Scribd
Upload
11 views

Case Digest Template (1)

The case of Oliver Fabugais v. Atty. Berardo C. Faundo Jr. revolves around allegations of immoral conduct by Faundo, who was accused of having inappropriate relations with Fabugais's wife during a custody battle. While the Supreme Court found insufficient evidence of gross immorality, it deemed Faundo's behavior inappropriate and contrary to the standards expected of lawyers, leading to sanctions. The ruling underscores the necessity for lawyers to maintain professional integrity, particularly in the presence of minors.

Uploaded by

Carls Raven Danao
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
11 views

Case Digest Template (1)

The case of Oliver Fabugais v. Atty. Berardo C. Faundo Jr. revolves around allegations of immoral conduct by Faundo, who was accused of having inappropriate relations with Fabugais's wife during a custody battle. While the Supreme Court found insufficient evidence of gross immorality, it deemed Faundo's behavior inappropriate and contrary to the standards expected of lawyers, leading to sanctions. The ruling underscores the necessity for lawyers to maintain professional integrity, particularly in the presence of minors.

Uploaded by

Carls Raven Danao
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

TITLE (Based on the syllabus)

TOPIC In Re: Elmo Abad


CASE TITLE Oliver Fabugais v. Atty. Berardo C. Faunclo, Jr.

GR. NO. A.C. no. 10145 DATE June 11, 2018

DOCTRINE This case reasserts the principles under Canon 7 and Rule 7.03 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility that obligate lawyers to maintain
high moral standards privately and publicly, and to avoid conduct
adversely reflecting on their fitness to practice law.

FACTS In 2006, a complaint was filed by Oliver Fabugais against Atty. Berardo
C. Faundo Jr., charging conduct unbecoming of a lawyer due to alleged
immoral relations with his (Fabugais’s) wife, Annaliza Fabugais. Key
events included a 10-year-old girl, Marie Nicole Fabugais, observing
Atty. Faundo embracing her mother in bed and an incident where Atty.
Faundo, clad in only a towel, entered a room instructing others to leave
so he could be alone with Annaliza. The complaint also detailed
confrontational incidents between Fabugais and Faundo, including a
motorcycle chase where Faundo allegedly threatened Fabugais.
Annaliza was being represented by Faundo in a custody battle with
Fabugais.

Despite Faundo’s denial of any immoral behavior and claims of


professional assistance in Annaliza’s custody case, multiple incidents
raised reasonable suspicion of misconduct. The case for disbarment
was initiated after Fabugais filed the complaint, primarily supported by
his daughter’s sworn statements.

Procedurally, the case was forwarded to the Integrated Bar of the


Philippines (IBP) following recommendations from the IBP-
ZAMBASULTA Chapter Board in 2007. The IBP Investigating
Commissioner proposed suspension based on Rule 1.01 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility because Faundo’s behavior suggested the
appearance of immorality, though explicit misconduct was not
confirmed. The IBP Board of Governors approved this
recommendation. Subsequently, the complainant passed away,
fostering uncertainty regarding pursuing the complaint. The IBP
nonetheless resolved the respondent’s motion for reconsideration in
2013 by reaffirming the initial suspension decision.
ISSUE 1. Whether Atty. Faundo engaged in acts of gross immorality that
violated the Code of Professional Responsibility.

2. Whether the evidence presented sufficiently supports the


respondent’s alleged misconduct to justify suspension from legal
practice.

RULING 1. The Supreme Court found insufficient evidence of explicit immoral


acts, yet adjudged Atty. Faundo’s conduct as inappropriate, creating
the appearance of immorality contrary to Rule 1.01. The decision
emphasized the imperative for lawyers to uphold professional integrity,
especially before impressionable minors. Thus, although not
constituting gross immorality, Faundo’s actions were censurable and
warranted sanction.

2. The chasing incidents were dismissed due to inadequate proof


against Faundo. Concerning Atty. Faundo’s general conduct, there was
sufficient ground to enforce sanctions owing to behavior unbecoming of
a lawyer by engaging in conduct perceived as scandalous, undermining
public confidence in the legal profession.

REMARKS

You might also like