Case Digest (G.R. No. 167615)
Facts:
In Catu v. Rellosa, Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu, co-owner with his mother Regina Catu and brother Antonio Catu, sought to recover possession of a residential unit in a building on Lot No. 19, Block No. 3, P.A.S.-14849, located at 959 San Andres Street, Malate, Manila, which was occupied by Elizabeth C. Diaz-Catu and Antonio Pastor. After demands to vacate went unheeded, Regina and Antonio initiated a barangay conciliation under the Lupong Tagapamayapa of Barangay 723, Zone 79, 5th District of Manila, presided over by Respondent Atty. Vicente G. Rellosa in his capacity as punong barangay, with meetings on March 15, March 26, and April 3, 2001. Failing an amicable settlement, Rellosa issued a certification to file an ejectment action. Regina and Antonio then filed ejectment in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila, Branch 11, where Rellosa entered his appearance as counsel for the defendants. On July 5, 2002, Wilfredo Catu filed an administrative complaint, charging that RellosaCase Digest (G.R. No. 167615)
Facts:
- Parties and Property
- Complainant Wilfredo M. Catu is co-owner, with his mother Regina Catu and brother Antonio Catu, of a lot (Lot No. 19, Block No. 3, Pas-14849) and a building at 959 San Andres Street, Malate, Manila.
- Respondent Atty. Vicente G. Rellosa is the punong barangay of Barangay 723, Zone 79, 5th District of Manila.
- Dispute and Proceedings
- Regina and Antonio contested the possession of one building unit by Elizabeth C. Diaz-Catu and Antonio Pastor; demands for vacation were ignored.
- A complaint was filed before the Lupong Tagapamayapa of Barangay 723; respondent presided over conciliation meetings on March 15, March 26, and April 3, 2001.
- Failing settlement, respondent issued a certification to file the ejectment case in the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) of Manila, Branch 11.
- Regina and Antonio filed ejectment; respondent entered appearance as counsel for Elizabeth and Pastor.
- Wilfredo Catu filed an administrative complaint (July 5, 2002) alleging impropriety by respondent acting both as punong barangay and defense counsel.
- The Integrated Bar of the Philippines’ Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) investigated, found violations of Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 7(b)(2) of RA 6713, and recommended one-month suspension. This was approved by the IBP Board of Governors.
Issues:
- Whether Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility applies to an incumbent punong barangay who intervened in a matter as a public official.
- Whether Section 7(b)(2) of RA 6713 or Section 90 of RA 7160 governs the private practice of law by a punong barangay.
- Whether respondent’s appearance as counsel without prior written permission violated civil service rules and professional ethical canons.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)