Case Digest (A.C. No. 12121)
Facts:
Complainant Celestino Malecdan filed a complaint for estafa, breach of contract, and damages against spouses James and Josephine Baldo before the Lupon of Barangay Pico, La Trinidad, Benguet, and alleged that Respondent Atty. Simpson T. Baldo improperly appeared as counsel on August 14, 2014 in violation of Section 9, P.D. 1508. Malecdan brought an administrative complaint to the IBP Baguio-Benguet Chapter on August 18, 2014; the Investigating Commissioner recommended a warning on June 2, 2015, but the IBP Board of Governors reversed and recommended that Atty. Baldo be reprimanded, prompting review by the Court.Issues:
- Did Atty. Simpson T. Baldo violate Section 9, P.D. 1508 by appearing as counsel before the Lupon?
- If so, did that appearance constitute a breach of Canon 1, Rule 1.01, Code of Professional Responsibility warranting disciplinary sanction and what sanction was proper?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Case Digest (A.C. No. 12121)
Facts:
Celestino Malecdan filed a complaint for Estafa, Breach of Contract and Damages against spouses James and Josephine Baldo before the Lupon of Barangay Pico, Municipality of La Trinidad, Benguet, and on August 14, 2014 Atty. Simpson T. Baldo appeared as counsel for the spouses during the barangay hearing. On August 18, 2014 Malecdan lodged an administrative complaint with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Baguio-Benguet Chapter alleging violation of Section 9 of Presidential Decree 1508 which bars the appearance of counsel before the Lupon. The IBP Committee on Ethics furnished Atty. Baldo a copy of the complaint and set a conciliation conference on September 12, 2014, and after failure to settle the matter the complaint was endorsed to the Committee on Bar Discipline-IBP on September 15, 2014. The CBD-IBP required Atty. Baldo to file a verified answer by Order dated September 17, 2014, and after scheduling and rescheduling of conferences the respondent filed an Answer dated February 23, 2015 admitting his presence at the barangay proceeding but explaining he was permitted to participate after asking permission from the officer-in-charge and from the complainant. Investigating Commissioner Eduardo R. Robles granted Malecdan leave to file a supplemental complaint on March 24, 2015, and Malecdan filed a Verified Supplemental Complaint Affidavit on March 31, 2015 reiterating his vehement objection to Atty. Baldo’s presence and alleging that the respondent used his influence to prevail upon barangay officials to allow his participation. Commissioner Robles issued a Report and Recommendation dated June 2, 2015 recommending that Atty. Baldo be given a warning, but the IBP Board of Governors, by Resolution dated June 20, 2015, reversed and set aside that recommendation and instead recommended that Atty. Baldo be reprimanded; the case thereafter reached the Court which reviewed the records and the parties’ submissions.Issues:
Did Atty. Simpson T. Baldo’s appearance and participation as counsel at the barangay hearing of August 14, 2014 violate Section 9 of Presidential Decree 1508? Did such appearance constitute a breach of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility warranting disciplinary sanction?Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Case Digest (A.C. No. 12121)
Facts:
- Parties and subject matter
- Complainant Celestino Malecdan filed an administrative complaint against Respondent Atty. Simpson T. Baldo for appearing and participating as counsel in proceedings before the Lupon of Barangay Pico, La Trinidad, Benguet on August 14, 2014.
- The complaint alleged violation of Section 9 of Presidential Decree 1508 (P.D. 1508), which provides that parties in barangay conciliation proceedings must appear in person without the assistance of counsel, except for minors and incompetents.
- Initial filings and IBP Baguio-Benguet Chapter proceedings
- On August 18, 2014, Malecdan filed the complaint with the Office of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Baguio-Benguet Chapter.
- The Committee on Ethics furnished Atty. Baldo a copy of the complaint and set a conciliation conference on September 12, 2014; the parties failed to settle and on September 15, 2014 the complaint was endorsed to the Committee on Bar Discipline-IBP (CBD-IBP).
- CBD-IBP pre-hearing activity and respondent's answer
- The CBD-IBP issued an order dated September 17, 2014 requiring Atty. Baldo to file a duly verified answer within fifteen days.
- A notice dated January 14, 2015 set a mandatory conference for February 18, 2015; Malecdan filed a mandatory conference brief on February 12, 2015.
- The mandatory conference was rescheduled to March 24, 2015 after Atty. Baldo failed to attend the February 18, 2015 conference.
- In his Answer dated February 23, 2015, Atty. Baldo admitted presence at the barangay proceedings and explained he obtained permission from the officer-in-charge and that Malecdan allegedly consented to his participation because of prior acquaintance.
- Supplemental complaint and factual dispute
- On March 24, 2015, Investigating Commissioner Eduardo R. Robles gave Malecdan fifteen days to file a supplemental complaint and gave Atty. Baldo fifteen days to file a supplemental answer.
- On March 31, 2015, Malecdan filed a Verified Supplemental Complaint Affidavit alleging he vehemently objected to Atty. Baldo's presence, and that Atty. Baldo used his influence to prevail upon the Punong Barangay and the Barangay Secretary to permit his participation over objections.
- Investigating Commissioner's recommendation and IBP Board action
- Investigating Commissioner Robles issued a Report and Recommendation dated June 2, 2015 recommending that At...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Primary legal questions presented
- Whether Atty. Simpson T. Baldo's appearance and participation as counsel in the August 14, 2014 barangay proceedings violated Section 9 of P.D. 1508.
- Whether such appearance constituted a violation of Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR) prohibiting unlawful, dishonest, imm...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)