Title
Arsenio vs. Tabuzo
Case
A.C. No. 8658
Decision Date
Apr 24, 2017
A lawyer faced disbarment over alleged misconduct during a case hearing, but the Supreme Court dismissed the complaint due to insufficient evidence.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.C. No. 8658)

Facts:

  1. Administrative Complaint Against JS Contractor:

    • Francis C. Arsenio (Arsenio) filed an administrative complaint against JS Contractor, a recruitment agency, before the Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA).
    • Atty. Johan A. Tabuzo (Atty. Tabuzo) was the Overseas Employment Adjudicator assigned to the case.
  2. Incident During the Hearing:

    • During a scheduled hearing on May 10, 2000, Atty. Tabuzo asked Arsenio to sign three blank sheets of paper, which Arsenio complied with.
    • A week later, Arsenio inquired about the purpose of the signed blank sheets. Atty. Tabuzo responded angrily, using offensive language and threatening Arsenio.
  3. Dismissal of Arsenio’s Case:

    • Arsenio later discovered that his case against JS Contractor was dismissed.
    • He filed a complaint against Atty. Tabuzo before the Office of the Ombudsman for violation of Republic Act (RA) No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act).
  4. Ombudsman’s Resolution:

    • The Ombudsman found probable cause against Atty. Tabuzo and ordered the filing of an Information against him.
    • Atty. Tabuzo filed a Motion for Reconsideration, claiming he was not served any summons and that there was a discrepancy in his name (referred to as "Atty. Romeo Tabuso").
  5. Acquittal in Criminal Case:

    • Atty. Tabuzo was acquitted by the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Mandaluyong City for violation of RA No. 3019.
  6. Disbarment Complaint:

    • Arsenio filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Tabuzo before the Supreme Court, alleging conduct unbecoming of a lawyer.
    • The case was referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation.
  7. IBP Proceedings:

    • The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) recommended a reprimand for Atty. Tabuzo, but the IBP Board of Governors modified this to a three-month suspension.
    • Atty. Tabuzo filed a Motion for Reconsideration, which was denied.

Issue:

  • Whether the disbarment complaint against Atty. Tabuzo constitutes sufficient grounds for his disbarment.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Conclusion:

  • The Supreme Court dismissed the disbarment complaint against Atty. Johan A. Tabuzo due to insufficient evidence.


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.