Case Digest (A.C. No. 10783)
Facts:
Atty. Benigno Bartolome v. Atty. Christopher A. Basilio, A.C. No. 10783, January 31, 2018, Supreme Court Special First Division, Perlas-Bernabe, J., writing for the Court.Complainant Atty. Benigno Bartolome filed administrative charges that led to the Court's October 14, 2015 Decision in Bartolome v. Basilio, where the Court found respondent Atty. Christopher A. Basilio guilty of violating the 2004 Rules of Notarial Practice and Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Decision imposed three penalties “effective immediately”: (a) suspension from the practice of law for one year; (b) revocation of his incumbent notarial commission; and (c) prohibition from being commissioned as a notary public for two years. The Decision was circulated to all courts for implementation.
Basilio, through counsel Atty. Edward L. Robea, maintained he received the Decision on December 2, 2015, and filed a motion for reconsideration which the Court denied with finality in a Resolution dated April 20, 2016. After reports that Basilio had continued to appear in court, Atty. Sotero T. Rambayon wrote the Office of the Chief Justice requesting inquiry; the matter was referred to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC), which recommended a show cause order requiring Basilio to state why he should not be held in contempt for failing to immediately comply with the suspension and to file sworn certifications proving cessation from practice.
Pursuant to the Court’s October 5, 2016 Resolution, Basilio was required to show cause and submit certifications. He responded, asserting he believed the suspension was held in abeyance while his motion for reconsideration was pending, relying on Maniago v. De Dios. Basilio later filed a Motion to Lift Suspension (dated July 19/25, 2017) accompanied by an Affidavit of Cessation and certifications from the IBP-Tarlac Chapter and several trial courts, stating he commenced serving the suspension on July 9, 2016 and had ceased notarial acts since December 2, 2015.
The OBC, however, in its September 13, 2017 Report and Recommendation, asserted Basilio had not immediately complied and recommended an additional fine of P10,000.00 for indirect contempt and that the lifting of his suspension be held in abeyance pending payment of the fine. The OBC’s timelin...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Should Basilio’s suspension from the practice of law be lifted?
- Should Basilio be fined for failing to immediately comply with the Court’s order of susp...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)