Case Digest (AC-1928) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In In the Matter of the IBP Membership Dues Delinquency of Atty. Marcial A. Edillon (A.C. No. 1928, 189 Phil. 468, Dec. 19, 1980), respondent Marcial A. Edillon, an attorney admitted to practice before this Court, repeatedly refused to pay his annual dues to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines despite due notice. On November 29, 1975, the IBP Board of Governors unanimously adopted Resolution No. 75-65 recommending his removal from the Roll of Attorneys for “stubborn refusal to pay his membership dues,” pursuant to Section 24, Article III of the IBP By-Laws and Rule 139-A, Section 10 of the Rules of Court. The IBP President filed this recommendation with the Supreme Court on January 21, 1976. The Court required Edillon to comment, and he reiterated his refusal on February 23, 1976. After receiving the IBP’s reply, holding a hearing on June 3, 1976, and entertaining memoranda, this Court disbarred him on August 3, 1978, by unanimous vote. Thereafter, Edillon filed multiple motio... Case Digest (AC-1928) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Proceedings leading to respondent’s removal
- On November 29, 1975, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Board of Governors adopted Resolution No. 75-65 recommending the removal of Atty. Marcial A. Edillon from the Roll of Attorneys for “stubborn refusal to pay his membership dues,” pursuant to Article III, Section 24(2) of the IBP By-Laws.
- The Board’s resolution was submitted to the Supreme Court on January 21, 1976. The Court required Edillon’s comment (January 27, 1976), received his refusal on February 23, 1976, ordered the IBP to reply (March 2, 1976), received the IBP’s joint reply on March 24, 1976, held a hearing on June 3, 1976, and thereafter required memoranda, submitting the case for resolution.
- Disbarment and subsequent motions
- The Supreme Court unanimously disbarred Edillon on August 3, 1978 (In re Atty. Marcial A. Edillon, AC-1928, 84 SCRA 554). His motion for reconsideration (filed August 19, 1978) was denied on November 23, 1978.
- Beginning June 5, 1979, Edillon submitted letters (June 5, August 7, November 13, 1979; April 12, 1980) and a verified application for reinstatement, citing his health, advanced age, welfare of former clients, payment of delinquent dues, and an undertaking to abide by all IBP By-Laws and resolutions if reinstated.
- Resolution granting reinstatement
- The Court issued a minute resolution on October 23, 1980, granting Edillon’s petition for reinstatement, noting full payment of dues, his acceptance of the Court’s competence to regulate the profession, and permitting him to take anew the lawyer’s oath and sign the Roll of Attorneys upon payment of required fees.
- The minute resolution expressly stated it was “without prejudice to issuing an extended opinion,” leading to the present detailed decision.
Issues:
- Whether the compulsory membership in the IBP and payment of annual dues under Rule 139-A, Section 10 of the Rules of Court and the IBP By-Laws invade constitutional rights to liberty and property.
- Whether, in the exercise of its full and plenary discretion, the Supreme Court should reinstate a disbarred member based on factors such as payment of dues, passage of time, demonstrated contrition, public interest, and the welfare of clients.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)