Title
Berenguer vs. Carranza
Case
A.C. No. 716
Decision Date
Jan 30, 1969
A lawyer was reprimanded for negligence after introducing a false affidavit in court, prolonging a case despite no wilful intent to deceive.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.C. No. 716)

Facts:

  1. Complaint Filed: On July 15, 1966, Eduardo J. Berenguer filed a complaint against Pedro B. Carranza, a lawyer, for allegedly deceiving the Court of First Instance of Sorsogon.
  2. Allegation: Carranza introduced an Affidavit of Adjudication and Transfer in court, which falsely stated that the deceased left no legitimate heirs except the affiant (his client’s mother). In reality, the deceased was survived by four daughters and one son (the complainant’s father).
  3. Respondent’s Defense: Carranza claimed he had no hand in preparing the affidavit or the petition, as they were prepared in Pasay City. He argued that the affidavit was introduced only to prove the transfer of property to his client.
  4. Investigation: The case was referred to the Solicitor General, who found no evidence linking Carranza to the preparation of the false affidavit. However, the Solicitor General noted that Carranza failed to exercise due diligence in reviewing the affidavit, contributing to confusion and prolongation of the cadastral case.

Issue:

  1. Whether respondent Pedro B. Carranza violated his oath as a lawyer by consenting to or introducing false evidence in court.
  2. Whether Carranza’s failure to exercise due diligence in reviewing the affidavit constitutes a breach of his professional duties, even if the falsehood was not wilful.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court found respondent Pedro B. Carranza liable for failing to exercise due diligence as a lawyer. While there was no evidence of wilful deception, his failure to thoroughly review the affidavit and ensure its accuracy resulted in confusion and prolongation of the case. The Court reprimanded Carranza and warned that a repetition of such conduct would be dealt with more severely.

Ratio:

  • (Unlock)

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.