CARLA CALOS LLB-MBA 1 ISIDRA BARRIENTOS VS ATTY ELERIZZA LIBIRAN- METEORO (A.C. No.

6408 August 31, 2004) Facts: On May 21, 2001 Isidra Barrientos filed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines against Atty. Elerizza A. Libiran-Meteoro a complaint for deciept and non-payment of debt. The letter- complaint stated that the respondent issued several bounced check of Equitable PCIBank due to insufficient funds in favor of Isidra and Olivia. May 16, 2001 through her sister in law tried to give complainant a title of parcel of land which was registered under the name of Victoria Villamar in exchanged for the bounced check; it discovered that the title was just entrusted to the respondent. ISSUES: Whether or not Deceits and Non payments of Debt ground for disbarment of a lawyer? HELD: NO. The general is that Lawyer may not be suspended or disbarred and the court may not be ordinarily assuming jurisdiction to discipline him in his non-professional or private capacity. Where, however the if the misconduct outside of the lawyers professional dealings is so gross a character as to show him morally unfit for the office and unworthy of the privileged which his licenses and the law confer on him, the court may be justified in suspending or removing him from office of attorney. Administrative sanction was warranted by the respondents gross misconduct and hereby suspended for six months and payment of debt to the complainant. TOLENTINO V. MENDOZA 440 SCRA 519 Complainants: PEDRO G. TOLENTINO, ROMEO M. LAYGO, SOLOMON M. LUMALANG, SR., MELITON D. EVANGELISTA, SR., and NELSON B. MELGAR Respondent: ATTY. NORBERTO M. MENDOZA, (A.C. No. 5151. October 19, 2004) FACTS: The complainants filed a complaint against Atty. Mendoza entitled Grossly Immoral Conduct and Gross Misconduct and alleging that Former Municipal Trial Court Judge Atty Mendoza abandoned his legal wife Felicitas Valderia for his paramour Marilyn Dela Fuente, who is married to Ramon G Marcos, they have been cohabiting in Oriental Mindoro openly

and publicly husband and wife and bear two children declaring in their birth certificate that they are legally married. ISSUE: Is the act of the respondent an immoral one? HELD: yes, The court finds the act of the respondent as violation to the code of professional responsibility that a lawyer shall not engage in an unlawful, deceitful and immoral act. The respondent is guilty of immorality and be suspended indefinitely from practicing his profession until he submits satisfactory proof that he has abandoned his immoral course of conduct. RICAFORT V. BANSIL 429 SCRA 194 COMPLAINANT: ATTY. FEDERICO RICAFORT RESPONDENT: ATTY. EDDIE R. BANSIL FACTS: On March 17, 2003, Atty. Federico Ricafort filed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines a complaint entitled Miscoduct and Violation of the Constitution on the right of the People to information on matters of Public Concerns and R.A 6173 against Atty. Eddie Bansil. The petition alleged that the respondent has been commissioned as a Notary Public of Guagua, Pampanga and has the required to submit his notarial book and documents to the RTC of Guagua Pampanga. Complainant requested Atty. Bacani to send respondent a word that he wanted to verify some documents contained in Notarial Book No. 15 series of 2002 and to bring the book to the Office of the Cleck of Court but the respondents answer was the book was lost due to flood. ISSUES: Whether or not the respondent violated the R.A 6173(CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARD FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEE) and administratively liable for misconduct and violation of Constitution for right of the people to information? HELD: NO. R.A. 6173 or the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public Officials And Employee will not apply to the present administrative complaint against the respondent hence, he is administratively liable for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility for not attending and granting the complainants request to look at his notarial book. The respondent is Guilty of Unprofessional Conduct.

RUDECON MANAGEMENT CORPORATION AND ATTY. RUGELIO D. TACORDA V. ATTY. MANUEL N.CAMACHO (A.C. NO. 6403, AUGUST 31, 2004) FACTS: Rudecon and Tacorda filed the instant complaint for disbarment or suspension against Atty. Camacho. Rudecon filed a motion before Branch 78 seeking to cite Singson and his counsel, Atty. Camacho, for contempt for having allegedly violated the rule against forum shopping. On September 3, 1998, Sisenando Singson, represented by herein respondent Atty.Manuel N. Camacho, filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City a complaint against herein complainant Rudecon Management Corporation for damages and reconveyance, docketed as Civil Case No. Q-98-35444. And the court, in its dispositive portion found them guilty. ISSUES: Whether or not Atty. Manuel N. Camacho is liable for violation of CPR. HELD: NO. Although respondent was held to be guilty in forum shopping, the court agreed with respondent that there was no intention on his part to mislead the court by concealing the pendency of Civil Case No. Q-98-35444 in Branch 79 when they filed the Motion for Intervention. The instant administrative complaint against Atty. Camacho is dismissed for Lack of Merit. SILVA VDA. DE FAJARDO V. BUGARING 440 SCRA 160 FACTS: Silva vda. De Fajardo filed an administrative case before the courts stem seeking for the disbarment of Atty. Bugaring for untruthful statements in allegedly trying to fleece her of P3,532,170 in attorneys fees. ISSUES: Whether or not the complaint is a ground for disbarment for untruthful statement of trying to deceit the complainant in collecting professional fee. HELD: NO. This disbarment case may proceed independently of the civil action for collection, without running afoul of the prohibition against forum shopping. HENCE RexieEfren A. Bugaring is found LIABLE for gross misconduct and is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of ONE (1) YEAR.