REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

SUPREME COURT
OFFICE OF THE BAR CONFIDANT

FEDERICO CALLEJAS,
Complainant,

- versus - Administrative Case No. _______________

For: Disbarment
Atty. EMELLIE GEMANIL-ESPINA,
Respondent.
X------------------------x

COMPLAINT
Your Honors:

By virtue of this Complaint, I would like to formally file an administrative case for
Disbarment against Emillie Gemanil-Espina (Roll No. 48117), with office at Unit 6,
Hectan Commercial Center, Barangay Halang, Calamba City.

The following is a brief narrative of the facts upon which I am basing my

complaint:

1. I am one of the respondents in a labor case entitled “John Castro, et. al.,
versus Cely Rosa Express, et. al.,” docketed as NLRC Case No. RAB
IV-27276-08-C, NLRC Case No. RAB IV-O8-27311-08-C, and NLRC Case
No. RAB IV-10-27595-08-C.

2. In a Decision dated December 29, 2009 Labor Arbiter Danna M. Castillon

ruled that myself and my son, Frederick Callejas are guilty of Illegal
Dismissal.

3. Believing in good faith that the Decision is wrong, I looked for a lawyer to file
an appeal on my behalf as well as the other respondents in the
above-mentioned cases.

4. May I just mention that during the pendency of my case and even before my
case was decided by the Labor Arbiter, I was already receiving several calls
from a certain “Anthony” who claims that he knows my case and that I should
get a good lawyer if I want to have a positive outcome of my case.
Not knowing who this person is, I just ignored his claims.

5. Then sometime in early January 2010, I again received a call from this
“Anthony” who claimed that he knows of a lawyer who is well connected and
who can help me win my appeal. Not knowing this person, I asked him how
he came to know of my predicament. Anthony claimed that Atty. Espina is well
connected with the labor officials and she knows about my case.

6. Sometime again in January 2010, at Pancake House in Paseo, Sta. Rosa,

Laguna, me and my companion John Pallera met with Anthony and a lady
who introduced herself to me as Atty. Emillie Gemanil-Espina. She
represented herself to be an expert in labor cases as she had already
handled numerous cases, which she claimed she mostly won. I then told her
about my problem at the Labor Arbiter stage and dicussed with her the facts
of the case that was ignored in that proceedings. Atty. Espina told me not to
worry and assured to me that she fully knows how to handle my case and

1
 take care of everything that needs to be done in order to rectify the mistakes
and save my case. Atty. Espina even mentioned that she knows a lot of the
NLRC Commissioners and that she can make sure that my case would be
raffled to a commissioner whom she knows and thus ensure the success of
my appeal.

7. Eager to successfully appeal my case, I agreed to engage Atty. Espina's

services to file an appeal before the NLRC relying and trusting on her
representations and assurances that I would win my appeal after six (6)
months.

8. Immediately, Atty. Espina required me to give her Php50,000.00 which I did.

On several occasions, she further obtained from me various sums in the total
amount of Php30,000.00, more or less which she claimed will be for her fees
and "under the table fees” needed to ensure that my case would be raffled to
a Commissioner she knows and thus assure my case will succeed. When I
expressed my reservations about the “proper fees” for the NLRC
Commissioners Atty. Espina was referring to, she merely said this is the way
things are done and if I don’t pay, I will surely lose my appeal.

9. Further, Atty. Espina required me to prepare the amount of Php120,000.00 as

premium payment for a bond and also to open a time deposit for the amount
of the judgment with the Bank of the Philippine Islands. I asked her why I
have to prepare the premium payment and at the same time make a time
deposit. I asked her if it is possible just for me to make a cash bond so that I
will not incur additional expenses. Atty. Espina replied that I should just trust
her and that this is the way things are done in the NLRC. I insisted upon her
that I am worried because of the additional expenses that I would be
incurring.

10. Atty. Espina insisted and told me to deposit the amount in BPI Tagaytay
branch. Atty. Espina then told me that she has arranged everything and just
talk to the Manager. Atty. Espina also instructed me to just execute an affidavit
then I could be able to withdraw the time deposit amount in BPI and hence, I
could get my money back. I have a lot of questions to Atty. Espina but Atty.
Espina insisted that this should be done or otherwise, my appeal would not be
successful and I would lose more money. Thus, I gave her the premium
payment and opened a time deposit with BPI per her instructions. Atty. Espina
then presented to me several documents including the bond agreement
where she just instructed me to sign and she did not give me any
explanations. When I was asking for an explanation regarding these
documents, she again just told me that this is the way things are done in the
NLRC and if I do not follow her, I would lose my case. Again, trusting her
because she is my lawyer, I followed all her instructions, tips and advice.
Atty. Espina firmly assured me during these initial meetings that she will
handle my case and that my appeal will be successful.

11. However, after giving to Atty. Espina the monies she requested, I did not hear
from her anymore. I made several calls to her to follow-up my case but she
did not respond. She did not even furnish me with a copy of the Appeal that
she was supposed to file for me and the copy of the bond agreement where I
had paid a large amount of premium.

12. Subsequently, I received a copy of the Resolution of the NLRC dated

23 August 2010 dismissing my appeal. I was shocked and greatly disturbed
because all along, Atty. Espina made me believe that she will handle
competently my case and/or use the money I gave her to ensure success of
my appeal. A copy of the Decision of the NLRC is hereto attached as Annex
“A”.

2
 13. I tried repeatedly to call or see Atty. Espina but she was always unavailable.
She also never answered my text messages. I had to wait several times near
her office to catch her but to no avail. Until finally, I was able to learn her
home address from “Anthony”, and I was able to chance upon her and
confront her about the dismissal of my case. Initially, Atty. Espina's only
advice to me was just to transfer all my properties so that it would not be
seized by the sheriff. Thereafter, Atty. Espina simply told me: “let's see what I
can still do in the NLRC”.

14. May I also point-out that during one of the hearings before the Office of Labor
Arbiter Castillon, for the execution of the labor decision, I noticed that
Atty. Espina seemed insenstive and was inappropriately jesting with the
adverse party. I found these actions to be very inconsiderate because that
proceeding involved the properties of my family.

15. I again pleaded with Atty. Espina to help me seek a reversal of the dismissal
of my appeal. Finally she relented and she asked me to give her
Php24,000.00 to appeal my case to the Court of Appeals. After I gave her the
money she asked, again, she did not update me on the case.

16. I later on discovered that the case she filed before the Court of Appeals was
dismissed on a technicality because the jurat of the Verification in the Petition
she filed as well as the Affidavit of Service did not contain proof of the affiant’s
identity. Also, pertinent records were not appended to the Petition. A copy of
the dismissal by the Court of Appeals is hereto attached as Annex “B”.

17. I later came to know that the identification of the affiant in notarizing
documents is a basic requirement which every lawyer and notary should
know. Also, that in the preparation of petitions such as the one Atty. Espina
filed for me before the Court of Appeals (Certiorari under Rule 65) all relevant
documents must be attached to the petition and every lawyer ought to know
this.

18. Again, I tried to contact Atty. Espina to confront her about the dismissal of my
case before the Court of Appeals but she did not explain what happened. I
finally decided to engage the services of another lawyer to represent me
before the Court of Appeals.

19. The foregoing actions of Atty. Espina is very unprofessional. As her client, I
am entitled to be updated about my case which she never did. I noticed that
she never made a complete study of my case because I did not see her exert
any efforts to gather any evidence, which could have been used. Worse, she
committed glaring errors in the handling and preparation of my case which
should not have happened had she been knowledgeable about the law.

20. Also, Atty. Espina is guilty of unprofessional conduct when she provided me
illicit advice and tips and when she assured me that she can win the case for
me before the NLRC because of her “connections” and “under the table fees”
she will pay to the commissioners of the NLRC for which she obtained money
from me.

Wherefore, in consideration of the foregoing, Atty. Espina should not be allowed

to practice law because of her unprofessional ways. If the Honorable Court would allow,
I would also like to claim damages. Likewise, may I also pray for such other reliefs or
remedies just and equitable under the premises.

FEDERICO CALLEJAS
Complainant

3
 VERIFICATION

I, FEDERICO CALLEJAS, of legal age, Filipino citizen and residing at Indang,

Cavite, after having been duly sworn to in accordance with law, hereby depose and say
that:

1. I am the Complainant in the above-entitled case;

2. I have caused the preparation and filing of the foregoing pleading; and

3. I have read all the allegations contained therein and that they are true and
correct of my own personal knowledge and based on the records on hand.

AFFIANT FURTHER SAYETH NAUGHT.

FEDERICO CALLEJAS
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME this _____ day of June 2012,

affiant exhibiting to me his Driver's License No. ________________ issued on
______________ at _______________.

Doc No. _____;

Page No. _____; Notary Public
Book No. _____;
Series of 2012.