Case Digest (A.C. No. 7121 [Formerly CBD Case No. 04-1244)
Facts:
Emiliani Wilfredo R. Cruz and Carlos R. Cruz v. Atty. Evelyn Brul‑Cruz and Atty. Gracelda N. Andres, A.C. No. 7121 (Formerly CBD Case No. 04‑1244), March 08, 2022, Supreme Court En Banc, Hernando, J., writing for the Court.Complainants are stepchildren and compulsory heirs of the late spouses Carlos Galman Cruz, Sr. and Emiliana de la Rosa Cruz. The spouses owned seven parcels in Meycauayan, Bulacan (the Meycauayan properties) registered since 1968. Emiliana died in 1974; Carlos, Sr. later married respondent Atty. Evelyn Brul‑Cruz in 1978. When Carlos, Sr. died in 1988, the estate remained unpartitioned.
Around 2000 the complainants discovered that the Meycauayan properties were subject of an expropriation suit (RTC Malolos, Civil Case No. 771‑M‑2000) in which the spouses Cruz were impleaded. Complainants claim that Atty. Evelyn knew of the expropriation yet did not inform them and instead misrepresented herself and her children by Carlos, Sr. as sole heirs. They also alleged that Atty. Gracelda N. Andres, a relative of Atty. Evelyn and then a government lawyer, appeared in the expropriation and later in a petition for issuance of owner’s duplicate titles on behalf of the spouses Cruz without authority.
In the petition for duplicate titles Atty. Evelyn alleged the properties had been assigned to her under an alleged family agreement and that she possessed the original titles which were lost; her daughter testified under a purported special power of attorney. Complainants contested the asserted assignment and produced the original titles in the possession of a sibling. Atty. Evelyn later withdrew the duplicate‑title petition. Complainants filed criminal and administrative complaints and sought disbarment.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Investigating Commissioner recommended dismissal, characterizing the dispute as a family inheritance quarrel and finding that Atty. Evelyn believed in good faith she held the properties pursuant to the heirs’ agreement. The IBP Board of Governors adopted that recommendation and dismissed the complaint. Complainants filed a Rule 65 petition for certiorari with this Court contesting the IBP action; the Court referred the matter to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC).
The OBC recommended that both respondents be indefinitely suspended for gross misconduct: it found Atty. Evelyn’s evidence showed no final partition and tha...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Should Atty. Evelyn Brul‑Cruz be held administratively liable for grave misconduct for her conduct in the expropriation proceedings and the petition for issuance of owner’s duplicate titles?
- Should Atty. Gracelda N. Andres be held administratively liable for unauthorized practice of law and misconduct for appearing in those proceedings while a government employee and for purpor...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)