dismissal of the ESBEL CHUA, and RUBEN MAGLUYOAN,
execution, the validity and regularity of which are by their counsel" is not clear. The word "counsel"
principal action in each case. Had the Perez respondents.
unchallenged, but the levy made by the respondent may be either singular or plural in construction, so
spouses desired in earnest to continue with the said
Sheriff. In this regard, the remedy is not the recall of that when we said "counsel" we meant the counsels
cases they could have done so. But the fact is that
the writ, but an independent action to enjoin the on record of the petitioners who were responsible
Mrs. Perez practically abandoned civil case 7532
Sheriff from proceeding with the projected sale, in for the inordinate delay in the execution of the final DAVIDE, JR., J.:
when she instituted the above mentioned urgent
which action the conjugal nature of the levied stocks judgment in the basic civil case 39407, after the
motion to recall writ of execution in the basic civil The pivotal issue raised in this special civil action for
should be established as a basis for the subsequent Court of Appeals had rendered its aforementioned
case 39407, anchored on the same grounds which certiorari with mandamus is whether R.A. No. 7691 1
issuance of a permanent injunction, in the event of a decision of November 15, 1962. And it is on record
she advanced in the former case, until the said civil has divested Regional Trial Courts of jurisdiction
successful claim. Incidentally, in the course of the that the movants are such counsels. Atty. Bolinas,
case 7532 was dismissed on November 9, 1963, over election offenses, which are punishable with
protracted litigation, the petitioners had already upon his own admission, "entered his appearance in
upon her own motion. Anent civil case 55292, the imprisonment of not exceeding six (6) years.
availed of this remedy in civil cases 7532 and the case at bar about the time the Court of First
Perez spouses virtually deserted the same when
55292, only to abandon it as they incessantly sought Instance of Manila dismissed the petitioners' Petition
they instituted the herein petition for certiorari with The antecedents are not disputed.
other, and often simultaneous, devices of thwarting for Relief in Civil Case No. 39407," or about August
urgent writ of preliminary injunction based on the
satisfaction of the judgment debt. (Emphasis 3, 1961 and even prior to the Court of Appeals In its Minute Resolution No. 96-3076 of 29 October
same grounds proffered in the said civil case — until
supplied) . decision above-mentioned. Atty. Baizas claims that 1996, the Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
the latter was also dismissed on March 20, 1964,
he "became petitioners' counsel only in October, resolved to file an information for violation of Section
And because of this statement, they now counter with the consent of the parties because of the
1963 when he filed, with Atty. A.N. Bolinao, Jr. Civil 261(i) of the Omnibus Election Code against private
that the said cases could not be branded as having pendency then of the aforesaid petition for certiorari.
Case No. 55292 before the Court of First Instance of respondents Diosdada Amor, a public school
been instituted for delay.
The movants further contend that "If there was Manila presided by the Hon. Judge Alikpala although principal, and Esbel Chua and Ruben Magluyoan,
The reference we made to civil cases 7532 and delay, it was because petitioners' counsel happened it appears on record that the urgent motion to recall both public school teachers, for having engaged in
55292 in the above-quoted statement must not be to be more assertive ... a quality of the lawyers writ of execution filed by Mrs. Perez in the basic civil partisan political activities. The COMELEC
considered out of context. We said that the (which) is not to be condemned." case 39407 on September 3, 1963, was over the authorized its Regional Director in Region VIII to
petitioners incidentally had already availed of the signature of one Ruby Zaida of the law firm of handle the prosecution of the cases.
A counsel's assertiveness in espousing with candour "Crispin Baizas & Associates" as counsel for Mrs.
suggested remedy only in the sense that said civil
and honesty his client's cause must be encouraged Forthwith, nine informations for violation of Section
cases 7532 and 55292 were apparently instituted to Perez. It is to be recalled that the said urgent motion
and is to be commended; what we do not and 261(i) of the Omnibus Election were filed with Branch
prove the conjugal nature of the levied shares of is the same motion discussed above, which,
cannot countenance is a lawyer's insistence despite 23 of the Regional Trial Court of Alien, Northern
stocks in question. We used the word incidentally curiously enough, antedated by at least one month
the patent futility of his client's position, as in the Samar, and docketed therein as follows:
advisedly to show that in their incessant search for the lifting of the writ of preliminary injunction issued
case at bar. in civil case 7532.
devices to thwart the controverted execution, they a) Criminal Cases Nos. A-1439 and A-1442,
accidentally stumbled on the suggested remedy. But It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, against private respondents Diosdada Amor, Esbel
ACCORDINGLY, the motion for partial
the said civil cases were definitely not the "proper ordinarily a layman to the intricacies and vagaries of Chua, and Ruben Magluyoan.
reconsideration is denied. Our decision of May 22,
remedy" in so far as they sought the issuance of the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If

Page 101 of 132


b) Criminal Case No. A-1443, against private exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount or In their Comment, private respondents maintain that indirectly, intervenes in any election campaign or
respondents Esbel Chua and Ruben Magluyoan. fine and regardless of other imposable accessory R.A. No. 7691 has divested the Regional Trial Courts engages in any partisan political activity, except to
and other penalties including the civil liability arising of jurisdiction over offenses where the imposable vote or to preserve public order, if he is a peace
c) Criminal Cases Nos. A-1444 and A-1445, from such offenses or predicated thereon, penalty is not more than 6 years of imprisonment; officer.
against private respondent Esbel Chua only; irrespective of time [sic], nature, value and amount moreover, R.A. 7691 expressly provides that all
thereof, Provided, However, that in offenses laws, decrees, and orders inconsistent with its Under Section 264 of the Code the penalty for an
d) Criminal Cases Nos. A-1446 to A-1449, election offense under the Code, except that of
including damages to property through criminal provisions are deemed repealed or modified
against private respondent Diosdada Amor only. failure to register or failure to vote, is "imprisonment
negligence, they shall have exclusive original accordingly. They then conclude that since the
jurisdiction thereof. election offense in question is punishable with of not less than one year but not more than six
In an Order 2 issued on 25 August 1997, respondent
imprisonment of not more than 6 years, it is years" and the offender shall not be subject to
Judge Tomas B. Noynay, as presiding judge of
In light of the foregoing, this Court has therefore, no cognizable by Municipal Trial Courts. probation and shall suffer disqualification to hold
Branch 23, motu proprio ordered the records of the
jurisdiction over the cases filed considering that the public office and deprivation of the right of suffrage.
cases to be withdrawn and directed the COMELEC
maximum penalty imposable did not exceed six (6) We resolved to give due course to the petition.
Law Department to file the cases with the Section 32 of B.P. Blg. 129 as amended by Section
years.
appropriate Municipal Trial Court on the ground that Under Section 268 of the Omnibus Election Code, 2 of R.A. No. 7691, provides as follows:
pursuant to Section 32 of B.P. Blg. 129 as amended The two motions 4 for reconsideration separately Regional Trial Courts have exclusive original
by R.A. No. 7691, 3 the Regional Trial Court has no filed by the COMELEC Regional Director of Region jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal action or Sec. 32. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Court,
jurisdiction over the cases since the maximum VIII and by the COMELEC itself through its Legal proceedings for violation of the Code except those Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial
imposable penalty in each of the cases does not Department having been denied by the public relating to the offense of failure to register or failure Courts in Criminal Cases. — Except in cases falling
exceed six years of imprisonment. Pertinent portions respondent in the Order of 17 October 1997, 5 the to vote. 6 It reads as follows: within the exclusive original jurisdiction of Regional
of the Order read as follows: petitioner filed this special civil action. It contends Trial Court and of the Sandiganbayan, the
that public respondent "has erroneously Sec. 268. Jurisdiction of courts. — The regional trial Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts,
[I]t is worth pointing out that all the accused are court shall have the exclusive original jurisdiction to and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise:
misconstrued the provisions of Rep. Act No. 7691 in
uniformly charged for [sic] Violation of Sec. 261(i) of try and decide any criminal action or proceedings for
arguing that the Municipal Trial Court has exclusive
the Omnibus Election Code, which under Sec. 264 violation of this Code, except those relating to the (1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all
original jurisdiction to try and decide election
of the same Code carries a penalty of not less than offense of failure to register or failure to vote which violations of city or municipal ordinances committed
offenses" because pursuant to Section 268 of the
one (1) year but not more than six (6) years of shall be under the jurisdiction of the metropolitan or within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and
Omnibus Election Code and this Court's ruling in
imprisonment and not subject to Probation plus municipal trial courts. From the decision of the
"Alberto [sic] vs. Judge Juan Lavilles, Jr.," Regional (2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all
disqualification to hold public office or deprivation of courts, appeal will lie as in other criminal cases.
Trial Courts have the exclusive original jurisdiction offenses punishable with imprisonment not
the right of suffrage.
over election offenses. exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of
Among the offenses punished under the Election
Sec. 31 [sic] of the Judiciary Reorganization Act of Code are those enumerated in Section 261 thereof. fine, and regardless of other imposable accessory or
On 17 February 1998, we required the respondents
1980 (B.P.) Blg. 129 as Amended by Rep. Act. 6691 The offense allegedly committed by private other penalties, including the civil liability arising
and the Office of the Solicitor General to comment
[sic] (Expanded Jurisdiction) states: Sec. 32. respondents is covered by paragraph (i) of said from such offenses or predicated thereon,
on the petition.
Jurisdiction — Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Section, thus: irrespective of kind, nature, value or amount thereof:
Circuit Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in In its Manifestation of 5 March 1998, the Office of Provided, however, That in offenses involving
Criminal Cases — Except [in] cases falling within the the Solicitor General informs us that it is "adopting" Sec. 261. Prohibited Acts. — The following shall be damage to property through criminal negligence,
exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial the instant petition on the ground that the guilty of an election offense: they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof.
Courts and the Sandiganbayan, the Municipal Trial challenged orders of public respondent "are clearly
Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts and the Municipal (i) Intervention of public officers and We have explicitly ruled in Morales v. Court of
not in accordance with existing laws and
Circuit Trial Courts shall exercise: employees. — Any officer or employee in the civil Appeals 7 that by virtue of the exception provided for
jurisprudence."
service, except those holding political offices; any in the opening sentence of Section 32, the exclusive
(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all In his Manifestation of 12 March 1998, public officer, employee, or member of the Armed Forces original jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts,
violations of city or municipal ordinance committed respondent avers that it is the duty of counsel for of the Philippines, or any police forces, special Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial
within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and private respondents interested in sustaining the forces, home defense forces, barangay self-defense Courts does not cover those criminal cases which
challenged orders to appear for and defend him. units and all other para-military units that now exist by specific provisions of law fall within the exclusive
(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all or which may hereafter be organized who, directly or original jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts and of
offenses punishable with an imprisonment of not

Page 102 of 132


the Sandiganbayan, regardless of the penalty It is obvious that respondent judge did not read at all Also, in this petition, Atty. Balbuena states: appear that the quoted portions were findings or
prescribed therefor. Otherwise stated, even if those the opening sentence of Section 32 of B.P. Blg. 129, rulings, or, put a little differently, our own words. The
excepted cases are punishable by imprisonment of as amended. It is thus an opportune time, as any, to 16. This Honorable Supreme Court, in the truth is, the quoted portion is just a part of the
not exceeding six (6) years ( i.e., prision correccional, remind him, as well as other judges, of his duty to be case of "Alberto -vs- Judge Juan Lavilles, Jr.," 245 memorandum of the Court Administrator quoted in
arresto mayor, or arresto menor), jurisdiction thereon studious of the principles of law, 10 to administer his SCRA 286 involving the same issue of jurisdiction the decision.
is retained by the Regional Trial Courts or the office with due regard to the integrity of the system between the lower courts and Regional Trial Court
Sandiganbayan, as the case may be. of the law itself, 11 to be faithful to the law, and to on election offenses, has ruled, thus: Rule 10.02 of Canon 10 of the Code of Professional
maintain professional competence. 12 Responsibility 14 mandates that a lawyer shall not
Among the examples cited in Morales as falling With respect to the other charges, a review of the knowingly misquote or misrepresent the text of a
within the exception provided for in the opening Counsel for petitioner, Atty. Jose P. Balbuena, Pertinent Provision of Law would show that pursuant decision or authority.
sentence of Section 32 are cases under (1) Section Director IV of petitioner's Law Department, must to Section 265 and 267 of the Omnibus Election
20 of B.P. Blg. 129; (2) Article 360 of the Revised also be admonished for his utter carelessness in his Code the Comelec has the power to conduct IN VIEW OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the instant
Penal Code, as amended; (3) the Decree on reference to the case against Judge Juan Lavilles, preliminary investigations all election offenses petition is GRANTED. The challenged orders of
Intellectual Property; 8 and (4) the Dangerous Drugs Jr. In the motion for Reconsideration 13 he filed, with punishable under the code and the Regional Trial public respondent Judge Tomas B. Noynay of 25
Act of 1972, 9 as amended. the court below, Atty. Balbuena stated: Court shall have the exclusive original jurisdiction to August 1997 and 17 October 1997 in Criminal Cases
try and decide any criminal action or proceedings for Nos. A-1439 and A-1442 to A-1449 are SET ASIDE.
Undoubtedly, pursuant to Section 268 of the As a matter of fact, the issue on whether the violation of the same. The Metropolitan Trial Court, Respondent Judge is DIRECTED to try and decide
Omnibus Election Code, election offenses also fall Regional Trial Court has exclusive jurisdiction over by way of exception exercise jurisdiction only on said cases with purposeful dispatch and, further,
within the exception. election offenses is already a settled issue in the offenses relating to failure to register or to vote. ADMONISHED to faithfully comply with Canons 4
case of Alberto Naldeza -vs- Judge Juan Lavilles, Noting that these provisions stands together with and 18 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics and Rule
As we stated in Morales, jurisdiction is conferred by Jr., A.M. No. MTJ-94-1009, March 5, 1996, where the provision that any election offense under the 3.01, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
the Constitution or by Congress. Outside the cases the Supreme Court succinctly held: code shall be punishable with imprisonment for one
enumerated in Section 5(2) of Article VIII of the (1) year to six (6) years and shall not be subject to Atty. Jose P. Balbuena is ADMONISHED to be more
Constitution, Congress has the plenary power to A review of the pertinent provision of law would probation (Section 264, Omnibus Election Code). We careful in the discharge of his duty to the court as a
define, prescribe, and apportion the jurisdiction of show that pursuant to Sec. 265 and 267 of the submit that it is the special intention of the code to lawyer under the Code of Professional
various courts. Congress may thus provide by law Omnibus Election Code, the COMELEC, has the vest upon the Regional Trial Court jurisdiction over Responsibility.
that a certain class of cases should be exclusively exclusive power to conduct preliminary investigation election cases as matter of exemption to the
heard and determined by one court. Such law would of all election offenses punishable under the Code No costs.
provisions on jurisdiction over criminal cases found
be a special law and must be construed as an and the RTC shall have the exclusive original under B.P. Reg. 129, as amended. Consequently, SO ORDERED.
exception to the general law on jurisdiction of jurisdiction to try and decide any criminal action or the amendment of B.P. Reg. 129 by Republic Act.
courts, namely, the Judiciary Act of 1948, as proceedings for violation of the same . The No. 7691 does not vest upon the MTC jurisdiction A.C. No. 3923. March 30, 1993.
amended, and the Judiciary Reorganization Act of Metropolitan, or MTC, by way of exception exercises over criminal election offenses despite its expanded
1980. R.A. No. 7691 can by no means be jurisdiction only on offenses relating to failure to jurisdiction. CONCORDIA B. GARCIA, complainant, vs. ATTY.
considered as a special law on jurisdiction; it is register or to vote. Noting that these provisions CRISANTO L. FRANCISCO, respondent.
merely an amendatory law intended to amend stand together with the provisions that any election If Atty. Balbuena was diligent enough, he would
specific sections of the Judiciary Reorganization Act offense under the code shall be punishable with have known that the correct name of the SYLLABUS
of 1980. Hence, R.A. No. 7691 does nut have the imprisonment of one (1) year to six (6) years and complainant in the case referred to is neither Alberto
1. LEGAL ETHICS; MISCONDUCT OF
effect of repealing laws vesting upon Regional Trial shall not be subject to probation (Sec. 263, Omnibus Naldeza as indicated in the motion for
COUNSEL; VIOLATION OF OATH NOT DELAY ANY
Courts or the Sandiganbayan exclusive original Election Code), we submit that it is the special reconsideration nor Alberto alone as stated in the
MAN OR MONEY OR MALICE; SUSPENSION FOR
jurisdiction to hear and decide the cases therein intention of the Code to vest upon the RTC petition, but ALBERTO NALDOZA. Moreover, the
ONE YEAR FROM PRACTICE OF LAW FOR GROSS
specified. That Congress never intended that R.A. jurisdiction over election cases as a matter of case was not reported in volume 245 of the
ABUSE OF RIGHT OF RECOURSE TO THE
No. 7691 should repeal such special provisions is exception to the general provisions on jurisdiction Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) as falsely
COURTS BY ARGUING A CAUSE THAT IS
indubitably evident from the fact that it did not touch over criminal cases found under B.P. 129 by RA represented in the paragraph 16 of the petition, but
OBVIOUSLY WITHOUT MERIT. — The cause of the
at all the opening sentence of Section 32 of B.P. Blg. 7691 does not vest upon the MTC jurisdiction over in volume 254 of the SCRA.
respondent's client is obviously without merit. The
129 providing for the exception. criminal election offenses despite its expanded
Worse, in both the motion for reconsideration and respondent was aware of this fact when he wilfully
jurisdiction. (Emphasis ours)
the petition, Atty. Balbuena deliberately made it resorted to the gambits summarized above,

Page 103 of 132


continuously seeking relief that was consistently and involved the same issues and parties, thus Francisco claims that what he appealed to the injunction docketed as CA Sp. No. 22392. The
denied, as he should have expected . . . By grossly violating the proscription against forum-shopping. Regional Trial Court in Civil Case No. Q-89-3833 petition was granted by the Court of Appeals on
abusing his right of recourse to the courts for the was the denial of his prayer for dismissal of Civil September 19, 1991, on the ground that the
purpose of arguing a cause that had been Respondent, in his comment, says that he inserted Case No. 1455. This is not true. Civil Case Q-89- judgment in the unlawful detainer case had come
repeatedly rebuffed, he was disdaining the in defense of his client's right only such remedies as 3833 was clearly a special civil action and not an final and executory as June 30, 1990.
obligation of the lawyer to maintain only such were authorized by law. appeal.
actions or proceedings as appear to him to be just 6. On September 24, 1991, Garcia filed a
The tangle of recourses employed by Francisco is On November 13, 1989, Judge Abraham Vera issued motion for execution in the unlawful detainer case.
and such defenses only as he believes to be
narrated as follows: an order enjoining Judge Bautista from proceeding On September 27, 1991, Lee, through Francisco,
honestly debatable under the law. By violating his
oath not to delay any man for money or malice, he with the trial of the unlawful detainer case. Upon filed a motion to inhibit Judge Singzon and to defer
1. On March 29, 1989, Lee, through
has besmirched the name of an honorable motion of the complainant, however, the injunction the hearing of the motion. A writ of execution was
Francisco, filed a complaint against Garcia and the
profession and has proved himself unworthy of the was set aside and Civil Case No. Q-89-3833 was nonetheless issued by Judge Singzon on October 8,
other lessors for specific performance and
trust reposed in him by law as an officer of the Court dismissed on January 9, 1990. Lee did not appeal. 1991.
reconveyance with damages in the Regional Trial
. . . For this serious transgression of the Code of Court of Quezon City. This was docketed as Civil 4. On April 6, 1990, Lee through Francisco, 7. Two days later, Lee, through Francisco,
Professional Responsibility, he deserves to be Case No. Q-89-2118. On June 9, 1989, Garcia filed filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with filed with the Supreme Court a petition for certiorari
sanctioned, not only as a punishment for his a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds of prayer for preliminary injunction with the Court of with preliminary injunction and temporary restraining
misconduct but also as a warning to other lawyers failure to state a cause of action, laches and Appeals against Judge Vera, Judge Singzon, Garcia order against the Court of Appeals, Judge Singzon,
who may be influenced by his example. Accordingly, prescription. The case was dismissed by Judge and the other lessors. Docketed as CA G.R. Sp No. Garcia and the other lessors. This Court denied the
he is hereby SUSPENDED for ONE YEAR from the Felimon Mendoza on August 10, 1989. 20476, the petition assailed the January 9, 1990 petition on January 27, 1992, and reconsideration on
practice of law and from the enjoyment of all the
order of Judge Vera dismissing Civil Case No. Q-89- April 8, 1992.
rights and privileges appurtenant to membership of 2. On May 29, 1989, Garcia and the other
3833. On May 31, 1989, the petition was denied.
the Philippine bar. lessors filed a complaint for unlawful detainer 8. Finally, Lee, still through Francisco, filed a
against Lee in the Metropolitan Trial Court of 5. On June 14, 1990, Judge Singzon decided petition for certiorari with preliminary injunction
RESOLUTION Quezon City. This was docketed as Civil Case No. Civil Case no. 1455 in favor of complainant Garcia against Judge Singzon, Garcia and the other lessors
1455. Through Francisco, Lee filed an answer and the other lessors. Lee did not appeal. Instead, in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City to set
PER CURIAM, p:
alleging as special and affirmative defense the on, June 21, 1990, through Francisco again, he filed aside and declare the writs of execution in Civil Case
In a sworn complaint filed with the Court on October pendency of Civil Case no. Q-89-2118 in the a petition against Judge Singzon and the other No. 1455. This was dismissed on August 4, 1992,
6, 1992, Concordia B. Garcia seeks the disbarment Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. On September lessors for certiorari and annulment of the decision and Lee, through Francisco, filed a motion for
of Atty. Crisanto L. Francisco. 5, 1989, Judge Marcelino Bautista issued a in Civil Case No. 1455 and damages with prayer for reconsideration. According to Francisco, he was
resolution rejecting this allegation on the ground that issuance of preliminary injunction. This was relieved as counsel while this motion was pending.
On March 9, 1964, Concordia B. Garcia and her the issues before the two courts were separate and docketed as Civil case No. 90-5852 in the Regional
husband Godofredo, the Dionisio spouses, and different. Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 98, presided by A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client but
Felisa and Magdalena Baetiong leashed a parcel of Judge Cesar C. Paralejo. not at the expense of truth and the administration of
land to Sotero Baluyot Lee for a period of 25 years 3. On October 24, 1989, Lee, through justice.
beginning May 1, 1964. Despite repeated verbal and Francisco, filed with the Regional Trial Court of In Francisco's comment before us, he alleges that
written demands, Lee refused to vacate after the Quezon City a petition for certiorari and prohibition Civil Case No. Q-90-5852 is an appeal from the The cause of the respondent's client in obviously
expiration of the lease. Lee claimed that he had an with preliminary injunction against Judge Bautista, unlawful detainer case. Again, he lies. Civil Case No. without merit. The respondent was aware of this fact
option to extend the lease for another 5 years and Garcia and the other lessors. This was docketed as Q-90-5852 was a specified civil action and not an when he wilfully resorted to the gambits summarized
the right of pre-emption over the property. civil Case No. Q-89-3833. In filing this petition, appeal. above, continuously seeking relief that was
Francisco knew or should have known that it consistently denied, as he should have expected. He
In this disbarment case, the complainant claims that violated the Rule on Summary Procedure prohibiting On July 2, 1990, Garcia's group filed an Omnibus thereby added to the already clogged dockets of the
Lee's counsel, respondent Francisco, commenced the filing of petitions for certiorari, mandamus or Motion to Dismiss Civil Case No. 90-5852. On July courts and wasted their valuable time. He also
various suits before different courts to thwart prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by 13, 1990, Judge Paralejo issued an order enjoining caused much inconvenience and expense to the
Garcia's right to regain her property and that all the court. Judge Singzon from enforcing the decision in that complainant, who was obliged to defend herself
these proceedings were decided against Lee. The case. Garcia attacked this order in a petition for against his every move.
proceedings stemmed from the said lease contract certiorari and prohibition with prayer for preliminary

Page 104 of 132


By grossly abusing his right of recourse to the courts DAVIDE, JR., J.: WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Court finds The petition further discloses that this Court denied
for the purpose of arguing a cause that had been the accused Aurelia Gomez guilty beyond the petitioner's petition (G.R. No. 116398) to set
repeatedly rebuffed, he was disdaining the In our resolution of 31 May 1995 dismissing this reasonable doubt of the crime of Libel, defined and aside the RTC's denial of her application for
obligation of the lawyer to maintain only such petition for "utter lack of merit," we required penalized under Article 355, in relation to Article 355 probation. The motion for reconsideration met the
actions or proceedings as appear to him to be just attorneys for petitioner to show cause "why they (sic) end 354 of the Revised Penal Code, and there same fate. Upon the prosecution's motion for
and such defense only as he believes to be honestly should not be disciplinarily dealt with for impeding being no mitigating or aggravating circumstances execution of the judgment in Criminal Case No. 85-
debatable under the law. By violating his oath not to the execution of the judgment in Criminal case No. present, she is hereby sentenced to an 49, the trial court issued a warrant of arrest.
delay any man for money or malice, he has 85-49 and for misusing the rules of procedure to indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from
besmirched the name of an honorable profession defeat the ends of justice in violation of Rule 10.03, six (6) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to In the final analysis then, the instant petition is to
and has proved himself unworthy of trust reposed in Canon 10 and Rule 12.04, Canon 12 of the Code of TWO (2) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) annul and set aside this Court's final resolution in
him by law as an officer of the Court. Professional Responsibility." The backdrop of our DAY of prision correccional, to pay a fine of G.R. No. 108331. The attorneys for the petitioner
order is summarized in the resolution in this wise: P2,000.00 to suffer subsidiary imprisonment in case know, or ought to know, that the special civil action
Atty. Crisanto l. Francisco took his oath as a lawyer of insolvency, to pay the offended party Marieto M. for certiorari will not lie against a final judgment of
on March 2, 1956. Considering his age and The petitioner seeks the issuance of the this Court. Even granting for the sake of argument
Tan, Sr. the amount of P70,000.00 as moral and
experience in the practice of the laws, he should extraordinary writs of certiorari and mandamus to that it could, this petition must fail for being filed one
exemplary damages, and to pay the costs.
have known better than to trifle with it and to use it annul and set aside the decision of the Regional Trial (1) year, four (4) months, and nineteen (19) days after
as an instrument for harassment of the complainant Court (RTC) of Ozamis City, Branch 15, in Criminal SO ORDERED. the entry of judgment in G.R. No. 108331 or long
and the misuse of judicial processes. For this Case No. 85-49, the Resolution of the Court of after the jurisprudentially established "reasonable
serious transgression of the Code of Professional Appeals of 5 September 1990 in CA-G.R. CR No. Her motion to reconsider the decision of the Court of time" prescribed for the remedy under Rule 65 of the
Responsibility, he deserves to be sanctioned, not 07482, and the Resolution of this Court in G.R. No. Appeals having been denied, the petitioner elevated Rules of Court.
only as punishment for his misconduct but also as a 108331; and to order the Court of Appeals to give the case to this Court on a petition for review on
warning to other lawyers who may be influenced by due course to the petitioner's appeal upon the filing certiorari which was docketed as G.R. No. 108331. As this Court sees it, the instant petition is a clever
his example. of appellant's brief. This petition was, however, denied for non- ploy to further delay the execution of the judgment in
compliance with Circular Nos. 1-88 and 28-91. Criminal Case No. 85-49.
Accordingly, he is hereby SUSPENDED for ONE The Comment of the Office of the Solicitor General
YEAR from the practice of law and from the reveals the following procedural antecedents, some Acting on the petitioner's motion for reconsideration, In their Explanation dated 21 June 1995 submitted in
enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of which are suppressed in the petition. this Court, in the resolution of 31 March 1993, compliance with the above show-cause order,
appurtenant to membership in the Philippine bar. reinstated the petition but denied it nonetheless "for attorneys for petitioner, namely: Alvin C. Go,
In spite of its resolution of 5 September 1990 in CA- being factual and for failure of the petitioner to Fernando C. Cojuangco, Vigor D. Mendoza, II, and
Let a copy of this Resolution be served immediately G.R. CR No. 07482 dismissing the petitioner's sufficiently show that respondent court had Antonio A. Ligon, averred:
on the respondent and circularized to all courts and appeal from the RTC decision in Criminal Case No. committed any reversible error in the questioned
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. 85-49 for failure to file the appellant's brief, the judgment." Petitioner's motion and supplemental Counsel for petitioner beg the indulgence of this
Court of Appeals accepted her Memorandum of 28 motion for reconsideration of the resolution of 31 Honorable Court in asking for the extraordinary relief
SO ORDERED. September 1990 wherein she raised the errors March 1993 were denied with finality. of seeking a declaration of mistrial of the libel case
allegedly committed by the trial court. On 8 April tried in the lower court through the special civil
G.R. No. 118584 October 24, 1995 1991, the Office of the Solicitor General filed the On 28 June 1993, this Court noted without action action for certiorari as they were impelled by their
Appellee's Brief refuting all the assigned errors. the petitioner's letter requesting that the issues conviction that petitioner performed a moral and
AURELIA S. GOMEZ, petitioner,
Since no reply brief was filed by the petitioner, the raised in the supplemental motion for legal obligation in writing the letter which was the
vs. Court of Appeals, in its resolution of 21 June 1991, reconsideration be given due consideration. basis for libel, as she did, which disclosed the price
resolved to consider the case submitted for decision fixing and price rigging of oil products by the private
HON. PRESIDING JUDGE, RTC, Branch 15, without the said brief. In the resolution of 23 August 1993, this Court complainant, Mr. Marieto Tan, for his private benefit
Ozamis City; COURT OF APPEALS, and PEOPLE denied the petitioner's motion to admit second (in Criminal Case No. 85-49, RTC-Ozamiz City).
OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents. On 9 June 1992, the Court of Appeals affirmed with motion for reconsideration and the second motion
modification the decision of the trial court, the for reconsideration. Entry of judgment in G.R. No. While counsel for petitioner are aware that their first
RESOLUTION dispositive portion of which reads as follows: 108331 was accordingly made on 8 September bounden duty as officers of the Court is to honor
1993. and follow Court rules issued for the orderly and
efficient administration of justice (Banogon vs.

Page 105 of 132


Zerna, 154 SCRA 593; Toledo vs. Burgos, 168 Herein counsel comprehend the difficulty in fully aware of the existence of their client's parenthetically, even extended the utmost liberality
SCRA 513), they are equally burdened by their questioning procedural parameters for the efficient (petitioner's) case with the trial court, Court of to petitioner who failed to file her Brief. Said
foremost obligation to prevent any miscarriage of and orderly administration of justice in strictly Appeals, and this Court, and had unhampered judgment was ultimately sustained by us in the
justice in accordance with their convictions. Herein following Court orders and jurisprudence access to the records thereof, especially those of resolution of 31 March 1993 in G.R. No. 108331,
counsel had perused the available pleadings and implementing thereof, but equally compelling is their the Court of Appeals and this Court since their office which had long become final, with the entry of
court processes in the libel against petitioner, and sworn duty to protect a client who has been is located near said Courts. In less than half a day, judgment made on 8 September 1993 yet. Thus, no
were fully convinced thereof and impelled by their innocently charged and stands to suffer deprivation any one of them or their authorized representatives depth of honest belief as to the innocence of the
desire to legally assist the latter to substantiate her of liberty should counsel omit to resort to the could have personally sought the information they accused could alter the final verdict. Petitioner's
innocence for the crime of libel. If they had extraordinary relief they sought in this petition. wanted from said Courts. Anent the records of the counsel, if they are so minded, can only seek to
overstretched the parameters of the conduct criminal case in Ozamiz City, if for whatever reason relieve their client from the effects of the judgment
required of lawyers in trying to protect their client's In the resolution of 9 August 1995, we then required petitioner could not personally secure photocopies from another forum, e.g., they may consider
liberty by resorting to this judicial process of the aforenamed lawyers to inform the Court if they of pertinent pleadings, orders, decisions, and other executive clemency.
certiorari, herein counsel had acted in good faith and were willing to submit the disciplinary matter for processes therein, counsel could have merely
beg the kind indulgence of this Honorable Court for resolution on the basis of their Explanation. In requested the Clerk of Court thereof for the Counsel's gambit is condemnable for it clearly
such action. compliance therewith, on 8 September 1995, they necessary information. As a matter of fact, the disregards a lawyer's duty to maintain absolute
filed a Manifestation wherein they expressed that it annexes attached to the petition showed beyond candor, fairness, and good faith to the Court (Canon
Contrary to the representations of the Office of the had not been their intention to violate the Code of cavil that counsel could have, without exerting 10, Code of Professional Responsibility). In Santos
Solicitor General, herein counsel were candid in the professional Responsibility and likewise apologized undue effort, obtained the requisite information with vs. Paguio (227 SCRA 770, 779 [1993]), we declared,
presentation of the factual and procedural to the Court "for whatever inconvenience the filing of respect to the cases before the trial court, the Court in no uncertain terms, that this Court can neither
antecedents based on pleadings given to them by the instant petition may have entailed." of Appeals, and this Court. condone nor tolerate attempts to mislead it through
their client. Counsel disclosed in the petition in page suppression of important facts which would have a
10 thereof that there is already an Entry of Judgment We find the explanation proferred unsatisfactory and Obviously then, the suppression of vital facts by bearing on its initial action.
in Criminal Case No. 85-49. the justification set forth for their action flimsy. counsel for petitioner, exposed by the Office of the
Solicitor General, was not due to the unavailability of We stress once again what we said before, that
Herein counsel similarly disclosed that — As to the charge of suppression of factual and litigations must end and terminate sometime and
such facts to counsel nor the difficulty of obtaining
procedural antecedents, we cannot lend credence somewhere, it being essential to the effective
them; in legal contemplation, excusable negligence
Moreover, up to this date, Atty. Pactolin refused to to the gossamer claim of petitioner's counsel that administration of justice that once a judgment has
was not present in the instant case. Plainly, the
surrender the records of the aforementioned case, they were "candid" in their presentation of these become final, the winning party be not, through a
concealment resorted to was nothing but a
so that accused-petitioner experienced extreme antecedents as evidenced by their disclosure, on mere subterfuge, deprived of the fruits of the verdict.
stratagem to give the petition a semblance of a valid
difficulties in filing the instant petition. And page 10 of the petition, that there already was an Hence, courts must guard themselves against any
grievance or a viable cause of action. Petitioner's
consequently, accused-petitioner stands helpless in entry of judgment in Criminal Case No. 85-49. scheme to bring about that result, for constituted as
counsel knew, or were reasonably expected to
determining the material dates of receipt of all Neither can we find tenable the allegation that up to they are to put an end to controversies, they should
know, the hopelessness of their client's cause since
orders, judgments, and other processes of the trial the date the petition was filed, Atty. Pactolin refused frown upon any attempt to prolong it (Lim Kim Tho
the petition was filed, it bears repeating, one year,
court, Court of Appeals, and that of this Honorable to surrender the records of the case, for which vs. Go Siu Kao, 82 Phil. 776 [1949]). Public policy
four months, and nineteen days after the entry of
Court, all of which were addressed to Atty. Rodolfo reason, petitioner stood "helpless in determining the and sound practice demand that at the risk of
judgment in G.R. No. 108331 — long after the lapse
material dates of receipt of all orders, judgments, occasional errors, judgments of courts should
Pactolin. . . . of the jurisprudentially established measure of
and other processes of the trial court, Court of become final and irrevocable at some definite date
"reasonable time" prescribed for the remedy under
Appeals and that of this Honorable Court, all of fixed by law. Interes rei publicae ut finis sit litium
Hence, it could not be stated that herein counsel Rule 65 of the Rules of Court.
which were addressed to Atty. Rodolfo Pactolin." (Tolentino vs. Ongsiako, 7 SCRA 1001 [1963];
misrepresented on the procedural antecedents in
this case. Howsoever viewed, the filing of the instant petition Villaflor vs. Reyes, 22 SCRA 385 [1968]). And for
In the first place, attorneys for petitioner do not even
was nothing but a scheme to frustrate and further lawyers who disregard these postulates, we stated
claim that Atty. Pactolin unreasonably refused to
Rather, when counsel did institute the present delay the execution of the judgment in Criminal Case in Banogon vs. Zerna (154 SCRA 593 [1987]),
turn over the records to petitioner; ex hypothesi, he
petition, they were invoking the equity jurisdiction of No. 85-49. Neither could a claim of denial of due reiterated in Chua Huat vs. Court of Appeals (199
could have legitimately retained them pursuant to
this Honorable Court such that procedural rules be process save the day for petitioner as the judgment SCRA 1, 15 [1991]), that:
Section 37, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court until
set aside to serve the ends of justice, as the liberty of the trial court was affirmed only after due
petitioner paid him his lawful fees. In any event, As officers of the court, lawyers have a responsibility
of a person is at stake. proceedings by the Court of Appeals which,
Attorneys Go, Cojuangco, Mendoza, and Ligon were to assist in the proper administration of justice. They

Page 106 of 132


do not discharge this duty by filing pointless WHEREFORE, Attorneys ALVIN C. GO, FERNANDO Cayetano Arellano, Victorino Mapa, Manuel Araullo was not punishable as such under the law and the
petitions that only add to the workload of the C. COJUANGCO, VIGOR D. MENDOZA, II, and and other learned jurists who were the honor and inherent powers of the court to punish for contempt.
judiciary, especially this Court, which is burdened ANTONIO A. LIGON are hereby CENSURED and glory of the Philippine Judiciary. The provisions of section 1 and 3 of said Rule 64 are
enough as it is. A judicious study of the facts and warned that a repetition of the same or similar acts a mere reproduction of section 231 and 232 of the
law should advise them when a case, such as this, in the future shall be dealt with more severely. Upon his request, the respondent was granted ten old Code of Civil Procedure, Act No. 190, amended,
should not be permitted to be filed to merely clutter days more besides the five originally given him to file in connection with the doctrine laid down by this
the already congested judicial dockets. They do not SO ORDERED. his answer, and although his answer was filed after Court on the inherent power if the superior courts to
advance the cause of law or their clients by the expiration of the period of time given him the punish for contempt is several cases, among them
VICENTE SOTTO January 21, 1949 said answer was admitted. This Court could have
commencing litigations that for sheer lack of merit In re Kelly, 35 Phil., 944. That the power to punish
do not deserve the attention of the courts. rendered a judgment for contempt after considering for contempt is inherent in all courts of superior
In re VICENTE SOTTO, for contempt of court.
his answer, because he does not deny the statue, is a doctrine or principle uniformly accepted
While lawyers owe entire devotion to the interest of Vicente Sotto in his own behalf. authenticity of the statement as it has been and applied by the courts of last resort in the United
their clients, warm zeal in the maintenance and published. But, in order to give the respondent States, which is applicable in this jurisdiction since
defense of their rights; and the exertion of their FERIA, J.: ample opportunity to defend himself or justify the our Constitution and courts of justice are patterned
utmost learning and ability, to the end that nothing publication of such libelous statement, the case was as expounded in American Jurisprudence is as
be taken away or be withheld from them, save by This is a proceeding for contempt of our court set for hearing or oral argument on January 4, the follows:
the rules of law legally applied (Canon 15, Canons of against the respondent Atty. Vicente Sotto, who was hearing being later postponed to January 10, 1949.
Professional Ethics), they should not forget that they required by their Court on December 7, 1948, to As the respondent did not appear at the date set for The power of inflicting punishment upon persons
are officers of the court, bound to exert every effort show cause why he should not be punished for hearing, the case was submitted for decision. guilty of contempt of court may be regarded as an
and placed under duty, to assist in the speedy and contempt to court for having issued a written essential element of judicial authority, IT is
efficient administration of justice (Canon 12, Canons statement in connection with the decision of this In his answer, the respondent does not deny having possessed as a part of the judicial authority granted
of Professional Responsibility). They should not, Court in In re Angel Parazo for contempt of court, published the above quoted threat, and intimidation to courts created by the Constitution of the United
therefore, misuse the rules of procedure to defeat which statement, as published in the Manila Times as well as false and calumnious charges against this States or by the Constitutions of the several states.
the ends of justice (Rule 10.03, Canon 10, Id.) or and other daily newspapers of the locality, reads as Supreme Court. But he therein contends that under It is a power said to be inherent in all courts general
unduly delay a case, impede the execution of a follows: section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, which jurisdiction, whether they are State or Federal; such
judgment or misuse court processes (Rule 12.04, confers upon this Supreme Court the power to power exists in courts of general jurisdiction
As author of the Press Freedom Law (Republic Act promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice, and
Canon 12, Id.). independently of any special express grant of
No. 53.) interpreted by the Supreme Court in the procedure, "this Court has no power to impose statute. In many instances the right of certain courts
As a final point, we wish to state that the apology case of Angel Parazo, reporter of a local daily, who correctional penalties upon the citizens, and that the of tribunals to punish for contempt is expressly
contained in the Explanation is misplaced. Counsel now has to suffer 30 days imprisonment, for his Supreme Court can only impose fines and bestowed by statue, but such statutory authorization
ought to know that they were not required to show refusal to divulge the source of a news published in imprisonment by virtue of a law, and has to be is unnecessary, so far as the courts of general
cause for the inconvenience the filing of the petition his paper, I regret to say that our High Tribunal has promulgated by Congress with the approval of the jurisdiction are concerned, and in general adds
caused this Court. The apology insinuates, rather not only erroneously interpreted said law, but that it Chief Executive." And he also alleges in his answer nothing statutory authority may be necessary as
smartly, that we required them to show cause out of is once more putting in evidence the incompetency that "in the exercise of the freedom of speech concerns the inferior courts statutory authority may
our whims or caprice, which, of course, is baseless, of narrow mindedness o the majority of its members, guaranteed by the Constitution, the respondent be necessary to empower them to act. (Contempt,
as demonstrated by our observations in the In the wake of so many mindedness of the majority made his statement in the press with the utmost 12 Jur., pp. 418, 419.)
resolution of 31 May 1995, particularly on the deliberately committed during these last years, I good faith and with no intention of offending any of
suppression of vital facts by the attorneys for believe that the only remedy to put an end to so the majority of the honorable members of this high In conformity with the principle enunciated in the
petitioner. much evil, is to change the members of the Tribunal, who, in his opinion, erroneously decided above quotation from American Jurisprudence, this
Supreme Court. To his effect, I announce that one of the Parazo case; but he has not attacked, or Court, in In reKelly, held the following:
We do not then hesitate to declare that counsel for the first measures, which as its objects the complete intended to attack the honesty or integrity of any
petitioner, Attorneys Alvin C. Go, Fernando C. reorganization of the Supreme Court. As it is now one.' The other arguments set forth by the The publication of a criticism of a party or of the
Cojuangco, Vigor D. Mendoza, II, and Antonio A. constituted, a constant peril to liberty and respondent in his defenses observe no court to a pending cause, respecting the same, has
Ligon have breached the foregoing Canons and democracy. It need be said loudly, very loudly, so consideration. always been considered as misbehavior, tending to
Rules. that even the deaf may hear: the Supreme Court obstruct the administration of justice, and subjects
very of today is a far cry from the impregnable Rules 64 of the rules promulgated by this court does such persons to contempt proceedings. Parties have
bulwark of Justice of those memorable times of not punish as for contempt of court an act which a constitutional right to have their fairly in court, by

Page 107 of 132


an impartial tribunal, uninfluenced by publications or But in the above-quoted written statement which he lower or degrade the administration of justice by this press, though separate and distinct, are equally
public clamor. Every citizen has a profound personal caused to be published in the press, the respondent Court. The Supreme Court of the Philippines is, sacred, and neither should be violated by the other.
interest in the enforcement of the fundamental right does not merely criticize or comment on the under the Constitution, the last bulwark to which the The press and the courts have correlative rights and
to have justice administered by the courts, under the decision of the Parazo case, which was then and still Filipino people may repair to obtain relief for their duties and should cooperate to uphold the principles
protection and forms of law, free from outside is pending reconsideration by this Court upon grievances or protection of their rights when these of the Constitution and laws, from which the former
coercion or interference. Any publication, pending a petition of Angel Parazo. He not only intends to are trampled upon, and if the people lose their receives its prerogatives and the latter its
suit, reflecting upon the upon court, the parties, the intimidate the members of this Court with the confidence in the honesty and integrity of the jurisdiction. The right of legitimate publicity must be
officers of the court, the counsel, etc., with reference presentation of a bill in the next Congress, of which members of this Court and believe that they cannot scrupulously recognized and care taken at all times
to the suit, or tending to influence the decision of the he is one of the members, reorganizing the Supreme expect justice therefrom, they might be driven to to avoid impinging upon it. In a clear case where it is
controversy, is contempt of court and is punishable. Court and reducing the members, reorganizing the take the law into their own hands, and disorder and necessary, in order to dispose of judicial business
The power to punish for contempt is inherent in all Supreme Court and reducing the members of perhaps chaos might be the result. As a member of unhampered by publications which reasonably tend
court. The summary power to commit and punish for Justices from eleven to seven, so as to change the the bar and an officer of the courts Atty. Vicente to impair the impartiality of verdicts, or otherwise
contempt tending to obstructed or degrade the members of this Court which decided the Parazo Sotto, like any other, is in duty bound to uphold the obstruct the administration of justice, this court will
administration of justice, as inherent in courts as case, who according to his statement, are dignity and authority of this Court, to which he owes not hesitate to exercise its undoubted power to
essential to the execution of their powers and to the incompetent and narrow minded, in order to fidelity according to the oath he has taken as such punish for contempt. This Court must be permitted
maintenance of their authority is a part of the law of influence the final decision of said case by this attorney, and not to promote distrust in the to proceed with the disposition if its business in an
the land. (In re Kelly, 35 Phil., 944, 945.) Court, and thus embarrass or obstruct the administration of justice. Respect to the courts orderly manner free from outside interference
administration of justice. But the respondent also guarantees the stability of other institutions, which obstructive of its constitutional functions. This right
Mere criticism or comment on the correctness or attacks the honesty and integrity of this Court for the without such guaranty would be resting on a very will be insisted upon as vital to an impartial court,
wrongness, soundness or unsoundness of the apparent purpose of bringing the Justices of this shaky foundation. and, as a last resort, as a individual exercises the
decision of the court in a pending case made in Court into disrepute and degrading the right of self-defense, it will act to preserve its
good faith may be tolerated; because if well founded administration of justice, for in his above-quoted Respondent's assertion in his answer that "he made existence as an unprejudiced tribunal. . . ."
it may enlighten the court and contribute to the statement he says: his statement in the press with the utmost good faith
correction of an error if committed; but if it is not and without intention of offending any of the majority It is also well settled that an attorney as an officer of
well taken and obviously erroneous, it should, in no In the wake of so many blunders and injustices of the honorable members of this high Tribunal," if the court is under special obligation to be respectful
way, influence the court in reversing or modifying its deliberately committed during these last years, I true may mitigate but not exempt him from liability in his conduct and communication to the courts, he
decision. Had the respondent in the present case believe that the only remedy to put an end to so for contempt of court; but it is belied by his acts and may be removed from office or stricken from the roll
limited himself to as statement that our decision is much evil, is to change the members of the statements during the pendency of this proceeding. of attorneys as being guilty of flagrant misconduct
wrong or that our construction of the intention of the Supreme Court. To this effect, I announce that one The respondent in his petition of December 11, (17 L. R. A. [N.S.], 586, 594).
law is not correct, because it is different from what of the first measures, which I will introduce in the alleges that Justice Gregorio Perfecto is the principal
he, as proponent of the original bill which became a coming congressional sessions, will have as its promoter of this proceeding for contempt, In view of all the foregoing, we find the respondent
law had intended, his criticism might in that case be object the complete reorganization of the Supreme conveying thereby the idea that this Court acted in Atty. Vicente Sotto guilty of contempt of this Court
tolerated, for it could not in any way influence the Court. As it is now the Supreme Court of today the case through the instigation of Mr. Justice by virtue of the above-quoted publication, and he is
final disposition of the Parazo case by the court; constitutes a constant peril to liberty and Perfecto. hereby sentenced to pay, within the period of fifteen
inasmuch as it is of judicial notice that the bill democracy. days from the promulgation of this judgment, a fine
presented by the respondent was amended by both It is true that the constitutional guaranty of freedom of P1,000, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of
Houses of Congress, and the clause "unless the To hurl the false charge that this Court has been for of speech and the press must be protected to its insolvency.
court finds that such revelation is demanded by the the last years committing deliberately "so many fullest extent, but license or abuse of liberty of the
blunders and injustices," that is to say, that it has press and of the citizen should not be confused with The respondent is also hereby required to appear,
interest of the State" was added or inserted; and
been deciding in favor of one party knowing that the liberty in its true sense. As important as the within the same period, and show cause to this
that, as the Act was passed by Congress and not by
law and justice is on the part of the adverse party maintenance of an unmuzzled press and the free Court why he should not be disbarred form
any particular member thereof, the intention of
and not on the one in whose favor the decision was exercise of the right of the citizen, is the practicing as an attorney-at-law in any of the courts
Congress and not that of the respondent must be
rendered, in many cases decided during the last maintenance of the independence of the judiciary. of this Republic, for said publication and the
the one to be determined by this Court in applying
years, would tend necessarily to undermine the As Judge Holmes very appropriately said U. S vs following statements made by him during the
said act.
confidence of the people in the honesty and integrity Sullens (1929), 36 Fed. (2nd), 230, 238, 239: "The pendency of the case against Angel Parazo for
of the members of this Court, and consequently to administration of justice and the freedom of the contempt of Court.

Page 108 of 132


In his statement to the press as published in the sentencing Angel Parazo to 30 days imprisonment reproduced in the resolution of this Court of 2. It need be said loudly, very loudly so that even the
Manila Times in its issue of December 9, 1948, the for contempt. December 7, 1948. deaf may hear: The Supreme Court if today is far cry
respondent said "The Supreme Court can send me from the impregnable bulwark of Justice of those
to jail, but it cannot close my mouth; " and in his On December 7, 1948, considering the statement as In his statement, respondent does not limit himself memorable times of Cayetano Arellano, Victoriano
other statement published on December 10, 1948, in "intended not only to intimidate the members of this to saying that this Tribunal has erroneously Mapa, Manuel Araullo and other learned jurists who
the same paper, he stated among others: "It is not Court or influence the final disposition of said interpreted Republic Act No. 53, but alleges that were the glory of the Philippine judiciary.
the imprisonment that is degrading, but the cause of (Parazo) case, but also to degrade and vilify the said erroneous interpretation "is once more putting
the imprisonment." In his Rizal day speech at the administration of justice," this Court adopted a in evidence the incompetency or narrow- 3. The reporter, who is erroneously convicted of
Abellana High School in Cebu, published on January resolution ordering respondent to show cause within mindedness of the majority of its members," contempt and unjustly sentenced to 30 days
3, 1949, in the Manila Daily Bulletin, the respondent five days why he should not be punished for coupled with this sweeping and calumnious imprisonment by the Supreme Court, should be
said that "there was more freedom of speech when contempt, "without prejudice to taking further action accusation: immediately and spontaneously pardoned by the
American Justices sat in the Tribunal than now when against him as attorney." Executive Power, to serve as lesson in law to the
In the wake of so many blunders and injustices majority of the members of that High Tribunal.
it is composed of our countrymen;" reiterated that
Alleging to be suffering from myologenous leukemia, deliberately committed during these last years, I
"even if it succeeds in placing him behind bars, the
with moderately severe anemia, and that his believe that the only remedy to put an end to so 4. That sentence is intolerable, and should be
court can not close his mouth," and added: "I would
physician had advised him to have "absolute rest much evil, is to change the members of the protested by all newspapers throughout the country,
consider imprisonment a precious heritage to leave
and to avoid any form of mental and physical strain Supreme Court. under the cry of "The press demands better qualified
for those who would follow me because the cause is
for a few weeks," respondent prayed for a 15-day justices for the Supreme Court."
noble and lofty." And the Manila Chronicle of To fittingly crown this dastard imputation of
extension to file his answer. He was granted a 10-
January 5 published the statement of the deliberately committing blunders and injustice, There can be no question that respondent knowingly
day extension.
respondent in Cebu to the effect that this Court respondent would bully the members of this Court, published false imputations against the members of
"acted with malice" in citing him to appear before In the resolution of December 13, 1948, granting by making the following intimidating announcement: this Court. He accused them of such depravity as to
this Court on January 4 when "the members of this said extension, this Court branded as false have committed "blunders and injustices
Court know that I came here on vacation." In all said respondent's allegations the effect that he had To this effect, I announce that one of the first deliberately." He has maliciously branded them to be
statements the respondent misrepresents to the formal charges pending in this Court against Mr. measures, which I will introduce in the coming incompetent, narrow-minded, perpetrators of evil, "a
public the cause of the charge against him for Justice Perfecto and that the latter is the "moving congressional sessions, will have as its objects the constant peril to liberty and democracy," to be the
contempt of court. He says that the cause is for spirit" of these contempt proceedings. complete reorganization of the Supreme Court. opposite of those who were the honor and glory of
criticizing the decision of this Court in said Parazo the Philippines judiciary, to be needing a lesson in
case in defense of the freedom of the press, when in Two days after the expiration of the 10-day There are other rhetorical passages in respondent's
law, to be rendering an intolerable sentence, to be
truth and in fact he is charged with intending to extension granted to him, respondent filed his statement, aimed to emphasize the nuclear ideas of
needing replacement by better qualified justices.
interfere and influence the final disposition of said answer. The belated filing of said answer was the statement, to the effect that the majority of the
case through intimidation and false accusations overlooked by this Court in order not to deprive members of the Supreme Court are incompetent Respondent has not presented any evidence or
against this Supreme Court. So ordered. respondent of the benefits of his answer. Filed out of and narrow-minded and guilty of "so many blunders offered any to support his slanderous imputations,
time, due to his unexplained fault, it could legally and injustices deliberately committed" and that the and no single word can be found in his answer
Moran, C.J., Paras, Pablo, Perfecto, Bengzon, have been rejected. author will introduce in the coming congressional showing that he ever believed that the imputations
Briones, Tuason, Montemayor and Reyes, JJ., sessions a measure "to change the members of the are based on fact.
concur. In said answer, dated December 24, 1948, Supreme Court" and to effect a "complete
respondent repeated one of his allegations which, in reorganization of the Supreme Court. Respondent appears to belong to the class of
the resolution of December 13, 1948, this Court had individuals who have no compunction to resort to
already declared to be false. Among such maximizing expressions intended to falsehood of falsehoods. The record of this case
Separate Opinions stress the main ideas and purposes of the statement indicates that the practice of falsehoods seems to
Respondent has not denied that he is the author of are the following: be habitual in respondent, and this is proved when
PERFECTO, J., concurring:
the statement for which he has been summoned to he reiterated in his answer one of his allegations in a
our bar for contempt and he has not denied the 1. As it is now constituted, the Supreme Court of
Respondent published in the Manila newspapers of previous petition which were pronounced by this
correctness of the text published in the Manila today constitutes a constant peril to liberty and
Sunday, December 5, 1948, a written statement in Court to be false in its resolution in its resolution of
Chronicle and other daily newspapers and which is democracy.
relation with the decision rendered by this Court December 3, 1948.

Page 109 of 132


More than thirty years ago, using the words of that the marriage took place had been declared a Now law or valid authority has been invoked in SEC. 231. What Contempts of Court may be
respondent himself, in "those memorable times of forgery. support of the theory, unless we could countenance Punished Summarily. — A court of First Instance or
Cayetano Arellano, Victorino Mapa, and Manual a fictitious maxim that respondent is the sovereign. a judge of such court at chambers, may punish
Araullo and other learned jurists who were the glory It is not necessary to give the details of the whole The theory lacks even the merit of novelty. Long summarily, by fine not exceeding two hundred
of the Philippines judiciary" and when it was the disgusting affair, wherein the revolting and sinister before the claim of respondent that, because he is a pesos, or by imprisonment not exceeding ten days,
"impregnable bulwark of Justice," the Supreme nature of an individual is pictured in bold relief with senator, he is above the law, Mussolini, Hitler and all or both, a person guilty of misbehavior in the
Court pronounced respondent guilty of falsehoods some of its ugliest features. The more that 4 years of the tyrants and dictators who preceded them since presence of or so near the court or judge as to
three times: first, in case in which he was sentenced imprisonment imposed upon the accused did not the dawn of history had always claimed that they obstruct administration of justice, including the
to 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional for reform him. It only served to emphasize the were above they law and acted as if they were really refusal of a person present in court to be sworn as a
criminally abducting Aquilina Vasquez, a girl less beginning of along career of falsehoods and so. Unfortunately for respondent, senators are witness or to answer as a witness when lawfully
then 18 years of age, and to pay her a dowry of slanders already spanning more than 40 years, soon creatures of the Constitution and the Constitution required.
P500 and to support the offspring of his relations nearing half of a century. makes them amenable to law.
with her (U. S. vs. Sotto, 9 Phil., 231); second, in a SEC. 232. What Other Acts are Contempts of Court .
Respondent also chose not to deny his intimidating As a second defense, respondent alleges that, not — A person guilty of any of the following act any be
sentence of disbarment as a blackmailer ( In re Sotto,
announcement to introduce in the coming sessions having appeared either as attorney or a witness in punished as for contempt:
38 Phil., 532); and third, in prison sentence for false
of Congress, among the first measures, one for the the Parazo case, he cannot be held either for direct
libel (U. S. vs. Sotto, 38 Phil., 666). The first and the
change of the members of the Supreme Court and or for indirect contempt. 1. Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ,
last sentences bear the signature of Chief Justice
for the latter's complete reorganization. process, order, judgment of command of a court, or
Cayetano Arellano himself.
The defense is based on stark ignorance of the law injunction granted by a court or judge;
He has not explained or justified why he has to on the subject.
In the first case the Supreme Court found that only
intimidate the members of the Supreme Court with 2. Misbehavior of an officer of the court in the
on July 29, 1906, Vicente Sotto wrote a letter to
change and reorganization, and why, to make the Respondent alleges, as third defense, that he made performance of his official duties, or in his official
Aquilina Vasquez, protesting his love for her and
intimidation more dreadful, he had to announce the his statement with "utmost good faith," with "no transactions;
urging her to leave her house and go with him; on
horrible course of subverting and trampling down intention of offending any of the majority of the
the afternoon of August 1, 1906, Sotto made an 3. A failure to obey a subpoena duly served;
the Constitution, as all who can read and honorable members of the High Tribunal," and that
arrangement with Luis Crisologo for the renting of
understand the fundamental law know that it is he has not attacked nor intended to attack the
his house since that night when Sotto went with 4. The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person or
beyond the powers of Congress to reorganize and honesty or integrity of any one.
Aquilina into the room of the house, where she property in the custody of an officer by virtue of an
change the membership of the Supreme Court.
passed the night; Sotto had told Crisologo that he This allegation lacks sincerity in view of his order or process of the court held by him.
wanted the house for a forestry ranger who was just Because the announcement is highly subversive, imputation, among several others equally false and
arriving from Bohol; Sotto did not leave the room 5. The persons defeated in a civil action concerning
being aimed at shaking the very foundations of this calumnious, that the majority members of the
until the middle of the night; Aquilina transferred to a the ownership or possession of real estate who,
Republic, it could have been no less terrible than for Supreme Court have committed many blunders and
house in Sambag where Sotto brought various after being evicted by the sheriff from the realty
the respondent to have announced an intention to injustices deliberately." The slanderous imputation
housekeeping utensils; during the following days under litigation in compliance with judgment
attain his purposes by resorting to open rebellion. can only be attributed to bad faith.
and nights Aquilina was visited by respondent. rendered, shall enter or attempt to enter upon the
The fact that respondent is a lawyer and a senator
As another defense, respondent questions the same for the purpose of executing acts of ownership
aggravates his flaunted purpose to assault the very
On August 10, 1906, a complaint was filed against validity of the penal provisions of Rule 64, implying or possession or who shall in any manner disturb
Constitution he has sworn to obey and defend.
Vicente Sotto and Pio Datan, charging them with the that said penalties are not procedural in nature, and possession by the person who the sheriff placed in
crime of rapto. As a defense, respondent offered We have devoted considerable time to respondent's invoking the provisions of section 13 of Article VIII of possession of said reality.
evidence to show that on August 5, 1906, a legal answer. the Constitution, limiting the rule-making power of
marriage was celebrated between Aquilina and the SEC. 235. Trial of the Charge. — Upon the day fixed
the Supreme Court to matters of pleading, practice,
accused Pio Datan, Sotto's washerman and As first defense, respondent alleges that he made for the trial, the court shall proceed to investigate the
and procedure in courts, and to the admission to the
accomplice in crime. Upon the evidence, the the written press statement, not as a lawyer or as a charge and shall hear any answer or testimony
practice of law.
Supreme Court pronounced the celebration of the private citizen, but as a senator. He avers a senator which the accused may make or offer.
alleged marriage to be false. The certificate of should have ample liberty to discuss public affairs Respondent's contention can be easily disposed of
SEC. 236. Punishment if Found Guilty. — The court
marriage offered as evidence in support of the claim and should not be annoyed with contempt by quoting the following provisions of Act No. 190:
shall then determine whether the accused is guilty
proceedings.
off the contempt charged; and, if it be adjudged that

Page 110 of 132


he is guilty, he may be fined not exceeding one freedom of action of the members of the Supreme at-law and incapacitated from exercising the legal President and respondent appeared either to be
thousand pesos, or imprisoned not more than six Court, by bullying them with the menace of change, profession. He was found guilty of: ignorant of the Constitution or to be bent on
months, or both. If the contempt consist in the reorganization, and removal, upon the false flagrantly violating it.
violation of an injunction, the person guilty of such accusation that they have been committing (a) Lack of fidelity to clients;
contempt may also be ordered to make complete "blunders and injustices deliberately," and the 5. Respondent is the number of the bill which was
(b) Blackmailing, by abusing his position as director enacted into Republic Act No. 53, but the purposes
restitution to the party injured by such violation. menacing action constitutes a flagrant violation of
of a newspaper whose columns he used to blacken of his bill were thwarted by an amendment
the Constitution. Such a thing is not covered by the
Therefore, even on the false hypothesis that the reputation of those who refused to yield to introduced by the Senate, denying the privilege
freedom of the press or by the freedom to criticize
penalties for contempt are not procedural in nature, demands made by him in his business as lawyer; granted therein when in conflict with the interest of
judges and court proceedings, as no one in his
courts of justice may impose said penalties, if not senses has ever conceived that such freedom the Senate. Respondent's bill was for an absolute
(c) Publication of malicious and unjustifiable
under Rule 64, under the provisions of Act No. 190. include any form of expressed gangterism, whether privilege. Because the majority decision of the
insinuations against the integrity of a judge who had
oral or written. Supreme Court had made his failure patent,
The power to punish for contempt is inherent in fined him for the crime of libel;
respondent took occasion to give vent to his grudge
courts of justice. It springs from the very nature of The freedom of the press is not involved in these against the Supreme Court, wherein, of the 15 cases
(d) Giving false testimony or perjury. (38 Phil., 532.)
their functions. Without such power, courts of justice proceedings. To assert otherwise is to mislead. he had since liberation, he lost all except three, as
would be unable to perform effectively their What is at stake in these proceedings is the integrity 2. On September 24, 1918, the Supreme Court can be seen in the records of the following cases:
functions. They function by orders. Every decision is of our system of administration of justice and the sentenced respondent to imprisonment for libel, for
a command. The power to punish disobedience to independence of the Supreme Court and its freedom besmirching the honesty of three private individuals, L-23, Filomena Domiit Cabiling vs.
command is essential to make the commands from any outside interference intended to obstruct it Lope K. Santos, Jose Turiano Santiago and The Prison Officer of the Military
effective. or to unduly sway it one way or another. Hermenegildo Cruz with false charges. (38 Phil., Prison of Quezon City LOST
666.)
Respondent is in error in maintaining that the The freedom of the press is one of the causes which
Supreme Court has no power to enact Rule 64, He is we have always endeared. The repeated prosecution 3. After having been cited for contempt in these L-212, Narcisa de la Fuente vs
correct in calling it judicial legislation although he and persecutions we have endured in the past for its proceedings, respondent, in order to pose as a Fernando Jugo, etc. et al. WON
fails to remember that judicial legislation in matters sake — we have been hailed to court eight times, — martyr for the freedom of the press, waged a
of judicial practice and procedure is expressly are conclusive evidence of the firm stand we have campaign of viturperation against the Supreme
authorized by section 13 of Article VIII of the taken as defender of such freedom. It can be seen Court. He made repeated press statements and L-247, Monsig. Canilo Diel vs. Felix
Constitution. from official records that every acquittal handed delivered speeches in his home province to show Martinez, etc. et al. WON
down to us by the Supreme Court had been a new that he cannot expect justice from the Supreme
As a last defense, respondent invokes the
step forward and new triumph for the freedom of the Court, that the Supreme Court will imprison him, that
constitutional freedom of the press, which includes L-301, In the matter of the petition of LOST
press. (U. S. vs. Perfecto, 42 Phil., 113 Sept. 9, he will be imprisoned for the sake of the freedom of
the right to criticize judges in court proceedings. Carlos Palanca to be admitted a
1921; U.S. vs. Perfecto, 43 Phil., 58, March 4, 1922; the press, thereby posing as a false martyr for it. (As
Citizen of the Philippines
Respondent, undoubtedly, misses the point, and his U. S. vs. Perfecto, 43 Phil., 887, March 4, 1922.) amicus
That stand has remained the same, as can be shown 4. In his persecutory obsession, respondent would
citations about said freedom, with which we fully curiae
in our written opinion in another contempt make all believe that, contrary to fact, the writer of
agree, have absolutely no bearing on the question
proceedings in the Ben Brillantes case, which failed this opinion is the moving spirit behind these
involved in these proceedings.
to attract public attention at the time. contempt proceedings and that the Supreme Court L-307, Eufemia Evangelista et al. vs.
No one, and the members of the Supreme Court is acting merely as a tool. Apparently, respondent Rafael Maninang LOST
would be the last to do so, has ever denied Among the facts which we cannot ignore in deciding was irked by his failure to sit even for a single
respondent the freedom of the press and his this case, are the following: moment in the Senate Electoral Tribunal, because of
L-599, Amalia Rodriguez vs. Pio E.
freedom to criticize our proceedings, this Court and our objection. The publicity given to our objection
1. That this is not the first time respondent has been Valencia et al. LOST
its members. Respondent's statement goes much has exposed the illegality of respondent's
brought to a court of justice, for a grave misbehavior designation made by the Senate President as, under
further than mere criticism of our decision and the
and for perpetrating stark falsehoods. In a decision section 11 of Article VI of the Constitution, the power
majority members of this Court. The statement is an L-1201, Vicente Sotto vs. Tribunal del
by the Supreme Court of September 6, 1918, to choose Senators for the Electoral Tribunal
attempt to interfere with the administration of justice, Pueblo et al. LOST
respondent was removed from the office of attorney- belongs to the Senate, and not to its presiding
to miscarry and defeat justice, by trammelling the
officer. At the bar of public opinion, the Senate

Page 111 of 132


His repeated press releases in which he tried to and we do not wish to endanger respondent's life by His blatant posing, therefore, in this case as a martyr
L-1287, Ong Sit vs. Edmundo Piccio
focus public attention to the most harmless part of sending him to prison, and thus causing him the for the freedom of the press, as part of his
et al. LOST
his statement, wherein he accuses the majority of mental and physical strains which his physician systematic campaign of falsehoods and slanders
the Supreme Court of incompetency or narrow- advised him to avoid. Although the continued directed against the Supreme Court, is an imposture
L-1365, Vitaliano Jurado vs. Marcelo mindedness, have shown, however, that respondent existence of respondents is more harmful than that only ignorants, blockheads and other mental
Flores LOST is not completely devoid of personal responsibility, beneficial to our Republic and to human society, we pachyderms can swallow.
as he is aware that he has no possible defense for have to be consistent with our abidance by the
alleging that the members of the Supreme Court injunction of the Sermon on the Mount: "Thou shalt It takes too much effrontery for such a character as
L- 1509, Tagakotta Sotto vs. respondent to pose as a martyr and no less than for
have committed "blunders and injustices not kill." (Matth., Chapter 5, paragraph 21.) Although
Francisco Enage LOST the sake of a sacred cause, the freedom of the
deliberately," for which reason he has widely their segregation from the society of decent men is
publicized his expectation that he will be sentenced advisable because of the dangers of corruptive press, which no one has no much dishonored with
in this case to imprisonment, a penalty that, by his contamination, even the lives of moral lepers have to his blackmailing practices and by his long list of
L-1510, Bernarda Ybañez de Sabido cases in the courts of justice, starting as far back as
repeated public utterances, he himself gives the be spared. After all, the heaviest punishment for an
et al. vs. Juan V. Borromeo et al. LOST 1901. (Julia vs. Sotto, 2 Phil., 247; U. S. vs. Sotto, 9
impression that he is convinced he deserves. evildoer is the inherent stigma of shame of his
evildoings. Phil., 231; In re Sotto, 38 Phil., 532; U. S. vs. Sotto,
L-1938, Vicente Sotto vs. Crisanto Verily he deserves to be sentenced to six months 38 Phil., 666; R.G. No. 201; U. S. vs. Sotto, R.G. No.
Aragon et al. WON imprisonment, the maximum allowed by Rule 64, Let it be clear that we are not punishing respondent 11067; U. S. vs. Sotto, R.G. No. 14284; U. S. vs.
and such penalty would not be heavy enough because we want to curtail his freedom of the press, Vicente Sotto, R.G. No. 16004; People vs. Vicente
because of the attendance of several aggravating but because of his wanton interference in the Sotto, R.G. No. 23643.)
L-1961, The People of the Philippines circumstances, namely, the falsehoods he resorted independence of the Supreme Court his overt
vs. Antonio de los Reyes LOST to in this case, his insolence after he was cited for attempt to deprive us of our freedom of judgment in Respondent belongs to that gang of unprincipled
contempt, the fact that he is a lawyer and a Senator, a pending case, his swashbuckling bravado to politicians headed by a Senate President who
the fact that he has already been sentenced to intimidate the members of this Court to sway their trampled down the popular will by the arbitrary and
L-2041, Quirico Abeto vs. Sotero unconstitutional suspension of Senators Vera,
imprisonment for falsely libeling three private decision in favor of a litigant.
Rodas LOST Diokno and Romero (Vera vs. Avelino, 77 Phil., 192),
individuals, the fact that more than 30 years ago he
had been disbarred as a blackmailer, the fact that The freedom of the press is not in the least involved who issued the false certification as to the voting of
more than 40 years ago he was sentenced to be in these proceedings. The offensive statements has the congressional resolution regarding the infamous
L-2370, Voltaire Sotto vs. Rafael
jailed for more than 4 years as an abductor. The not been published by respondent as a Parity Amendment, thus perpetrating falsification of
Dinglasan et al. LOST
majority of this Court has sentenced a young and newspaperman, editor or journalist. He does not public document (Mabanag vs. Lopez Vito, 78 Phil.,
humble newspaperman to 30 days imprisonment appear to be a member of the staff of any one of the 1), who muzzled the people by ordering, in
Upon the records of his previous cases in 1918 and
only for refusing to answer a question. The offense newspapers which published his statement. We did usurpation of executive powers mayors all over the
of these proceedings, it is inevitable to conclude that
committed by respondent is much graver than a not even molest said newspapers. Their editors have country not to allow the holding of public meetings
we have before us the case of an individual who has
mere refusal to answer a question. not been cited for contempt. We did not interfere which the opposition had organized to denounce the
lowered himself to unfathomable depths of moral
with their freedom to publish the scurrilous frauds in the elections of November 11, 1947
depravity, — a despicable habitual liar,
We concur, however, in the decision imposing upon statement. (Cipriano C. Primicias, as General Campaign
unscrupulous vilifier and slanderer, unrepented
respondent a fine of P1,000 with subsidiary Manager of the Coalesced Minority Parties vs.
blackguard and blackmailer, shameful and If respondent has not attempted by his browbeating
imprisonment and ordering him to show cause why Valeriano E. Fugoso, as Mayor of the City of Manila,
shameless libeler, unmindful of the principles of to undermine and overthrow the very foundations of
he should not be completely deprived of the 80 Phil., 71) who wantonly violated the Constitution
decency as all hardened criminals. He is a disgrace our judicial system and actually sought to defeat and
privilege of practicing the profession of a lawyer. by interfering with the management of the funds of
to the human species. He is a shame to the Senate. miscarry the administration of justification in a
High reasons of humanity restrained us from the Senate Electoral Tribunal (Suanes vs. The Chief
sending respondent to prison, unless he should pending litigation, we would certainly have abstained Accountant of the Senate, 81 Phil., 819), who, again
Aghast at the baseness of his character, we felt, at
voluntarily choose to enter therein, instead of paying from summoning him merely for criticizing, insulting in violation of the fundamental law, usurped the
first blush, the impulse of acquitting him, as his
the fine. He is old and, according to his physician, and slandering the members of the Court. After all exclusive powers of the Senate when he designated
contemptible conduct, culminating in the press
suffering from myologenous leukemia with his reputation for lack of veracity, malice and respondent to sit in the Senate Electoral Tribunal,
statement in question, seemed compatible only with
moderately severe anemia, requiring absolute and unscrupulosity is well-known in official records and who crowned his misdeeds by enunciating on
the complete irresponsibility of schizophrenics,
avoidance of any from of mental and physical strain, branding him with the indelible stigma of infamy. Saturday, January 15, 1949, the most immoral
idiots, or those suffering from doddery.

Page 112 of 132


political philosophy — that of open toleration of the Senate is the sole tribunal on cases of penalty of imprisonment which he well deserves 3. The freedom of the press does not, however,
rackets, graft and corruption in public office. impeachment. ,without minding the ill consequences it may entail safeguard any publication intended to bully courts
to his health and life and without heeding the and judges in order to sway their judgment on
According to Rizal, the victims immolated in the altar No justice with full sense of responsibility should promptings of our pity and sense of humanity. pending cases, and such interference and
of great ideals, to be acceptable, have to be noble, commit a dereliction of official duty by inhibiting Fortunately, very many years have already elapsed obstruction should be promptly and drastically
spotless and pure. They should, therefore, be as himself in a case upon imaginary or fabricated since we acquired the state of mind with which we checked for the sake of an effective administration
noble and pure as Socrates, Christ, Joan of Arc, grounds. The members of the Supreme Court are can judge things and persons with an open and free of justice.
Lincoln, Bonifacio, Mabini, Gandhi and Rizal himself. not such moral weaklings as to easily yield to conscience, truly emancipated from the shackles of
Then and only then will martyrdom be hallowed and dishonest appeals to a false sense of delicacy. A any prejudice. The hateful events during the 4. Tribunal should be prompt in stopping the
glorified because it is will worthy of the effulgent cowardly surrender to groundless challenges of Japanese occupation were the best mycelium for threatening and browbeating tactics of swaggering
grandeur of sacred ideals. "Hate never produces unscrupulous parties is unbecoming to a judge, and spawning and the choicest fertilizers for growing political ruffians and cutthroats bend on thwarting
anything but monsters and crime criminals!" Love much more to a Justice of the Highest Tribunal of prejudices against Generals Yamashita and Homma, the scale of justice, as the opposing alternative to
alone realizes wonderful works, virtue alone can the Republic. to the extent of justifying any measure or action that such a stern judicial attitude is surrendered to
save! Redemption presupposes virtue, virtue would spell their doom. Immediate members of our judicial anarchy.
sacrifice, and sacrifice love! Pure and spotless must It is true that, after respondent had failed to sit in the
family and ourselves endured agonizing sufferings
the victim be that the sacrifice may be acceptable!" Senate Electoral Tribunal, because we objected to 5. Courts of justice annealed to face and ever ready
and some of our near relatives were liquidated under
(El Filibusterismo.) the designation issued to him by Senate President to deal vigorously with attempts to turn them into
their regime. But when Yamashita and Homma came
Avelino on constitutional grounds, he requested the puppets of domineering would-be dictators are
to this Supreme Court, seeking remedy against the
Respondent complains in his answer that he is not Chief Justice to relieve us one of the members of the essential in maintaining the reign of law and
absurdly iniquitous procedure followed by the
accorded fair dealing because the writer of this Senate Electoral Tribunal, and respondent would guaranteeing the existence of an orderly society.
military commissions which tried them, so iniquitous
opinion has not abstained from taking part in this make it appear that for his move we are prejudiced
that it closed to the Japanese generals all chances This opinion has been written to modify and clarify
case. The complaint is absolutely groundless. It is against him.
of fair trial, no scintilla of prejudice precluded us our stand in concurring in the decision.
based on two false premises, concocted by
He is absolutely wrong. His request to the Chief from casting the lone vote intended to give them the
respondent to make it appear that he is a victim of
Justice did not disturb us the least. The Constitution remedy and justice they sought for, notwithstanding G.R. No. L-42032 January 9, 1976
persecution, and on a conclusion, also false,
does not grant anyone the power to oust, replace, or the fact that Yamashita and Homma, appeared, in
because based on the two false premises. IN THE MATTER OF THE PRODUCTION OF THE
dismiss any member of the Senate Electoral the general consent of our people, to be veritable
monsters of cruelty and murder. Certainly, BODY OF MANUEL DE GRACIA ON A WRIT OF
Respondent alleges that there are pending in the Tribunal, judicial or senatorial, during his term of
respondent would not pretend having given us, if HABEAS CORPUS. MANUEL DE GRACIA,
Supreme Court certain charges he filed against the office in the Tribunal. Although an illegal substitution
ever, stronger grounds for prejudice than Yamashita petitioner,
writer and that the undersigned is the "moving spirit" has been made once in the case of Senators
behind these proceedings. Both trump-up Sebastian and Cuenco, such precedent did not and Homma, or that he is worse than both of them.
vs.
allegations are false, and the Supreme Court has make constitutional what is unconstitutional, and the
We are not to end this opinion without expressing
declared it to be so in its resolution of December 13, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court has made clear THE WARDEN, MUNICIPAL JAIL, Makati, Rizal;
our steadfast addiction to the following propositions:
1948. his stand to uphold the Constitution by stating it in THE PROVINCIAL WARDEN, PROVINCIAL JAIL,
black and white in the decision he penned in the 1. The independence of the judiciary from outside Pasig, Rizal; HON. REYNALDO P. HONRADO,
The records of the Supreme Court show that no Suanes case L-2460. Respondent's failure was so Judge of the Court of First Instance of Rizal,
interference or obstruction is essential to the
such charges have been filed. Respondent ought to obvious for us to mind his move. Branch XXV, Pasig, Rizal; and MARCIANO P.
effectively of its functions so that it can afford
know, if he can read and understand the STA. ANA, Assistant Provincial Fiscal, Pasig,
protection to fundamental rights including the
Constitution, that if he has any charge to file against After all, should we waste time and energy by Rizal, respondents.
freedom of the press, against encroachments and
a justice of the Supreme Court to seek his ouster, he entertaining any kind of prejudice against
illegal assaults.
has to file it with the House of Representatives, the respondent, when there are so many great minds,
only agency authorized by the fundamental law to beautiful characters, and wonderful personalities 2. The freedom of the press includes the right to
institute impeachment proceedings. that are demanding our attention and whose spiritual FERNANDO, J.:
comment on pending judicial cases and the right to
companionship makes life enjoyable? criticize the public and private life of all public
If the House of Representatives should institute it, It is settled law-that habeas corpus is the
officers, without any exception. appropriate remedy for release from confinement of
the respondent will have the opportunity to sit in If we had entertained any prejudice against
judgment as a senator as, under the Constitution, respondent, we would have meted out to him the a person who has served his sentence. 1 It i s on

Page 113 of 132


such a doctrine that reliance is placed by petitioner some justice; ...." 4 There was a motion for confinement of the accused. However, after being to release Manuel de Gracia, the petitioner in this
Manuel de Gracia in this application for the issuance reconsideration, but it was fruitless. 5 Hence this able to study the applicable rule and jurisprudence, case; VII. That by virtue of odd order ... and the
of such a writ. It is undisputed that while the petition. the undersigned concluded that the proper remedy Order of Release, ... the undersigned respondent
information against petitioner charged him with the is not amendment of the information because released on said date the petitioner as evidenced by
commission of frustrated homicide to which he On December 8, 1975, this Court issued the judgment had already been rendered on the first certificate of discharge from prison and that is the
pleaded not guilty, it was later amended to one of following resolution: "The Court [issued] the writ of information, but the filing of a new information for reason why he cannot produce the body of said
serious physical injuries. It is to such lesser offense habeas corpus returnable to this Court on Friday, homicide upon the authority of this Honorable person before this Honorable Court; VIII That he was
that on September 10, 1971, he entered a plea of December 12, 1975 and required the respondents to Court's ruling in People v. Manolong, and It is similar not able to make the return of the writ immediately
guilty. On the very same day, respondent Judge make a [return] of the writ not later than the cases. 8 on the ground that he was at that time confined in
Reynaldo P. Honrado imposed upon him the penalty aforesaid date. The Court further Resolved: (a) to set the hospital, and he was d only on December 13,
of four months and one day of arrests mayor without this case for hearing on Monday, December 15, As no return of the writ had been filed on the date 1975." 10 There was likewise a return of the writ on
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. That 1975 at 10:30 a.m.; and (b) to [grant] the motion of set for hearing by respondent wardens, a resolution such a date on behalf of respondent Cresencio T.
period of confinement he had duly served by petitioner to litigate as pauper in this case." 6 On the of the following tenor was adopted by this Court: Pimentel, Municipal Warden of Makati, Rizal. It was
November 10, 1975, considering that he had been date set for hearing, respondent Judge Reynaldo P. "When this case was called for hearing this morning, therein declared: "1. That the petitioner was not in
under detention since July 18, 1975. 2 This Honrado filed his return, worded as follows: "1. That Atty. Salvador N. Beltran appeared for the petitioner his custody when he received copy of the petition as
notwithstanding, the petition alleged that he was not the petitioner Manuel de Gracia has already been while Assistant Provincial 'Fiscal Marciano P. Sta. the petitioner was transferred to 'the Rizal Provincial
set free, the reason being that on November 19, ordered released by this court per order dated Ana, Jr. and Major o Maristela appeared for the Jail on December 3, 1975, as he was going to be
1975, the last day of the prison term imposed upon December 11, 1975, in view of the fact that Trial respondents. Thereafter, the Court Resolved (a) to charged with the crime of homicide and 'therefore,
him, "respondent Assistant Provincial Fiscal Fiscal Marciano P. Sta. Ana, Jr. has not as of this require Assistant Provincial Fiscal Marciano P. Sta. his confinement has to be in the Rizal Provincial Jail
Marciano P. Sta. Ana filed with the respondent time filed the amended information for Homicide Ana, Jr. to file a [return] of the writ for the and that by virtue of said transfer, respondent
Judge, in the very same case where your petitioner after the death of Florante Valenzuela, the offended respondent wardens not later than 10:30 a.m. of Municipal Warden could not produce the body of the
was convicted and for which he served sentence, party in this case, notwithstanding his motion Wednesday, December 17, 1975; and (b) to [reset] 'petitioner before this- Honorable Court." 11
Criminal Case No. 15289, a 'Motion to Order the entitled 'Motion to Order the Warden to hold the the hearing of this case on the aforesaid date and
Warden to Hold the Release of Manuel de Gracia Release of Manuel de Gracia dated November 19, time. 9 It should be stated likewise that Major On the morning Deeember 17, 1975, respondent
(your petitioner)' alleging as a ground that the 'father 1975, ...; 2. That in view of the release from custody Edgardo Maristela assured the Court that petitioner Assistant Provincial Fiscal Marciano P. Sta. Ana, Jr.
of the victim, Gilberts Valenzuela, informed the of Manuel de Gracia, the present petition for habeas had been release What was declared orally by him and the two aforesaid wardens appeared. Neither
movant (respondent Asst. Fiscal, not the People of corpus has become moot and academic. ..." 7 Fiscal was thereafter set forth in writing in accordance with petitioner nor his counsel, Salvador N. Beltran, was
the Philippines), that the victim in the above-entitled of Rizal, did likewise. The return stated: "1. That the his return dated December 16, 1975: II That on Sept. present. There was this manifestation though:
case died and for this reason the undersigned will Respondent Marciano P. Sta. Ana, Jr., the Assistant 18, 1975, the Office of the Provincial Warden '[Petitioner thru counsel, respectfully manifests that
file an amended information. 3 Then came this Provincial petitioner is not in his custody or power received a commitment order issued by Judge he has already been released from confinement, for
paragraph in the petition: "That on the following day, although, as alleged in the petition, it was upon his Reynaldo Honrado, dated 16 September 1975, ...; which reason the present petition has been rendered
November 20, 1975, the respondent Judge, despite motion that the respondent Judge issued the IV. That by virtue 6f that commitment order which moot and academic .... 12 It would appear, therefore,
the clear and incontrovertible fact that he had no Order ... ordering the warden to hold the release of the petitioner was sentenced to suffer the penalty of that with the release of petitioner, the matter had
jurisdiction to act on said motion because the case the accused (herein petitioner). 2. That the reason from four (4) months and one (1) day, he was indeed become moot and academic. That disposes
had long been terminated and his decision therein for his said motion ... is, as stated therein, that he transferred to Makati Municipal Jail, on Sept. 18, of this petition, except for one final note. There was
had already been executed, and, further, even was informed of the death of the victim and he was 1975, to service his prison term thereat pursuant to a lapse in judicial propriety by counsel Salvador N.
assuming that the respondent Judge could still act going to file an amended information. 3. That Presidential Decree No. 29 as said prisoner is Beltran who did not even take the trouble of
in the case, he could not and should not act on the because of the necessity for immediate action so as classified as Municipal prisoner; V That the petitioner appearing in Court on the very day his own petition
Fiscal's motion because the same was not set for to avoid the accused being released so that he was brought back and confined again to the Rizal was reset for hearing, a lapse explicable, it may be
hearing and no copy thereof was furnished to your could be held to answer for a crime of homicide, and Provincial Jail on Dec. 3, 1975, by virtue of assumed, by his comparative inexperience and
petitioner whose very liberty was being sought to be in the honest belief at that time that the proper Remittance order issued by Judge Pedro Revilla, paucity of practice before this Tribunal. it suffices to
deprived, still [he] persisted in acting upon the remedy was the filing of an amended information for Executive Judge CFI Rizal dated Dec. 3, 1975, ...; VI. call his attention to such failing by way of guidance
Fiscal's motion and granted the same 'in the interest homicide, the undersigned filed the motion on said That on December 12, 1975, the Office of the for his future actuations as a member of the bar.
of justice,' not at all minding that your petitioner, ground. The information concerning the death of the Provincial Warden of Rizal received an Order from
victim was given to the undersigned by the victim's the Court of First Instance of Rizal presided by WHEREFORE, the petition for habeas corpus is
while maybe a convict in the eyes of the respondent
father only on November 19, 1975, the last day of Honorable Judge Reynaldo Honrado, directing him dismissed for being moot and academic.
Judge, is still entitled to due process of law and to

Page 114 of 132


G.R. No. 106719 September 21, 1993 The questioned order was issued in connection with Supplemental Petition and Urgent Supplemental respondent Secretary's acts in refusing to hold in
the administrative complaint filed with the Manifestation. Included in said pleadings were the abeyance implementation of petitioners' preventive
DRA. BRIGIDA S. BUENASEDA, Lt. Col. ISABELO Ombudsman (OBM-ADM-0-91-0151) by the private motions to hold the lawyers of petitioners in suspension and in tolerating and approving the acts
BANEZ, JR., ENGR. CONRADO REY MATIAS, Ms. respondents against the petitioners for violation of contempt and to disbar them ( Rollo, pp. 210-267). of Dr. Abueva, the OIC appointed to replace
CORA S. SOLIS and Ms. ENYA N. LOPEZ, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Attached to the "Omnibus Submission" as annexes petitioner Buenaseda, are in violation of the
petitioners, were the orders and pleadings filed in Administrative Resolution dated September 22, 1992; and
According to the petition, the said order was issued Case No. OBM-ADM-0-91-1051 against petitioners
vs. upon the recommendation of Director Raul Arnaw (d) therefore, respondent Secretary should be
(Rollo, pp. 268-480).
and Investigator Amy de Villa-Rosero, without directed to comply with the Resolution dated
SECRETARY JUAN FLAVIER, Ombudsman
affording petitioners the opportunity to controvert The Motion for Disbarment charges the lawyers of September 22, 1992 immediately, by restoring the
CONRADO M. VASQUEZ, and NCMH NURSES
the charges filed against them. Petitioners had petitioners with: status quo ante contemplated by the aforesaid
ASSOCIATION, represented by RAOULITO
sought to disqualify Director Arnaw and Investigator resolution" (Comment attached to Rollowithout
GAYUTIN, respondents. (1) unlawfully advising or otherwise causing or
Villa-Rosero for manifest partiality and bias ( Rollo, paginations between pp. 613-614 thereof).
pp. 4-15). inducing their clients — petitioners Buenaseda, et
Renato J. Dilag and Benjamin C. Santos for
al., to openly defy, ignore, disregard, disobey or In the Resolution dated November 25, 1992, this
petitioners.
On September 10, 1992, this Court required otherwise violate, maliciously evade their preventive Court required respondent Secretary to comply with
Danilo C. Cunanan for respondent Ombudsman. respondents' Comment on the petition. suspension by Order of July 7, 1992 of the the aforestated status quo order, stating inter alia,
Ombudsman . . ."; (2) "unlawfully interfering with and that:
Crispin T. Reyes and Florencio T. Domingo for On September 14 and September 22, 1992, obstructing the implementation of the said order
private respondent. petitioners filed a "Supplemental Petition ( Rollo, pp. (Omnibus Submission, pp. 50-52; Rollo, pp. 259- It appearing that the status quo ante litem motam , or
124-130); Annexes to Supplemental Petition; Rollo 260); and (3) violation of the Canons of the Code of the last peaceable uncontested status which
pp. 140-163) and an "Urgent Supplemental Professional Responsibility and of unprofessional preceded the present controversy was the situation
Manifestation" (Rollo, and unethical conduct "by foisting blatant lies, obtaining at the time of the filing of the petition at
QUIASON, J.: bar on September 7, 1992 wherein petitioners were
malicious falsehood and outrageous deception" and
pp. 164-172; Annexes to Urgent Supplemental then actually occupying their respective positions,
This is a Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and by committing subornation of perjury, falsification
Manifestation; Rollo, pp. 173-176), respectively, the Court hereby ORDERS that petitioners be
Mandamus, with Prayer for Preliminary Injunction or and fabrication in their pleadings (Omnibus
averring developments that transpired after the filing allowed to perform the duties of their respective
Temporary Restraining Order, under Rule 65 of the Submission, pp. 52-54; Rollo, pp. 261-263).
of the petition and stressing the urgency for the positions and to receive such salaries and benefits
Revised Rules of Court. issuance of the writ of preliminary injunction or On November 11, 1992, petitioners filed a as they may be lawfully entitled to, and that
temporary restraining order. "Manifestation and Supplement to 'Motion to Direct respondents and/or any and all persons acting under
Principally, the petition seeks to nullify the Order of
the Ombudsman dated January 7, 1992, directing Respondent Secretary of Health to Comply with 22 their authority desist and refrain from performing any
On September 22, 1992, this Court ". . . Resolved to
the preventive suspension of petitioners, September 1992 Resolution'" (Manifestation act in violation of the aforementioned Resolution of
REQUIRE the respondents to MAINTAIN in the
attached to Rollo without pagination between pp. September 22, 1992 until further orders from the
meantime, the STATUS QUO pending filing of
Dr. Brigida S. Buenaseda, Chief of Hospital III; 613 and 614 thereof). Court (Attached to Rollo after p. 615 thereof).
comments by said respondents on the original
Isabelo C. Banez, Jr., Administrative Officer III;
supplemental manifestation" (Rollo, p. 177). On November 13, 1992, the Solicitor General On December 9, 1992, the Solicitor General,
Conrado Rey Matias, Technical Assistant to the
Chief of Hospital; Cora C. Solis, Accountant III; and submitted its Comment dated November 10, 1992, commenting on the Petition, Supplemental Petition
On September 29, 1992, petitioners filed a motion to
Enya N. Lopez, Supply Officer III, all of the National alleging that: (a) "despite the issuance of the and Supplemental Manifestation, stated that (a) "The
direct respondent Secretary of Health to comply
Center for Mental Health. The petition also asks for September 22, 1992 Resolution directing authority of the Ombudsman is only to recommend
with the Resolution dated September 22, 1992
an order directing the Ombudsman to disqualify respondents to maintain the status quo, respondent suspension and he has no direct power to suspend;"
(Rollo, pp. 182-192, Annexes, pp. 192-203). In a
Director Raul Arnaw and Investigator Amy de Villa- Secretary refuses to hold in abeyance the and (b) "Assuming the Ombudsman has the power
Resolution dated October 1, 1992, this Court
Rosero, of the Office of the Ombudsman, from implementation of petitioners' preventive to directly suspend a government official or
required respondent Secretary of Health to
participation in the preliminary investigation of the suspension; (b) the clear intent and spirit of the employee, there are conditions required by law for
comment on the said motion.
charges against petitioner (Rollo, pp. 2-17; Annexes Resolution dated September 22, 1992 is to hold in the exercise of such powers; [and] said conditions
to Petition, Rollo, pp. 19-21). On September 29, 1992, in a pleading entitled abeyance the implementation of petitioners' have not been met in the instant case" (Attached to
"Omnibus Submission," respondent NCMH Nurses preventive suspension, the status quo obtaining the Rollo without pagination).
Association submitted its Comment to the Petition, time of the filing of the instant petition; (c)

Page 115 of 132


In the pleading filed on January 25, 1993, petitioners other power or perform such functions or duties as with which it is associated. Where a particular word not a penal statute and is to be interpreted liberally
adopted the position of the Solicitor General that the may be provided by law." is equally susceptible of various meanings, its (People v. Adler, 140 N.Y. 331; 35 N.E. 644).
Ombudsman can only suspend government officials correct construction may be made specific by
or employees connected with his office. Petitioners On the other hand, the Solicitor General and the considering the company of terms in which it is The purpose of R.A. No. 6770 is to give the
also refuted private respondents' motion to disbar petitioners claim that under the 1987 Constitution, found or with which it is associated (Co Kim Chan v. Ombudsman such powers as he may need to
petitioners' counsel and to cite them for contempt the Ombudsman can only recommend to the heads Valdez Tan Keh, 75 Phil. 371 [1945]; Caltex (Phils.) perform efficiently the task committed to him by the
(Attached to Rollo without pagination). of the departments and other agencies the Inc. v. Palomar, 18 SCRA 247 [1966]). Constitution. Such being the case, said statute,
preventive suspension of officials and employees particularly its provisions dealing with procedure,
The crucial issue to resolve is whether the facing administrative investigation conducted by his Section 24 of R.A. No. 6770, which grants the should be given such interpretation that will
Ombudsman has the power to suspend government office. Hence, he cannot order the preventive Ombudsman the power to preventively suspend effectuate the purposes and objectives of the
officials and employees working in offices other than suspension himself. public officials and employees facing administrative Constitution. Any interpretation that will hamper the
the Office of the Ombudsman, pending the charges before him, is a procedural, not a penal work of the Ombudsman should be avoided.
investigation of the administrative complaints filed They invoke Section 13(3) of the 1987 Constitution statute. The preventive suspension is imposed after
against said officials and employees. which provides that the Office of the Ombudsman compliance with the requisites therein set forth, as A statute granting powers to an agency created by
shall have inter alia the power, function, and duty to: an aid in the investigation of the administrative the Constitution should be liberally construed for the
In upholding the power of the Ombudsman to charges. advancement of the purposes and objectives for
preventively suspend petitioners, respondents Direct the officer concerned to take appropriate which it was created (Cf. Department of Public
(Urgent Motion to Lift Status Quo, etc, dated action against a public official or employee at fault, Under the Constitution, the Ombudsman is Utilities v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas. Co., 200 Ark.
January 11, 1993, pp. 10-11), invoke Section 24 of and recommend his removal, suspension, demotion, expressly authorized to recommend to the 983, 142 S.W. (2d) 213 [1940]; Wallace v. Feehan,
R.A. No. 6770, which provides: fine, censure or prosecution, and ensure compliance appropriate official the discipline or prosecution of 206 Ind. 522, 190 N.E., 438 [1934]).
therewith. erring public officials or employees. In order to make
Sec. 24. Preventive Suspension. — The an intelligent determination whether to recommend In Nera v. Garcia, 106 Phil. 1031 [1960], this Court,
Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively The Solicitor General argues that under said holding that a preventive suspension is not a
such actions, the Ombudsman has to conduct an
suspend any officer or employee under his authority provision of the Constitutions, the Ombudsman has penalty, said:
investigation. In turn, in order for him to conduct
pending an investigation, if in his judgment the three distinct powers, namely: (1) direct the officer
such investigation in an expeditious and efficient
evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against concerned to take appropriate action against public Suspension is a preliminary step in an administrative
manner, he may need to suspend the respondent.
such officer or employee involves dishonesty, officials or employees at fault; (2) recommend their investigation. If after such investigation, the charges
oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the removal, suspension, demotion fine, censure, or The need for the preventive suspension may arise are established and the person investigated is found
performance of duty; (b) the charge would warrant prosecution; and (3) compel compliance with the from several causes, among them, the danger of guilty of acts warranting his removal, then he is
removal from the service; or (c) the respondent's recommendation (Comment dated December 3, tampering or destruction of evidence in the removed or dismissed. This is the penalty.
continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed 1992, pp. 9-10). possession of respondent; the intimidation of
To support his theory that the Ombudsman can only
against him. witnesses, etc. The Ombudsman should be given
The line of argument of the Solicitor General is a preventively suspend respondents in administrative
the discretion to decide when the persons facing
The preventive suspension shall continue until the siren call that can easily mislead, unless one bears in cases who are employed in his office, the Solicitor
administrative charges should be preventively
case is terminated by the Office of Ombudsman but mind that what the Ombudsman imposed on General leans heavily on the phrase "suspend any
suspended.
not more than six months, without pay, except when petitioners was not a punitive but only a preventive officer or employee under his authority" in Section
the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office suspension. Penal statutes are strictly construed while 24 of R.A. No. 6770.
of the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or procedural statutes are liberally construed
When the constitution vested on the Ombudsman The origin of the phrase can be traced to Section
petition of the respondent, in which case the period (Crawford, Statutory Construction, Interpretation of
the power "to recommend the suspension" of a 694 of the Revised Administrative Code, which dealt
of such delay shall not be counted in computing the Laws, pp. 460-461; Lacson v. Romero, 92 Phil. 456
public official or employees (Sec. 13 [3]), it referred with preventive suspension and which authorized
period of suspension herein provided. [1953]). The test in determining if a statute is penal is
to "suspension," as a punitive measure. All the the chief of a bureau or office to "suspend any
whether a penalty is imposed for the punishment of
Respondents argue that the power of preventive words associated with the word "suspension" in subordinate or employee in his bureau or under his
a wrong to the public or for the redress of an injury
suspension given the Ombudsman under Section 24 said provision referred to penalties in administrative authority pending an investigation . . . ."
to an individual (59 Corpuz Juris, Sec. 658;
of R.A. No. 6770 was contemplated by Section 13 cases, e.g. removal, demotion, fine, censure. Under
Crawford, Statutory Construction, pp. 496-497). A Section 34 of the Civil Service Act of 1959 (R.A. No.
(8) of Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, which the rule of Noscitor a sociis, the word "suspension"
Code prescribing the procedure in criminal cases is 2266), which superseded Section 694 of the Revised
provides that the Ombudsman shall exercise such should be given the same sense as the other words
Administrative Code also authorized the chief of a

Page 116 of 132


bureau or office to "suspend any subordinate officer Director Arnaw and Atty. Villa-Rosero (Rollo, pp. 6- "judgment" of the Ombudsman on the basis of the On the other hand, we take cognizance of the
or employees, in his bureau or under his authority." 13). Joining petitioners, the Solicitor General administrative complaint. In the case at bench, the intemperate language used by counsel for private
contends that assuming arguendo that the Ombudsman issued the order of preventive respondents hurled against petitioners and their
However, when the power to discipline government Ombudsman has the power to preventively suspend suspension only after: (a) petitioners had filed their counsel (Consolidated: (1) Comment on Private
officials and employees was extended to the Civil erring public officials and employees who are answer to the administrative complaint and the Respondent" "Urgent Motions, etc.;
Service Commission by the Civil Service Law of working in other departments and offices, the "Motion for the Preventive Suspension" of
1975 (P.D. No. 805), concurrently with the President, questioned order remains null and void for his failure petitioners, which incorporated the charges in the (2) Adoption of OSG's Comment; and (3) Reply to
the Department Secretaries and the heads of to comply with the requisites in Section 24 of the criminal complaint against them (Annex 3, Omnibus Private Respondent's Comment and Supplemental
bureaus and offices, the phrase "subordinate officer Ombudsman Law (Comment dated December 3, Submission, Rollo, pp. 288-289; Annex 4, Rollo, Comment, pp. 4-5).
and employee in his bureau" was deleted, 1992, pp. 11-19).
appropriately leaving the phrase "under his pp. 290-296); (b) private respondent had filed a reply A lawyer should not be carried away in espousing
authority." Therefore, Section 41 of said law only Being a mere order for preventive suspension, the to the answer of petitioners, specifying 23 cases of his client's cause. The language of a lawyer, both
mentions that the proper disciplining authority may questioned order of the Ombudsman was validly harassment by petitioners of the members of the oral or written, must be respectful and restrained in
preventively suspend "any subordinate officer or issued even without a full-blown hearing and the private respondent (Annex 6, Omnibus Submission, keeping with the dignity of the legal profession and
employee under his authority pending an formal presentation of evidence by the parties. In Rollo, pp. 309-333); and (c) a preliminary conference with his behavioral attitude toward his brethren in
investigation . . ." (Sec. 41). Nera, supra, petitioner therein also claimed that the wherein the complainant and the respondents in the the profession (Lubiano v. Gordolla, 115 SCRA 459
Secretary of Health could not preventively suspend administrative case agreed to submit their list of [1982]). The use of abusive language by counsel
The Administrative Code of 1987 also empowered him before he could file his answer to the witnesses and documentary evidence. against the opposing counsel constitutes at the
the proper disciplining authority to "preventively administrative complaint. The contention of same time a disrespect to the dignity of the court of
suspend any subordinate officer or employee under petitioners herein can be dismissed perfunctorily by Petitioners herein submitted on November 7, 1991 justice. Besides, the use of impassioned language in
his authority pending an investigation" (Sec. 51). holding that the suspension meted out was merely their list of exhibits (Annex 8 of Omnibus pleadings, more often than not, creates more heat
preventive and therefore, as held in Nera, there was Submission, Rollo, pp. 336-337) while private than light.
The Ombudsman Law advisedly deleted the words respondents submitted their list of exhibits (Annex 9
"nothing improper in suspending an officer pending
"subordinate" and "in his bureau," leaving the of Omnibus Submission, Rollo, pp. 338-348). The Motion for Disbarment (Rollo, p. 261) has no
his investigation and before tho charges against him
phrase to read "suspend any officer or employee place in the instant special civil action, which is
are heard . . . (Nera v. Garcia., supra).
under his authority pending an investigation . . . ." Under these circumstances, it can not be said that confined to questions of jurisdiction or abuse of
The conclusion that can be deduced from the There is no question that under Section 24 of R.A. Director Raul Arnaw and Investigator Amy de Villa- discretion for the purpose of relieving persons from
deletion of the word "subordinate" before and the No. 6770, the Ombudsman cannot order the Rosero acted with manifest partiality and bias in the arbitrary acts of judges and quasi-judicial
words "in his bureau" after "officer or employee" is preventive suspension of a respondent unless the recommending the suspension of petitioners. officers. There is a set of procedure for the discipline
that the Congress intended to empower the evidence of guilt is strong and (1) the charts against Neither can it be said that the Ombudsman had of members of the bar separate and apart from the
Ombudsman to preventively suspend all officials and such officer or employee involves dishonesty, acted with grave abuse of discretion in acting present special civil action.
employees under investigation by his office, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the favorably on their recommendation.
irrespective of whether they are employed "in his WHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED and the
performance of duty; (2) the charge would warrant
office" or in other offices of the government. The The Motion for Contempt, which charges the Status quo ordered to be maintained in the
removal from the service; or (3) the respondent's
moment a criminal or administrative complaint is lawyers of petitioners with unlawfully causing or Resolution dated September 22, 1992 is LIFTED and
continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed
filed with the Ombudsman, the respondent therein is otherwise inducing their clients to openly defy and SET ASIDE.
against him.
deemed to be "in his authority" and he can proceed disobey the preventive suspension as ordered by
the Ombudsman and the Secretary of Health can SO ORDERED.
to determine whether said respondent should be The same conditions for the exercise of the power to
placed under preventive suspension. preventively suspend officials or employees under not prosper (Rollo, pp. 259-261). The Motion should
G.R. No. 102781. April 22, 1993.
investigation were found in Section 34 of R.A. No. be filed, as in fact such a motion was filed, with the
In their petition, petitioners also claim that the 2260. Ombudsman. At any rate, we find that the acts BONIFACIO SANZ MACEDA, Presiding Judge,
Ombudsman committed grave abuse of discretion alleged to constitute indirect contempt were Branch 12, Regional Trial Court, Antique, petitioner,
amounting to lack of jurisdiction when he issued the The import of the Nera decision is that the legitimate measures taken by said lawyers to
suspension order without affording petitioners the disciplining authority is given the discretion to question the validity and propriety of the preventive vs.
opportunity to confront the charges against them decide when the evidence of guilt is strong. This fact suspension of their clients.
during the preliminary conference and even after is bolstered by Section 24 of R.A. No. 6770, which HON. OMBUDSMAN CONRADO M. VASQUEZ AND
petitioners had asked for the disqualification of expressly left such determination of guilt to the ATTY. NAPOLEON A. ABIERA, respondents.

Page 117 of 132


Bonifacio Sanz Maceda for and in his own behalf. of his pending case load, as the Court has the dated November 22, 1951 denying petitioner's liable to the State under the Revised Penal Code for
necessary records to make such a determination . . . motion for reconsideration and directing petitioner to his felonious act.
Public Attorney's Office for private respondent. In fine, where a criminal complaint against a judge or file his counter-affidavit and other controverting
other court employee arises from their administrative evidences. However, We agree with petitioner that in the
SYLLABUS absence of any administrative action taken against
duties, the Ombudsman must defer action on said
complaint and refer the same to this Court for In his affidavit-complaint dated April 18, 1991 filed him by this Court with regard to his certificates of
1. REMEDIAL LAW; JURISDICTION; OFFICE
determination whether said judge or court employee before the Office of the Ombudsman, respondent service, the investigation being conducted by the
OF THE OMBUDSMAN HAS JURISDICTION TO
had acted within the scope of their administrative Napoleon A. Abiera of the Public Attorney's Office Ombudsman encroaches into the Court's power of
INVESTIGATE OFFENSE COMMITTED BY JUDGE
duties. alleged that petitioner had falsified his Certificate of administrative supervision over all courts and its
WHETHER OR NOT OFFENSE RELATES TO
Service 1 dated February 6, 1989, by certifying "that personnel, in violation of the doctrine of separation
OFFICIAL DUTIES; REASON. — Petitioner also
4. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; OMBUDSMAN CANNOT all civil and criminal cases which have been of powers.
contends that the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction
SUBPOENA SUPREME COURT AND ITS submitted for decision or determination for a period
over said cases despite this Court's ruling in Orap Article VIII, section 6 of the 1987 Constitution
PERSONNEL; REASON. — The Ombudsman cannot of 90 days have been determined and decided on or
vs. Sandiganbayan, since the offense charged arose exclusively vests in the Supreme Court
compel this Court, as one of the three branches of before January 31, 1998," when in truth and in fact,
from the judge's performance of his official duties, administrative supervision over all courts and court
government, to submit its records, or to allow its petitioner knew that no decision had been rendered
which is under the control and supervision of the personnel, from the Presiding Justice of the Court of
personnel to testify on this matter, as suggested by in five (5) civil and ten (10) criminal cases that have
Supreme Court . . . The Court disagrees with the first Appeals down to the lowest municipal trial court
public respondent Abiera in his affidavit-complaint. been submitted for decision. Respondent Abiera
part of petitioner's basic argument. There is nothing clerk. By virtue of this power, it is only the Supreme
The rationale for the foregoing pronouncement is further alleged that petitioner similarly falsified his
in the decision in Orap that would restrict it only to Court that can oversee the judges' and court
evident in this case. Administratively, the question certificates of service for the months of February,
offenses committed by a judge unrelated to his personnel's compliance with all laws, and take the
before Us is this: should a judge, having been April, May, June, July and August, all in 1989; and
official duties. A judge who falsifies his certificate of proper administrative action against them if they
granted by this Court an extension of time to decide the months beginning January up to September
service is administratively liable to the Supreme commit any violation thereof. No other branch of
cases before him, report these cases in his 1990, or for a total of seventeen (17) months.
Court for serious misconduct and inefficiency under government may intrude into this power, without
certificate of service? As this question had not yet
Section 1, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, and On the other hand, petitioner contends that he had running afoul of the doctrine of separation of
been raised with, much less resolved by, this Court,
criminally liable to the State under the Revised Penal been granted by this Court an extension of ninety powers.
how could the Ombudsman resolve the present
Code for his felonious act. (90) days to decide the aforementioned cases.
criminal complaint that requires the resolution of
The Ombudsman cannot justify its investigation of
2. ID.; ID.; ID.; JURISDICTION TO said question?
Petitioner also contends that the Ombudsman has petitioner on the powers granted to it by the
INVESTIGATE OFFENSE RELATED TO OFFICIAL no jurisdiction over said case despite this Court's Constitution, 3 for such a justification not only runs
DECISION
DUTIES SUBJECT TO PRIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ruling in Orap vs. Sandiganbayan, 2 since the counter to the specific mandate of the Constitution
ACTION TAKEN AGAINST JUDGE BY SUPREME NOCON, J p: offense charged arose from the judge's performance granting supervisory powers to the Supreme Court
COURT; REASON. — However, We agree with of his official duties, which is under the control and over all courts and their personnel, but likewise
petitioner that in the absence of any administrative The issue in this petition for certiorari with prayer for supervision of the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the undermines the independence of the judiciary.
action taken against him by this Court with regard to preliminary mandatory injunction and/or restraining investigation of the Ombudsman constitutes an
his certificates of service, the investigation being order is whether the Office of the Ombudsman could encroachment into the Supreme Court's Thus, the Ombudsman should first refer the matter
conducted by the Ombudsman encroaches into the entertain a criminal complaint for the alleged constitutional duty of supervision over all inferior of petitioner's certificates of service to this Court for
Court's power of administrative supervision over all falsification of a judge's certification submitted to courts. determination of whether said certificates reflected
courts and its personnel, in violation of the doctrine the Supreme Court, and assuming that it can, the true status of his pending case load, as the
of separation of powers. whether a referral should be made first to the The Court disagrees with the first Part of petitioner's Court has the necessary records to make such a
Supreme Court. basic argument. There is nothing in the decision in determination. The Ombudsman cannot compel this
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; ID.; PROCEDURE TO BE Orap that would restrict it only to offenses Court, as one of the three branches of government,
OBSERVED BY OMBUDSMAN REGARDING Petitioner Bonifacio Sanz Maceda, Presiding Judge committed by a judge unrelated to his official duties. to submit its records, or to allow its personnel to
COMPLAINT AGAINST JUDGE OR OTHER COURT of Branch 12 of the Regional Trial Court of Antique, A judge who falsifies his certificate of service is testify on this matter, as suggested by public
EMPLOYEE; PURPOSE. — Thus, the Ombudsman seeks the review of the following orders of the Office administratively liable to the Supreme Court for respondent Abiera in his affidavit-complaint. 4
should first refer the matter of petitioner's of the Ombudsman: (1) the Order dated September serious misconduct and inefficiency under Section
certificates of service to this Court for determination 18, 1991 denying the ex-parte motion to refer to the 1, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, and criminally The rationale for the foregoing pronouncement is
of whether said certificates reflected the true status Supreme Court filed by petitioner; and (2) the Order evident in this case. Administratively. the question

Page 118 of 132


before Us is this: should a judge, having been Judge Jose P. Castro of the Regional Trial Court, contempt charge but the same was denied by the On February 29,1984, upon knowing that Criminal
granted by this Court an extension of time to decide Branch LXXXIV in Quezon City, denying his appeal respondent judge in an Order, as follows: Case No. Q-31587 for libel was instituted against
cases before him, report these cases in his from an order holding him in contempt of court. him by respondent Fiscal Atienza, petitioner filed a
certificate of service? As this question had not yet Petitioner likewise asks this Court (1) to order Considering that ARMANDO ANG was found guilty supplemental petition for prohibition against
been raised with, much less resolved by, this Court. respondent judge Castro to forward the records of of "Direct Contempt" of court, the notice of appeal respondent Judge Jose P. Arro of the Regional Trial
how could the Ombudsman resolve the present Civil Case No. Q-35466 to the Intermediate filed by him thru counsel cannot be given due Court, Branch CIII, in Quezon City, who was
criminal complaint that requires the resolution of Appellate Court; (2) to enjoin him from enforcing his course and is hereby denied, as the pronouncement assigned to try and hear said criminal case.
said question? order for the arrest of petitioner; (3) to restrain of guilt in a direct contempt is not appealable. Petitioner prays for a supplemental writ of
respondent Assistant Fiscal Narciso 'I'. Atienza of preliminary injunction to enjoin Judge Arro from
In fine, where a criminal complaint against a Judge Meantime, in view of the fact that said Armando Ang
Quezon City from conducting preliminary proceeding with said Criminal Case No. Q-31587.
or other court employee arises from their has remained in hiding and has been eluding the
investigation on the libel charge filed against him by
administrative duties, the Ombudsman must defer officers of the law in serving the original warrant for On March 5, 1984, We issued a Temporary
respondent judge; and, (4) to prohibit respondent
action on said complaint and refer the same to this his arrest, let an alias warrant be issued for his arrest Restraining Order enjoining respondent Judge from
Judge Jose P. Arro of the Regional Trial Court of
Court for determination whether said Judge or court so that he can serve his sentence of five (5) days proceeding and/or conducting hearing on the
Rizal, Branch CIII, Quezon City from proceeding and
employee had acted within the scope of their imprisonment. (p. 45, Rollo) criminal complaint for libel.
or conducting a hearing on the criminal complaint
administrative duties. for libel against petitioner in Criminal Case No. Q- Thereafter, respondent judge instituted before the On June 4, 1984, after considering the allegations,
31587. Office of the City Fiscal of Quezon City a criminal
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby issues, and arguments adduced in the petition and
GRANTED. The Ombudsman is hereby directed to complaint (I.S. No. 83- 22198) for libel against herein supplemental petition petition for certiorari,
In November 1983, petitioner, through the Office of
dismiss the complaint filed by public respondent petitioner for using malicious, insolent and prohibition and mandamus, respondents' comments
the Presidential Assistant on Legal Affairs, lodged
Atty. Napoleon A. Abiera and to refer the same to contemptuous language against him in his letter- thereon as well as petitioner's reply to respondent
with this Court an administrative complaint against
this Court for appropriate action. complaint filed before this Court. fiscal's comment with motion to dismiss the
respondent judge for ignorance of the law, gross
inexcusable negligence, incompetence, manifest aforesaid petition, We resolved to give due course to
SO ORDERED. Hence, instant petition.
partiality, grave abuse of discretion, grave the petition and required both parties to submit
misconduct, rendering unjust decision in Civil Case On February 20, 1984, We issued a temporary simultaneously their memoranda on the issues within
No. Q-35466 and dereliction of duties in not restraining order enjoining (1) the respondent judge thirty (30) days from notice.
G.R. No. L-66371 May 15, 1985 resolving his motion for reconsideration of the from carrying out the warrant of arrest issued in Civil
Despite the lapse of the period granted both parties,
adverse decision in said civil case. Case No. Q-35466, entitled: "Engson Realty Co.,
ARMANDO ANG, petitioner, they failed to file their memoranda. Thus, the case is
Inc., Plaintiff, versus Lim Eng Si, Defendant of the
On December 23, 1983, upon learning of the deemed submitted for decision.
Regional Trial Court, Branch LXXXIV at Quezon City;
vs. administrative case filed against him by petitioner, and (2) the respondent fiscal from conducting the Upon a careful scrutiny of the records of the case,
respondent judge ordered petitioner to appear preliminary investigation for libel lodged by
HON. JUDGE JOSE P. CASTRO, Regional Trial We found that the alleged malicious imputations
before him on December 29, 1983 at 8:30 in the respondent judge against petitioner in I.S. No. 83-
Judge, Branch LXXXIV and HON. JUDGE JOSE P. were not uttered in the presence or so near
morning, and to show cause why he should not be 22198 of Quezon City.
ARRO, Branch CIII, both of the Regional Trial respondent Judge Jose P. Castro as to obstruct or
punished for contempt of court, for malicious,
Court of Rizal, and ASSISTANT FISCAL NARCISO interrupt the proceedings before him; rather, they
insolent, inexcusable disrespect and contemptuous Asked to comment why he proceeded with the
T. ATIENZA of Quezon City, respondents. were contained in the pleadings and/or letters-
attitude towards the court and towards him. preliminary investigation of the complaint for libel
complaint filed by petitioner before the Office of the
Salonga, Ordonez, Yap, Corpuz and Padlan for filed by respondent judge against herein petitioner,
On January 9, 1984, respondent judge found Presidential Assistant on legal Affairs and before this
petitioner. despite the restraining order from this Court, Fiscal
petitioner guilty of contempt of court, sentenced him Court in the aforementioned administrative case filed
Narciso T. Atienza explained that long before the
to suffer five (5) days imprisonment and ordered his by petitioner against him.
undersigned receive said order, the information for
arrest for his failure, despite notice, to appear on the libel against Armando Ang has already been filed in Section 3, particularly paragraphs (b) and (d), Rule
RELOVA, J.: scheduled hearing of the contempt charge against court." Indeed, records show that the information for 71 of the New Rules of Court, provide:
him. libel was lodged on February 2, 1984; whereas, the
In the supplemenal petition for certiorari, prohibition
temporary restraining order was issued on February SEC. 3. Indirect contempts to be punished after
and mandamus, Armando Ang seeks to set aside On February 3, 1984, petitioner filed his notice of
20, 1984. charge and hearing. — After charge in writing has
the order, dated February 9, 1984, of respondent appeal from the judgment of conviction in the

Page 119 of 132


been filed, and an opportunity given to the accused proceedings are pending, it is direct contempt the course of judicial proceedings, provided the
to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of because it is equivalent to a misbehavior committed statements are pertinent or relevant to the case. "
any of the following acts may be punished for in the presence of or so near a court or judge as to TEEHANKEE, J.:p
contempt: interrupt the administration of justice. Considering Records show that the libel case had already been
instituted in court when the restraining order was The Court in dismissing the petition and affirming the
the aforecited provisions, petitioner's conduct if at
xxx xxx xxx issued by Us. Nonetheless, considering the appellate court's dismissal of petitioners-appellants'
all, constitutes indirect contempt and, if found guilty
privileged character of petitioner's communication to appeal for failure to file appellants' brief finds that
he may appeal pursuant to Section 10, Rule 71 of
(b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful the Chief Justice barring a prosecution for libel, it is petitioners have shown no valid and justifiable
the Rules of Court. which reads:
writ, process, order, judgment, or command of a proper that the injunction against respondent reason for their inexplicable failure to file their brief
court, or injunction granted by a court or judge, SEC. 10. Review of judgment or order by Court of Regional Trial Court, Branch CIII, Quezon City, from and have only themselves to blame for their
including the act of a person who, after being appeals or Supreme Court; bond for stay . — The proceeding with the hearing of Criminal Case No. Q- counsel's utter inaction and gross indifference and
dispossessed or ejected from any real property by judgment or order of a Court of First Instance made 31587, be made permanent pursuant to the neglect in not having filed their brief for a year since
the judgment or process of any court of competent in a case of contempt punished after written charge restraining order and established doctrine against receipt of due notice to file the same.
jurisdiction, enters or attempts or induces another to and hearing may be reviewed by the Court of the use of the strong arm of the law as an instrument
enter into or upon such real property, for the The case originated in the Antique court of first
Appeals or the Supreme Court, but execution of the of arbitrary and oppressive prosecution.
purpose of executing acts of ownership or instance where after due trial judgment was
judgment or order shall not be suspended until a
possession, or in any manner disturbs the ACCORDINGLY, the petition with respect to the rendered in favor of respondents-plaintiffs upholding
bond is filed by the person in contempt, in an
possession given to the person adjudged to be action against respondent Judge Jose P. Castro of their action for quieting of title with recovery of
amount fixed by the Court of First Instance,
entitled thereto the Regional Trial Court, Branch LXXXIV, Quezon possession and damages.
conditioned that if the appeal be decided against
him he will abide by and perform the judgment or City is granted and said respondent judge is hereby
xxx xxx xxx Petitioners-defendants appealed the adverse
order. The appeal may be taken as in criminal cases. ordered to elevate the records of Civil Case No. Q-
judgment to the Court of Appeals. On June 25,
35466 to the Intermediate Appellate Court at once
(d) Any improper conduct tending directly or 1970, petitioners as appellants received notice
Anent the ancillary action for prohibition, We find the for disposition in accordance with the terms hereof.
indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the through their counsel Benjamin M. Valente to submit
same meritorious, considering that the basis of the
administration of justice; Respondent trial judge is hereby ordered to dismiss the appellants' brief within the reglementary forty-
libel case (Criminal Case No. Q-31587) filed against
the libel case (Criminal Case No. Q-31587). five day period to expire on August 9, 1970.
Respondent Judge Castro, in his comment, argues petitioner before the respondent Regional Trial
that failure of petitioner to appear, despite notice, on Court, Branch CIII, Quezon City was a On August 10, 1970 (the last day of the reglementary
The temporary restraining order issued on February
the scheduled hearing of the contempt charge for communication addressed to the Chief Justice of period, August 9 being a Sunday), petitioners'
20, 1984 enjoining respondent Judge Jose P. Castro
the use of derogatory language in his two letters the Supreme Court which was coursed through the counsel, Atty. Valente, filed a motion to withdraw as
from enforcing or carrying out the warrant of arrest
addressed to the Office of the Presidential Assistant Office of the Presidential Assistant on legal Affairs, counsel due to his having been employed as
issued in Civil Case No. Q-35466 is made
on Legal Affairs and to this Court in an complaining against respondent judge's ignorance technical assistant in the Supreme Court, with a
permanent.
administrative complaint against him, constitutes of the law, gross inexcusable negligence, prayer that appellants' newly engaged counsel be
direct contempt as the acts actually impeded, incompetence, disregard for the Supreme Court SO ORDERED. given sufficient time to file their brief. Said new
embarrassed and obstructed him in the administrative order, grave misconduct, rendering counsel, Atty. Esdras F. Tayco, filed on August 18,
administration of justice. an unjust decision and dereliction of duty. It is G.R. No. L-34369 September 30, 1974 1970 his appearance with the appellate court.
manifest that as held in the case of Santiago vs.
We do not agree. The Rules of Court cannot be any Calvo, 48 Phil. 922, "a communication made in good ANTONIO VILLASIS, MATERNIDAD V. VILLASIS On August 27, 1970, the appellate court received
clearer. The use of disrespectful or contemptuous faith upon any subject matter in which the party and SANTIAGO ORENDAIN, petitioners, respondents-appellees' motion to dismiss the
language against a particular judge in pleadings making the communication has an interest or appeal dated August 5, 1970 for appellants' failure
vs.
presented in another court or proceeding is indirect, concerning which he has a duty is privileged if made to file their brief within the reglementary period.
not direct, contempt as it is not tantamount to a to a person having a corresponding interest or duty, HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, ELEUTERIO
misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court or although it contains incriminatory or derogatory On September 12, 1970, the appellate court required
VILLASIS and LAURA S. VILLASIS, respondents.
judge as to interrupt the administration of justice. matter which without the privilege would be libelous both counsels of appellants, Atty. Valente (whose
Stated differently, if the pleading containing and actionable ... that parties, counsel and Augusto A. Kimpo for petitioners. withdrawal it held in abeyance until he filed a proper
derogatory, offensive or malicious statements is witnesses are exempted from liability in libel or motion in verified form with the signed conformity of
submitted in the same court or judge in which the Silvestre Untaran, Jr. for respondents. the clients as per its resolution of August 18, 1970)
slander for words otherwise defamatory published in

Page 120 of 132


and Atty. Tayco to comment on the dismissal The appeal is patently without merit. thereafter. But as already pointed out, he never filed "the period consumed during the pendency of the
motion. the appellants' brief during the interval of almost 11 motion to dismiss should be excluded from the
New counsel Tayco's claim in his motion for months that the appellate court took before it finally period given to petitioners to submit their brief, and
Withdrawing counsel Valente filed his manifestation reconsideration that he had not received the notice dismissed the appeal per its resolution of June 25, if this is done, the brief submitted by them on April
dated September 28, 1970 alleging inter alia that he to file brief borders on the frivolous. Such notice to 1971. During all this period and even during the 17, 1957 may be deemed presented in due time."
had not received a copy of the dismissal motion and file brief had been received by his predecessor- three months that followed when he filed two
could not therefore comment thereon and counsel Atty. Valente and is binding on him as the motions for reconsideration, he presented no It is manifest that there are two basic differences in
submitting therewith the signed conformity of his successor. A new counsel who accepts a case in earnest of prosecuting the appeal by at least filing this case: here, the motion to dismiss the appeal
clients to his withdrawal and reiterating his prayer for midstream is presumed and obliged to acquaint the brief even at that late date but contented himself was filed precisely on the ground of failure to file the
the court to grant his withdrawal and to grant himself with all the antecedent processes and with a perfunctory prayer in his motion that brief after the expiration of the 45-day reglementary
appellants sufficient time to file their brief. New proceedings that have transpired in the record prior "appellants be allowed to file their brief."! period and no question of suspension of the period
counsel Tayco filed no comment whatsoever. to his takeover. It is noteworthy that Atty. Tayco arises, whereas there, the appellee questioned
makes no claim that he was unaware that notice to The appellate court committed no error therefore in appellants' right to appeal when only 5 days of their
The appellate court granted withdrawing counsel's file brief had been duly served on Atty. Valente and dismissing the appeal. Petitioners-appellants have 45-day period had elapsed such that the rule 5 that a
motion to withdraw per its resolution of October 9, that the period would expire on August 10, 1970 and shown no valid and justifiable reason for their motion to dismiss "interrupts the time to plea" was
1970 but meanwhile issued no resolution on the that Atty. Valente had asked in his two withdrawal inexplicable failure to file their brief and have only applied by this Court by analogy; and here,
appellees' motion to dismiss the appeal. motions that he (Tayco) as new counsel be granted themselves to blame for their counsel's utter petitioners-appellants never filed their brief while
"sufficient time" to file the brief. inaction and grow indifference and neglect in not there appellants immediately filed their brief within 5
On June 25, 1971 or after the lapse of more than
having filed their brief for a year since receipt of due days of notice of dismissal of their appeal.
eleven (11 months or to be more exact, 319 days) Here the notice to file the brief had been received on notice to file the same. They could not even claim
without appellants having filed their brief at all, the June 25, 1970 to expire on August 10, 1970. The It may parenthetically be noted that aside from
ignorance of the appellate court's notice to file brief
appellate court's special sixth division1 issued its appellate court did not dismiss the appeal at petitioners' bare assertion of merit in their appeal,
since it had required withdrawing counsel Valente to
resolution granting the dismissal motion and appellees' instance for failure of appellants to file the Court has not been shown that to reinstate the
secure their written conformity before granting his
dismissing the appeal on the ground stated by brief until one year later as per its resolution of June appeal would serve any purpose and not just be a
withdrawal as counsel, and certainly they must have
appellees in their motion that appellants had failed 25, 1971 or until almost eleven months after the futile waste of time, since petitioners have never
ascertained from him as well as new counsel the
to file their brief within the reglementary 45-day expiration of the reglementary period on August 10, submitted their brief nor their proposed assignment
status of their appeal — which accounts for Atty.
period. 1970. of errors against the trial court's verdict. To cap it all,
Valente's repeated prayers in his two motions for
withdrawal for the granting of sufficient time for new petitioners in praying for a reversal of the appellate
It was only then that new counsel Tayco apparently The appellate court gave appellants all the time and
counsel to file the brief. They had almost a year court's dismissal of their appeal, pray that they be
stirred from almost a year of inaction and filed a opportunity to duly prosecute their appeal by filing
thereafter to make sure that their new counsel did given an extension of fifteen (15) days from notice of
motion dated July 13, 1971 for reconsideration of their brief in the interval to no avail. It asked both
attend to their appeal and did file the brief. the decision within which to file the appellants' brief
the dismissal of the appeal on the ground that he as counsels per its resolution of September 12, 1970 (at last!). Such laches and lassitude on their part
new counsel had not received the notice to file brief. (which in effect granted appellants the sufficient time The case of Alonso vs. Rosario4 cited by petitioners serve but to confirm the correctness of the appellate
The appellate court per its resolution of August 17, asked by Atty. Valente in his withdrawal motion to is clearly inapplicable. There, appellants had filed an court's dismissal of their appeal.
1971 denied the motion for reconsideration, pointing file their brief) to comment on the dismissal motion opposition to the motion to dismiss their appeal
out that "Attorney Tayco's appearance was entered but withdrawing counsel Valente claimed he could ACCORDINGLY, the petition at bar is dismissed with
(filed by appellee just five days after the notice to file
[on August 18, 1970] after the period for filing brief not file any comment as he had not received the costs against petitioners.
brief was served) asking that they be allowed to file
had already expired [on August 10, 1970]."2 motion while new counsel Tayco ignored the court's the brief after notice of denial of the motion, and
resolution and filed no comment and filed no brief! G.R. No. 71169 August 30, 1989
New counsel Tayco filed a second motion for when the appellate court denied both the dismissal
reconsideration on September 10, 1971 still without and the extension, they moved for reconsideration JOSE D. SANGALANG and LUTGARDA D.
Even going by new counsel Tayco's mistaken notion
having filed appellants, brief, which the appellate and for at least 15 days to file their brief, but the SANGALANG, petitioners, FELIX C. GASTON and
that he was entitled to a new notice to file brief, the
court3 denied per its resolution of October 6, 1971. court therein both denied reconsideration and DOLORES R. GASTON, JOSE V. BRIONES and
appellate court's resolution of September 12, 1970
dismissed the appeal as well for failure to file brief ALICIA R. BRIONES, and BEL-AIR VILLAGE
requiring his comment on the motion to dismiss
Hence, the present appeal by certiorari wherein within the reglementary period. Within five (5) days ASSOCIATION, INC., intervenors-petitioners,
appeal for failure to file appellant's brief was
petitioners are represented by their third counsel, of such dismissal, appellants nevertheless filed their
tantamount to such notice and he should then have
Atty. Augusto A. Kimpo vice Atty. Tayco. brief. This Court in reinstating the appeal held that vs.
prepared and filed the brief within forty-five days

Page 121 of 132


INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and AYALA Ayala's Counsel himself would like to do but did not litigation, one party prevails, but his success will not have raised no new arguments to warrant
CORPORATION, et al., respondents. even contend, is a manifestation of this Court's justify indictments of bribery by the other party. He reconsideration and they can not veil that fact with
unusual partiality to Ayala and puts to serious should be aware that because of his accusations, he inflammatory language.
RESOLUTION question its integrity on that account. 5 has done an enormous disservice to the integrity of
the highest tribunal and to the stability of the Atty. Sangco himself admits that "[a]s a judge I have
... administration of justice in general. learned to live with and accept with grace criticisms
of my decisions". 13 Apparently, he does not practice
SARMIENTO, J.: [i]t is submitted that this ruling is the most serious As a former judge, Atty. Sangco also has to be what he preaches. Of course, the Court is not
reflection on the Court's competence and integrity aware that we are not bound by the findings of the unreceptive to comment and critique of its
The incident before the Court refers to charges for
and exemplifies its manifest partiality towards Ayala. trial court (in which his clients prevailed).lâwphî1.ñèt decisions, but provided they are fair and dignified.
contempt against Atty. J. Cezar Sangco, counsel for
It is a blatant disregard of documented and But if we did not agree with the findings of the court Atty. Sangco has transcended the limits of fair
the petitioners Spouses Jose and Lutgarda
incontrovertible and uncontroverted factual findings a quo, it does not follow that we had acted arbitrarily comment for which he deserves this Court's rebuke.
Sangalang. (G.R. No. 71169.)
of the trial court fully supported by the records and because, precisely, it is the office of an appeal to
On February 2, 1989, the Court issued a Resolution, the true significance of those facts which both the review the findings of the inferior court. In our "show-cause" Resolution, we sought to hold
requiring, among other things, Atty. Sangco to show respondent court and this Court did not bother to Atty. Sangco in contempt, specifically, for resort to
cause why he should not be punished for contempt read and consequently did not consider and To be sure, Atty. Sangco is entitled to his opinion, insulting language amounting to disrespect toward
"for using intemperate and accusatory language." 1 discuss, least of all in the manner it did with respect but not to a license to insult the Court with the Court within the meaning of Section 1, of Rule
On March 2, 1989, Atty. Sangco filed an explanation. to those in which it arrived at conclusions favorable derogatory statements and recourses to argumenta 71, of the Rules of Court. Clearly, however, his act
to Ayala. 6 ad hominem. In that event, it is the Court's duty "to also constitutes malpractice as the term is defined
The Court finds Atty. Sangco's remarks in his motion act to preserve the honor and dignity ... and to by Canon 11 of the Code of Professional
for reconsideration, reproduced as follows: To totally disregard Ayala's written letter of safeguard the morals and ethics of the legal Responsibility, as follows:
application for special membership in BAVA which profession." 9
... clearly state that such membership is necessary CANON 11-A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND
because it is a new development in their relationship We are not satisfied with his explanation that he was MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS
This Decision of this Court in the above-entitled with respect to its intention to give its commercial lot merely defending the interests of his clients. As we AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST
case reads more like a Brief for Ayala ... 2 buyers an equal right to the use of Jupiter Street held in Laureta, a lawyer's "first duty is not to his ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.
without giving any reason therefor, smacks of client but to the administration of justice; to that end,
... [t]he Court not only put to serious question its Rule 11.01...
judicial arrogance ... 7 his client's success is wholly subordinate; and his
own integrity and competence but also jeopardized
conduct ought to and must always be scrupulously
its own campaign against graft and corruption ... Rule 11.02...
observant of law and ethics." 10 And while a lawyer
undeniably pervading the judiciary ... 3
must advocate his client's cause in utmost earnest Rule 11.03-A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous,
... [A]re all these unusual exercise of such
... and with the maximum skill he can marshal, he is not offensive or menacing language or behavior before
arbitrariness above suspicion? Will the current
at liberty to resort to arrogance, intimidation, and the Courts.
campaign of this Court against graft and corruption
The blatant disregard of controlling, documented innuendo.
in the judiciary be enhanced by such broad
and admitted facts not put in issue, such as those Rule 11.04-A lawyer should not attribute to a Judge
discretionary power of courts? 8 That "[t]he questions propounded were not meant or
summarily ignored in this case; the extraordinary motives not supported by the record or have no
efforts exerted to justify such arbitrariness and the intended to accuse but to ... challenge the thinking materiality to the case.
disparaging, intemperate, and uncalled for. His
very strained and unwarranted conclusions drawn in the Decision, 11 comes as an eleventh-hour effort
suggestions that the Court might have been guilty of
therefrom, are unparalleled in the history of this to cleanse what is in fact and plainly, an unfounded Rule 11.05...
graft and corruption in acting on these cases are not
Court ... 4 accusation. Certainly, it is the prerogative of an
only unbecoming, but comes, as well, as an open Thus, aside from contempt, Atty. Sangco faces
unsuccessful party to ask for reconsideration, but as
assault upon the Court's honor and integrity. In punishment for professional misconduct or
... we held in Laureta, litigants should not "'think that
rendering its judgment, the Court yielded to the malpractice.
they will win a hearing by the sheer multiplication of
... [T]o ignore the fact that Jupiter Street was records before it, and to the records alone, and not
words' ". 12 As we indicated (see Decision denying
originally constructed for the exclusive benefit of the to outside influences, much less, the influence of WHEREFORE Atty. J. Cezar Sangco is (1)
the motions for reconsideration in G.R. Nos. 71169,
residents of Bel- Air Village, or rule that respondent any of the parties. Atty. Sangco, as a former judge of SUSPENDED from the practice of law for three (3)
74376, 76394, 78182, and 82281, and deciding G.R.
Court's admission of said fact is "inaccurate," as an inferior court, should know better that in any months effective from receipt hereof, and (2)
No. 60727, dated August 25, 1989), the movants

Page 122 of 132


ORDERED to pay a fine of P 500.00 payable from Petitioner, at the start of the proceedings and until On May 15, 2000, the Court of Appeals rendered a Moreover, under Section 26 of Rule 138 of the Rules
receipt hereof. Let a copy of this Resolution be the case was submitted for decision, was decision that denied the petition for lack of merit. 11 of Court, an attorney may withdraw his
entered in his record. represented by counsel, Atty. Ronald E. Javier. On The appellate court held that the reglementary representation by written consent of his client filed in
October 7, 1999, the RTC rendered a decision, period to file the appeal began to run when Atty. court. Otherwise, notice and hearing on the
IT IS SO ORDERED. finding petitioner and Looyuko jointly and severally Javier, who was still counsel of record as far as the withdrawal are necessary. Therefore, even if Atty.
liable to the Bank for the amount of P96,000,000, RTC was concerned, received a copy of the decision Javier had already written a letter to petitioner
G.R. No. 145213 March 28, 2006
plus interests and costs.3 The decision was received on October 20, 1999, giving petitioner until withdrawing his services as counsel, it did not
JIMMY T. GO a.k.a. JAIME T. GAISANO, by Atty. Javier, as counsel of record for petitioner, November 4, 1999 within which to file his appeal or become effective until after the submission by
Petitioner, on October 20, 1999. Prior to this receipt, however, motion for reconsideration. It ruled that petitioner petitioner of the letter officially terminating Atty.
the relationship had apparently turned sour for filed his Motion for Reconsideration a day after the Javier’s services on October 29, 1999. In fact,
vs. counsel and client. On September 30, 1999, Atty. period to file had lapsed, so that he had already lost petitioner even stated in the letter that his
Javier wrote to petitioner, informing the latter that he his right to appeal from the decision. termination of Atty. Javier’s services was effective
HON. ZEUS C. ABROGAR, in his capacity as was withdrawing his services as counsel. Petitioner, only beginning October 29, 1999. 13 This constitutes
Presiding Judge of REGIONAL TRIAL COURT however, formally released Atty. Javier only on Petitioner is now before this Court on a Petition for an admission by petitioner that when Atty. Javier
Branch 150, Makati, and INTERNATIONAL October 29, 1999 through a Notice of Termination 4 Review by Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of received the decision, he was still considered by
EXCHANGE BANK, Respondents. attached as Annex "A" to the "Entry of Appearance," Court to reverse the denial of his Petition for petitioner as his counsel.
filed with the RTC on November 5, 1999 by Certiorari by the Court of Appeals. Petitioner argues
DECISION that he should be given a new trial as his former Petitioner also argues that he should not be bound
petitioner’s new counsel, Atty. Gregorio D. Caneda,
Jr. counsel, Atty. Javier, was grossly negligent in the by the acts of Atty. Javier whom he claimed was
AZCUNA, J.:
handling of his case and that he has a meritorious grossly negligent in the handling of his case, even to
This is an appeal by petition for review under Rule On November 5, 1999, petitioner, now represented defense. the extent of calling him incompetent or that his
45 of the Rules of Court from a decision of the Court by Atty. Caneda, Jr., filed a Motion for actions were intentionally done. This argument has
Reconsideration of the October 7, 1999 decision. 5 The Court finds the petition without merit. It should already been discredited as Atty. Javier was
of Appeals.
When the RTC denied the motion,6 petitioner be noted that the assailed decision was decided by absolved of all negligence in connection with the
Petitioner Jimmy T. Go raises the issue of whether or through his new lawyer filed a Notice of Appeal 7 on the Court of Appeals under Rule 65 of the Rules of case by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP),
not his Notice of Appeal from the decision of the November 5, 1999. On February 8, 2000, the RTC Court. To be granted relief under a special civil after conducting an investigation upon a complaint
Regional Trial Court (RTC) should be given due issued an Order8 denying the Notice of Appeal on action, it must be convincingly proven that the court filed by petitioner himself. 14 The IBP furnished this
course despite having been filed late. the ground that the reglementary period had already a quo committed grave abuse of discretion, or an Court a copy of the resolution dismissing the
expired on November 4, 1999, or one day before act constituting a patent and gross evasion of a complaint which the Court noted in a Resolution
The facts are not in dispute. duty, or a virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined
petitioner filed his Notice of Appeal, considering that dated May 8, 2002 and thereafter the Court declared
the Registry Return Card showed that Atty. Ronald or to act in contemplation of law, or that the trial the case closed and terminated. Considering that
On March 31, 1998, respondent International
Javier received a copy of the decision on October court exercised its powers in an arbitrary and petitioner’s contention is that he should not be made
Exchange Bank (Bank) filed a Complaint before the
20, 1999. The decision having become final and despotic manner by reason of passion and personal to suffer the consequences of his counsel’s
RTC of Makati 1for Collection of a Sum of Money
executory, upon motion by the Bank, the RTC hostility. 12 Bearing this standard in mind, the Court negligence, his argument has no leg to stand on
against petitioner and Alberto T. Looyuko, docketed
ordered the issuance of a Writ of Execution against finds no error in the denial of the petition by the since Atty. Javier was declared not negligent in the
as Civil Case No. 98-791. The complaint alleged that
petitioner.9 Court of Appeals as there was no showing that the first place.
the Bank opened a credit line in favor of Looyuko to
RTC had gravely abused its discretion or whimsically
which petitioner executed a Surety Agreement
On March 6, 2000, petitioner filed a Petition for exercised its judgment. The Court agrees with the Even on the merits, the Court finds no substantial
binding himself solidarily for all debts incurred under
Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus under Rule 65 RTC and the Court of Appeals that the decision was reason to reverse the RTC’s decision finding
the credit line. On various occasions, the defendants
of the Rules of Court with the Court of Appeals to properly mailed to Atty. Javier as he was still petitioner liable solidarily with Looyuko to the Bank.
availed of the credit line to the total amount of
assail the denial of the Motion for Reconsideration counsel of record. His receipt of the decision on There was no denying that he had signed the
P98,000,000, as evidenced by eight (8) promissory
and the Notice of Appeal and the granting of the October 20, 1999 is, therefore, the starting point promissory notes as a co-maker and that he
notes co-signed by both defendants. When the
issuance of a Writ of Execution. 10 Petitioner claims from which to count the 15-day reglementary period. executed a Surety Agreement. Petitioner argues that
debts became due, the Bank demanded that the
that he should not be bound by the receipt of the The RTC, therefore, correctly dismissed the Notice the parties had actually intended their liabilities to be
defendants settle their obligations. The defendants,
decision by Atty. Javier who was no longer his of Appeal that was filed late. joint and that he has evidence to prove that his
however, failed to pay, prompting the Bank to
counsel when the latter received the decision. liability was less than what the RTC declared him
institute the case against them. 2

Page 123 of 132


liable for. Petitioner’s liability is largely a factual derogatory implication, they are clearly involving the same issues in the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice
assessment that has been thoroughly and unsubstantiated and disrespectful to a member of Court of Appeals other tribunals or agencies, with
extensively passed upon by the RTC and should not the Bench. the result that said courts, tribunals or agencies G.R. No. L-35867 June 28, 1973
be disturbed on appeal.15 have to resolve the same issues.
The Court is also dismayed that such baseless FRANCISCO A. ACHACOSO, in his own behalf
Before closing, the Court has a few observations attacks were assisted by counsel, who is an officer 1. To avoid the foregoing, in every petition and in behalf of Capital Insurance & Surety Co.,
regarding the conduct of petitioner and his counsel of the court. Under Canon 11 of the Code of filed with the Supreme Court or the Court of Inc.,
in this case. The petitioner alleges that: Professional Responsibility, A LAWYER SHALL Appeals, the petitioner, aside from complying with
vs.
OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN RESPECT DUE TO THE pertinent provisions of the Rules of Court and
Now it can be told, that the fishy and suspicious COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS. In existing circulars, must certify under oath all of the THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, COTRAM, S.A.,
actuations of Atty. Javier was done for the sole particular, he shall not attribute to a judge motives following facts or undertakings: (a) he has not CAPITAL LIFE ASSURANCE CORP., JOAQUIN G.
purpose of making sure that Jimmy T. Go will lose not supported by the records or by evidence. A theretofore commenced any other action or GARRIDO, respondents.
his case. With due respect, to our mind, it can even lawyer should submit grievances against a Judge to proceeding involving the same issues in the
be said that the respondent IBank and its counsel the proper authorities only. Atty. Caneda, Jr. should Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or any other Rodrigo M. Nera for petitioner.
Atty. Benedicto Valerio, Alberto Looyuko, have known better than to permit the irresponsible tribunal or agencies; (b) to the best of his
petitioner’s nemesis against whom he initiated and unsupported claim against Judge Abrogar to be knowledge, no such action or proceeding is pending Norberto J. Quisumbing & R.P. Mosqueda for
several cases, and Looyuko’s counsel Atty. included in the pleadings. Allowing such statements in the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, or private respondent.
Flaminiano, the Honorable Presiding Judge of the to be made is against a lawyer’s oath of office and different Divisions thereof, or any other tribunal or
Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 150 Zeuz RESOLUTION
goes against the Code of Professional agency; (c) if there is such other action or
Abrogar and Petitioner’s negligent counsel Atty. Responsibility. Petitioner Jimmy T. Go and Atty. proceeding pending, he must state the status of the
Javier are in cahoots with one another in their Gregorio D. Caneda, Jr. are STRICTLY WARNED same; and (d) if he should thereafter learn that a
common objective to pin down Mr. Jimmy T. Go. not to make disrespectful statements against a similar action or proceeding has been filed or is TEEHANKEE, J.:
Our apprehension is not without basis, consider the Judge without basis in the records or the evidence. pending before the Supreme Court, the Court of
following: x x x16 The Court censures the practice of counsels who
Appeals, or different Divisions thereof, or any other
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The decision secure repeated extensions of time to file their
tribunal or agency, he undertakes to promptly inform
Petitioner thereafter goes on to state the basis for of the Court of Appeals dated May 15, 2000 in CA- pleadings and thereafter simply let the period lapse
the aforesaid courts and such other tribunal or
his accusations against everyone connected to the G.R. SP No. 57572 is AFFIRMED. Costs against without submitting the pleading or even an
agency of that fact within five (5) days therefrom.
case: 17 1) Looyuko had petitioner. explanation or manifestation of their failure to do so.
2. Any violation of this revised Circular will The Court herein reprimands petitioner's counsel for
withdrawn his appeal; 2) Atty. Flaminiano conformed SO ORDERED. entail the following sanctions: (a) it shall be a cause such misconduct with the warning that a repetition
to the writ of execution; 3) Atty. Javier neglected his
for the summary dismissal of the multiple petitions thereof will be dealt with more severely.
case and continued to represent Looyuko in other REVISED CIRCULAR NO. 28-91 February 8,
or complaints; (b) any willful and deliberate forum
cases; 4) Looyuko supported the Motion to Cite 1994 Upon the filing on December 15, 1972 of the petition
shopping by any party and his counsel through the
petitioner for contempt that was filed by the Bank; at bar for review of the Court of Appeals' decision
TO: THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE filing of multiple petitions or complaints to ensure
and, 5) Judge Abrogar was once an assistant fiscal dismissing petitioner's petition for mandamus filed
PHILIPPINES, ALL OTHER BAR ASSOCIATIONS, favorable action shall constitute direct contempt of
under then Manila City Fiscal Atty. Flaminiano. with said court to compel the Manila court of first
THE OFFICE OF THE SOLICITOR GENERAL AND court; and (c) the submission of a false certification
instance to allow petitioner's proposed appeal from
Petitioner’s particular attack against an RTC Judge THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE shall constitute indirect contempt of court, without
its adverse judgment dismissing plaintiff's complaint,
is a serious accusation that erodes trust and prejudice to the filing of criminal action against the
SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL REQUISITES FOR the Court per its resolution of December 22, 1972
confidence in our judicial system. This Court will not guilty party and the institution of disciplinary
PETITIONS FILED WITH THE SUPREME COURT required respondents to comment thereon.
hesitate to sanction persons who recklessly and proceedings against the counsel.
nonchalantly impute ill motives that are nothing AND THE COURT OF APPEALS TO PREVENT
Respondents filed on February 8, 1973 an extensive
FORUM SHOPPING OR APPEALS TO PREVENT This revised Circular shall take effect on April 1,
more than unfounded speculations. The above eighteen page comment and petitioner's counsel,
FORUM SHOPPING OR MULTIPLE FILING OF 1994.
"suspicious" circumstances enumerated, whether Rodrigo M. Nera, filed on February 12, 1973 a
taken together or separately, are plainly unjustified PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS
February 8, 1994. motion for leave to file reply within 15 days from
as they fail to even remotely show the existence of a notice alleging that there was need for such reply "in
The attention of the Court has been called to the
grand conspiracy against petitioner. For all their (Sgd.) ANDRES R. NARVASA order that this Honorable Court may be fully and
filing of multiple petitions and the complaints

Page 124 of 132


completely informed of the nature of the controversy of pleadings and the cost of services of the necessary manifestation that he was foregoing WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION COMMISSION,
which gave rise to the instant petition." The Court stenographer-typist shall be furnished in advance by the filing of such reply on petitioner's behalf. His ATANACIO A. MARDO, as Chief Hearing Officer
granted such leave per its resolution of February 23, petition upon being notified thereof," that when he inaction unduly delayed the Court's prompt of Regional Officer of the Department of Labor,
1973 and notice of such leave was served on asked for a third extension on March 29, 1973, he so disposition of the case after the filing by CITY SHERIFF OF MANILA and MARIO ABITRIA,
counsel on February 27, 1973. informed petitioner and requested him to remit the respondents on February 8, 1973 of their comments respondents.
expenses for the preparation of reply as per on the petition showing its lack of merit.
On the last day for filing of the reply, viz, March 14, agreement" and that he tried to contact petitioner Manuel A. Corpuz for petitioner.
1973 counsel asked for an additional 15 days before the expiration of the extended period but The Court would have then so disposed of the
averring that "due to the pressure of urgent petition had it not been for petitioner's plea to be Pagano C. Villavieja and Cecilia E. Curso for public
failed to do as petitioner "was then most of the time
professional work and daily trial engagements of the given time and opportunity to file a reply to the respondent Atanacio A. Mardo.
out of his office."
undersigned counsel during the original period comments in order to fully apprise the Court of the
Hector C. Regino for private respondent.
granted, he has not had sufficient material time to Counsel relates that it was only on May 30, 1973 nature of the controversy, which plea the Court
complete the preparation of petitioner's reply." The when he received notice of the Court's resolution of granted in reliance on his good faith. Yet after having FERNANDO, J.:
Court granted the requested extension per its May 24, 1973 denying the petition and requiring his obtained three extensions of time for the filing of the
resolution of March 20, 1973. explanation — long after the expiration on April 13, reply, counsel simply failed to file any reply nor to This Court, in a resolution of June 21, 1967, was
1973 of the extended period for the filing of the reply give the Court the courtesy of any explanation or persuaded, regrettably as it turned out, to give due
On the last day of the extended period for filing of — that he wrote petitioner and in turn asked the manifestation for his failure to do so. course to a certiorari and prohibition proceeding
the reply, viz, March 29, 1973 counsel again asked petitioner to explain the latter's failure to comply with a plea for preliminary injunction, a restraining
for still another 15-day extension stating that "due to with his request for a remittance of P500.00 to cover Counsel readily perceived in his explanation that his order being issued, in view of the rather vehement
the pressure of urgent professional work and daily the necessary expenses, and that petitioner had conduct comes close to delaying the administration and earnest protestations of petitioner Manila Pest
trial engagements of the undersigned counsel, he replied that counsel's letter had been misplaced by of justice and trifling with the Court's processes. It ControI, Inc. that it was denied procedural due
has not had sufficient material time to complete the a clerk and hence, petitioner had "failure to act on does not reflect well on counsel's conduct as an process. As will be more fully explained, such is not
preparation of petitioners reply. The undersigned the same." officer of the Court that after assuring the Court that the case at all.
counsel humbly apologizes that in view of his the third extension requested by him "in view of his
crowded schedule, he has been constrained to ask Counsel pleads that "this counsel has not the least crowded schedule" and "of urgent professional work More specifically, it was alleged that on February 24,
for this extension, but respectfully assures the intention of delaying the administration of justice and and daily trial engagements" would be the last within 1967, respondent Workmen's Compensation
Honorable Court that this will be the last one much less trifle with the resolutions and orders of which period he would at last file the awaited reply, Commission, through its referee, considered a
requested.' As per its resolution of April 6, 1973, the this Honorable Court. The inability of this counsel to for him thereafter to let the period simply lapse complaint filed against it by the other respondent,
Court granted counsel's motion for such third and submit the reply within the extension granted by this without any explanation whatsoever, and worse, to Mario Abitria, for compensation submitted for
last extension. Honorable Court was due to supervening wait to be found out, and have the Court require him decision after he and a physician had testified,
circumstances which could not be attributed to this to explain. petitioner's counsel having failed to appear at the
The period for the filing of petitioner's reply lapsed counsel and that "if this poor and humble hearing of February 24, 1967.1 Then came,
on April 13, 1973 without counsel having filed any practitioner has been impelled to inaction it surely Considering, however, that counsel's record shows according to the petition, a motion for
reply manifestation explaining his failure to do so. was not intentional on his part, the truth of the no previous infractions on his part since his reconsideration dated March 7, 1967, petitioner
matter being that this counsel was just helpless in admission to the Philippine Bar in 1953, the Court is praying that he be allowed to present evidence on
Accordingly, the Court in its resolution of May 24, disposed to be lenient in this instance.
the face of petitioner's failure to comply with his his behalf.2 It was denied in an order of April 4, 1967,
1973 denying the petition for review for lack of merit,
commitments aforesaid;" and that "this counsel as a decision had already been rendered against
further required petitioner's counsel to show cause ACCORDINGLY, the Court hereby administers a
deeply regrets this incident and hereby apologizes petitioner, as employer, awarding respondent Abitria
why discipline action should not be taken against reprimand on Atty. Rodrigo M. Nera, with the
to this Honorable Court for all his shortcomings P6,000.00 as his disability compensation benefit. It
him for failure to file the reply after having obtained warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts
relative to this case, which after all were due to was also pointed out in such order that there was no
such leave and three extensions time within which to shall be dealt with more severely. Let a copy of this
causes and circumstances not of his own making plea in such motion for reconsideration for such
do so. resolution be filed in his personal record.
and far beyond his control." decision being set aside, as it was limited to seeking
Counsel filed in due course his verified Explanation G.R. No. L-27662 October 29, 1968 an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses. It
Counsel's explanation is far from satisfactory. If could not be granted as the matter was looked upon
dated June 7, 1973 stating that he was retained in
indeed he was not in a financial position to advance MANILA PEST CONTROL, INC., petitioner, as "moot and academic." 3 It was then alleged in the
the ease "on a piece-work basis on the verbal
the necessary expenses for preparing and petition that on April 11, 1967, a motion for
understanding that all expenses for the preparation
submitting the reply, then he could have filed timely vs.

Page 125 of 132


reconsideration of the aforesaid order was filed with performance of an obligation, which under the law it to two glassful [when] he was brought to the himself stated that claimant's exposure to his work
the averment that petitioner was not aware of any must fulfill, namely, to compensate for the serious Philippine General Hospital and given injection and aggravated the illness and we believe that the
decision rendered in the case as no copy of the and debilitating ailment of tuberculosis acquired in was X-rayed. From that hospital he was transferred respondent had failed to dispute the work
same had theretofore been furnished to its counsel. 4 the course of employment by respondent Abitria. to the Quezon Institute where he was subsequently connection as there is no showing that claimant's
After a denial of such motion for reconsideration on Accordingly, the petition for certiorari and prohibition admitted. The attending physician testified further ailment was due to the lowering of his resistance by
April 24, 1967, and a plea for execution on behalf of should be, as it is hereby, denied. that the right lung had bronchogenous lesions in the causes other than the nature of his work as laborer
respondent Abitria, which was granted on June 14, upper lobe with honeycomb at 2nd and 3rd of the respondent."7
1967, the City Sheriff of Manila, likewise made a The facts as found by respondent Workmen's intercostal space, while the left lung had fibrotic
respondent, levied on petitioner's properties on June Compensation Commission, which must be deemed lesion behind the anterior rib II. ... He was It must be a realization that no valid defenses could
14, 1967, by virtue of the above writ of execution. 5 conclusive, can yield no other conclusion but the discharged from the Quezon Institute on September be interposed that prompted petitioner to rely on the
undeniable liability for compensation to respondent 3, 1966, but the illness was not yet arrested alleged deprivation of due process, a contention,
It is petitioner's contention that in the light of the Abitria on the part of petitioner. Thus: "From the although there was stopping of the hemoptysis. The which as will now be shown, is without basis.
above alleged infringement of procedural due recorded evidence, it appears that claimant was doctor testified on cross examination that the nature
process, the actuation of respondent Commission employed with the respondent since February 4, The petition was so worded that the employer's right
of work of the claimant involving strenuous physical
was either in excess of its jurisdiction or with grave 1956, working six (6) days a week and receiving an to be heard appeared to have been disregarded. No
exertion and other factors of work such as the
abuse of discretion. That was the basis for the relief average monthly wage of P180.00 as laborer for the further attention should be accorded such an alleged
lowering of his resistance in view of the enormous
sought, seeking a writ of preliminary injunction respondent. He was assigned in the Research grievance. If it did not introduce any evidence, it had
inhalation of chemical fumes also brought about the
restraining City Sheriff of Manila, from proceeding Division which conducted research on rat traps and itself solely to blame. No fault could be attributed to
aggravation of the claimant's present condition.
with the sale at public auction of petitioner's other matters regarding extermination of pests, respondent Workmen's Compensation Commission.
According to the claimant the respondent was duly
properties and after hearing, annulling the aforesaid animals and insects. It was testified to by the There must be such a realization on the part of
notified of his illness through the general manager
writ of execution and likewise all the proceedings in claimant and his witnesses that in the place of his petitioner for its four-page memorandum submitted
and in view of the respondent's refusal to pay him
RO4-WC Case No. 5503, thereafter making the employment he was made to inhale dangerous in lieu of oral argument did not bother to discuss
disability compensation despite repeated demands,
injunction permanent, and ordering respondent fumes as the atmosphere was polluted with such a matter at all. Accordingly, such a contention
claimant filed this instant claim."6
Abitria to pay petitioner the sum of P500.00 as poisonous chemical dusts. The working condition of need not detain us further as it ought never to have
attorney'sfees. Thus was imparted more than just a his place of work was also warm and humid in view The sole issue then, as accurately set forth in the been raised in the first place.
semblance of plausibility to the petition, deceptive in of the products being manufactured by the above decision, was "to determine in this case ...
Petitioner would make much however of the
character, as subsequent pleadings proved, but respondent. He was not extended any protective whether ... there is sufficient or substantial evidence
allegation that, as shown in the answer of
nonetheless insufficient to call for its summary device and he was also made to lift heavy objects in in support of the claim for disability compensation
respondent Workmen's Compensation
dismissal. the painting and soldering. In his soldering work benefits under the Workmen's Compensation Law.
Commission,8 the decision was sent to a certain
muriatic acid and soldering paste [were] used. The evidence on record is crystal clear that the
On June 21, 1967, this Court issued a resolution to Attorney Manuel Camacho but care of petitioner's
Sometime in July, 1966 while the claimant was claimant had already substantially proven his case
this effect: "The respondents in L-27662 (Manila counsel, Attorney Manuel Corpuz. Petitioner would
soldering [he] began to experience symptoms of and all indications point that the illness of
Pest Control, Inc. vs. Workmen's Compensation emphasize that the one "officially furnished" with a
pulmonary tuberculosis. Because of his spitting of moderately advanced, pulmonary tuberculosis was
Commission, et al.) are required to file, within 10 copy of such decision was not its counsel, who was
blood or hemoptysis, he went to consult Dr. Felix service connected in view of his work as laborer
days from notice hereof, an answer (not a motion to without any connection with the aforesaid Attorney
Tuazon of the Quezon Institute whose diagnosis was involving strenuous physical exertion which brought
dismiss) to the petition for prohibition; let temporary Camacho. It would conclude, therefore, that it had
pulmonary tuberculosis, chronic, active moderately about the lowering of his resistance due to the
restraining order issue, effective immediately and not received a copy of a decision which could not
advanced, right: minimal, left. He was confined at massive inhalation of injurious chemical fumes to the
until further orders from this Court." thereafter reach the stage of finality calling for a writ
the Quezon Institute under the care of Dr. Felix extent that he was made an easy prey to the
of execution.
Tuazon. According to the attending physician, he contraction of TB bacilli. The fact that there was no
The answer of respondent Workmen's
was admitted in the hospital ward as a hemoptic evidence on record that claimant was sick upon This contention was squarely met in the reply-
Compensation Commission of July 21, 1967 and the
patient or one who is bleeding from the lungs. When entrance to his employment, it is presumed that he memorandum of November 6, 1967 of the
later pleadings, revealed quite a different story. It is
he was admitted he was prescribed Vita K. ampules, was normal in every respect during the first period of Workmen's Compensation Commission. Why it
now quite clear that instead of being the offended
bronocal, ablocid, duestrep injections and other his employment and the disease of pulmonary happened thus was explained in an affidavit of one
party suffering from a legitimate grievance, its right
anti-TB drugs. His clinical history showed that the tuberculosis showed only during the later part of his of its employees, a certain Gerardo Guzman,
to due process having been summarily disregarded,
claimant was diagnosed with severe coughing employment when he was assigned in the research included therein.9 As set forth in such reply
petitioner was not above resorting to every
followed by expectoration of fresh blood amounting division of the respondent. The attending physician memorandum: "As stated in the affidavit of Mr.
technicality the law affords to evade the

Page 126 of 132


Guzman, he went to the office of Atty. Corpuz, on Which of the above conflicting versions is entitled to Petitioner, and petitioner alone, could be expected the above circumstances disclosed, of petitioner's
March 10, 1967 to deliver a copy of the decision ..., credence? That of respondent Workmen's to furnish such a cause. Who would benefit thereby? counsel, Attorney Manuel A. Corpuz calls for words
but Atty. Corpuz refused to receive the said decision Compensation Commission would appear to be The answer cannot be in doubt. Through such of reproof.
alleging that he was no longer handling the case. more in accordance with the realities of the circumstance, wether intended or otherwise, a basis
Atty. Corpuz, instead instructed Mr. Guzman to situation. It is entitled to belief. was laid for at least a delay of the fulfillment of a just It is one thing to exert to the utmost one's ability to
deliver the said decision to Atty. Camacho since it claim. For it is to be noted that there is no, as there protect the interest of one's client. It is quite another
was already Atty, Camacho who was handling the This would not be the first time, in the first place, could not be any, valid ground for denying thing, and this is to put it at its mildest, to take
case, and Atty. Camacho, according to Atty. where out of excess of zeal and out of a desire to compensation to respondent Abitria on the facts as advantage of any unforeseen turn of events, if not to
Corpuz, even had the records of the case." 10 In view rely on every conceivable defense that could delay if found. Considering how great and pressing the create one, to delay if not to defeat the recovery of
of such instruction, it was further noted, Guzman not defeat the satisfaction of an obligation laborer's need for the compensation due him was what is justly due and demandable, especially so,
"went the office of Atty. Camacho, but since Atty. incumbent on one's client, counsel would attempt to and the consequent temptation to settle for less if in when as in this case, the obligee is a necessitous
Camacho was not around he handed the copy of the put the most favorable light on a course of conduct the meanwhile, the money he had the right to and poverty-stricken man suffering from a dreaded
decision to the receiving clerk therein, who received which certainly cannot be given the stamp of expect, was not forthcoming, petitioner, as the disease, that unfortunately afflicts so many of our
it as evidenced by the stamp pad bearing the name approval. Not that it would clear counsel of any employer liable, had everything to gain and nothing countrymen and even more unfortunately requires
of the Law Office of Camacho, Zapa, Andaya & further responsibility. His conduct leaves much to be to lose by such a turn of events. Even if it were an an outlay far beyond the means of our poverty
Associates on the attached true copy of the Notice desired. His responsibility aside, it made evident honest mistake, the consequences were still stricken masses.
of Decision, ..."11 why, to repeat the effort to evade liability by deplorable.
petitioner by invoking the due process guaranty The ancient and learned profession of the law
From which it could make the apt observation. "It is must not be rewarded with success. It is quite revealing that in not one of the pleadings stresses fairness and honor; that must ever be kept
indeed sad to note that after the Counsel for filed by petitioner did it ever indicate how it could in mind by everyone who is enrolled in its ranks and
Petitioner refused to receive the copy of said Under the above circumstances, no due process validly avoid its liability under the Workmen's who expects to remain a member in good standing.
decision, he is now impugning the delivery of said question arose. What was done satisfied such a Compensation Commission which disclosed that the This Tribunal is rightfully entrusted with the serious
decision to Atty. Camacho and is denying constitutional requirement. An effort was made to ailment suffered by respondent Abitria while in its responsibility of seeing to it that no deviation from
knowledge of it when in fact and truth the delivery of serve petitioner with a copy of the decision; that employment was indeed compensable. Neither in its such a norm should be countenanced. If what
said decision to Atty. Camacho was made per his such effort failed was attributable to the conduct of memorandum submitted on October 19, 1967 nor occurred here would not be characterized for the
instruction to Mr. Guzman, as evidenced by the its own counsel. True, there was a denial; it is far rejoinder of November 21, 1967, did it ever occur to shocking thing it was, then it could be said that the
attached affidavit of Mr. Guzman." 12 from persuasive, as already noted. It does not have petitioner to allege that if given the opportunity for law is less than fair and far from honorable. What
the ring of truth. There is no reason why the decision hearing it could interpose a plausible, not to say a happens then to the ideal that only he is fit to belong
In view of the rather persuasive character of such an would have been served on some other counsel if valid defense. It did not do so because it could not to such a profession who remains a faithful votary at
affidavit and the understandable reflection on the there where no such misinformation, if there where do so. Our decisions as to the undeniable liability of the altar of justice? Such an ideal may be difficult to
actuation of counsel for petitioner, there was, as no such attempt to mislead. an employer similarly situated are impressive for approximate. That is true, but let it not be said that
could be expected submitted by petitioner's counsel their number and unanimity.13 when such a notorious breach of its lofty standard
a rejoinder, dated November 26, 1967. He would No benefit would have accrued to respondent took place, as unfortunately it did in this case, this
have this Court believe that the reply-memorandum Workmen's Compensation Commission. It was It would thus be grimly ironic if the due process Court exhibited magnificent unconcern.
is contradicted by what appeared in respondents' merely performing its official function. Certainly, it concept, in itself an assurance and a guaranty of
answer, where it was stated that a copy of the could be expected to see to it that the law's justice and fairness, would be the very vehicle to WHEREFORE, this petition for certiorari and
decision was received, not by him but by the law beneficiaries were not inconvenienced, much less visit on a hapless and impoverished litigant injustice prohibition with preliminary injunction is denied. With
office of a certain Attorney Camacho. He would then frustrated, by its failure to follow the regular and unfairness. The law itself would stand in treble costs against petitioner to be paid by his
ask why Guzman did not serve a copy of the procedure prescribed. It was unlikely that the disrepute, if such a gross perversion of its dictates counsel, Attorney Manuel A. Corpuz.
decision to him. He would even assume, for employee entrusted with serving a copy of the were allowed. Any other view is unthinkable.
decision, in this particular case, and in this particular G.R. No. L-6294 February 10, 1911
argument sake, that there was a refusal on his part Otherwise, there would be a stultification of all our
to accept a copy of this decision, but he would case alone, would depart so radically from what the efforts to promote social justice 14 and a mockery of THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,
argue why did not Guzman, who could be expected law requires, if there were no such intervening cause the constitutional ideal of protection to labor. 15
to know the duties of a service officer, fail "to state that resulted in his going astray. How could vs.
said refusal in his official return." petitioner escape responsibility? Considering the above, it is not enough that
petitioner be required to pay forthwith the sum due LEONCIO BALLENA, defendant-appellant.
respondent Abitria. The unseemly conduct, under

Page 127 of 132


Buencamino, Diokno, Mapa, Buencamino jr., Platon Subsequently thereto, and on the 29th of falsely, but he did so maliciously, as it appears from disbelieved the fiscal, testifying as a witness, but it
and Lontok for appellant. September, 1909, the fiscal filed an information in the record that he was an enemy of the fiscal at that would have looked upon the whole prosecution as a
the Court of First Instance of that province against time, the fiscal having prosecuted him previous to fabrication.
Attorney-General Villamor for appellee. the said Leoncio Ballena, charging him with the this trial. So the only question to be determined is,
crime of subornation of perjury. Upon this complaint as we have said, Was the testimony of Barruga The judgment appealed from being in accordance
TRENT, J.: with the law and the merits of the case, same is
the defendant was duly tried, found guilty, and material to the issues involved in that criminal case
sentenced to six month's imprisonment, to pay a against her daughter for perjury? Materiality is an hereby affirmed, with costs against the defendant.
On the 21st of September, 1909, there was tried in
fine of P500, to the corresponding subsidiary essential element in the crime of perjury. (U. S. vs. So ordered.
the Court of First Instance of the subprovince of
Masbate criminal case No. 163, entitled "United imprisonment is case of insolvency, to the accessory Estraña, 16 Phil. Rep., 520.) It, therefore, necessarily
G.R. No. L-35253 July 26, 1976
States vs. Ana Ramirez," in which the defendant was penalties provided for by law, and to pay the costs. follows that materiality is likewise an indispensable
charged with the crime of perjury. The basis of this From this sentence and judgment the defendant requisite in the crime of subornation of perjury, as CITY OF MANILA, petitioner,
prosecution was the false testimony given by the appealed, and now insists that the testimony by the latter is derived from the former.
defendant in a certain criminal case tried in that given by Estefania Barruga in that perjury case was vs.
immaterial to the issues involved therein. If this The term 'material matter' means the main fact
court wherein one Ciriaco Pellejera was defendant,
contention be true, the defendant is not guilty. which was the subject of the inquiry, or any COURT OF APPEALS and METROPOLITAN
charged with homicide, in that the said Pellejera did,
circumstance which tends to prove that fact, or any THEATER COMPANY, respondents.
by means of blows, cause the death of the husband
There are certain well-defined and indispensable fact, or circumstance, which tends to corroborate or
of Ana Ramirez. In this homicide case Ana Ramirez B.T. Dayaw S.M. Santiago, Jr. & Associates for
requisites which must be established in every case strengthen the testimony relative to such inquiry, or
was called as a witness, and, after being duly sworn, petitioner.
of subornation of perjury before an accused person, which legitimately affects the credit of any witness
testified that her husband died of fever and that
charged with the commission of this crime, can be who testifies. (Quoted with approval in U. S. vs.
during his illness, which lasted more than two Jalandoni Jamir & Associates for respondent
convicted. Every essential element constituting the Estraña, supra.)
weeks, she observed no contusions or other injuries Company.
crime of perjury must be established by competent
on his body. She denied having testified under oath In the criminal case in which the witness Barruga
testimony. The prosecution must show the nature of
before the provincial fiscal in the town of gave that false testimony, the main question
the proceedings in which the alleged perjury was
Dimasalang, contrary to her testimony in this case, involved was whether or not Ana Ramirez testified
committed, the court, or officer, in which, or before CASTRO, C.J:
and she also denied having been in the house of one before the provincial fiscal that her husband died as
whom, the false oath was taken; that the witness
Jose Largo for the purpose of testifying with a result of the blows inflicted by Ciriaco Pellejera, as This is an appeal by way of certiorari from the
was duly sworn; that the testimony was material,
reference to the death of her husband. Whereas, as she had testified in the trial of the case against decision of the Court of Appeals dated June 20,
and false; that the defendant knowingly and willfully
a matter of fact, she did testify, under oath, before Pellejera that she did not so testify before the fiscal. 1972 in CR-SP-W707-R, annulling the special order
procured another to swear falsely, and that the
the said fiscal, in that town, that her husband died It is clear that the false testimony of Ana Ramirez of execution of September 30, 1971 and the writ
witness suborned did testify under circumstances
as a direct result of the blows inflicted by Pellejera against Pellejera was material. In the trial of the case issue order of December 29, 1971 in civil cases
rendering him guilty of perjury.
and that his death occurred within three days after against Ana for perjury there was presented a 78845 and 79907 of the Court of First Instance of
having received these blows. Ana Ramirez was In the case at bar the record shows beyond any question of fact as to whether or not Ana testified, Manila. This Court resolved to consider this appeal
found guilty as charged and sentenced accordingly. question of a doubt that the witness Barruga, after under oath, before the fiscal in that investigation that as a special civil action.
being duly sworn, did knowingly and willfully testify her husband did in fact die as a result of the wounds
In the trial of this perjury case on Estefania Barruga, The petitioner City of Manila (hereinafter referred to
falsely in a criminal case before a duly constituted inflicted by Pellejera. The court found this to be true.
mother of the defendant Ana, was a witness for the as the City), commenced on July 2, 1968 an action
tribunal; that this witness so testified at the It was important to know whether or not the fiscal, at
defendant, and at the instigation of one Leoncio for unlawful detainer against the private respondent
instigation of the defendant Ballena; and that the the time Ana testified before him, attempted to rape
Ballena she testified that the fiscal, Señor Bailon, at Metropolitan Theater Company (Company, for short)
defendant knew that the testimony given by the her or asked her mother for permission to marry her.
the time he was in Dimasalang making the in civil case 172062 of the City Court of Manila,
witness Barruga was false. The witness so informed If the fiscal had committed these acts they would
investigation into the cause of the death of Ana's which, after due hearing, dismissed the case. From
the defendant. Notwithstanding this information, the have constituted a strong circumstance showing the
husband, attempted to rape her daughter Ana, and this dismissal the City appealed on December 16,
defendant strongly insisted that by the witness innocence of Ana. The fiscal was the moving party in
asked for the hand of the girl in marriage, but she 1969 to the Court of First Instance of Manila where
Barruga testifying that the fiscal committed those the perjury case and it was upon his sworn
did not desire to accept this proposition of the fiscal the case was docketed as civil case 78845.
acts would be the only was to save her daughter complaint that Ana was prosecuted. If he should
because he was a married man.
from imprisonment. The defendant not only have attempted to prosecute Ana after having On January 9, 1929 the City and the Company
knowingly and willfully induced this witness to swear committed these acts the court would not only have entered into an agreement whereby for and in

Page 128 of 132


consideration of P1.00 the former sold, assigned On March 19, 1970, during the pre-trial of civil case motion, denying the allegation that it is insolvent and prohibition, setting aside the special order of
and transferred to the latter three parcels of land 78845, the presiding judge of Branch XXIII of the that its appeal was intended merely to delay, and execution of September 30, 1971 of the trial court,
with a total area of 8,343.40 square meters; that the Court of First Instance of Manila suggested to the praying that, in the event that the trial court should and made permanent the preliminary injunction
building which the Company would construct City the filing of another complaint to recover favorably consider the execution pending appeal theretofore issued. From the said judgment, the City
thereon would be principally devoted to theatrical possession of the land and building involved in the under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, it be allowed to interposed this appeal (which this Court has
performances; that the Company was authorized to unlawful detainer case. post a supersedeas bond to stay the execution considered as a special civil action), claiming that
borrow money and mortgage the property as under Section 3 of said Rule 39. On September 30, the respondent Court of Appeals erred in disturbing
security; that upon completion of the theater, the On May 29, 1970 the City filed a complaint for 1971 the trial court issued a special order for the the findings of fact of the trial court which are
Company would reconvey to the City the lots and rescission of contract with receivership, docketed as execution of its judgment dated August 5, 1971, supported by substantial evidence and substituting
building, subject to such encumbrances as might civil case 79947, which the City asked in an ex parte upon the filing by the City of a bond in the amount of therefor its own conclusions which are based on
have been imposed thereon in connection with the motion to be consolidated with the appealed case P30,000, pursuant to the provisions of Section 2 of speculations, surmises and conjectures, or which
construction of the building, that the City after the 78845. On June 1, 1975 the trial court approved the Rule 39 of the Rules Court. are manifestly mistaken or absurd; and that the
reconveyance to it of the property, would execute a consolidation. respondent Court used the office of the writ of
contract of lease of the same property in favor of the On October 4, 1971 the Company filed an urgent certiorari and prohibition to set aside the findings of
After a joint trial of the appealed case and civil case motion for reconsideration, contending that the City
Company for a period of 99 years at a yearly rental fact and conclusions made by the trial court in the
7,9947, the Court of First Instance of Manila had no valid ground for execution pending appeal
of P100 and the Company would pay annually the exercise of its jurisdiction.
rendered on August 5, 1971 its decision declaring, under Section 2 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court,
necessary amount to meet the obligations
among others, that the City is entitled to recover and reiterating its offer to post a suspersedeas In its answer, the Company contends that the review
contracted for the construction of the building until
from the Company the possession of the bond. sought must hinge solely on whether or not the
they are fully paid; and that upon the termination of
Metropolitan Theater Building and the three lots on Court of Appeals has committed errors of
the lease; the Company would return to the City the
which it was constructed, and ordering the On December 29, 1971 the trial court issued an jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion, as
leased premises and the building.
Company to deliver the possession thereof to the order denying the motion for reconsideration, distinguished from mere errors of judgment; That the
The Company had borrowed as of December 10, City. approving the bond filed by the City, and directing first ground relied upon in the petition raises a
1931 the total amount of P700,000 from the El the implementation of the execution order of question Of fact inasmuch as it seeks a review of the
On August 9, 1971 the City filed a motion for September 30, 1971.
Hogar Filipino, secured by a mortgage over the finding of fact of the Court of Appeals; and that the
execution of the decision based on Section 8 of Rule
parcels of land involved in the agreement between second ground is devoid of merit since the Court of
70 of the Rules of Court relative to judgment in The Company then filed on January 6, 1972 with the
the City and the Company. Appeals is vested by law with jurisdiction to issue
illegal detainer and forcible entry cans. On August respondent Court of Appeals a special civil action
writs of certiorari and prohibition in aid of its
On December 10, 1931 tie City and the Company 20, 1971 the Company filed its opposition to the for certiorari and prohibition, docketed as GR-
appellate jurisdiction and can review the order of
entered into and executed a contract whereby the said motion, contending that the consolidated 00707-R, for the annulment of the special order of
execution of the trial court pending appeal. It
latter, for and in consideration of P1.00, resold re- actions had become an accion publiciana which execution dated September 30, 1971 and the writ-
likewise refuted the arguments adduced by the
assigned, re-transferred and re-conveyed to the could not be the subject of a motion for immediate issue-order o f December 29, 1971. The respondent
petitioner in support of the errors ally committed by
former the parcels of land together with the theater execution under Section 8 of Rule 70 of the Rules of Court, in its resolution dated January 11, 1972,
the respondent Court, and prayed for the dismissal
building constructed thereon. Pursuant to the Court. granted ex parte the writ of preliminary injunction
of the petition.
agreement the City subsequently leased the same to applied for by the Company to stay the enforcement
On August 23, 1971 the Company filed its notice of of the orders complained of, upon the filing of a
the Company. The cardinal issue in this case is Whether or not the
appeal and cash bond, and on August 25, 1971 its P2,000 bond, and required the City to answer the respondent Court of Appeals committed grave
Ravaged during the last World War, the Metropolitan record on appeal. petition. abuse of discretion when it set aside the special
Theater Building could no longer be devoted to order of execution issued by the trial court pending
On September 1, 1971 the City filed an amended The City moved to have the writ of injunction
theatrical performances. appeal. The petitioner's complaint that the Court of
motion for execution, reiterating its ground for dissolved, pointing out that the bond was insufficient
execution pending appeal under Section 8, Rule 70 Appeals made use of the writ of centiorari to set
The City then notified the Company of the and that the act sought to be restrained had already
of the Rules of Court, and adding another ground, aside the order of execution would hardly require
termination of the contract and demanded that the become fait accompli. The motion was denied; the
which is the alleged "dilatory tactics and insolvency" discussion for it is settled that it can do so provided
latter vacate and turn over the premises to the City then filed its answer.
of the Company, under Section 2 of Rule 39 of the the trial co committed a grave abuse of discretion in
former. The Company refused to do so; the City then
Rules of Court. On September 24, 1971 the The respondent Court rendered its decision on June issuing the order. 1
filed an ejectment suit.
Company filed its opposition to the amended 20, 1972 granting the writ of certiorari and

Page 129 of 132


Section 2 of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court which en The discretion given by statute to issue execution 1. The first ground given by the trial court to the property in litigation during the pendency of this
tee the conditions in order that a judgment may be pending appeal is not however unconfined, vagrant, justify immediate execution contains three continue on appeal when the highly valuable parcels
executed before the expiration of the time to appeal absolute, and arbitrary. Rather, it is sound concatenated special reasons, namely, the of land on which the building in dispute is
is hereunder quoted: discretion, for the court may grant such execution Company's insolvency, the risk of forfeiture of the constructed belong to the plaintiff City of Manila,
only when there are good reasons therefore, and City's lots, and the prodigal if not anomalous, which lands run the risk of being foreclosed any time
On motion of the Prevailing party with notice to the which are to be stated in a special order. If in the wastage of the rental income of the Theater by the mortgagee El Hogar Filipino because of
adverse party the court may, in its division order mind of the court, taking into consideration the facts Building. Said the trial court: defendant's failure to pay the annual amortizations
execution to issue before the expiration of the time and circumstances surraounding the case, good agreed upon in the mortgage contract.
to appeal upon good reasons to be stated in a reasons exist, the exercise of the power to issue It is not disputed that the four (4) parcels of land on
special order. If a record on appeal is filed thereafter immediate execution of the judgment cannot be which the Metropolitan Theater Building was The City of Manila has made it of reward that it is
the motion and the special order shall be included considered as grave abuse of discretion. 4 Provided construction are owned by plaintiff City of Manila; willing to pay the mortgage debt to El Hogar Filipino.
the rein. there are good reasons for execution according to that said parcels of land with a total area of 8,343.40 It has to do so to prevent a very valuable property
the judgment of the trial judge, such judgment square. meters covered by Transfer Certificates of from danger foreclosed The City of Manila is in a
Of the three conditions required (to wit: (a) there Title Nos. 368, 36813, 7138 were M18 were very much better financial position than the
should generally not be interfered with, modified,
must be a motion by the prevailing party with notice mortgaged on December 10, 1931 in favor of El defendent to pay the mortgage obligation. The fact
controlled, or inquired into by the appellate court;
to the adverse party; (b) there must be good reasons Hogar Filipino to answer for a principal indebtedness that El Hogar Filipino has not chosen up to now to
the latter should generally not substitute its way of
for issuing execution; and (e) the good reasons must of P700,000.00 which was used for the construction exercise its right of foreclosure does net change the
thinking for that of the trial court, otherwise, the
be stated in a special order), only the existence of of the Metropolitan Theater building now of this case fact that there is danger of foreclosure and that El
discretionary power given to the trial court would
good reasons is disputed. between the plaintiff and the defendant. After the Hogar Filipino may exercise its right to do same at
have no meaning. The appellate court may,
however, interfere with that discretion lodged in the building was adverely damaged by the last war, 6e any time. If El Hogar Filipino foreclose the mortgage,
Even though the element that gives validity to an
trial court only in case of grave abuse 5or in case defendant Metropolitan Theater Company did not the City on Manila loses four (4) — parcels of
execution Pending appeal is the existence of good
conditions have so far changed since the issuance pay to El Hogar Filipino the annual amortizations valuable property containing a total area of 8,343.40
reasons in support thereof, the statute, nevertheless,
of the order as to necessitate the intervention of the provided for in the mortgage contract Defendant has square meters. The defendant does not stand to
does not determine, enumerate, or give examples of
appellate court to protect the interests of the parties not even paid in full the annual interests due the lose much according to its managing director all the
what may be considered good reasons to justify
t contingenecies which were not or could have not loan. The balance sheet of the defendant shows that income that it rives from the building is eaten up by
execution. What these good reasons are must
been contemplated by the trial judge at the time of as of June 30, 1968 the indebtedness to the El administration expenses, maintenance expenses,
therefore, necessarily be addressed to the discretion
the issuance of the order. 6 Hogar Filipino was P721,547.82 (Exh. R The income salaries of officers and employees, partial payment
of the court.
from the Metropolitan Theater Building derived from of interests El Hogar Filipino and other necessary
Inasmuch as the issuance of the writ of execution The trial court retains its discretion to issue an order the rents collected by the defendant from the expenses. The City of Manila is entitled in justice
depends on the discretion of the trial court, such of immediate execution pending appeal even when various tenants for the year 1966-67 averaged and equity to the immediate possession of the
issuance must necessarily be controlled by the the losing party posts a supersedeas bond to stay P104,342.00 a year (Exh. C-2); Of this income only property in litigation so it can take steps to protect
judgment of the judge in accordance with his own execution. 7 It is necessary, however, in order that P49,045.92 was paid to El Hogar Filipino. The rest of its interests on the building and the land and to
conscience and by a sense of justice and equity, the trial court may disregard the supersedeas bond, the income was disbursed for overhead expense prevent further damage.
free from the control of another's judgment or that there be special and compelling reasons including the directors' fees, officers' salaries,
justifying immediate execution. 8 In the case before salaries and wages of employees, legal and audit It has been held that when judgment is in favor of
conscience. It must be so for discretion implies the
us where the Company offered to post a fees, maintenance and repair (Exh. R-1, sheet 2, the plaintiff it may be executed immediately, to
absence of a hard and fast rule. This Court has said
supersedeas bond to stay immediate execution, the Exh. R-2, sheet 4). There are no prospects that the prevent further damage to him caused by the loss of
that discretion is the power exercised by a court to
basic issue raised can be resolved by determining indebtedness to El Hogar Filipino never be paid if his possession (Sumintac vs. Court, 74 Phil. 445).
determine questions arising in the trial of a case to
which no strict law is applicable, but which from whether there are good, special and compelling the defendant continues possessing the
In the decision complained of, the Court of Appeals
their nature and the circumstances of the case, are reasons justifying the questioned order of execution. Metropolitan Theater Building as it has done for the
discarded the first ground relied upon by the trial
controlled by the personal judgment of the court. 2 It In such determination, the facts and circumstances past 26 years. At any time it chooses to, El Hogar
court, to wit, that the Company is insolvent. Said the
is the power which the law confers on public officials which impelled the court to act as it did and its own Filipino may exercise its right to foreclose the
Court of Appeals:
tp act officially under certain circumstances in assessment of the equities are entitled to mortgage because of defendant's failure to pay the
accordance with their own judgment or conscience. considerable weight, for the issuance of the order of annual amortizations on the mortgage loan. It is not From the evidence of respondent City of Manila that
3 immediate execution is within its sound discretion. 9 right, fair or just that defendant Metropolitan Theater the income of the Metropolitan Theater Building for
Company should be allowed to continue possessing the yearn 1966-67 averaged P104,342.00 a year and

Page 130 of 132


of that income. only P49,045.92 was paid to El The Company, however, contends that the trial court Company, by agreement with the City, mortgaged 2. The second ground given by the trial court
Hogar Filipino, and that as of June 30, 1968, the has not categorically found that the Company is these lots in favor of the El Hogar Filipino to answer to justify immediate execution is the City's having pit
indebtedness to the latter was P721,547.82, insolvent This contention cannot be accorded credit for the principal indebtedness of P700,000 used for up a bond of P30,000 to answer for the return of the
respondent court expressed the view that 'There are inasmuch as the insolvency of a party may be the construction of the Metropolitan Theater property and damages in the event that it be finally
no prospects that the indebtedness to El Hogar inferred from a number of circumstances on record. Building. Inasmuch as the Company has failed for 26 adjudicated on appeal that the Company is entitled
Filipino can ever be paid if the defendant 13
If insolvency is the inability or the lack of means to years after World War II to pay in full even the to the possession of the property. The Court of
(Metropolitan Theater Company) continues pay one's debt, or the condition of a person who is interests on the indebtedness, let alone the Appeals did not likewise consider this as a good
possessing the Metropolitan Theater Building. ... At unable to pay his debts as they fall due, 14 then there amortizations on the principal, the El Hogar Filipino reason for execution pending appeal on the ground
any time it chooses to, El Hogar Filipino may is no doubt that the Company is insolvent for it has has the right to foreclose the mortgage Should the that the action is not for a sum of money and that in
exercise its right to foreclose the mortgage because been unable to pay not only the amortizations on the mortgage be foreclosed the City will lose its three the case of Rodriguez vs. Court of Appeals 18 the
of defendant's failure to pay the annual principal but also the full interests on the loan as parcels of land with a total area of 8,343.40 square filing of the bond w not by itself considered a good
amortizations of the mortgage loan. they fell due, and that it is not in a position to pay meters, but the Company, on the contrary, will not reason, for the dilatory nature of the appeal was also
the mortgage debt. stand to lose much, for the money it spent in the considered by this Court.
Be that as it may, it does not clearly show the construction of the Theater was borrowed from the
insolvency of the Metropolitan Theater Company. It The Court of Appeals, however, not only disregard mortgagee, and the income it derives from the It is true that in Rodriguez vs. Court of Appeals, this
may have the means, other than the income from the facts on record when it stated that the building, according to the Company's managing Court considered, besides the filing of the
the theater building, with which. to meet its financial insolvency of the Company has not been clearly director, is totally eaten up by administration supersedeas bond alone or the dilatory nature of the
obligations. shown, but also aggravated its error when it expenses, maintenance expenses, salaries of appeal. That does not mean, however, that the filing
conjectured that the Company "may have means, officers and employees, sundry expenses and partial of the supersedeas bond al or the dilatory nature of
If the facts from which the trial court inferred the other than the income from the theater building, with the appeal alone, is not in itself a good and special
payments of the interest on the loan.
Company's insolvency were only those recited by which to meet its financial obligations." The mere reason for execution pending appeal. In the very
the Court of Appeals in the aforequoted paragraphs possibility that the Company may have means to The Court of Appeals, however, rejected this same case relied upon by the Court of Appeals, this
then we cannot but agree with the appellate court pay its obligations cannot outweigh the facts on ground, stating that the danger of foreclosure; Court approvingly quoted Moran, thus:
that the insolvency of the Company has not bean record that clearly show that the Company is according to the belief of the Company, is very
celebrity shown. But the Court of Appeals has insolvent. The Court of Appeals, in setting aside the remote. It said: The element that gives validity to an order of
omitted, and consequently failed to appreciate, conclusion of the trial court on this matter of the execution is the existence of the good reasons if
many other facts recited m the special order of Company's insolvency, which, as has been shown, The Metropolitan Theater Company entertained a they may be found distinctly somewhere in the
execution, which clearly show that the Company is is based on the facts on record, and substituting strong belief that the danger that El Hogar Filipino record. In this connection it has been held that the
insolvent. It omitted and, disregarded the fact that therefor its conjecture, committed grave abuse of might foreclose on the property "is very remote," filing of bond by the successful party is a good
the Company could not even pay in full the annual discretion, for "the findings of fact of the lower court and cited the fact that it has not even been ever reason for ordering excecution. That the appeal is
interest due due on the mortgage for 26 years, as a cannot be disregarded except in the absence of hinted. being taken for purposes of delay is also a good
consequence of which the original loan of P700,000 substantial evidence to support it." 15 This Court has reason. (Rodriguez v. Court of Appeals, 105 Phil.
had increased to P721,547.82 10 It likewise omitted The fact that the Company entertained said tenuous 777, 780-781). 19
likewise sad that "it is a fair statement of the
and failed to consider other factors appearing in the belief cannot negate the mortgagee's right to
governing principle to say that the appellate function
other portions of the record, to wit, that the balance foreclose whenever it so desires. Neither can such In Hacienda Navarra, Inc. vs. Labrador 20 the filing of
is exhausted when there is found to be a rational
sheet of the Company shows a total deficit of belief serve as a guaranty that the mortgagee will bond alone was considered a good and special
basis for the result reached by the trial court." 16
P1,261,851 as of December 31, 1967, as against the not foreclose nor will it bar foreclosure should it reason for ordering execution pending appeal. Said
book value of its capital of only P77,419.58; 11 that It cannot be gainsaid that the insolvency of a desire to. The fact is that because the mortgaged this Court:
the Company has incurred in arrears in monthly defeated party, where it has been clearly shown is a has a right to foreclose whenever it so chooses, the
City runs the risk of losing its property given as The filing of the bond required by the respondent
dues and penalties that ran up to P439,019.11 from good and special reason for execution pending
security. As between the City that would lose judge in the order sought to be annulled constitutes
February 1967 to June 1968, inclusive; 12 that, as appeal. 17
incalculably more and the Company which would a special ground authorizing the court to issue a writ
stated by the trial court, "There are no prospects
Compounding the Company's insolvency and as a lose practically nothing in case of foreclosure, the of execution pending appeal, in conformity with the
that the indebtedness to El Hogar Filipino can ever
result of its failure to pay its obligations, is the risk of City must take more pains in avoiding the provisions of section 144 of the Code of Civil
be paid if the Defendant continues possessing the
forfeiture of the City's valuable lots. The parcels of foreclosure. Procedure.
Metropolitan Theater Building as it has done for the
past 26 years after the last war." land on which the Metropolitan Theater Building was
constructed are the City's property, and that the

Page 131 of 132


In People's Bank vs. San Jose 21 this Court also held the income, for if it were not so, why did the trial The Company, to support the decision of the Court appeal, despite the Company's offer to fire a
that the filing of a bond by the prevailing party is a court say that "There are no prospects that the of Appeals, likewise contends that the refusal of the supersedeas bond to stay execution, are compelling
good and special reason for ordering execution indebtedness to El Hogar Filipino can ever be paid if trial court to accept the supersedeas bond to stop enough to warrant immediate execution. 27
pending appeal.22 the defendant continue s possessing the execution is sufficient to taint the order of execution
Metropolitan Theater Building as it has done for the with arbitrariness and constitutes grave abuse of If the same cogent reasons are considered in the
The Court of Appeals also expressed the fear that past 26 years after the last war"? The Court of discretion. light of the fact that the Metropolitan Theater
should the trial court's judgment be reversed on Appeals hesitated to say whether to prevent this building is no longer devoted to the primary purpose
appeal the damages that may arise from its wastage was a good reason for execution pending We do not think so. It is well settled that even upon for which it was intended, that is, to theatrical
execution pending appeal may not be fully appeal. the filing of the supersedeas bond, the losing party performances, they would outweight the security
compensated, without however stating the nature of is not entitled as a matter of right to a suspension of offered by the supersedeas bond which was
the said damages. Will said damages not be the fair We do think that under the facts, circumstances and the execution Section 3 of Rule 39 of the Rules of rejected by the trial court.
and reasonable value of the use and occupation of equities in the instant case, to prevent such wastage Court merely empowers the Court to order such
the property or the amount of rentals received by the of income so that considerably more of the income suspension in the exercise of its sound discretion. 23 We hold that the Court of Appeals, in substituting its
Company from the building? Is the P30,000 bond can be channelled to the payment of the The acceptance and approval of i supersedeas bond judgment for the statutory discretion soundly and
not sufficient for said rentals? If it is insufficient, indebtedness is a compelling reason to justify to stay execution lies within the discretion of the judiciously exercised by the trial court in issuing the
should the Court of Appeals not have ordered the immediate execution. court. 24 Hence, the trial court may disregard the questioned Social Order of Execution, acted with
amount to be increased? supersedeas bond and order immediate execution grave abuse of discretion.
Pursuant to the contract between the City and the provided there are special and compelling reasons
From what has been said, it is thus clear that the Company, the latter, in the words of the Court of ACCORDINGLY, the decision of the Court of
justifying execution, which reasons obtain in this
Court of Appeals erred in not considering the City's Appeals, is obliged to pay annually the necessary Appeals dated June 20, 1972 in G.R. SP-00707-R is
case. 25
posting a bond as a good and special reason to amount to meet the obligations contracted for the set aside, and the order of the trial court of
justify execution pending appeal. construction of the building until they are fully paid." Another reason given to support the decision December 29, 1971 directing the implementation of
It appears that the Company's income from the complained of is that execution pending appeal its execution order of September 30, 1971, is
3. The third ground given by the trial court in building is the only source of what it pays to the El cannot be justified because the supposed right of maintained, with costs against the Company.
the special order of execution is that the expenses Hogar Filipino, for in its memorandum, the Company the City to immediate repossession of the property
of administering the building would be very much says that it is the duty of the petitioner to repair the to prevent further loss caused by dispossession is
less if the City of Manila were in possession of the building so that it could "generate enough income to the core of the controversy and the merit of such
building. The reason is that the City will not have to cover fully the amortizations due to El Hogar Filipino claim is under appeal. Anent this matter suffice it to
pay directors' fees, officers' salaries, salaries and as they fell due." Ordinary diligence and prudence say that in determining whether execution should be
wages of employees, and legal and audit fees, since dictate that whatever income is derived from the stayed or not, the merits of a case, which should not
the City of Manila has already the necessary theater should be primarily and principally devoted be determined in advance of the appeal, are of no
facilities, personnel and employees to maintain and to the payment of the indebtedness. The wastage of moment Thus this Court said in Mapua vs. David 26
administer the building. This ground was rejected, the income will ultimately result in non- payment of that:
the Court of Appeals saying that "we cannot bring the indebtedness, and this will be to the prejudice
ourselves to believe that it is justifiable reason for and damage of the City which must pay the The reason by petitioner to maintain that the stay
the immediate execution of the judgment of a obligation or the outstanding balance thereof, if it granted by the respondent court is a grave abuse of
respondent court Moreover it is speculative, without does not want to lose its lots which were discretion is the merits of their own case. They
any proof whatsoever." mortgaged. If the present possessor cannot channel allege that defendant has absolutely no right to
such income to the payment of the indebtedness, possession and has, therefore, no defense
It will be noted that the Court of Appeals did not whatsoever. But the merits of the case should not
should not the City which ultimately has to pay the
doubt the fact that more than one-half of the be determined at this state of the proceedings in
indebtedness if the Company fails to pay it not be
average yearly income of the building is spent for advance of the appeal taken by both parties from
given an opportunity to do so? Would it be equitable
directors and employees salaries, fees and services. the judgment rendered by respondent court in the
to allow the present possessor to waste the income,
Out of the yearly income of P104,342 only principal case.
and let the City ultimately suffer tremendous
P49,045.92 was paid to El Hogar Filipino. In the
damages on account of such waste?
appreciation of the trial judge, although he did not In conclusion, all the reasons given by the trial court
explicitly say so, such expenses were a wastage of in ordering the execution of its. order pending

Page 132 of 132

You might also like