Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine

VILLARINA-SUAZO, 1. Far Eastern Shipping Co v Sometime in 1980, M/V PAVLODAR, 1. Whether or not the counsel violated the 1. Yes. As between the
MELINDA OTAGAN CA and PPA GR No 130068 owned and operated by the Far Eastern CPR. lawyer and the courts, a
Shipping Company, arrived at the Port of 2. Whether or not the canons under the CPR lawyer owes candor,
Oct 1, 1998
Manila. When the vessel reached the applies to lawyers in government service. fairness and good faith to
landmark, Gavino ordered the engine the court. He is an officer of
stopped and anchor dropped which was the court exercising a
relayed by Kavankov to the crew. privilege which is
However, the anchor did not take hold and indispensable in the
the bow of the vessel rammed into the administration of justice.
apron of the pier causing considerable Candidness, especially
damage to the pier and the vessel.The towards the courts, is
PPA, through the OSG, filed a complaint essential for the expeditious
for a sum of money against the FESC, administration of justice. A
Capt. Senen C. Gavino and the Manila lawyer is obliged to observe
Pilots Association, praying that the the rules of procedure and
defendants therein be held jointly and not to misuse them to
severally liable to pay for damages plus defeat the ends of justice. A
costs of suit., which the trial court and the lawyer should not only help
CA decided in the affirmative. Neither of attain these objectives but
the defendants was happy with the should likewise avoid any
decision and both of them unethical or improper
elevated their respective plaints to the SC practices that impede,
via separate petitions for review on obstruct or prevent their
certiorari. However, on matters of realization, charged as he is
compliance with procedural requirements, with the primary task of
the conduct of the respective counsel for assisting in the speedy and
FESC, PPA and OSG leaves much to be efficient administration of
desired, to the displeasure and justice. Sad to say, the
disappointment of the Court. The records members of said law firm
showed that the counsels of FESC filed sorely failed to observe their
several motion for extension of time to file duties as responsible
petition totaling to 210 days, and 180 days members of the Bar.
for the OSG before the comment was filed 2. Yes. the Court find a
to the court and copies where not lackadaisical attitude and
furnished to the parties involved; the complacency on the part of
certification against forum shopping is also the OSG in the handling of
defective. its cases and an almost
reflexive propensity to move
for countless extensions, as
if to test the patience of the
Court, before favoring it with
the timely submission
ofrequired pleadings.
The OSG is reminded that
just like other members of
the Bar, the canons under
the Code of Professional
Responsibility apply with
equal force on lawyers in
government service in the
discharge of their official
tasks. These ethical duties
are rendered even more
exacting as to them
because, as government
counsel, they have the
added duty to abide by the
policy of the State to
promote a high standard of
ethics in public service.

Wherefore, counsel for

FESC, the law firm of Del
Rosario and Del Rosario,
specifically its associate,
Atty. Herbert A. Tria, is
REPRIMANDED and
WARNED. The original
members of the legal team
of the OSG are
ADMONISHED and
WARNED
RA 6713 Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public Officials
 Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine
TERNORA, J PAUL 2. Gonzales Austria, et al. v I. Complainants Atty. Ligaya Gonzales- 1. WON Judge Abaya is guilty of all the 1st issue: In summation, A lawyer who holds a
CAALIM Abaya 176 SCRA 634 Austria (Atty. Austria), Leonila Fuertes accusations imputed against him. the court find Judge government office may not be
(Fuertes), and Edgardo Servando 2. WON Atty Austria is guilty of dishonesty Abaya guilty of grave and disciplined as a member of the
(Servando) have filed a case and misconduct. Assuming yes, is she serious misconduct Bar
againstJudge Emmanuel M. Abaya (Judge disbarred? affecting his moral for misconduct in the
Abaya) of RTC Br. 51 of Puerto Princesa characted which would have discharge of his duties as a
City (MABUHAY! Hometown ko!) on the warrented his dismissal government official. However,
following grounds: from the service had his if the misconduct
a. Estafa through falsification of public or resignation not been of a government official is of
official documents, by verifying official accepted. The court forfeits such a character as to affect
hours rendered by a certain Anabelle all of his retirement benefits his qualification as a lawyer or
Cardenas (Cardenas) who has never except earned leave credits. to show
reported for duty, and by receiving Annabelle Cardenas is moral delinquency, then he
salaries of said Cardenas through the dimissed from office with may be disciplined as a
forgery of the Cardena’s signature, thus prejudice to her member of the Bar upon such
deceiving the government and defrauding reappointment to the ground.
the gov’t of bug amount of money. Judiciary.
b. Gross dishonesty and corruption by The judge is the visible
soliciting, demanding, receiving bribed representation of the law
money in exchanged for favorable and of justice. From him,
resolutions and decisions from different the people draw their will
litigations in Br. 52, where Abaya has and awareness to obey the
been temporarily assigned. law. For him then to
c. Illegal exaction of portion of the salaries transgress the highest
of his subordinate Servando as part and ideals of justice and public
condition of his continued employment in service for personal gain is
Br. 51, where Abayais the presiding judge. indeed a demoralizing
example constituting a valid
II. Judge Abaya has denied all the cause for disenchantment
accusations against him. He says that and loss of confidence in
these accusations are in retaliation of Atty the judiciary as well as in
Austria against (1) the administrative case the civil service system.
that Judge Abaya has earlier filed against By these acts, Judge Abaya
one of his accusers, Atty. Austria, for has demonstrated his
dishonesty and grave misconduct in unfitness and unworthiness
having forged Judge Abaya’s signature in of the honor and requisites
a probation order in a criminal casei which attached to his office.
the latter presiding and (2) for the (b) second issue
disbarment of said Atty Austria based on (dishonesty and
the same alleged offense. misconduct/disbarment of
Atty Austria) - The
III. After Atty Austria files her comment, complaints for dishonesty
the court has consolidated the cases. The and grave misconduct and
court has granted the MR of complainants, for disbarment against Atty.
which adjoins Cardenas as defendant, Ligaya Gonzales-Austria,
along with Judge Abaya, in this said case. then Clerk of Court of
Branch 52, RTC Palawan,
IV. The case is referred to Court of stem from her act of having
Appeals Justice Oscar M. Herrera for allegedly forged the
investigation, report and recommendation. signature of Judge
Justice Herrera find Judge Abaya and Abaya in a probation order
Cerdenas guilty of the charges against in Criminal Case entitled
them and thereby recommends: "People vs. Leonardo Cruz"
a. FORFEITURE of retirement benefits of for attempted homicide. Atty
Judge Abaya except earned leave credits; Austria admits to having
b. REMOVAL of Annabelle Cardenas from signed said probations
office as Court Stenographer; orders but done with
c. ONE-YEAR SUSPENSION from office knowledge and consent of
as Attorney of Atty. Austria. Judge Abaya. Because of
workload, Judge Abaya is
not able to sign and
promulgate the said
order, which causes further
delay for the probational
release of Cruz. Cruz has
personally come to the
courthouse of Judge Abaya
to beg the latter to sign said
order, however, he has
again forgotten to sign it.
Atty Austria, acting as clerk
of court, is the one who
promulgates said order. She
justifies her action under the
theory of agency (Art 1881
of the Civil Code) in that
having been granted full
authority to promulgate the
probation order, she
necessarily had the
authority to sign the Judge's
name if the need arose. She
further maintains that as
Judge Abaya never
complained about the
alleged forgery, he is
deemed to have ratified it
and is now estopped from
questioning her authority.
Lastly, she compares the
probation order to a writ of
execution which is usually
done by the Clerk of Court.
The court affirms the
findings of Justice Herrera
that the duties of the clerk of
court in the absence of any
express direction of the
judge is well defined under
section 5, Rule 136 of the
Rules of Court. Signing
orders in the name of, and
simulating the signature of
the judge is not included
under said Rule. Wherefore,
the court ACCEPTS the
resignation of Atty. Austria
and DECLARES the
forfeiture of her salaries and
SUSPENDS her as a
member of the bar for one
(1) year.
 Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine
RODICA, RONALD 3. Collantes v Renomeron Disbarment against Atty. Renomeron, Whether or not the respondent register of The Court ruled that
DUMAS 200 SCRA 584 Register of Deeds of Tacloban City. Atty. deeds, as a lawyer, may also be disciplined Renomeron may be
Collantes, counsel for V& G Better Homes by the Court for his malfeasance as a public disciplined by the Court as
Subdivision, Inc. (V&G), filed an official? public official for his
administrative case against Atty. misconduct constituted a
Renomeron, for the latter’s irregular violation of his oath as a
actuations with regard to the application of lawyer.
V&G for registration of 163 pro forma The lawyer's oath (Rule
Deed of Absolute Sale with Assignment 138, Section 17, Rules of
(in favor of GSIS) of lots in its subdivision. Court; People vs. De Luna,
V&G complied with the desired 102 Phil. 968), imposes
requirements, however, Renomeron upon every lawyer the duty
suspended the registration of the to delay no man for money
documents pending the compliance of the or malice. The lawyer's oath
former with their “special conditions”, is a source of his obligations
which was that V&G should provide him and its violation is a ground
with weekly round trip ticket from for his suspension,
Tacloban to Manila plus P2,000.00 as disbarment or other
pocket money per trip, or, in lieu thereof, disciplinary action (Legal
the sale of respondent’s Quezon City Ethics, Ruben E. Agpalo,
house and lot by V&G or GSIS 1983 Edition, pp. 66-67).
representatives. Renomeron formally The Code of Professional
denied the registration of the documents. Responsibility applies to
He himself elevated the question on the lawyers in government
registrability of the said documents to service in the discharge of
Administrator Bonifacio (of the National their official tasks (Canon
Land Titles and Deeds Registration 6). As the Code of Conduct
Administration-NLTDRA). The and Ethical Standards for
Administrator then resolved in favor of the Public Officials requires
registrability of the documents. Despite public officials and
the resolution of the Administrator, employees to process
Renomeron still refused the registration documents and papers
thereof but demanded from the parties expeditiously and
interested the submission of additional prohibits them from directly
requirements not adverted in his previous or indirectly having a
denial financial or material interest
in any transaction requiring
the approval of their office,
and likewise bars them from
soliciting gifts or anything of
monetary value in the
course of any transaction
which may be affected by
the functions of their office,
the Code of Professional
Responsibility forbids a
lawyer to engage in
unlawful,
dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct (Rule
1.01, Code of Professional
Responsibility), or delay any
man's cause "for any
corrupt motive or interest"
(Rule 103). A lawyer shall
not engage in conduct that
adversely reflects on
his fitness to practice law,
nor shall he, whether in
public or private life, behave
in a scandalous manner to
the discredit of
the legal profession. (Rule
7.03, Code of Professional
Responsibility.)
This Court has ordered that
only those who are
"competent, honorable, and
reliable" may practice the
profession of law (Noriega
vs. Sison, 125 SCRA 293)
for every lawyer must
pursue "only the highest
standards in the practice of
his calling" (Court
Administrator vs. Hermoso,
150 SCRA 269, 278). The
acts of dishonesty and
oppression which Attorney
Renomeron
committed as a public
official have demonstrated
his unfitness to practice the
high and noble calling of the
law (Bautista vs. Judge
Guevarra, 142 SCRA 632;
Court Administrator vs.
Rodolfo G. Hermoso, 150
SCRA 269).
Attorney Vicente C.
Renomeron was disbarred
from the practice of law and
his name was stricken off
the Roll of Attorneys
 Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine
RIVAS, JEREMIAH 4. Vitriolo v Atty. Dasig 400 This is an administrative case for WoN Atty Dasig violated the Attorney’s WHEREFORE, respondent The Attorney’s Oath is the
SCRA 172 disbarment filed against Atty. Felina S. Oath as well as of Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.03 Arty. Felina S. Dasig is source of the obligations and
Dasig,1 an official of the Commission on of Canon 1 and Rule 6.02 of Canon 6 of the found liable for gross duties of every lawyer and any
Higher Education (CHED). The charge Code of Professional Responsibility, misconduct and violation thereof is a ground for
involves gross misconduct of particularly for acts of dishonesty as well as dishonesty in violation of disbarment, suspension, or
respondent in violation of the Attorney’s gross misconduct as OIC, Legal Services, the Attorney’s Oath as well other disciplinary action. The
Oath for having used her public office to CHED as the Code of Professional Attorney’s Oath imposes upon
secure financial spoils to the detriment of Responsibility, and is every member of the bar the
the dignity and reputation of the CHED. hereby ordered duty to delay no man for
DISBARRED. money or malice. Said duty is
*The record shows that the respondent, further stressed in Rule 1.03 of
on various occasions, during her tenure as the Code of Professional
OIC, Legal Services, CHED, attempted to Responsibility.16 Respondent’
extort from Betty C. Mangohon, Rosalie s demands for sums of money
B. Dela Torre, Rocella G. Eje, and to facilitate the processing of
Jacqueline N. Ng sums of money as pending applications or
consideration for her favorable action on requests before her office
their pending applications or requests violates such duty, and runs
before her office. afoul of the oath she took
*Complainants likewise aver that when admitted to the Bar.
respondent violated her oath as attorney- Such actions likewise run
at-law by filing eleven (11) baseless, contrary to Rule 1.03 of the
groundless, and unfounded suits Code of Professional
before the Office of the City Prosecutor of Responsibility.
Quezon City, which were subsequently
dismissed
*she had willfully failed to pay just
debts owing to "Borela Tire Supply" and
"Nova’s Lining Brake & Clutch" as
evidenced by the dishonored checks she
issued,
*she encouraged and ordered her son,
Jonathan Dasig, a guard of the Bureau of
Jail Management and Penology, to draw
his gun and shoot the Coronacions on
the evening of May 14, 1997. As a result
of this incident, a complaint for grave
threats against the respondent and her
son.
Finally, complainants allege that
respondent authored and sent to then
President Joseph Estrada a libelous
and unfair report, which maligned the
good names and reputation of no less
than eleven (11) CHED Directors
calculated to justify her ill motive of
preventing their re-appointment and with
the end view of securing an appointment
for herself
PECENIO, ROXANNE 5. U.S. v Barredo 32 Phil 449 The appellants in this case were 1. WoN the prosecutor failed to discharge it it is the prosecutors duty to
MONTERO convicted in the court below of the when he neglected and declined to the provincial fiscal had advise the court wherein the
crime of attempted rape, and each of proceed with the prosecution. failed to discharge his proceedings are pending as to
them was sentenced to two years, four 2. the trial judge properly appointed a duty in the premises, and the result of his investigations,
months and one day of prisión special fiscal to conduct the proceedings in partly for the information of and to move the court to
correccional, together with the accessory his stead committing magistrates and dismiss the proceedings,
penalties prescribed by law prosecuting officers leaving it to the court to take
they are contending that: generally . such action as may be
*the contentions of counsel for the the trial judge properly proper in the premises. In
appellants touching the alleged lack of appointed a special fiscal this jurisdiction provincial
jurisdiction of the court below to to conduct the proceedings fiscals are not clothed with
entertain and adjudicate this action in his stead. power,
because the trial conducted by a We find no error in the Discretion in the matter of
special fiscal, improvidently appointed proceedings in the case at subjecting to trial persons
by the trial judge without authority of bar prejudicial to the remanded for trial lies with
law. substantial rights of the the judge of that court.
THE JUDGE APPOINTED A SPECIAL defendants and Section 1 of Act No. 1699
FISCAL BECAUSE: appellants, and the reads in part as follows:
the Provincial Prosecutor stated that as judgment convicting and "Whenever the provincal
a result of his investigations based sentencing them in the fiscal is absent from the
upon the complaint of the private court below should province, or fails or refuses to
prosecutrix, he was satisfied that the therefore be affirmed, discharge his duty by reason
accused had not committed the crime of illness or other cause, or by
with which they were charged; that the reason of personal interest in a
evidence against them was prosecution or other matter is
unsatisfactory and unworthy of disqualified to act therein as
credence; and that they were victims of provincial fiscal, the judge of
a conspiracy of their personal and political the Court of First Instance
enemies to ruin them by compelling them for the province is
to stand trial f or a heinous offence which authorized and required to
they had not committed. appoint a temporary fiscal

PASTOR, JOHN ELVIN 6. Suarez v Platon 69 Phil Lieut. Vivencio Orais of the Phil. WON there is sufficient ground to proceed Petition dismissed. The
CARTAGINA 564 Constabulary and one of the respondents, with the criminal case for arbitrary detention Court cannot
filed a complaint under oath with the against Lieut. Orais and Justice of Peace overemphasize the
justice of peace of Calauag, Province of Jimenez. necessity of close scrutiny
Tayabas, charging Fortunato Suarez, and investigation of
petitioner herein, and one Tomas Ruedas, prosecuting officers of all
with sedition. While the preliminary cases handled by them, but
investigation was pending, Lieut. Orais, in whilst his Court is averse to
obedience to an order of the Provincial any form of vacillation by
Commander of Tayabas, moved for the such officers in the
temporary dismissal of the case. prosecution of public
Thereafter, Suarez charged Lieut. Orais offenses, it is
and Damian Jiminez in the same court unquestionable that they
with the crime of arbitrary detention. Since may, in appropriate cases,
the justice of peace of Calauag, Judge in order to do justice and
Platon, is one of the accused, the avoid injustice, reinvestigate
preliminary investigation was conducted cases in which they have
by the justice of peace of Lopez, Tayabas, already filed the
who thereafter bound the defendants over corresponding informations.
to the CFI. Motion for dismissal was The prosecuting officer “is
objected and denied by Judge David of the representative not of an
2nd Branch CFI Tayabas. Subsequently, ordinary party to a
Fiscal Yamson, who was assigned by the controversy, but of a
DOJ to conduct the prosecution of the sovereignty whose
case, moved for reconsideration, denying obligation to govern
the motion for dismissal. Judge Servillano impartially is as compelling
Platon, granted the motion for as its obligation to govern at
reconsideration and dismissed the case all; and who interest,
holding that the evidence was insufficient therefore, in a criminal
to convict the accused of the crime prosecution is not that is
charged. Hence, the petitioner appealed shall win a case, but that
to this Court praying for a peremptory writ justice shall be done. As
of mandamus to compel the respondent such, he is in a peculiar and
judge to reinstate the criminal case which very definite sense the
had been ordered dismissed. servant of the law, the two-
fold aim of which is that guilt
shall not escape nor
innocence suffer. He may
prosecute with earnestness
and vigor, indeed, he should
do so. But while he may
strike hard blows, he is not
at liberty to strike foul ones.
It is as much his duty to
refrain from improper
methods calculated to
produce a wrongful
conviction as it is to use
every legitimate means to
bring about a just one.” (Mr.
Justice Sutherland of the
US SC)
 Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine
PASCUA, JACKLYN MAE 7. People v Esquivel 82 Phil Pablo Esquivel and Amado Dizon (alias Whether or not the duty of prosecuting No. Code of Professional
PLAZA 453 Amado Basco) and Ben Pascual (alias attorneys to prove beyond reasonable doubt The judgment as to Basco Responsibility Canon 6- Rule
Bernabe Pascual) were found guilty of was carried out to properly will be and it is affirmed, 6.01. states that the primary
robbery and double homicide. They were with one-half of the costs of duty of a lawyer engaged in
sentenced but Pablo Esquivel and Amado appeal, except that the public prosecution is not to
Dizon (alias Amado Basco) filed an indemnity for each set of convict but to see that justice
appeal. A witness, Simplicio Navarro, 17 heirs shall be P6000 instead is done. The suppression of
years old, residing at 1324 Juan Luna, of P2,000. The judgment facts or the concealment of
Tondo, Manila stated how the accused against Esquivel is reversed witnesses capable of
robbed the jeep and killed the drivers with one-half of the costs establishing the innocence of
namely: Rosalio Paje and Benigno charged de oficio. the accused is highly
Valenzuela. Basco and Esquivel as well reprehensible and is cause for
as Pascual each signed and swore to a disciplinary action.
confession written at the MPC In a criminal case, the
headquarters. Both repudiated these prosecution bears the burden
statements alleging they had been forced of proving that the defendant is
to sign them through violence. The charge guilty beyond all reasonable
of maltreatment was not denied although doubt. This means that the
there was a chance for the prosecution to prosecution must convince
do so. Moreover, there is a stamp of truth that there is no other
in the charge of torture. It will be seen that reasonable explanation that
the evidence against Esquivel, apart from can come from the evidence
his alleged confession, consist of presented at trial.
Simplicio Navarro's testimony that he The case for the prosecution
came to know this defendant in Jacutan's was not presented with the
house and Gorgonio Rivera's testimony care and thoroughness which
that Esquivel suggested the liquidation of the gravity of the offense
the two drivers. The prosecution does not demanded. The evidence was
claim that Esquivel made the trip to Manila presented in a slipshod
or that he accompanied the men who manner. No efforts seem to
murdered the drivers. And Rivera's and have been exerted to amplify
Navarro's testimony does not pretend to and cement with positive and
show that Esquivel took part in the unequivocal assurances and
devising of the scheme to entice jeeps to details what appeared to be
Nueva Ecija. From what was gathered casual and loose references to
from the confused evidence, it does not the accused's supposed
even say that Esquivel was around at any intervention in the crime. In
moment from the time the jeeps arrived to this connection it may not be
the time the drivers were removed to a out of place to bring to the
secluded spot. That Esquivel suggested attention of prosecuting
the elimination of the drivers, as Gorgonio attorneys the absolute
Rivera asserted, was contradicted by the necessity of laying before the
other witness, Simplicio Navarro, who said court the pertinent facts at
that it was Jacutan from whom the idea their disposal with methodical
came and that it was Turong, not Basco, and meticulous attention,
who seconded it. Esquivel's presence in clarifying contradictions and
Jacutan's house when Simplicio Navarro filling up gaps and loopholes in
arrived from Manila the first time is the their evidence, to the end that
only point on which the two witnesses the court's mind may not be
agree. But that presence alone does not tortured by doubts, that the
constitute proof that Esquivel was a party innocent may not suffer and
to the criminal conspiracy. the guilty not escape
unpunished. Obvious to all,
this the prosecution's prime
duty to the court, to the
accused, and to the state.
ORIEL, JOVEN MARK 8. Triente, Sr. v FACTS: Trieste was the mayor of ISSUE: Whether or not the recommendation HELD: YES. The Solicitor
DIMPAS Sandiganbayan 145 SCRA Numancia, Aklan. In 1980, during his of the Solicitor General is proper and legally General is well within his
term, the Municipality of sound. rights to make such
508
Numancia purchased construction recommendation. A public
materials from Trigen Agro-Industrial prosecutor should not
Development Corporation. hesitate to recommend to
Trieste was allegedly the president of said the court the accused’s
corporation. Trieste was then sued for acquittal if the evidence in
allegedly violating his
the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act possession shows that the
particularly for willfully and unlawfully accused is innocent. If on
having financial or appeal by the accused from
pecuniary interest in a business, contract a conviction by the
or transaction in connection with which trial court he finds no legal
said accused basis to sustain the
intervened or took part in his official conviction, he should not
capacity and in which he is prohibited by also hesitate to recommend
law from having any that the accused be
interest. acquitted.
Trieste, in defense, said that he already
divested his interest from the corporation
when he
took his office as mayor; that he sold his
shares to his sister; he presented
evidence to that effect.
The Solicitor General doubted said sale
because it was not registered in the
Securities and Exchange
Commission. Moreover, the advertisement
of Trigen in the local rotary club shows
that Trieste is the
president of the corporation.
As time passed, the old Solicitor General
was replaced by a new one. The new Sol-
Gen gave
credit to the arguments presented by
Trieste as it recommended the dismissal
of the case on the
ground that Trieste did divest his interest
from the corporation by virtue of his selling
his shares to
his sister; that said sale cannot be
doubted simply because it was not
reported to the SEC; that sales
of stocks are not required to be reported in
the SEC.
 Assigned Person CASE Facts Issue Ruling Doctrine
NAZI, KATHERINE 9. Macoco v Diaz 70 Phil 97 A complaint for malpractice filed by one Whether or not Atty. Diaz should be Yes. Whatever might have
GARCIA Marcelino Macoco against Esteban B. disbarred been the agreement and
Diaz, attorney-at-law, with license to with whomsoever
practice in Philippine courts. In order to respondent might have
redeem a property belonging to his wife’s entered it into, the
father, which had been levied upon and undeniable fact remains that
sold at public auction, complainant he misappropriated the
Marcelino Macoco deposited with the money in breach of trust.
provincial sheriff of Ilocos Norte the sum This makes him unfit for the
of P380. As no redemption could be done, office of an attorney-at-law.
the money was returned by the sheriff to And his being a deputy
one Alberto Saguitan, then counsel for fiscal and not law
Marcelino Macoco. Saguitan used the practitioner at the time of
money according to himself and failed to the misappropriation, far
turn it over to Macoco; whereupon, the from mitigating his guilt,
latter entrusted its collection to respondent aggravates it. Want of moral
herein, Esteban B. Diaz. It appears that integrity is to be more
Diaz succeeded in collecting P300 from severely condemned in a
Suguitan, but he also misappropriated this lawyer who holds a
amount. Respondent admitted the responsible public office.
misappropriation. He averred, however, Wherefore, respondent
that he had an agreement with Macoco for Eteban B. Diaz is hereby
the payment of the money by him disbarred from the practice
misappropriated: that when this of law, and is hereby
agreement failed, he again entered into a ordered to surrender his
similar arrangement with Hermenegildo certificate to the clerk of
Galapia, Lope Ragragola and Pedro court within five days from
Ragragola, who, as he attempted to notice. This Solicitor
prove, were the persons to whom the sum General is hereby ordered
of P300 was really due, Macoco being to investigate the conduct of
merely a trustee thereof; and that in Attorney Alberto Suguitan
pursuance of this arrangement whereby and file later the
he would pay the sum of P300, deducting corresponding report
therefrom 20 per cent for his attorney’s
fees, he had already made partial
payments to said persons. Macoco,
however, and Lope Ragragola denied this
agreement.
MINQUE, JENESSA 10. Lim v Barcelona 425 Facts:Atty. Edilberto Barcelona was a Issue:Whether or not respondent committed Ruling:YES. As a lawyer,
DIGAL SCRA 67 lawyer formerly employed with the NLRC a violation to CPR. who was also a public
as chief of the PublicAssistance Center. officer, respondent
He informed complainant Lim miserably failed to cope with
through phone that his employees the strict demands and high
filed a labor complaint against him and standards of the legal
it was necessary that he sees him and profession. The Court is
talk. Respondent visited him in hisoffice convinced that the
and told him to settle the case or else his evidenceagainst respondent
business, Top Gun Billiards will be shut is clear and convincing. He
down. Forsettlement, the amount was is administratively liable for
P20,000.Subsequently, complainant, Lim, corrupt activity, deceit,
requested the NBI to investigate andgross misconduct. As
Barcelona, in which the NBI then correctly held by the Board
performed an entrapment operation where of Governors of the IBP of
Barcelona was arrested on the grounds of: the Philippines, he should
(a) deceit; (b)malpractice or other gross notonly be suspended from
misconduct in office; (c) grossly immoral the practice of law but
conduct; (d) conviction of a crimeinvolving disbarred.WHEREFORE,
moral turpitude; and (e) violation of lawyer’ respondent Atty. Edilberto
s oath. Barcelona is found
administratively guilty of
corruptactivity, deceit, and
gross misconduct and is
hereby ordered
DISBARRED.
MATRES, JATS XYVEN
BUNDA
MADJOS, JOAN CANCIO
ILAO, ROWENA
LIGUTOM
DIAZ, JENNICA
BEROU, STEPHEN
BAJAN, ERMIEGEN
BAJADO, JENIE FE
ANOB, MICHELLE
ABA-A, SARAH D.