Case Digest (A.C. No. 1445)
Facts:
Benita A. Agbayani v. Atty. Jaime V. Agtang, Administrative Case No. 1445, October 05, 1976, Supreme Court Second Division, Antonio, J., writing for the Court.The complainant, Benita A. Agbayani, filed a complaint for disbarment against respondent Atty. Jaime V. Agtang, alleging that Agtang knowingly made a false statement in Special Proceedings No. 4943-III (the adoption petition of Geronimo Reyes) by representing that Reyes had no child when, according to the complainant, Reyes in fact had a child named Balbina Reyes; this alleged falsehood purportedly misled the trial court into granting the adoption.
After respondent filed his comment on May 26, 1975, the matter was referred by the Court on June 4, 1976 to the Office of the Solicitor General for investigation, report and recommendation. The OSG set and reset hearings several times (November 27–28, 1975; December 19, 1975; July 26, 1976) with postponements—some at the complainant's request and one by joint motion—until August 16, 1976, when both parties appeared but the complainant submitted an affidavit of desistance stating she had been misled into filing the complaint and desired to withdraw it. Despite that affidavit, the Solicitor assigned to the case continued the investigation.
The respondent presented evidence at the OSG investigation. The complainant affirmed her affidavit of desistance but did not present testimony otherwise. Respondent testified that in mid‑August 1973 he interviewed Geronimo Reyes and that Reyes stated he had no child and was a widower; respondent signed the verification and secured consent affidavits for the adoption on August 20, 1973. The respondent also denied prior acquaintance with Reyes and frequenting Reyes's barrio. A witness, Honorio Tunac, corroborated that he was present at respondent’s house during the interview, that Reyes answered he had no child, and that the interview lasted some 40–50 minutes.
On September 8, 1976 the Acting Solicitor General submitted a report recommending dismissal of the charges, finding that respondent had relied in good faith on Reyes's representations, that the complainant admitted she had been misled and had personal motives (her husband wa...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the complainant establish by convincing proof that respondent committed a disbarable offense by making false representations in the adoption petition?
- Did respondent act with bad faith or intent to deceive the court, such that his reliance on Geronimo Reyes's statements does not excuse t...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)