#1 Case Title: ATTY. ILUMINADA M. VAFLOR-FABROA, complainant, vs. ATTY.

OSCAR
PAGUINTO, respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Violation of Canons 1, 8, 10 and
Rule 12.03 of Code of Professional Responsibility and Lawyers Oath.
Syllabi Class: Administrative Law|Attorneys|Code of Professional Responsibility
Syllabi:
1. Administrative Law; Attorneys; Respondent violated the Lawyers Oath that a lawyer shall
not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit nor give aid or
consent to the same.+
2. Same; Same; Code of Professional Responsibility; Respondent violated Rule 12.03 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility which states that a lawyer shall not, often obtaining
extensions of time to file pleadings, memoranda or briefs, let the period lapse without submitting
the same or offering an explanation for his failure to do so. +
Division: EN BANC
Docket Number: A.C. No. 6273
Ponente: CARPIO-MORALES
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, respondent, Atty. Oscar P. Paguinto, is SUSPENDED for two years from the practice
of law for violation of Canons 1, 8, 10, and Rule 12.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
and the Lawyers Oath, effective immediately. Let copies of this Decision be furnished the Office
of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to respondents personal record as an attorney; the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and all courts in the country for their information and guidance.

#2 Case Title: SPOUSES NICASIO and DONELITA SAN PEDRO, complainants, vs.
ATTY. ISAGANI A. MENDOZA, respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys ; Legal Ethics ; Attorneys Fees ;
Syllabi:
1. Same; Same; Same; The rule is that when there is a disagreement, or when the
client disputes the amount claimed by the lawyer . . . the lawyer should not arbitrarily
apply the funds in his possession to the payment of his fees.+
2. Attorneys; Legal Ethics; It has been said that [t]he practice of law is a privilege
bestowed on lawyers who meet the high standards of legal proficiency and morality.+
3. Same; Same; Code of Professional Responsibility; When a lawyer collects or
receives money from his client for a particular purpose (such as for filing fees,

registration fees, transportation and office expenses), he should promptly account to the
client how the money was spent. If he does not use the money for its intended purpose,
he must immediately return it to the client. His failure either to render an accounting or
to return the money (if the intended purpose of the money does not materialize)
constitutes a blatant disregard of Rule 16.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
(CPR).+
4. Same; Same; Attorneys Fees; Retaining Lien; Elements of a Valid Retaining
Lien.+
Division: SECOND DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 5440
Ponente: LEONEN
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Isagani A. Mendoza is SUSPENDED from the practice of
law for three (3) months. He is also ordered to RETURN to complainants the amount of
P68,250.00 with 6% legal interest from the date of finality of this judgment until full
payment. Respondent is further DIRECTED to submit to this court proof of payment of
the amount within 10 days from payment. Let a copy of this resolution be entered in
respondent Atty. Isagani A. Mendozas personal record with the Office of the Bar
Confidant, and a copy be served to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Office of
the Court Administrator for circulation to all the courts in the land.

#3 Case Titles: JOSEFINA CARANZA VDA. DE SALDIVAR, complainant, vs. ATTY.

RAMON SG CABANES, JR., respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Gross Negligence in
Violation of Canon 17, and Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of Canon 18 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys|Legal Ethics|Gross Negligence|Penalties
Division: SECOND DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 7749
Ponente: PERLAS-BERNABE,J.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Ramon SG Cabanes, Jr. is found guilty of gross negligence
in violation of Canon 17, and Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of Canon 18 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. He is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period
of six (6) months, effective upon his receipt of this Resolution, and is STERNLY WARNED
that a repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt with more severely. Let a copy

of this Resolution be furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, and the Office of the Court Administrator for circulation to all the courts.

#4 Case Titles: NATIVIDAD P. NAVARRO and HILDA S. PRESBITERO, complainants,

vs. ATTY. IVAN M. SOLIDUM, JR., respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys|Disbarment
Division: EN BANC
Docket Number: A.C. No. 9872
Counsel: Bimbo Lavides for respondent.
Ponente: PER CURIAM
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds Atty. Ivan M. Solidum, Jr. GUILTY of violating Rule 1.01,
Canon 16, Rule 16.01, and Rule 16.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Accordingly, the Court DISBARS him from the practice of law effective immediately upon
his receipt of this Decision. Atty. Solidum is ORDERED to return the advances he received
from Hilda S. Presbitero, amounting to P50,000, and to submit to the Office of the Bar
Confidant his compliance with this order within thirty days from finality of this Decision.
Let copies of this Decision be furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant, the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines for distribution to all its chapters, and the Office of the Court
Administrator for dissemination to all courts all over the country. Let a copy of this
Decision be attached to the personal records of respondent.

#5 Case Titles: ARCATOMY S. GUARIN, complainant, vs. ATTY. CHRISTINE A.C.

LIMPIN, respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys; Legal Ethics; Disbarment;
Syllabi:
1. Same; Same; Disbarment; Disbarment proceedings are sui generis and can
proceed independently of civil and criminal cases.+
2. Attorneys; Legal Ethics; 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.+
Division: THIRD DIVISION

Docket Number: A.C. No. 10576

Counsel: Gatchalian, Castro & Mawis for respondent.
Ponente: VILLARAMA, JR.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, we find respondent Atty. Christine A.C. Limpin GUILTY of violation of Canon
1, Rule 1.01 and Rule 1.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, we
SUSPEND respondent Atty. Christine A.C. Limpin from the practice of law for SIX (6)
MONTHS effective upon finality of this Decision, with a warning that a repetition of the
same or similar act in the future will be dealt with more severely. Let copies of this
Decision be furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant to be appended to respondents
personal record as an attorney, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the Department of
Justice, and all courts in the country for their information and guidance.

#6 Case Title: NESTOR B. FIGUERAS and BIENVENIDO VICTORIA, JR.,

complainants, vs. ATTY. DIOSDADO B. JIMENEZ, respondent.
Case Nature: PETITION for review on certiorari of the resolutions of the IBP Board of
Governors.
Syllabi Class: Administrative Law|Attorneys|Penalties
Division: FIRST DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 9116
Ponente: VILLARAMA, JR.,J.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. Atty. Diosdado B. Jimenez is found administratively
liable for violation of Rule 12.04, Canon 12 and Rule 18.03, Canon 18 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. He is suspended from the practice of law for one (1) month
effective from finality of this Resolution, with warning that a repetition of the same or
similar violation shall be dealt with more severely. Let a copy of this Resolution be
furnished, upon its finality, to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and all the courts in
the Philippines, and spread on the personal record of respondent lawyer in the Office of
the Bar Confidant, Supreme Court of the Philippines.

#7 Case Titles: BERNARD N. JANDOQUILE, complainant, vs. ATTY. QUIRINO P.

REVILLA, JR., respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.

Syllabi Class: Notary Public|2004 Rules on Notarial Practice

Syllabi:
1. Notary Public; 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice; Atty. Revilla, Jr. readily admitted
that he notarized the complaint-affidavit signed by his relatives within the fourth civil
degree of affinity. Section 3(c), Rule IV of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice clearly
disqualifies him from notarizing the complaint-affidavit, from performing the notarial act,
since two of the affiants or principals are his relatives within the fourth civil degree of
affinity.+
2. Same; 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice; A person shall not perform a notarial act
if the person involved as signatory to the instrument or document (1) is not in the
notarys presence personally at the time of the notarization and (2) is not personally
known to the notary public or otherwise identified by the notary public through a
competent evidence of identity.+
3. Same; If the notary public knows the affiants personally, he need not require them to
show their valid identification cards.+
Division: FIRST DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 9514
Ponente: VILLARAMA, JR.,J.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Quirino P. Revilla, Jr., is REPRIMANDED and DISQUALIFIED
from being commissioned as a notary public, or from performing any notarial act if he is
presently commissioned as a notary public, for a period of three (3) months. Atty. Revilla,
Jr. is further DIRECTED to INFORM the Court, through an affidavit, once the period of his
disqualification has lapsed.

#8 Case Titles: LICERIO DIZON, complainant, vs. ATTY. MARCELINO CABUCANA,

JR., respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.
Syllabi Class: Notary Public
Division: THIRD DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 10185
Counsel: Soller, Peig, Escat & Pieg for complainant.
Ponente: MENDOZA,J.

Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Atty. Marcelino Cabucana, Jr. GUILTY of violating
Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, the Court
SUSPENDS him from the practice of law for three (3) months, REVOKES his incumbent
notarial commission, if any, and PROHIBITS him from being commissioned as a notary
public for two (2) years, effective immediately, with a stern WARNING that a repetition of
the same or similar offense shall be dealt with more severely. Let copies of this resolution
be furnished the Bar Confidant to be included in the records of the respondent; the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines for distribution to all its chapters; and the Office of the
Court Administrator for dissemination to all Courts throughout the country.

#9 Case Titles: JOSEFINA M. ANION, complainant, vs. ATTY. CLEMENCIO

SABITSANA, JR., respondent.
Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Disbarment.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys
Syllabi:
1. Attorney-Client Relationships; Conflict of Interests; The relationship
between a lawyer and his/her client should ideally be imbued with the highest
level of trust and confidence; Part of the lawyers duty in this regard is to avoid
representing conflicting interests, a matter covered by Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility.+
2. Attorneys; Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are sui generis.+
3. Same; Same; Tests to Determine whether or not Conflict of Interests is Present.+
Division: SECOND DIVISION
Docket Number: A.C. No. 5098
Ponente: BRION,J.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court resolves to ADOPT the findings and
recommendations of the Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines. Atty. Clemencio C. Sabitsana, Jr. is found GUILTY of misconduct for
representing conflicting interests in violation of Rule 15.03, Canon 15 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. He is hereby SUSPENDED for one (1) year from the practice of
law. Atty. Sabitsana is DIRECTED to inform the Court of the date of his receipt of this
Decision so that we can determine the reckoning point when his suspension shall take
effect.

#10 Case Title: FLORENCE TEVES MACARUBBO, complainant, vs. ATTY. EDMUNDO
L. MACARUBBO, respondent.

RE: PETITION (FOR EXTRAORDINARY MERCY) OF EDMUNDO L. MACARUBBO.

Case Nature: ADMINISTRATIVE CASE in the Supreme Court. Petition to be Reinstated in
the Rules of Attorneys.
Syllabi Class: Attorneys|Legal Ethics
Syllabi:
1. Attorneys; Legal Ethics; While the Court is ever mindful of its duty to discipline and
even remove its errant officers, concomitant to it is its duty to show compassion to those
who have reformed their ways.+
Division: EN BANC
Docket Number: Adm. Case No. 6148
Counsel: Sacred Heart Parish Legal Aid Office
Ponente: PERLAS-BERNABE,J.
Dispositive Portion:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant petition is GRANTED. Respondent
Edmundo L. Macarubbo is hereby ordered REINSTATED in the Roll of Attorneys.