Title
Adez Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
Case
G.R. No. 100643
Decision Date
Dec 12, 1995
Atty. Dacanay disbarred for falsifying court records; reinstated after three years, demonstrating remorse and readiness to uphold legal standards.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 100643)

Facts:

  1. Intercalation of Material Fact:
    On 30 October 1992, Atty. Benjamin M. Dacanay was found guilty of intercalating a material fact in a decision of the Court of Appeals, which he appealed to the Supreme Court on certiorari. This act altered the factual findings of the Court of Appeals, with the apparent purpose of misleading the Supreme Court to obtain a favorable judgment. As a result, Atty. Dacanay was disbarred from the practice of law.

  2. Motion for Reconsideration:
    On 20 November 1992, Atty. Dacanay filed a Motion for Reconsideration, claiming that the inserted words were written by his client, the President of Adez Realty, Inc., and were unwittingly adopted by his secretary when formalizing the petition. He argued that he would not risk committing such an act, especially since he was a nominee for a regional trial judge position. The Court denied his motion on 3 December 1992.

  3. Motion to Lift Disbarment:
    On 23 February 1994, Atty. Dacanay filed a Motion to Lift Disbarment, stating that he had learned his lesson, was remorseful, and had certifications of good moral character from various individuals, including religious leaders and judges. The Court denied this motion on 11 August 1994.

  4. Ex-Parte Motion to Lift Disbarment:
    On 1 December 1994, Atty. Dacanay filed another Ex-Parte Motion to Lift Disbarment, emphasizing his remorse, the hardship his family faced, and his involvement in civic and religious work. His wife also wrote to the Court, pleading for reconsideration. The Court noted his letter on 21 March 1995.

  5. Further Pleas for Reinstatement:
    On 4 August 1995 and 17 November 1995, Atty. Dacanay sent additional letters to the Court, reiterating his remorse, the financial struggles he faced, and the impact of his disbarment on his family. The Court noted these letters on 12 September 1995 and 17 November 1995, respectively.

Issue:

  • (Unlock)

Ruling:

  • (Unlock)

Ratio:

  1. Reflection and Redemption:
    The Court emphasized that the three-year disbarment period provided Atty. Dacanay with ample time to reflect on his actions, seek redemption, and demonstrate his readiness to uphold the dignity of the legal profession.

  2. Admission of Guilt and Remorse:
    Atty. Dacanay’s admission of guilt, repeated pleas for reinstatement, and expressions of remorse were significant factors in the Court’s decision to lift his disbarment. These actions showed his acknowledgment of his wrongdoing and his commitment to reform.

  3. Conditions for Reinstatement:
    The Court reiterated that the practice of law is a privilege contingent upon maintaining high moral and professional standards. Atty. Dacanay was sternly warned that any future misconduct would be met with severe consequences.

  4. Role of the Supreme Court:
    The Supreme Court, as the guardian of the legal profession, has the ultimate disciplinary power over attorneys. This authority is not only a right but also a duty to ensure that members of the bar adhere to the highest standards of integrity and professionalism.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.