Case Digest (A.C. No. 8392)
Facts:
Rosario T. Mecaral v. Atty. Danilo S. Velasquez, A.C. No. 8392 (Formerly CBD Case No. 08‑2175), promulgated March 14, 2011, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam. Complainant Rosario T. Mecaral filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against Atty. Danilo S. Velasquez before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines’ Committee on Bar Discipline (IBP‑CBD), charging him with Gross Misconduct and Gross Immoral Conduct arising from a series of events beginning in 2002 when respondent hired Mecaral as his secretary and later made her his lover/common‑law wife.According to Mecaral’s position paper and supporting affidavits, in October 2007 respondent brought her to Upper San Agustin, Caibiran, Biliran, and left her with a religious group led by him, the Faith Healers Association of the Philippines. Her visits with respondent allegedly became scarce, she returned home, and respondent allegedly brought her back where his followers purportedly tortured, brainwashed and injected her with drugs. On December 24, 2007, when she tried to flee she was allegedly tied spread‑eagled to a bed, made to wear only a T‑shirt and diapers, fed stale food, and guarded constantly by female members including Bernardita Tadeo. Her mother, Delia, procured help from the Provincial Social Welfare Department and police officers PO3 Delan G. Lee and PO1 Arnel S. Robedillo, who rescued Mecaral and reunited her with her mother.
Mecaral also charged respondent with bigamy, submitting photocopies of marriage certificates showing a 1990 marriage to Ma. Shirley G. Yunzal and a 1996 marriage to Leny H. Azur, plus affidavits of witnesses, a National Statistics Office certification, and a certified machine copy of the Provincial Prosecutor’s Resolution and the Information for Serious Illegal Detention filed with the RTC, Branch 37‑Caibiran, Naval, Biliran.
Respondent received the Director for Bar Discipline’s February 22, 2008 order to file an answer within 15 days and stated by letter (March 28, 2008) he would defend himself in a verified pleading but never filed an answer. He and his counsel failed to appear at the September 2, 2008 mandatory conference; only complainant’s counsel attended. Investigating Commissioner Felimon C. Abelita III issued a Report and Recommendation (September 29, 2008) concluding respondent’s conduct warranted disbarment, citing respondent’s conversion of his secretary into a mistress, alleged bigamy, and the detention/torture allegations; the IBP Board of Governors of Pasig City adopted the recommendation by resolution of December 11, 2008.
The IBP file contained the Provincial Prosecutor’s April 30, 2008 Resolution which, upon reviewing pleading...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did respondent's failure to file an answer and to appear at IBP proceedings deprive him of due process or otherwise prevent the IBP and the Court from resolving the complaint?
- Were the factual allegations against respondent proved by the quantum of evidence required in disciplinary proceedings against a lawyer?
- Did respondent’s proven acts constitute violations of the Lawyer’s Oath, Canon 1, and Rule 7.03, Canon 7 of the Code of Profession...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)