Facts:

The case involves Armando A. Ala as the complainant and Atty. Juan G. Atencia as the respondent. The complaint was filed on November 14, 1973, by the Solicitor General, charging Atencia with malpractice, gross misconduct, and betrayal of trust. The basis for these charges stemmed from a 1968 investigation by the provincial fiscal of Catanduanes regarding an extortion complaint against Atencia, which was initially lodged by Ala in 1966. At the time of the events, Ala was a 55-year-old married provincial auditor with six children, while Miguela R. Luyon, a 36-year-old unmarried woman, worked as a clerk in the auditor's office. Miguela gave birth to a daughter, Maria Fe, in 1965, and falsely listed a man named Jose R. Avila as the father on the birth certificate.

In 1966, Miguela sought legal assistance from Atencia to establish Ala as the father of her child, leading to the filing of a paternity suit (Civil Case No. 562) against Ala. During the proceedings, Ala discovere...

Facts:

1. Background of the Parties:

   • Complainant Armando A. Ala was a married man with six children, employed as the provincial auditor of Catanduanes.
   • Miguela R. Luyon, an unmarried woman and employee in the auditor's office, gave birth to a child, Maria Fe, in 1965. The birth certificate falsely listed Jose R. Avila as the father.
   • Atty. Juan G. Atencia, admitted to the bar in 1953, was engaged by Miguela to file a paternity suit against Ala, alleging that Ala was the father of Maria Fe.

2. The Paternity Suit:

   • On June 24, 1966, Atencia filed a complaint for recognition and support on behalf of Maria Fe, attaching an affidavit allegedly signed by Ala acknowledging paternity.
   • Ala denied signing the affidavit and confronted the deputy clerk of court, Lauro Fajardo, who had purportedly notarized it.

3. Alleged Extortion:

   • On June 27, 1966, Atencia wrote a letter to Miguela, warning her against compromising the case with Ala, as it would prejudice Maria Fe's interests.
   • On July 1 and 2, 1966, Ala met with Atencia, who allegedly demanded money in exchange for dismissing the case. Ala paid Atencia P300 on July 2 and sent an additional P700 via air cargo on July 5.
   • Atencia denied receiving money from Ala, claiming the P700 was sent by Miguela to cover his expenses.

4. Withdrawal of the Case:

   • On August 2, 1966, Miguela filed a motion to dismiss the paternity suit, stating she no longer wished to pursue the case and had terminated Atencia's services.
   • The court dismissed the case on August 8, 1966.

5. Administrative Complaints:

   • Ala filed a disbarment complaint against Atencia, alleging extortion and unethical conduct.
   • Miguela also filed a complaint against Atencia, accusing him of betraying her trust and using confidential information against her.

6. Investigation and Findings:

   • The provincial fiscal of Catanduanes investigated the matter and found that Atencia had indeed received P1,040 from Ala but failed to fulfill his promise to dismiss the case.
   • The Solicitor General filed a complaint for disbarment based on the fiscal's findings.

Issue:

1. Whether Atty. Juan G. Atencia committed malpractice, gross misconduct, and betrayal of trust by allegedly extorting money from Armando A. Ala.
2. Whether Atencia's actions, including his handling of the paternity suit and his failure to return the affidavit, constituted unethical conduct warranting disciplinary action.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)