A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v.

Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

Tools
JURISPRUDENCE
! Cross Reference Cited In

"
(/jurisprudences/search?
Decision
493 PHIL 172-185

#
citation_finder=&full_text=Omar+Ali+v.+Atty.+Mosib+Bubong&issue_no=&ponente=&syllabus=&title=&utf8=%E2%9

$
EN BANC

% [A.C. No. 4018. March 8, 2005.]

& OMAR P. ALI, complainant, vs. ATTY.

MOSIB A. BUBONG, respondent.

'
DECISION
Search Matches

( )

PER CURIAM : p

This is a verified petition for disbarment 1 filed

against Atty. Mosib Ali Bubong for having been found
guilty of grave misconduct while holding the position
of Register of Deeds of Marawi City.
It appears that this disbarment proceeding is an
off-shoot of the administrative case earlier filed by
complainant against respondent. In said case, which
was initially investigated by the Land Registration
Authority (LRA), complainant charged respondent with
illegal exaction; indiscriminate issuance of Transfer

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 1 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

Certificate of Title (TCT) No. T-2821 in the names of

Lawan Bauduli Datu, Mona Abdullah, 2 Ambobae
Bauduli Datu, Matabae Bauduli Datu, Mooamadali
Bauduli Datu, and Amenola Bauduli Datu; and
manipulating the criminal complaint filed against Hadji
Serad Bauduli Datu and others for violation of the
Anti-Squatting Law (/laws/17933). It appears from the
records that the Baudali Datus are relatives of
respondent. 3
The initial inquiry by the LRA was resolved in
favor of respondent. The investigating officer, Enrique
Basa, absolved respondent of all the charges brought
against him, thus: HaEcAC

It is crystal clear from the foregoing

that complainant not only failed to prove
his case but that he has no case at all
against respondent Mosib Ali Bubong.
Wherefore, premises considered, it is
respectfully recommended that the
complaint against respondent be
dismissed for lack of merit and evidence. 4
The case was then forwarded to the
Department of Justice for review and in a report dated
08 September 1992, then Secretary of Justice
Franklin Drilon exonerated respondent of the charges
of illegal exaction and infidelity in the custody of
documents. He, however, found respondent guilty of
grave misconduct for his imprudent issuance of TCT
No. T-2821 and manipulating the criminal case for
violation of the Anti-Squatting Law (/laws/17933)
instituted against Hadji Serad Bauduli Datu and the
latter's co-accused. As a result of this finding,
Secretary Drilon recommended respondent's
dismissal from service.
On 26 February 1993, former President Fidel V.
Ramos issued Administrative Order No. 41
(/laws/26243) adopting in toto the conclusion reached
by Secretary Drilon and ordering respondent's

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 2 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

dismissal from government service. Respondent

subsequently questioned said administrative order
before this Court through a petition for certiorari,
mandamus, and prohibition 5 claiming that the Office
of the President did not have the authority and
jurisdiction to remove him from office. He also insisted
that respondents 6 in that petition violated the laws on
security of tenure and that respondent Reynaldo V.
Maulit, then the administrator of the LRA committed a
breach of Civil Service Rules when he abdicated his
authority to resolve the administrative complaint
against him (herein respondent).
In a Resolution dated 15 September 1994, we
dismissed the petition "for failure on the part of
petitioner to sufficiently show that public respondent
committed grave abuse of discretion in issuing the
questioned order." 7 Respondent thereafter filed a
motion for reconsideration which was denied with
finality in our Resolution of 15 November 1994. AcCTaD

On the basis of the outcome of the

administrative case, complainant is now before us,
seeking the disbarment of respondent. Complainant
claims that it has become obvious that respondent
had "proven himself unfit to be further entrusted with
the duties of an attorney" 8 and that he poses a
"serious threat to the integrity of the legal profession."
9

In his Comment, respondent maintains that

there was nothing irregular with his issuance of TCT
No. T-2821 in the name of the Bauduli Datus.
According to him, both law 10 and jurisprudence
support his stance that it was his ministerial duty, as
the Register of Deeds of Marawi City, to act on
applications for land registration on the basis only of
the documents presented by the applicants. In the
case of the Bauduli Datus, nothing in the documents

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 3 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

they presented to his office warranted suspicion,

hence, he was duty-bound to issue TCT No. T-2821 in
their favor.
Respondent also insists that he had nothing to
do with the dismissal of criminal complaint for violation
of the Anti-Squatting Law (/laws/17933) allegedly
committed by Hadji Serad Abdullah and the latter's co-
defendants. Respondent explains that his participation
in said case was a result of the two subpoenas duces
tecum issued by the investigating prosecutor who
required him to produce the various land titles
involved in said dispute. He further claims that the
dismissal of said criminal case by the Secretary of
Justice was based solely on the evidence presented
by the parties. Complainant's allegation, therefore,
that he influenced the outcome of the case is totally
unjustified.

Through a resolution dated 26 June 1995, 11

this Court referred this matter to the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report, and
recommendation. Acting on this resolution, the IBP
commenced the investigation of this disbarment suit.
On 23 February 1996, Commissioner Victor C.
Fernandez issued the following order relative to the
transfer of venue of this case. The pertinent portion of
this order provides: HScAEC

ORDER
When this case was called for
hearing, both complainant and respondent
appeared.
The undersigned Commissioner
asked them if they are willing to have the
reception of evidence vis-à-vis this case
be done in Marawi City, Lanao del Sur
before the president of the local IBP
Chapter. Both parties agreed. Accordingly,

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 4 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

transmit the records of this case to the

Director for Bar Discipline for appropriate
action. 12
On 30 March 1996, the IBP Board of Governors
passed a resolution approving Commissioner
Fernandez's recommendation for the transfer of venue
of this administrative case and directed the Western
Mindanao Region governor to designate the local IBP
chapter concerned to conduct the investigation,
report, and recommendation. 13 The IBP Resolution
states:
Resolution No. XII-96-153
Adm. Case No. 4018
Omar P. Ali vs. Atty. Mosib A. Bubong
RESOLVED TO APPROVE the
recommendation of Commissioner Victor
C. Fernandez for the Transfer of Venue of
the above-entitled case and direct the
Western Mindanao Region Governor
George C. Jabido to designate the local
IBP Chapter concerned to conduct the
investigation, report and recommendation.
Pursuant to this resolution, Atty. Benjamin B.
Bernardino, Director for Bar Discipline, wrote a letter
dated 23 October 1996 addressed to Governor
George C. Jabido, President of IBP Cotabato Chapter
requesting the latter to receive the evidence in this
case and to submit his recommendation and
recommendation as directed by the IBP Board of
Governors. 14
In an undated Report and Recommendation,
the IBP Cotabato Chapter 15 informed the IBP
Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD) that the
investigating panel 16 had sent notices to both
complainant and respondent for a series of hearings
but respondent consistently ignored said notices. The

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 5 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

IBP Cotabato Chapter concluded its report by

recommending that respondent be suspended from
the practice of law for five years. DTSIEc

On 01 July 1998, respondent filed a motion

dated 30 June 1998 praying for the transmittal of the
records of this case to the Marawi City-Lanao del Sur
Chapter of the IBP pursuant to Resolution No. XII-96-
153 as well as Commissioner Fernandez's Order
dated 23 February 1996.
Commissioner Fernandez thereafter ordered
the investigating panel of IBP Cotabato Chapter to
comment on respondent's motion. 17 Complying with
this directive, the panel expressed no opposition to
respondent's motion for the transmittal of the records
of this case to IBP Marawi City. 18 On 25 September
1998, Commissioner Fernandez ordered the referral
of this case to IBP Marawi City for the reception of
respondent's evidence. 19 This order of referral,
however, was set aside by the IBP Board of
Governors in its Resolution No. XIII-98-268 issued on
4 December 1998. Said resolution provides:
RESOLVED to DENY the ORDER
of Commissioner Victor C. Fernandez for
the transmittal of the case records of the
above-entitled case to Marawi City, rather
he is directed to re-evaluate the
recommendation submitted by Cotabato
Chapter and report the same to the Board
of Governors. 20
Prior to the issuance of Resolution No. XIII-98-
268, respondent filed on 08 October 1998 a motion
praying that the recommendation of the IBP Cotabato
Chapter be stricken from the records. 21 Respondent
insists that the investigating panel constituted by said
IBP chapter did not have the authority to conduct the
investigation of this case since IBP Resolution XII-96-
153 and Commissioner Fernandez's Order of 23
February 1996 clearly vested IBP Marawi City with the
https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 6 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

power to investigate this case. Moreover, he claims

that he was never notified of any hearing by the
investigating panel of IBP Cotabato Chapter thereby
depriving him of his right to due process.
Complainant opposed 22 this motion arguing
that respondent is guilty of laches. According to
complainant, the report and recommendation
submitted by IBP Cotabato Chapter expressly states
that respondent was duly notified of the hearings
conducted by the investigating panel yet despite
these, respondent did nothing to defend himself. He
also claims that respondent did not even bother to
submit his position paper when he was directed to do
so. Further, as respondent is a member of IBP Marawi
City Chapter, complainant maintains that the presence
of bias in favor of respondent is possible. Finally,
complainant contends that to refer the matter to IBP
Marawi City would only entail a duplication of the
process which had already been completed by IBP
Cotabato Chapter. iatdcjur

In an Order dated 15 October 1999, 23

Commissioner Fernandez directed IBP Cotabato
Chapter to submit proofs that notices for the hearings
conducted by the investigating panel as well as for the
submission of the position paper were duly received
by respondent. On 21 February 2000, Atty. Jabido, a
member of the IBP Cotabato Chapter investigating
panel, furnished Commissioner Fernandez with a
copy of the panel's order dated 4 August 1997. 24
Attached to said order was Registry Receipt No. 3663
issued by the local post office. On the lower portion of
the registry receipt was a handwritten notation reading
"Atty. Mosib A. Bubong." SHIcDT

On 20 April 2001, Commissioner Fernandez

ordered Atty. Pedro S. Castillo, Chairman of the
Commission on Bar Discipline for Mindanao, to
reevaluate the report and recommendation submitted

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 7 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

by IBP Cotabato Chapter. This directive had the

approval of the IBP Board of Governors through its
Resolution No. XIV-2001-271 issued on 30 June
2001, to wit:
RESOLVED to APPROVE the
recommendation of Director Victor C.
Fernandez for the Transfer of Venue of the
above-entitled case and direct the CBD
Mindanao to conduct an investigation, re-
evaluation, report and recommendation
within sixty (60) days from receipt of
notice. 25
Meanwhile, Bainar A. Ali, informed the CBD
Mindanao of the death of her father, Omar P. Ali,
complainant in this case. According to her, her father
passed away on 12 June 2002 and that in interest of
peace and Islamic brotherhood, she was requesting
the withdrawal of this case. 26
Subsequently, respondent filed another motion,
this time, asking the IBP CBD to direct the chairman of
the Commission on Bar Discipline for Mindanao to
designate and authorize the IBP Marawi City-Lanao
del Sur Chapter to conduct an investigation of this
case. 27 This motion was effectively denied by Atty.
Pedro S. Castillo in an Order dated 19 July 2002. 28
According to Atty. Castillo —
After going over the voluminous
records of the case, with special attention
made on the report of the IBP Cotabato
City Chapter, the Complaint and the
Counter-Affidavit of respondent, the
undersigned sees no need for any further
investigation, to be able to make a re-
evaluation and recommendation on the
Report of the IBP Chapter of Cotabato
City.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 8 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

WHEREFORE, the Motion to

authorize the IBP-Chapter of Marawi City,
Zamboanga del Norte is hereby denied.
The undersigned will submit his Report to
the Commission on Bar Discipline, IBP
National Office within ten (10) days from
date hereof.
In his Report and Recommendation, Atty.
Castillo adopted in toto the findings and conclusion of
IBP Cotabato Chapter ratiocinating as follows:
The Complaint for Disbarment is
primarily based on the Decision by the
Office of the President in Administrative
Case No. 41 dated February 26, 1993,
wherein herein respondent was found
guilty of Grave Misconduct in:

a) The imprudent
issuance of T.C.T. No.
T-2821; and,

b) Manipulating the
criminal complaint for
violation of the anti-
squatting law.EaHIDC

And penalized with dismissal from

the service, as Register of Deeds of
Marawi City. In the Comment filed by
respondent in the instant Administrative
Case, his defense is good faith in the
issuance of T.C.T. No. T-2821 and a denial
of the charge of manipulating the criminal
complaint for violation of the anti-squatting
law, which by the way, was filed against
respondent's relatives. Going over the
Decision of the Office of the President in
Administrative Case No. 41, the
undersigned finds substantial evidence
were taken into account and fully

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 9 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

explained, before the Decision therein was

rendered. In other words, the finding of
Grave Misconduct on the part of
respondent by the Office of the President
was fully supported by evidence and as
such carries a very strong weight in
considering the professional misconduct
of respondent in the present case.
In the light of the foregoing, the
undersigned sees no reason for amending
or disturbing the Report and
Recommendation of the IBP Chapter of
South Cotabato. 29
In a resolution passed on 19 October 2002, the
IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved, with
modification, the afore-quoted Report and
Recommendation of Atty. Castillo. The modification
pertained solely to the period of suspension from the
practice of law which should be imposed on
respondent — whereas Atty. Castillo concurred in the
earlier recommendation of IBP Cotabato Chapter for a
five-year suspension, the IBP Board of Governors
found a two-year suspension to be proper.
On 17 January 2003, respondent filed a Motion
for Reconsideration with the IBP which the latter
denied as by that time, the matter had already been
endorsed to this Court. 30
The issue thus posed for this Court's resolution
is whether respondent may be disbarred for grave
misconduct committed while he was in the employ of
the government. We resolve this question in the
affirmative.
The Code of Professional Responsibility
(/laws/27883) does not cease to apply to a lawyer
simply because he has joined the government service.
In fact, by the express provision of Canon 6 thereof,
the rules governing the conduct of lawyers "shall apply
to lawyers in government service in the discharge of

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 10 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

their official tasks." Thus, where a lawyer's misconduct

as a government official is of such nature as to affect
his qualification as a lawyer or to show moral
delinquency, then he may be disciplined as a member
of the bar on such grounds. 31 Although the general
rule is that a lawyer who holds a government office
may not be disciplined as a member of the bar for
infractions he committed as a government official, he
may, however, be disciplined as a lawyer if his
misconduct constitutes a violation of his oath as a
member of the legal profession. 32
Indeed, in the case of Collantes v. Atty. Vicente
C. Renomeron (/jurisprudences/18172), 33 we ordered
the disbarment of respondent on the ground of his
dismissal from government service because of grave
misconduct. Quoting the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz
Castro, we declared —
[A] person takes an oath when he
is admitted to the bar which is designed to
impress upon him his responsibilities. He
thereby becomes an "officer of the court"
on whose shoulders rests the grave
responsibility of assisting the courts in the
proper, fair, speedy and efficient
administration of justice. As an officer of
the court he is subject to a rigid discipline
that demands that in his every exertion the
only criterion be that truth and justice
triumph. This discipline is what has given
the law profession its nobility, its prestige,
its exalted place. From a lawyer, to
paraphrase Justice Felix Frankfurter, are
expected those qualities of truth-speaking,
a high sense of honor, full candor,
intellectual honesty, and the strictest
observance of fiduciary responsibility —
all of which, throughout the centuries,
have been compendiously described as
moral character. 34

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 11 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

Similarly, in Atty. Julito D. Vitriolo, et al. v. Atty.

Felina Dasig (/jurisprudences/7840), 35 this Court
found sufficient basis to disbar respondent therein for
gross misconduct perpetrated while she was the
Officer-in-Charge of Legal Services of the
Commission on Higher Education. As we had
explained in that case —
. . . [A] lawyer in public office is
expected not only to refrain from any act
or omission which might tend to lessen the
trust and confidence of the citizenry in
government, she must also uphold the
dignity of the legal profession at all times
and observe a high standard of honesty
and fair dealing. Otherwise said, a lawyer
in government service is a keeper of the
public faith and is burdened with high
degree of social responsibility, perhaps
higher than her brethren in private
practice. 36 (Emphasis supplied) DAHCaI

In the case at bar, respondent's grave

misconduct, as established by the Office of the
President and subsequently affirmed by this Court,
deals with his qualification as a lawyer. By taking
advantage of his office as the Register of Deeds of
Marawi City and employing his knowledge of the rules
governing land registration for the benefit of his
relatives, respondent had clearly demonstrated his
unfitness not only to perform the functions of a civil
servant but also to retain his membership in the bar.
Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
(/laws/27883) is explicit on this matter. It reads:
Rule 6.02 — A lawyer in the
government service shall not use his
public position to promote or advance his
private interests, nor allow the latter to
interfere with his public duties.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 12 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

Respondent's conduct manifestly undermined the

people's confidence in the public office he used to
occupy and cast doubt on the integrity of the legal
profession. The ill-conceived use of his knowledge
of the intricacies of the law calls for nothing less
than the withdrawal of his privilege to practice law.
As for the letter sent by Bainar Ali, the
deceased complainant's daughter, requesting for the
withdrawal of this case, we cannot possibly favorably
act on the same as proceedings of this nature cannot
be "interrupted or terminated by reason of desistance,
settlement, compromise, restitution, withdrawal of the
charges or failure of the complainant to prosecute the
same." 37 As we have previously explained in the case
of Irene Rayos-Ombac v. Atty. Orlando A. Rayos
(/jurisprudences/12135): 38
. . . A case of suspension or
disbarment may proceed regardless of
interest or lack of interest of the
complainant. What matters is whether, on
the basis of the facts borne out by the
record, the charge of deceit and grossly
immoral conduct has been duly proven.
This rule is premised on the nature of
disciplinary proceedings. A proceeding for
suspension or disbarment is not in any
sense a civil action where the complainant
is a plaintiff and the respondent lawyer is
a defendant. Disciplinary proceedings
involve no private interest and afford no
redress for private grievance. They are
undertaken and prosecuted solely for the
public welfare. They are undertaken for
the purpose of preserving courts of justice
from the official ministration of persons
unfit to practice in them. The attorney is
called to answer to the court for his
conduct as an officer of the court. The
complainant or the person who called the

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 13 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

attention of the court to the attorney's

alleged misconduct is in no sense a party,
and has generally no interest in the
outcome except as all good citizens may
have in the proper administrative of
justice. 39

WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Mosib A.

Bubong is hereby DISBARRED and his name is
ORDERED STRICKEN from the Roll of Attorneys. Let
a copy of this Decision be entered in the respondent's
record as a member of the Bar, and notice of the
same be served on the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, and on the Office of the Court
Administrator for circulation to all courts in the country.
TcSAaH

SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr., C.J., Puno, Panganiban,
Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-Gutierrez,
Austria-Martinez, Corona, Callejo, Sr., Azcuna, Tinga,
Chico-Nazario and Garcia, JJ., concur.
Carpio, J., took no part.
Carpio Morales, J., is on leave.

Footnotes

1. Filed by Police Supt. Omar P. Ali; Rollo, Vol. I,

pp. 4-5.
2. Also known as Mona Abdullah Bauduli Datu.
3. Respondent's Answer-Affidavit, Annex "4" of
Respondent's Comment dated 16 February
1995; Rollo, Vol. I, p. 64.
4. Annex "14" of Respondent's Comment dated
16 February 1995; Rollo, Vol. I, p. 117.
5. G.R. No. 112839.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 14 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

6. Named as respondents in the petition were

former President Fidel V. Ramos; Hon. Antonio
T. Carpio and Hon. Leonardo A. Quisumbing
(formerly of the Office of the President; now
members of this Court; Hon. Franklin Drilon (then
the Secretary of Justice); and Hon Reynaldo V.
Maulit (then the Administrator of the Land
Registration Authority); and Major Omar P. Ali
(complainant in the present disbarment case).
7. Supra, note 2; Rollo, p. 173.
8. Rollo, p. 5.
9. Ibid.
10. Presidential Decree No. 1529 (/laws/18340),
Sections 50, 51, and 58.
11. Rollo, Vol. I, p. 156.
12. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 40.
13. Resolution No. XII-96-153; Rollo, Vol. II, p.
3.
14. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 13.
15. Sometimes referred to as Cotabato City
Chapter or South Cotabato Chapter.
16. Composed of Attys. Edgardo A. Camello,
Carlos Valdez, Jr. (Chairman), Mando Sinsuat,
Jr., Renato Eugenio, and George C. Jabido.
17. Order dated 14 August 1998; Rollo, Vol. III,
p. 49.
18. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 46.
19. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 56.
20. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 78.
21. Rollo, Vol. III. pp. 57-58.
22. Rollo, Vol. III, pp. 60-66.
23. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 82.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 15 of 16
A.C. No. 4018 | Ali v. Bubong 5/16/20, 7:53 PM

24. Rollo, Vol. III, pp. 86-87.

25. Rollo, Vol. III, p. 193.
26. Rollo, Vol. V, p. 12.
27. Dated 27 July 2001; Rollo, Vol. III, pp. 185-
187.
28. Rollo, Vol. V, pp. 17-18.
29. Rollo, Vol. V, p. 127.
30. Resolution No. XV-2003-56.
31. Reyes v. Atty. Salvador M. Gaa
(/jurisprudences/14652), A.C. No. 1048, 14 July
1995, 246 SCRA 64; citing Gonzales-Austria v.
Abaya (/jurisprudences/20629), A.M. No. R-705-
RTJ, 23 August 1989, 176 SCRA 634.
32. Atty. Julito D. Vitriolo, et al. v. Atty. Felina
Dasig (/jurisprudences/7840), A.C. No. 4984, 1
April 2003, 400 SCRA 172.
33. A.C. No. 3056, 16 August 1991, 200 SCRA
584.
34. Id. at 589-590.
35. Supra, note 32.
36. Id. at 180.
37. Rule 139-B, §139-B, Revised Rules of Court
(/laws/514).
38. A.C. No. 2884, 28 January 1998, 285 SCRA
93.
39. Id. at 100-101.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/817?s_params=o6EHys8ZxxfAN2MjLgom Page 16 of 16