A.C. No. 12719 - Gerodias vs. Riveral

Sanny L. Gerodias, a former employee of Oriental Port and Allied Services Corporation (OPASCOR), filed a disbarment complaint before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) against three lawyers: Atty. Tomas A. Riveral, Atty. Annabel G. Pulvera-Page, and Atty. Lorena M. Supatan.
The complaint alleges that the respondents were involved in a conspiracy and act of connivance which led to the illegal dismissal of Gerodias from his employment.

During his tenure at OPASCOR, Gerodias was subjected to several disciplinary investigations due to various infractions, including heated altercations with co-employees, damage to company property, and abandonment of work.
The most recent disciplinary inquiry involved the incident of stealing a box of perfumes belonging to OPASCOR's clients, which ultimately led to his voluntary retirement after the company offered him the option of a graceful exit with separation pay rather than termination.

Gerodias opted to avail of an early retirement program, despite being two years short of the 15-year service requirement.
His request was approved by Riveral, the President and General Manager of OPASCOR, resulting in a retirement package equivalent to 22 months' pay and full granting of other benefits, even though his work status for 2016 was only for six months.
Shortly after receiving his retirement pay, Gerodias initiated further legal actions by filing a complaint for illegal dismissal against OPASCOR and demanding a detailed breakdown of the deductions made on his retirement pay.
Concurrently, OPASCOR pursued criminal charges against Gerodias for qualified theft.

The Labor Arbiter dismissed Gerodias’ complaint on February 3, 2017, on the grounds of lack of merit.
The decision was subsequently affirmed in its entirety by the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC) through an April 17, 2017 Decision and a May 31, 2017 Resolution.

Gerodias accused the respondents—Riveral, Pulvera-Page, and Supatan—of violating Canon 1 and Rules 1.01, 1.02, and 1.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) by allegedly conspiring to dismiss him from his employment.
Specifically, he charged that Riveral, as the head of OPASCOR, approved his early retirement (thus preempting a proper termination process that would have resulted in inferior separation pay) through a conspiracy with other implicated parties.
Gerodias also questioned certain corporate documents, notably the two confusing and conflicting Secretary’s Certificates—one signed by Pulvera-Page (OPASCOR’s Corporate Secretary) and the other by Mary Lou Z. Geyrosaga (OPASCOR’s Recording Secretary)—arguing that they indicated wrongful or unauthorized representation.
Additionally, the act of Atty. Supatan receiving a copy of Gerodias’ Position Paper during the labor case proceedings was interpreted as further evidence of collusion among the respondents.

Riveral and Pulvera-Page maintained that Gerodias was not illegally dismissed but voluntarily retired, arguing that no Board of Directors (BOD) decision was made to terminate his employment.
They contended that Riveral’s approval of the early retirement was executed in good faith, and that the retirement package was appropriate under the circumstances, despite the lapse in the requisite service period.
Concerning the disputed Secretary’s Certificates, it was argued that both Pulvera-Page and Geyrosaga were duly authorized through OPASCOR’s BOD resolutions and corporate by-laws to execute such documents.
Supatan defended her act by emphasizing that her receipt of the Position Paper was a routine and lawful part of her responsibilities as an associate of the law firm representing OPASCOR in the labor case.

On December 22, 2017, the IBP issued a Report and Recommendation recommending the dismissal of the disbarment complaint due to the lack of factual and legal basis.
It was found that the respondents had not violated any of the Canons of the CPR, the Lawyer’s Oath, or Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
On March 22, 2018, the IBP Board of Governors adopted the Investigating Commissioner’s findings and further resolved to dismiss the complaint.
Subsequently, on October 25, 2018, Gerodias submitted a Letter with an attached Affidavit of Desistance, expressing his disinterest in pursuing the case further.

Whether the conduct of the respondents—specifically, Riveral's approval of Gerodias’ early retirement and the alleged issuance of conflicting Secretary’s Certificates—amounted to a conspiracy or act of connivance that warranted disciplinary action under the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Whether the act of receiving a copy of Gerodias’ Position Paper by Atty. Supatan constituted any breach of the Lawyer’s Oath or implied participation in a conspiracy to dismiss Gerodias from his employment.
Whether Gerodias presented clear, convincing, and satisfactory evidence to substantiate his allegations against the respondents.
Whether the actions undertaken by the respondents fall within the scope of their authorized corporate and legal duties as prescribed by OPASCOR’s by-laws and applicable legal standards.