Case Digest (A.C. No. 7332)
Facts:
On January 21, 1999, Eduardo A. Abella (complainant) filed an illegal dismissal case against the Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (PT&T) before the Cebu City Regional Arbitration Branch (RAB) of the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), which was docketed as RAB-VII-01-0128-99. The Labor Arbiter, Ernesto F. Carreon, ruled in favor of Abella on May 13, 1999, ordering PT&T to pay him P113,100.00 as separation pay and P73,608.00 as backwages. PT&T, dissatisfied with this decision, appealed to the NLRC, which, on September 12, 2001, set aside the Labor Arbiter's ruling and ordered PT&T to reinstate Abella, along with backwages, 13th month pay, service incentive leave pay, moral damages, and attorney's fees. After a motion for reconsideration, the NLRC modified the monetary awards but maintained that Abella was illegally dismissed. PT&T subsequently filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals (CA), which, on September...
Case Digest (A.C. No. 7332)
Facts:
Background of the Case:
Eduardo A. Abella (complainant) filed an illegal dismissal case against Philippine Telegraph and Telephone Corporation (PT&T) before the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) in 1999. The Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Abella, ordering PT&T to pay separation pay and backwages. PT&T appealed, and the NLRC modified the decision, ordering reinstatement and payment of backwages, among other benefits.
Court of Appeals Decision:
The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the NLRC’s ruling but modified it to award separation pay in lieu of reinstatement. The CA later granted Abella’s motion for partial reconsideration, remanding the case to the Labor Arbiter for recomputation of monetary awards. The CA’s decision became final and executory on July 19, 2004.
Execution of the Decision:
Abella filed a Motion for Issuance of a Writ of Execution on October 25, 2004, which was assigned to Labor Arbiter Ricardo G. Barrios, Jr. (respondent). After months of inaction, Abella filed a Second Motion for Execution on March 3, 2005.
Allegation of Solicitation:
On November 4, 2005, Abella personally followed up with Barrios, who allegedly suggested that the matter could be “easily fixed” and asked, “how much is mine?” Abella claims he was forced to offer P20,000, which Barrios increased to P30,000. Before leaving, Barrios demanded and received P1,500 from Abella.
Issuance and Quashal of Writ of Execution:
Barrios issued a writ of execution on November 7, 2005, directing the sheriff to collect P1,470,082.60 from PT&T. PT&T moved to quash, which Barrios initially denied but later granted, issuing a new writ reducing Abella’s monetary awards to P114,585.
NLRC Annulment of Respondent’s Actions:
The NLRC annulled Barrios’ December 9, 2005 Order, stating he had no authority to modify the final and executory CA decision.
Disbarment Complaint:
Abella filed a disbarment complaint against Barrios, alleging violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility for soliciting money and issuing a wrongful decision to benefit PT&T.
Issue:
The sole issue is whether respondent Ricardo G. Barrios, Jr. is guilty of gross immorality for violating Rules 1.01 and 1.03, Canon 1, and Rule 6.02, Canon 6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Ruling:
The Court found Barrios guilty of gross immoral conduct and gross misconduct. He violated Rules 1.01 and 1.03 of Canon 1 and Rule 6.02 of Canon 6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Court imposed a fine of P40,000 on Barrios, noting that he had already been disbarred in a prior case, preventing a duplicate disbarment ruling.
Ratio:
Violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility:
- Rule 1.01 prohibits unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.
- Rule 1.03 prohibits delaying a case for corrupt motives.
- Rule 6.02 prohibits lawyers in government service from using their position to advance private interests.
Gross Immoral Conduct and Gross Misconduct:
- Barrios’ actions, including soliciting money and improperly modifying a final court decision, constituted gross immoral conduct and gross misconduct.
- The Court emphasized that lawyers must uphold the highest moral standards, and any deviation warrants disciplinary action.
Finality of the CA Decision:
- The CA decision was final and executory, and Barrios had no authority to modify its terms. His actions undermined judicial integrity and the rule of law.
Sanctions:
- While Barrios was already disbarred in a prior case, the Court imposed a fine of P40,000 to penalize his transgressions and deter similar misconduct in the future.