A.C. No.

7136
Guevarra v. Atty. Eala – Violation of Code of Professional Responsibility

FACTS:

The first encounter of Joselino Guevarra (complainant) and Atty. Emmanuel Eala
(Respondent) was when they were introduced by Irene Moje, who was then the fiancée
of the complainant. When the complainant and Irene got married, the former noticed
that his wife had been receiving texts saying “I miss you,” “I love you,” and “See you at
Megamall,” and she always came home late or early in the morning the next day.

The complainant then found out that his wife and Atty. Eala were having an affair
through a folded social card bearing the words “I Love You” in the complainant’s master
bedroom. This affair was also confirmed since Irene and Atty. Eala were seen attending
a couple of social events and were, under Guevarra’s complaint, flaunting their
adulterous relationship.

Respondent Atty. Eala denied these allegations, claiming that their relationship was low
profile and known only to the immediate members of their respective families, and that
he, as far as the general public was concerned, was still legally married to Mary Anne
Tantoco and had 3 children. He also contended that with respect to his purely personal
and low-profile special relationship with Irene, it was neither under scandalous
circumstances nor tantamount to grossly immoral conduct as would be grounds for
disbarment pursuant to Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court.

ISSUE: Whether or not respondent violated the Code of Professional Responsibility?

RULING: YES, the respondent violated the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 of the CPR proscribes a lawyer from engaging in “unlawful,
dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct,” and Rule 7.03 of Canon 7 of the same Code
proscribes a lawyer from engaging in any “conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness
to practice law.”

The case at bar involves a relationship between a married lawyer and a married woman
who is not his wife. It is immaterial whether the affair was carried out discreetly. The fact
remains that the respondent has been engaging in an illicit affair with a married woman,
which is a grossly immoral conduct and indicative of an extremely low regard for the
fundamental ethics of his profession. This detestable behavior renders him regrettably
unfit and undeserving of the treasured honor and privileges which his license confers
upon him.

Thus, the court granted the petition and disbarred Atty. Jose Emmanuel M. Eala for
grossly immoral conduct, violation of his oath of office, and violation of Canon 1, Rule
1.01, and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.