Title
IN RE: Haron S. Meling
Case
B.M. No. 1154
Decision Date
Jun 8, 2004
Atty. Melendrez sought to disqualify Haron S. Meling from the 2002 Bar Exams for failing to disclose pending criminal cases and using "Attorney" without Bar membership. The Court found Meling dishonest, suspended his Shariaa Bar membership, and ruled his unauthorized title use improper.

Case Digest (B.M. No. 1154)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Background and Petition Filing
    • On October 14, 2002, Atty. Froilan R. Melendrez filed a Petition with the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) seeking:
      • Disqualification of Haron S. Meling from taking the 2002 Bar Examinations.
      • Disciplinary action against Meling as a member of the Philippine Shariaa Bar.
    • Melendrez alleged that Meling failed to disclose three (3) pending criminal cases in his application to take the 2002 Bar Examinations:
      • Criminal Case No. 15685 for Grave Oral Defamation.
      • Criminal Case No. 15686 for Grave Oral Defamation.
      • Criminal Case No. 15687 for Less Serious Physical Injuries.
These cases arose from an incident on May 21, 2001, where Meling allegedly uttered defamatory words against Melendrez and his wife before media practitioners and others, and struck Melendrez’s wife, causing injury.
  • Allegation of Unauthorized Use of Title
    • Melendrez further alleged Meling used the title “Attorney” in his communications as Secretary to the Mayor of Cotabato City, despite not being a member of the Philippine Bar.
    • An indorsement letter dated November 27, 2001, received by the Sangguniang Panglungsod of Cotabato City, was attached to substantiate the use of the title.
  • Meling’s Answer and OBC Proceedings
    • Pursuant to the Court’s Resolution dated December 3, 2002, Meling filed his Answer on December 8, 2002, claiming:
      • Retired Judge Corocoy Moson advised settlement of the dispute; Meling believed the cases were “closed and terminated.”
      • The acts did not involve moral turpitude; he denied the allegations.
      • The use of “Attorney” was a clerical insertion by an office clerk.
    • The OBC Report and Recommendation (December 8, 2003) found:
      • Meling’s non-disclosure was dishonest and violated the oath in his bar application (citing Bar Matter 1209 and Rule 7.01, Code of Professional Responsibility).
      • His use of “Attorney” was unauthorized and may constitute indirect contempt of court.
      • Recommended Meling be barred from taking the Lawyer’s Oath and that his membership in the Shariaa Bar be suspended pending further orders.

Issues:

  • Whether Meling’s failure to disclose pending criminal cases in his bar application demonstrates dishonesty and lack of the good moral character required for bar membership.
  • Whether Meling’s unauthorized use of the title “Attorney” constitutes contempt or grounds for disciplinary sanction.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.