CANON 1 Isidra and Olivia.

Respondent sent text messages to complainants

asking for the deferment of the criminal charges with the promise that
CASE 11
she will pay her debt. Respondent, however, failed to fulfill said
Re: 2003 Bar Examinations promise. Respondent even tried to give to complainants a title for a
parcel of land in exchange for the bounced checks, but it was later
discovered that the land belonged to someone else, who merely
FACTS entrusted said title to the respondent. Thus, a complaint for
On September 22, 2003, there was a rumored leakage in the bar
disbarment was filed against Atty. Elerizza A. Libiran-Meteoro for
examination on the Mercantile Law subject. Investigation was lead
back to the office of Atty. Marcial O.T. Balgos, then Mercantile Law deceit and non-payment of debts.
Examiner, where the leakage started. Allegedly, Atty. Danilo de
Guzman (assistant lawyer in the firm of Balgos and Perez) stole a IBP Board of Governors Ruling
copy of Atty. Balgos’ file on Mercantile Law with the proposed test Respondent violated not only her oath as a lawyer but also Rule 1.01,
items, and the former sent it to some members of the Beta Sigma Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Atty. Elerizza A.
Lambda Fraternity. Libiran-Meteoro is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for
ISSUES
six (6) months and Restitution of P84,000 to complainant.
1. WON Atty. Balgos and Atty. de Guzman are guilty of gross
misconduct unbecoming a member of the Bar.

RULING ISSUES
YES. De Guzman abetted cheating or dishonesty by his fraternity 1. WON Atty. Elerizza A. Libiran-Meteoro is guilty of gross misconduct.
brothers in the examination, which is violative of Rule 1.01 of Canon
1, as well as Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility for RULING
members of the Bar. As for Atty. Balgos’ negligence, if he had taken YES. The Court held that deliberate failure to pay just debts and the
those simple precautions to protect the secrecy of his papers, issuance of worthless checks constitute gross misconduct, for which
nobody could have stolen them and copied and circulated them. The a lawyer may be sanctioned with suspension from the practice of law.
integrity of the bar examinations would not have been sullied by the Lawyers are instruments for the administration of justice and
scandal. vanguards of our legal system. They are expected to maintain not only
legal proficiency but also a high standard of morality, honesty, integrity
CASE 12 and fair dealing so that the people’s faith and confidence in the judicial
system is ensured. They must at all times faithfully perform their duties
Barrientos v. Libiran-Metereo
to society, to the bar, the courts and to their clients, which include
prompt payment of financial obligations. They must conduct
FACTS
themselves in a manner that reflects the values and norms of the legal
Respondent Atty. Elerizza Libiran-Meteoro issued several checks in
profession as embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility.
favor of Isidra Barrientos and Olivia Mercado (complainants) for the
Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 explicitly states that:
payment of a pre-existing debt. The checks bounced due to
insufficient funds thus charges for violation of B.P. 22 were filed by

Page 1 of 19
CANON 1 -- A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of days from notice. The Court fine􏰕ned respondent P2,000 and
the land and promote respect for law and for legal processes. required him to comply with the resolution requiring his comment
Rule 1.01 -- A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral within ten days under pain of imprisonment and arrest for a period of
or deceitful conduct. 􏰕five (5) days or until his compliance. NBI reported that respondent
was arrested in Tacloban City but was subsequently released after
The issuance of checks which were later dishonored for having been having shown proof of compliance with the resolution by remitting the
drawn amount of P2,000 and submitting his long overdue Comment.
against a closed account indicates a lawyer’s unfitness for the trust
and confidence reposed on her. It shows a lack of personal honesty Later on, it was discovered that respondent was also involved in
and good moral character as to render her unworthy of public another estafa case pertaining to his legal services rendered on the
confidence. The issuance of a series of worthless checks also shows victim of Dona Paz tragedy (Ferry that sank after colliding with an oil
the remorseless attitude of respondent, unmindful to the deleterious tanker on Dec. 20, 1987). The victim he represented filed a complaint
effects of such act to the public interest and public order. It also because of the compensation that the victim had received from
manifests a lawyer’s low regard to her commitment to the oath she Sulpicio Lines which was later deducted by Atty. Martinez.
has taken when she joined her peers, seriously and irreparably
tarnishing the image of the profession she should hold in high esteem. The Court later on referred the present case to the Integrated Bar of
Mere issuance of worthless checks by a lawyer, regardless of whether the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report, and recommendation.
or not the same were issued in his professional capacity to a client,
calls for appropriate disciplinary measures. Investigation Commissioner recommended that respondent Atty.
WHEREFORE, Atty. Elerizza A. Libiran-Meteoro is found guilty of Francisco P. Martinez be disbarred and his name stricken out from the
gross misconduct and is hereby SUSPENDED for six months from the Roll of Attorneys immediately.
practice of law, effective upon her receipt of this Decision, and is
ordered to pay complainant Isidra Barrientos the amount of On Sept. 27, 2003, the IBP Board of Governors passed a resolution
P84,000.00, as balance of her debt to the latter, plus 6% interest from approving the report and the recommendation of its investigating
date of finality of herein decision. commissioner.

CASE 13 ISSUE:

BARRIOS VS. ATTY. FRANCISCO P. MARTINEZ (2004) WON the crime of issuing worthless check constituting moral turpitude
and the act of the respondent considered to be a ground for
FACTS: disbarment

In the present case, respondent has been found guilty and convicted RULING:
by fi􏰕nal judgment for violation of B.P. Blg. 22 for issuing a worthless
check in the amount of P8,000. In the said case, the Court issued a YES. The SC agrees to the IBP Board of Governors recommendation
resolution requiring respondent to comment on the petition within 10 that respondent be disbarred from the practice of law.

Page 2 of 19
The Court stressed that membership in the legal profession is a to his position and office and sets a pernicious example to the
privilege, demanding a high degree of good moral character, not only insubordinate and dangerous elements of the body politic."
as a condition precedent to admission, but also as a continuing
requirement for the practice of law. Sadly, herein respondent falls WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Francisco P. Martinez is hereby
short of the exacting standards expected of him as a vanguard of the DISBARRED and his name is ORDERED STRICKEN from the Roll of
legal profession. 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
In the instant case, respondent has been found guilty and stands the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, and on the O􏰕ce of the Court
convicted by final judgment of a crime involving moral turpitude. Administrator for circulation to all courts in the country.

Moral turpitude includes everything which is done contrary to justice,

honesty, modesty, or good morals. It involves “an act of baseness,
CASE 14
vileness, or depravity in the private duties which a man owes his fellow
men, or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary A-1 FINANCIAL SERVICES INC. VS ATTY. LAARNI VALERIO
rule of right and duty between man and woman, or conduct contrary (2010)
to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals”.
FACTS:
In In The Matter of Disbarment Proceedings v. Narciso N. Jaramillo,
SC disbarred a lawyer convicted of estafa without discussing the A-1 Financial Services, Inc., granted respondent a loan amounting to
circumstances behind his conviction. P50,000.00. Respondent issued a check to secure the payment of the
loan. However, it was dishonored due to insufficient funds. Despite
SC held that: There is no question that the crime of estafa
repeated demands, Atty. Valerio failed to pay the whole amount of her
involves moral turpitude. The review of respondent's conviction
obligation.Thus, complainant 􏰕filed a B.P. 22 case against
no longer rests upon us. The judgment not only has become final but
respondent. After repeated demands by the trial court respondent
has been executed. No elaborate argument is necessary to hold the
failed to give any response. Complainant filed an administrative
respondent unworthy of the privilege bestowed on him as a member
complaint against respondent before the IBP. Respondent was
of the bar. Suffice it to say that, by his conviction, the respondent has
required to file an answer, but failed to do so. However, respondent’s
proved himself unfit to protect the administration of justice.
mother explained that her daughter had been diagnosed with
schizophrenia; thus, could not properly respond to the complaint
The SC therefore, finds disbarment to be the appropriate
against her.
penalty.
The IBP-CBD directed respondent to appear before the mandatory
"Of all classes and professions, the lawyer is most sacredly bound to
conference. Respondent, again, failed to attend the conference.
uphold the laws. He is their sworn servant; and for him, of all men in
Subsequently, the IBP ordered the parties to submit their position
the world, to repudiate and override the laws, to trample them
papers. No position paper was submitted by respondent.
underfoot and to ignore the very bands of society, argues recreancy

Page 3 of 19
Thus, the IBP-CBD recommended that Atty. Valerio be suspended Code of Professional Responsibility and violates the lawyer's oath
from the practice of law for a period of two (2) years, having found her which imposes upon every member of the Bar the duty to delay no
guilty of gross misconduct. man for money or malice. Respondent has failed to live up to the
values and norms of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of
IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved with modification of Professional Responsibility.
the period of suspension to 1 year.
The SC deem it reasonable to affirm the sanction imposed by
Nevertheless, to provide opportunity to explain herself, the Court the IBP-CBD. Atty. Valerio was ordered suspended from the
directed the respondent to submit a duly notarized medical certificate practice of law for two (2) years, because, aside from issuing
to support the claim of schizophrenia, However, no said record was worthless checks and failing to pay her debts, she has also shown
submitted. wanton disregard of the IBP's and Court Orders in the course of the
proceedings.
ISSUE:
SANCTIONS:
Whether or Atty. Valerio is guilty of gross misconduct and violation of
the Code of Professional Responsibility. Atty. Laarni N. Valerio is guilty of gross misconduct and violation
of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
RULING:
VIOLATED CANONS / STATUTE:
YES. The SC sustained the findings and recommendations of the IBP-
CBD. BP. 22

The Court, finds unmeritorious Mrs. Valerio's justification that Canon 1 — A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of
respondent is suffering from a health condition - schizophrenia, which the land and promote respect for law and for legal processes.
has prevented her from properly answering the complaint against her.
Indeed, we cannot take the "medical certificate" on its face, Rule 1.01 — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
considering failure to prove the contents of the certificate or present immoral or deceitful conduct.
the physician who issued it. CIaDTE

Respondent’s conduct in the course of the IBP and court proceedings

is also a matter of serious concern. She failed to answer the complaint
against her. Despite due notice, she failed to attend the disciplinary
hearings set by the IBP. She also ignored the proceedings before the
court as she likewise failed to both answer the complaint against her
and appear during her arraignment, despite orders and notices from
the court. Clearly, this conduct runs counter to the precepts of the

Page 4 of 19
 CASE 15 repeated written demands for payment of her obligations despite due
receipt of the same. Thus, Mr. Wilson Cham was compelled to file a
WILSON CHAM, complainant, v. ATTY. EVA PAITA-MOYA,
compaint for disbarment against Atty. Moya.
respondent.
In her answer, Atty. Moya alleged that she had religiously paid
her monthly rentals and had not vacated the apartment unit
Complaint for disbarment filed by complainant Wilson Cham surreptitiously. She also claimed that she transferred to another place
against respondent Atty. Eva Paita-Moya, who allegedly committed because she was given notice by the complainant to vacate the
deceit in occupying a leased apartment unit and, thereafter, vacating premises to give way for its repair and renovation, but which never
the same without paying the rentals and other dues. happened until presently. She actually wanted to ask that complainant
to account for her deposit for the apartment unit, but she could not do
so since she did not know complainants address or contact number.
For the same reason, she could not turn over to the complainant the
FACTS:
door keys to the vacated apartment unit.
According to the Complaint, on 1 October 1998, Atty. Moya
After the mandatory preliminary conference conducted by the
entered into a Contract of Lease with Greenville Realty and
Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Development Corp. (GRDC), represented by Mr. Cham as its
(IBP), the parties were given time to submit their respective Position
President and General Manager, involving a residential apartment unit
Papers per Order dated February 17, 2006.
owned by GRDC at P8,000.00 per month for a term of one year.
On 29 March 2006, complainant filed his Position Paper.
Moreover, upon the expiration of said lease contract, Atty. Moya
However, Atty. Moya, despite the extension given, did not file hers.
informed the complainant that she would no longer renew the same
Hence, the case was deemed submitted for resolution.
but requested an extension of her stay at the apartment unit until June
30, 2000 and promised to pay the monthly rental during the extension On September 8, 2006, Investigating Commissioner Acerey C.
period which Mr. Cham approved only that he (Cham) increased the Pacheco submitted his Report and Recommendation, recommending
rental rate to P8,650.00 per month for the period beginning October 1, the imposition of the penalty of three-month suspension on
1999 until June 30, 2000. respondent for violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
However, The IBP Board of Governors, however, passed Resolution
However, Atty. Moya stayed at the leased apartment until
No. XVII-2006- 585 dated December 15, 2006, amending the
October 2000 without paying her rentals from July to October 2000
recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner and approving the
and also failed to settle her electric bills for the months of September
dismissal of the Complaint for lack of merit.
and October 2000. As of October 15, 2004, her total accountability
amounted to P71, 007.88.

Sometime in October 2000, a report reached GRDC that Atty. ISSUE:

Moya had secretly vacated the apartment unit, bringing along with her
the door keys. Also, she did not pay attention to complainant’s WON ATTY. EVA MOYA IS GUILTY OF GROSS MISCONDUCT.

Page 5 of 19
RULIING: backtracked on her duty to pay her debts, such act already constituted
a ground for administrative sanction.
YES, she is. SC contends that the case must not be dismissed
and respondent must face the consequences of her actions. Respondents abandonment of the leased premises to avoid her
obligations for the rent and electricity bills constitutes deceitful conduct
SC said:
violative of the Code of Professional Responsibility, particularly Canon
A review of the records would reveal that respondent is, indeed, I and Rule 1.01 thereof, which explicitly state:
guilty of willful failure to pay just debt. Complainant is able to fully
CANON 1- A lawyer shall uphold the constitution,
substantiate that respondent has existing obligations that she failed to
obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and
settle.
legal processes.
Respondent did not expressly deny receipt of the letters of
Rule 1.01- A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
demand in her Answer to the Complaint. Having failed to rebut the
dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
foregoing allegations, she must be deemed to have admitted them.
Section 11, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, provides:

The Court stresses that membership in the legal profession is a

privilege. It demands a high degree of good moral character, not only
SECTION 11. Allegations not specifically denied
as a condition precedent to admission, but also as a continuing
deemed admitted. Material averment in the
requirement for the practice of law. In this case, respondent fell short
complaint, other than those as to the amount of
of the exacting standards expected of her as a guardian of law and
unliquidated damage, shall be deemed admitted
justice.
when not specifically denied.
Any gross misconduct of a lawyer in his or her professional or
Moreover, a settled rule of evidence is that the one who pleads
private capacity is a ground for the imposition of the penalty of
payment has the burden of proving it. The debtor has the burden of
suspension or disbarment because good character is an essential
showing with legal certainty that the obligation has been discharged by
qualification for the admission to the practice of law and for the
payment. In the instant case, the respondent failed to discharge the
continuance of such privilege. The Court has held that the deliberate
burden of proving payment, for she was unable to produce receipts or
failure to pay just debts and the issuance of worthless checks
any other proof of payment of the rentals due for the period of 1 July to
constitute gross misconduct, for which a lawyer may be sanctioned
September 20, 2000.
with one years suspension from the practice of law, or a suspension
Having incurred just debts, respondent had the moral duty and of six months upon partial payment of the obligation.
legal responsibility to settle them when they became due. Respondent
The case at bar merely involves the respondents deliberate
should have complied with just contractual obligations, and acted fairly
failure to pay her just debts, without her issuing a worthless check,
and adhered to high ethical standards to preserve the courts integrity,
which would have been a more serious offense.
since she is an employee thereof. Indeed, when respondent

Page 6 of 19
 GIS identified Guarin as Chairman of the Board of Directors (BOD)
and President.
The Investigating Commissioner of the IBP recommended that
she be suspended from the practice of law for three months, a penalty Mired with allegations of anomalous business transactions and
which this Court finds sufficient. practices, on December 18, 2008, LCI applied for voluntary dissolution
with the SEC.
JUDGMENT: Guilty of gross misconduct. SUSPENDED for 1
month from the practice of law with a WARNING:repetition of On July 22, 2009, Guarin filed this complaint with the Integrated
the same or a similar act will be dealt with more severely. Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP CBD)
claiming that Atty. Limpin violated Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 of the CPR
by knowingly listing him as a stockholder, Chairman of the Board and
CASE 16 President of LCI when she knew that he had already resigned and had
never held any share nor was he elected as chairperson of the BOD
ARCATOMY S. GUARIN, Complainant, v. ATTY. CHRISTINE A.C. or been President of LCI. He also never received any notice of meeting
LIMPIN, Respondent. or agenda where his appointment as Chairman would be taken up. He
has never accepted any appointment as Chairman and President of
LCI.
Complaint for disbarment filed by Arcatomy S. Guarin against
On the other hand, Atty. Limpin admits that she filed the GIS with
Atty. Christine Antenor Cruz Limpin for allegedly filing a false General
the SEC listing Guarin as a stockholder, the Chairman of the BOD and
Information Sheet (GIS) with the Securities and Exchange
President of LCI. She argued that the GIS was provisional to comply
Commission (SEC) thus violating Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 of the Code
with SEC requirements. It would have been corrected in the future but
of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
unfortunately LCI filed for voluntary dissolution shortly thereafter. She
averred that the GIS was made and submitted in good faith and that
her certification served to attest to the information from the last BOD
FACTS: meeting held on March 3, 2008.
In 2004, the complainant, Guarin as Chief Operating Officer and She asserted that Guarin knew that he was a stockholder. Atty.
thereafter as President of One Card Company, Inc. (OCCI), a member Limpin said that on October 13, 2008, she sent Guarin a text message
of the Legacy Group of Companies (LGC). However, he resigned from and asked him to meet with her so he may sign a Deed of Assignment
his post effective August 11, 2008 and transferred to St. Luke's concerning share holdings. Guarin responded in the affirmative and
Medical Center as the Vice President for Finance.
said that he would meet with her. Guarin, however, neglected to show
On November 27, 2008, Atty. Limpin, the Corporate Secretary of up at the arranged time and place for reasons unknown to Atty. Limpin.
Legacy Card, Inc. (LCI), another corporation under the Legacy Group On the strength of Guarin’s positive reply, Atty. Limpin filed the GIS on
(LGC), filed with the SEC a GIS for LCI for "updating purposes". The November 27, 2008. To belie the claim that LCI never held any board
meeting, Atty. Limpin presented Secretary’s Certificates dated May

Page 7 of 19
16, 2006, May 22, 2006, and June 13, 2007 bearing Guarin’s Grounds for such administrative action against a lawyer may be
signature. found in Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. Among these are
(1) the use of any deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in
Furthermore, Atty. Limpin contends that Guarin failed to present
such office and (2) any violation of the oath which he is required to
sufficient evidence to warrant disbarment. She stated that merely
take before the admission to practice.
presenting the GIS does not constitute as proof of any unethical
conduct, harassment and malpractice. It is undisputed that Atty. Limpin filed and certified that Guarin
was a stockholder of LCI in the GIS. While she posits that she had
IBP CBD found that Atty. Limpin violated Canon 1, Rules 1.01
made the same in good faith, her certification also contained a
and 1.02 of the CPR and recommended that she be suspended from
stipulation that she made a due verification of the statements
the practice of law for three months.
contained therein. That Atty. Limpin believed that Guarin would sign a
It was noted that only Mr. Celso de los Angeles had the authority Deed of Assignment is inconsequential, he never signed the
to appoint or designate directors or officers of Legacy. Atty. Limpin instrument. We also note that there was no submission which would
was aware that this procedure was not legally permissible. Despite support the allegation that Guarin was in fact a stockholder. In filing
knowing this to be irregular, she allowed herself to be dictated upon a GIS that contained false information, Atty. Limpin committed an
and falsely certified that Guarin was a stockholder, chairman and infraction which did not conform to her oath as a lawyer in accord
president of the company. with Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 of the CPR.

The IBP Board of Governors adopted in toto the CBD Report. In allowing herself to be swayed by the business practice of
Atty. Limpin moved for reconsideration but was denied. having Mr. de los Angeles appoint the members of the BOD and
officers of the corporation despite the rules enunciated in the
Corporation Code with respect to the election of such officers, Atty.
Limpin has transgressed Rule 1.02 of the CPR.
ISSUE: WON Atty. Limpin has violated Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and
Rule 1.02 of the CPR.

JUDGMENT:
RULIING: GUILTY of violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.02 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility. SUSPENSION from the practice of law
Yes. SC adopted the report and recommendation of the IBP. Atty.
for SIX (6) MONTHS (INCREASED due to the seriousness of Atty.
Limpin has violated Canon 1, Rule 1.01and Rule 1.02 of the CPR.
Limpin's action of submitting a false document). With WARNING:a
SC’s discussion: repetition of the same or similar act in the future will be dealt with more
severely.
A lawyer who assists a client in a dishonest scheme or who
connives in violating the law commits an act which justifies disciplinary
action against the lawyer.

Page 8 of 19
 CASE 17 card when unfolded contained a handwritten letter dated
October 7, 2000, the day of his wedding to Irene, reading:
GUEVERRA VS. EALA
My everdearest Irene,
FACTS:
By the time you open this, you'll be moments away from walking
 JANUARY 2000 Gueverra first met Eala in January 2000 down the aisle. I will say a prayer for you that you may find meaning
when his (complainant's) then-fiancee Irene introduced Eala in what you're about to do. HCDAac
to him as her friend who was married to Marianne with whom
he had three children. Sometimes I wonder why we ever met. Is it only for me to find
 October 2000 After his marriage to Irene , Gueverra fleeting happiness but experience eternal pain? Is it only for us to nd
noticed that from January to March 2001, Irene had been a true love but then lose it again? Or is it because there's a bigger
receiving from Eala cellphone calls, as well as messages plan for the two of us?
some of which read "I love you," "I miss you," or "Meet you
at Megamall." I hope that you have experienced true happiness with me. I have
 Gueverra also noticed that Irene habitually went home very done everything humanly possible to love you. And today, as you
late at night or early in the morning of the following day, and make your vows . . . I make my own vow to YOU!
sometimes did not go home from work. When he asked
about her whereabouts, she replied that she slept at her I will love you for the rest of my life. I loved you from the rst time I laid
parents' house in Binangonan, Rizal or she was busy with eyes on you, to the time we spent together, up to the nal moments of
her work. your single life. But more importantly, I will love you until the life in
 In February or March 2001, complainant saw Irene and me is gone and until we are together again.
respondent together on two occasions. On the second
Do not worry about me! I will be happy for you. I have enough
occasion, he confronted them following which Irene
abandoned the conjugal house. memories of us to last me a lifetime. Always remember though that
in my heart, in my mind and in my soul, YOU WILL ALWAYS
 On April 22, 2001, complainant went uninvited to Irene's
birthday celebration at which he saw her and respondent
. . . AND THE WONDERFUL THINGS YOU DO!
celebrating with her family and friends. Out of
embarrassment, anger and humiliation, he left the venue
BE MINE . . . . AND MINE ALONE, and I WILL ALWAYS BE YOURS
immediately. Following that incident, Irene went to the
AND YOURS ALONE!
conjugal house and hauled off all her personal belongings,
pieces of furniture, and her share of the household I LOVE YOU FOREVER, I LOVE YOU FOR ALWAYS. AS LONG AS
appliances. I'M LIVING MY TWEETIE YOU'LL BE!"
 Complainant later found, in the master's bedroom, a folded
social card bearing the words "I Love You" on its face, which Eternally yours, NOLI

Page 9 of 19
  Complainant soon saw respondent's car and that of Irene 3. Mary Anne is aware of Respondent's special friendship with
constantly parked at No. 71-B 11th Street, New Manila Irene.
where, as he was to later learn sometime in April 2001, Irene 4. his reference [in his above-quoted handwritten letter to Irene]
was already residing. He also learned still later that when his to the marriage between Complainant and Irene as a piece
friends saw Irene on or about January 18, 2002 together with of paper was merely with respect to the formality of the
respondent during a concert, she was pregnant. marriage contract.

Guevarra’s Complaint: Complaint for Disbarment against Atty. Jose par 19

Eala for "grossly immoral conduct and unmitigated violation of the
lawyer's oath." CcHDSA 1. denies the allegations in paragraph 19 , her special
relationship with Irene is neither under scandalous
On paragraph 14 of the COMPLAINT : Respondent and Irene were circumstances nor tantamount to grossly immoral conduct
even FLAUNTING THEIR ADULTEROUS RELATIONSHIP

On paragraph 15 of the complaint: Respondent's adulterous conduct Violated Rules:

with the complainant's wife and his apparent abandoning or
neglecting of his own family, Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility =
which proscribes a lawyer from engaging in "unlawful, dishonest,
Par 19 :Respondent's grossly immoral conduct runs afoul of the immoral or deceitful conduct,"
Constitution and the laws he, as a lawyer, has been sworn to uphold
Rule 7.03 of Canon 7 of the same Code = which proscribes a lawyer
Eala’s Answer: from engaging in any "conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness
to practice law."
Par 14
Ruling of IBP:
1. denies having ever flaunted an adulterous relationship with Irene
IBP Board of Governors : annulled and set aside the
2. Their relationship was low pro le and known only to the immediate Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner and accordingly
members of their respective families dismissed the case for lack of merit,

par 15 Issue: Whether or not Atty Eala be disbarred from the practice
of law
1. Respondent's relationship with Irene was not under
scandalous circumstances Ruling:
2. Respondent has maintained a civil, cordial and peaceful
relationship with [his wife] Mary Anne Yes. Without doubt, the adulterous relationship between respondent

Page 10 of 19
and Irene has been sufficiently proven by more than clearly Patricia’s Complaint: petitioned that respondent Simeon Barranco,
preponderant evidence — that evidence adduced by one party which Jr. be denied admission to the legal profession.
is more conclusive and credible than that of the other party and,
therefore, has greater weight than the other , which is the quantum of Simeon’s side: Respondent led a Manifestation and Motion to
evidence needed in an administrative case against a lawyer. Dismiss the case , but the Court denied respondent's motion to
dismiss. Simeon constantly repeated his motion to dismiss the
SC Decision: complaint and then by 1988 the Court resolved to dismiss the
complaint for failure of Patricia to prosecute the case for an
Atty. Jose Emmanuel M. Eala, is DISBARRED for grossly immoral unreasonable period of time and to allow Simeon to take the lawyer's
conduct oath upon payment of the required fees.
Patricia filed a complaint again, then the court canceled his
CASE 18 scheduled oath-taking.
Figueroa vs Barranco, Jr
IBP's report: recommended the dismissal of the case and that
Facts: respondent be allowed to take the lawyer's oath.
o Patricia and SImeon were townmates in Janiuay, Iloilo
o When they were both in their teens, they were steadies. Issue: Whether or not Simeon be denied to take the lawyer’s
o Respondent even acted as escort to complainant when she oath for his breach of promise to marry Patricia
reigned as Queen at the 1953 town fiesta.
o Complainant first acceded to sexual congress with respondent Ruling:
sometime in 1960. No.
o Their intimacy yielded a son. It was after the child was born, o The Supreme Court ruled that these facts do not constitute gross
complainant alleged, that respondent first promised he would immorality warranting the permanent exclusion of respondent
marry her after he passes the bar examinations. from the legal profession. His engaging in premarital sexual
o Their relationship continued and respondent allegedly made relations with complainant and promises to marry suggests a
more than twenty or thirty promises of marriage. doubtful moral character on his part but the same does not
o He gave only P10.00 for the child on the latter's birthdays. constitute grossly immoral conduct.
o Respondent had passed the 1970 bar examinations on the fourth o The Court has held that to justify suspension or disbarment the
attempt, after unsuccessful attempts act complained of must not only be immoral, but grossly immoral.
o Before he could take his oath, complainant led the instant o "A grossly immoral act is one that is so corrupt and false as to
petition that respondent did not fulfill his repeated promises to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled or disgraceful as to be
marry her. reprehensible to a high degree."
o Her trust in him and their relationship ended when she learned o Respondent and complainant were sweethearts whose sexual
that respondent married another woman relations were evidently consensual. All those years of amicable
and intimate relations refute her allegations that she was forced

Page 11 of 19
 to have sexual congress with him. because the latter failed to settle the accounts. That after that said
o The twenty-six years that respondent has been prevented from meeting, the respondent "held her arm and kissed her on the cheek
being a lawyer constitute su cient punishment therefor. During while embracing her very tightly."
this time there appears to be no other indiscretion attributed to The two met again to finalize the draft for the complaint and while on
him. their way home after the said meeting, the respondent suddenly
o Simeon, who is now sixty-two years of age, should thus be stopped the car and things went out of hand. Thus she decided to
allowed, albeit belatedly, to take the lawyer's oath. refer the case to another lawyer.

ISSUES
CASE 19 1. WON the respondent committed acts are grossly immoral which
Advincula v. Macabanta would warrant the disbarment or suspension from the practice of law.

STATUTE RULING
The Code of Professional Responsibility provides: NO. The SC held that lawyers are expected to abide the tenets of
morality, not only upon admission to the Bar but all throughout their
CANON I – x x x legal career as lawyers belong to an exclusive and honored
Rule 1.01-- A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, fraternity. Lawyers are called upon to safeguard the integrity of the
immoral or deceitful conduct. legal profession and should adhere to the unwaveringly to the
highest standard of morality. The respondent admitted to the act of
CANON 7-- A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity kissing the complainant on the lips as evidenced as well of his asking
of the legal profession and support the activities of the Integrated for apology from complainant in his text message. Regardless of the
Bar. fact that the respondent admitted that he kissed the complainant but
xxxx the Court held that this was not accompanied by malice because the
Rule 7.03-- A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely respondent immediately asked for forgiveness after sensing the
reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public annoyance of the respondent after texting him. Thus the Court held
or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the that this is not grossly immoral nor highly reprehensible which will
legal profession. warrant disbarment or suspension. But the Court reprimanded
respondent to be more prudent and cautious.
FACTS
CASE 20
The case is a disbarment case against respondent on the ground of
gross immorality. It was alleged that sometime in December 2004, Zaguirre v. Castillo
complainant seek for legal advice from peitioner regarding her
collectibles from a travel company. Respondent sent Demand Letter STATUTES
and sometime in February 2005, they met at Zensho Restaurant to
discuss the possibility of filing complaint against the travel company

Page 12 of 19
Rule 1.01
A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful On September 10, 1997, Atty. Castillo executed an affidavit, duly
conduct. acknowledged before a notary public, admitting his relationship with
Zaguirre, recognizing that the unborn child she was carrying was his,
Canon 7 and that he was willing to support the said child.
A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal However, when the child was born on December 9, 1997, Castillo
profession, and support the activities of the Integrated Bar of the started to refuse recognizing the child and giving her any form of
Philippines. support.

Castillo’s Claim:
Rule 7.03
(1) What transpired between them was merely mutual lust and
A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his
desire, and that he never courted her.
fitness to practice of law, nor should he, whether in public or private
life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal (2) He never represented himself as a single man, and that it is
profession. known in the office that he was married and had children.
(3) The child is not his because Zaguirre was seeing other men.
Immoral conduct (4) He only signed the affidavit to save Zaguirre from
Conduct which is so willful, flagrant or shameless as to show embarrassment. He did not know then that she was seeing other
indifference to the opinion of good and respectable members of the men.
community. Furthermore, such conduct must not only be immoral, but
grossly immoral. That is, it must be so corrupt as to constitute a Nonetheless, the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline found Atty.
criminal act or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree Castillo guilty of gross immoral conduct with a penalty of indefinite
or committed under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as to suspension from the practice of law.
shock the common sense of decency. ISSUES
1. WON Castillo is guilty of gross immoral conduct.
FACTS 2. WON indefinite suspension from the practice of law is the correct
Zaguirre and Castillo were officemates at the National Bureau of penalty.
Investigation (NBI) in 1996. Castillo, who represented himself a
single man, courted Zaguirre and promised to marry her. RULING
They had an intimate relationship from 1996 – 1997. At that time, 1. YES. The court agrees with the findings and recommendations of
Castillo was preparing for the Bar exams which he passed. the IBP.
Castillo was admitted to the Bar on May 10, 1997.
However, around the first week of May 1997, Zaguirre learned that In this case, Castillo committed 3 acts that do not conform to the strict
Castillo is a married man as Castillo’s wife went to her office, standards demanded of members of the profession: (1) extra-marital
confronted her about Zaguirre’s relationship with her husband, affair, (2) fathering a child with another woman, (3) reneging his
Castillo. At that moment, Zaguirre was already pregnant.

Page 13 of 19
notarized statement recognizing and undertaking to support his that after he took his oath in 1997, Castillo severed his ties with
child. Zaguirre and now lives with wife and children in Mindoro, which the
Court found as indication of his effort to mend his ways and
The Court previously held all these acts as unbecoming or below the recognize the impact of his offense on the noble profession.
standards of morality required of every lawyer, demonstrating an
unscrupulousness that is highly censurable.
CASE 21
Court’s answer to Castillo’s defenses VENTURA VS ATTY. SAMSON
(1) He did not deny his affair with Zaguirre. The Court was AC NO. 9608, Nov. 27,2012
appalled at his reprehensible and amoral attitude when he said, “men
are polygamous in nature.” PARTIES:
(2) Not using deception does not absolve him gross immorality Complainant: Maria Victoria B. Ventura
because the fitness to be a member of the legal profession is not Respondent: Atty. Danilo Samson
dependent on whether the other party knowingly engaged in an
immoral relationship with him. FACTS:
(3) In pari delicto (i.e Zaguirre being in in equal fault for seeing other - Complainant Maria Victoria B. Ventura led on July 29, 2004 a
men) is immaterial because the purpose of the proceeding was to Complaint 2 2 for Disbarment or Suspension before the
purge the law profession of unworthy members and not to grant Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Commission on Bar
relief to complainant. Discipline against respondent Atty. Danilo S. Samson for
(4) Same with (3). "grossly immoral conduct."
- In her complaint: (Maria Ventura)
The Court also further held that since he was reviewing for the Bar at 2. Ventura executed a Sworn Statement dated Apr. 19,2002
the time he was having an affair with Zaguirre, he knew very well that and a Supplement-Complaint dated May 10, 2002, stating
to be admitted to the Bar, he must possess a good moral character, herein that the crime of RAPE was committed against her
and that continuous possession of such character is essential in when she was 13 years by Atty. Samson who is married
maintaining good standing in the profession. Therefore, admission to to Teresita Samson.
the Bar does not preclude subsequent judicial inquiry concerning his a) Sworn Statement content:
mental or moral fitness to become a lawyer. Also, since the practice Sometime in Dec. 2001 at around midnight she was
of law is merely a privilege, one can be deprived of his license sleeping in the maid’s room at respondent’s house
when it has been ascertained by the court that he is guilty of when respondent entered and went on top of her, he
misconduct. kissed her lips, sucked her breast and had sexual
intercourse. Another incident happened on Mar.
2. YES. The IBP was correct in giving Castillo a penalty of indefinite 19,2002 at respondent’s farm in Agusan del sur.
suspension rather than disbarment because disbarment should not Respondent asked her to go with him to the farm
be meted out if a lesser punishment could be given. It was shown where he sexually abused her, thereafter, respondent

Page 14 of 19
 gave her 500 pesos and warned not to tell her mother 2. Respondent admits the allegation of par. 2 of the complaint
or he would kill her mother effect that Ventura filed a complaint against him for rape with
b) Supplement-Complaint content: qualification that the said complainant for rape was dismissed.
Respondent allowed her to sleep in his house after Respondent however has no knowledge or information to the
her mother agreed to let her stay there while she truth of the allegation that she was 13 years old
studied at the Agusan National Highschool. On March
5. Respondent denies par. 8 that acts of respondent having
19,2002 respondent forced her to ride a multi-cab.
sex with complainant constitute gross immoral conduct. He
When they arrived at his poultry, respondent dragged
alleged that it was done with mutual agreement after
her to dilapidated shack. She resisted his advances
respondent gave money to complainant for sex
but her efforts proved futile.
3. In her counter-affidavit, herein respondent admitted that 6. The complaint is instigated by Corazon Ventura who was
sexual intercourse indeed transpired between them an employee at the Law Oce of respondent herein. The said
4. After the conduct of preliminary investigation, the Oce of Corazon Ventura entertained hatred and [had a grudge]
the Provincial Prosecutor of Agusan Del Sur, Philippines against the herein respondent who terminated her services
issued a RESOLUTION dated 10 June 2002 dismissing due to misunderstanding.
the charge of RAPE and nding the existence of probable
cause for the crime of QUALIFIED SEDUCTION and 7. The ling of the Criminal Case against respondent as well as
issued the corresponding INFORMATION for QUALIFIED this Administrative Case is a well-orchestrated and planned
SEDUCTION on 04 July 2002. act of Corazon Ventura as vengeance against respondent.
5. Complainant filed a motion for reconsideration which was
8. xxxxxxx
denied
6. The aforesaid resolution was elevated to the DOJ by way 9. xxxxxxx
of petition for review.

8. The act/s committed by the herein Respondent Atty. Danilo

S. Samson against the herein Complainant MARIA VICTORIA Respondent further alleged therein that complainant usually
B. VENTURA MARIA VICTORIA B. VENTURA as stayed late at night with her male friends when her mother
hereinbefore stated clearly constitute . . . "grossly immoral was out of the house. He claimed that he heard rumors that
conduct grossly immoral conduct" under Section 27 of Rule complainant had sexual affairs with different boys.
138 of the Rules of Court of the Philippines which provides for Respondent narrated that on March 19, 2002, he saw
a penalty of "DISBARMENT or SUSPENSION DISBARMENT complainant with some of her classmates near their rented
house.
or SUSPENSION of an Attorney by the of an Attorney by the
SUPREME COURT SUPREME COURT. Respondent narrated that on March 19, 2002, he saw
* RESPONDENT ALLEGED IN HIS ANSWER: complainant with some of her classmates near their rented
house. Complainant told him that they wanted to go out to

Page 15 of 19
swim but they did not have money. When she asked if he RULING:
could spare some amount, he gave her money. He told her in
Yes. From the undisputed facts gathered from the evidence
jest that he wanted to see her that afternoon and go to a place
and the admissions of respondent himself, we nd that
where they could be alone, and he was surprised when she
respondent's act of engaging in sex with a young lass, the
agreed
daughter of his former employee, constitutes gross immoral
Respondent insisted that what happened between them was conduct that warrants sanction. Respondent not only admitted
the first and the last incident. He claimed that he was able to he had sexual intercourse with complainant but also showed
confirm that complainant is no longer a virgin. no remorse whatsoever when he asserted that he did nothing
wrong because she allegedly agreed and he even gave her
Then, on December 14, 2006, complainant and her mother
money. Indeed, his act of having carnal knowledge of a
appeared before the public prosecutor and executed their
woman other than his wife manifests his disrespect for the
respective Affidavits of Desistance. Complainant stated that
laws on the sanctity of marriage and his own marital vow of
what happened between respondent and her in March 2002
fidelity. Moreover, the fact that he procured the act by enticing
was based on mutual understanding. Thus, she was
a very young woman with money showed his utmost moral
withdrawing the complaint she led against respondent before
depravity and low regard for the dignity of the human person
the RTC as well as the one she led before the IBP
and the ethics of his profession.
Commission on Bar Discipline. Accordingly, the criminal case
against respondent was dismissed. The Court is mindful of the dictum that the power to disbar
must be exercised with great caution, and only in a clear case
On November 10, 2007, the Board of Governors of the IBP
of misconduct that seriously affects the standing and
issued Resolution No. XVIII-2007-237, to wit:
character of the lawyer as an officer of the Court and as a
…….. Atty. Danilo S. Samson is hereby SUSPENDED member of the bar. Thus, where a lesser penalty, such as
SUSPENDED from the practice of law for (5) years with Stern temporary suspension, could accomplish the end desired,
Warning. disbarment should never be decreed. 26 26 However, in the
present case, the seriousness of the offense compels the
Complainant now moves to reconsider the IBP Resolution. Court to wield its power to disbar as it appears to be the most
She argues that the penalty imposed by the IBP is not appropriate penalty.
commensurate to the gravity and depravity of the offense
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Danilo S. Samson is
He further stresses that because of his admission and hereby DISBARRED DISBARRED for Gross Immoral
remorse, and since this is the first time he has been found Conduct, Violation of his oath of office, and Violation of
administratively liable, he is entitled to a reduction of the Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 of the Code of
penalty to one year suspension from the practice of law. Professional Responsibility
ISSUE: WON the penalty for disbarment is proper.

Page 16 of 19
 The pertinent provisions in the Code of Professional Facts:
Responsibility provide:
Stemmerik visited the PH and was introduced to Mas. He expressed
CANON 1 — A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE his interest in wanting to acquire a property in the PH as he finds the
CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND PH beautiful. Mas told Stemmerik that he could legally acquire and
PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL own real property in the Philippines. Respondent even
PROCESSES. suggested an 86,998 sq.m. property in Quarry, Agusuin, Cawag,
Subic, Zambales with the assurance that the property was
Rule 1.01. — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
alienable.
immoral or deceitful conduct.

xxx xxx xxx

Stemmerik agreed to purchase said property with Mas as his
CANON 7 — A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD
representative and attorney-in-fact. Stemmerik also tasked Mas to
THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL
prepare all the necessary documents as an attorney. Mas demanded
PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE
and received a fee of P400,000. Confident that respondent would
INTEGRATED BAR.
faithfully carry out his task, complainant returned to Denmark,
xxx xxx xxx entrusting the processing of the necessary paperwork to
respondent.
Rule 7.03. — A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that
adversely reects on his tness to practice law, nor shall he,
whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous
Mas prepared a contract to sell for the property between Stemmerik,
manner to the discredit of the legal profession.
represented by Mas, and the purported owner, Bonifacio de Mesa. A
Deed of Sale conveying the property from de Mesa to Ailyn
Gonzales for P3.8M was prepared and notarized. Respondent also
drafted and notarized an agreement between Stemmerik and
Gonzales stating that it was complainant who provided the
CASE 22
funds for the purchase of the property. Complainant then gave
Stemmerik v. Mas respondent the full amount of the purchase price (P3.8 million)
for which respondent issued an acknowledgment receipt.
Parties:

Complainant - Keld Stemmerik, citizen and resident of Denmark

Stemmerik tried to get in touch with Mas to inquire about when the
Respondent – Atty. Leonuel Mas
property could be registered in his name. Mas refused to answer
Stemmerik’s calls and emails.

Page 17 of 19
 The Board of Governors of the IBP adopted the
findings and recommendation of the CBD with the modication
In 2005, Stemmerik visited the PH again. He engaged the services
that respondent was further required to return the amount of
of the Jimenez Gonzales Liwanag Bello Valdez Caluya &
P4.2 million (3.8 m property value + 400k collected fees) to
Fernandez Law Office to ascertain the status of the property he
respondent.
supposedly bought. He was devastated to learn that aliens
could not own land under Philippine laws. Also, Community Issue:
Environment & Natural Resources office (CENRO) of the
WON respondent was properly given notice of the disbarment
Department of Environment and Natural Resources in Olongapo
proceedings against him? Yes. Court issued notice to Mas’s
City said that the said property was inalienable and thus cant be
registered address with IBP. Not court’s fault if he didn’t update.
disposed of or acquired.
WON Mas violated Canon 1 of Code of Responsibility? Yes. Did not
obey legal process of acquiring land.
Stemmerik with his new attorneys-in-fact, exerted efforts to find Mas
SC Ruling:
and charge him for his fraudulent acts. The IBP disclosed that Mas
hasn’t been paying his membership dues and has abandoned his The respondent did not le any answer or position paper, nor
law office in Olangapo City. did he appear during the scheduled mandatory conference.
Respondent in fact abandoned his last known address, his law
office in Olongapo City, after he committed the embezzlement.
Stemmerik filed disbarment case against Mas and prayed for Mas’s Mas himself rendered the service of notice on him impossible,
expulsion. Mas didn’t file his answer despite notices sent to his the notice requirement cannot apply to him and he is thus
address. He also didn’t attend the conference’s with the CBD considered to have waived it. The law does not require that the
(Commission on Bar Discipline). impossible be done.

CBD/IBP ruling: In this connection, lawyers must update their records

with the IBP by informing the IBP National Oce or their
Respondent used his position as a lawyer to mislead
respective chapters 19 19 of any change in oce or residential
complainant on the matter of land ownership by a foreigner.
address and other contact details. 20 20 In case such change
The CBD found respondent to be "nothing more than an
is not duly updated, service of notice on the oce or residential
embezzler" who misused his professional status as an attorney
address appearing in the records of the IBP National Oce shall
as a tool for deceiving complainant and absconding with
constitute sucient notice to a lawyer for purposes of
complainant's money. He abused the trust and condence
administrative proceedings against him.
reposed by complainant in him. The CBD recommended the
disbarment of respondent. Respondent committed a serious breach of his oath as
a lawyer. He is also guilty of culpable violation of the Code of

Page 18 of 19
Professional Responsibility, the code of ethics of the legal
profession.
CANON 2
A lawyer who resorts to nefarious schemes to
CASE 23
circumvent the law and uses his legal knowledge to further his
selsh ends to the great prejudice of others, poses a clear and CASE 24
present danger to the rule of law and to the legal system.
CASE 25

CASE 26
Laws violated:

CANON 1 — A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE

CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND
PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES.

Rule 1.01. — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,

immoral or deceitful conduct. A lawyer shall not engage in
unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct

Rule 1.02. — A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities

aimed at A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at
defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal
system.

Section 7, Article XII of the Constitution provides: SEC. 7. Save

in cases of hereditary succession, no private lands shall be
transferred or conveyed except to individuals, corporations, or
associations qualified to acquire or hold lands of the public
domain.

Sanctions:

Disbarred. Respondent is hereby ORDERED ORDERED to return

to complainant Keld Stemmerik the total amount of P4.2 million
with interest at 12% per annum from the date of promulgation
of this resolution until full payment. Respondent is further
DIRECTED DIRECTED to submit to the Court proof of payment
of the amount within ten days from payment.

Page 19 of 19