MARY JANE VELASCO & ATTYS.

CHARLIE DOROIN & HECTOR CENTENO

560 SCRA 1, A.C. No. 5033, July 28, 2008

FACTS:

Mary Jane was appointed by the RTC as administratrix in the settlement of estate of
her late father, Dr. Eduardo Doroin. Atty. Charlie Doroin fooled Mary Jane by deceitful
means into making her sign an Extra-Judicial Settlement and Deed of Partition allotting
P1.2M as her share; giving Josephine, her father’s
paramour, P7.2M; allotting her alleged 3 illegitimate siblings of
P1.2M alleging such sharing is in accordance with law. No
share was assigned to her mother who was the legal
wife of Dr. Eduardo Doroin.

When Mary Jane visited the lot owned by her father

situated at Kingspoint Subdivision sometime in June 1996,
there was no house constructed thereon, but when she
visited it again in January 1999, there was already a
four-door townhouse constructed. She was informed by the
caretaker at the site that the owner is one Evangeline.
She also learned later that the said property was one of
the properties submitted to the intestate court and was sold by
Atty. Doroin to Evangeline by forging the signature of her
father. Atty. Centeno, being a Notary Public, knowing well
that Dr. Eduardo Doroin was already dead as of 21
January 1996, made it appear in the said Deed of
Absolute Sale that Dr. Doroin appeared before him on 17
January 1997.

ISSUE: Whether the acts of Attys. Doroin & Centeno for forgery
& falsification constitute violation of lawyer’s oath and justifies
imposition of penalty of suspension and disbarment.

HELD: YES. Attys. Charlie Doroin & Hector Centeno violated

Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
which states that:
“A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful.”

In the case at bar, complainant claims that respondent

lawyers forged the deed of sale and forced her to
sign the deed of extra-judicial settlement by explaining to her
that it was “in accordance with law.”

The complained actuations of the respondent lawyers

constitute a blatant violation of the lawyer’s oath to
uphold the law and the basic tenets of the Code of
Professional Responsibility that no lawyer shall engage in
dishonest conduct.

Lawyers must conduct themselves beyond reproach at all

times, whether they are dealing with their clients or the
public at large and a violation of the high moral standards
of the legal profession justifies the imposition of the
appropriate penalty, including suspension and disbarment.