Case Digest (A.C. No. 8084)
Facts:
Patrocinia H. Salabao v. Atty. Andres C. Villaruel, Jr., A.C. No. 8084, August 24, 2015, Supreme Court Second Division, March 28, 2016, Del Castillo, J., writing for the Court.Complainant Patrocinia H. Salabao instituted a civil action in 1995 against Elmer Lumberio to recover real property in Taguig City; the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 162, Pasig City rendered a decision in her favor in 2002. Thereafter Atty. Andres C. Villaruel, Jr. entered as counsel for Lumberio and pursued numerous post-judgment remedies and separate filings which Salabao characterized as abusive tactics aimed at delaying execution of the final judgment.
Chronologically, respondent filed an appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) under CA-GR CV No. 76360 (the CA decided in Salabao's favor on January 13, 2004), and thereafter sought relief before the Supreme Court in GR No. 167413 (which was denied as untimely). Subsequent filings by respondent included a Petition for Annulment of Judgment before the CA (CA-G.R. SP No. 97564) that was dismissed, a petition before the Supreme Court under GR No. 181243, a petition for certiorari in CA-GR SP No. 101992 that was dismissed, and multiple motions to defer or suspend execution, requests for judicial courtesy, motions for reconsideration, and motions to inhibit judges and cite officials in contempt.
Respondent also filed a separate civil case in the RTC of Mauban, Quezon (Civil Case No. 08-0666-M) which the Investigating Commissioner found to be barred by improper venue, res judicata and the anti-forum shopping rule, and an administrative complaint against Judge Briccio Ygana of RTC Branch 153. Various trial judges and the CA rebuked respondent for perceived dilatory tactics; for example, an RTC judge inhibited herself and admonished respondent to be more professional, and the CA in its October 23, 2007 decision expressly characterized the annulment petition as "a last-ditch effort to defer the execution" of the RTC decision.
Salabao filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against respondent for abuse of court processes and violations of Canons 10 and 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The complaint was referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation; Investigating Commissioner Oliver A. Cachapero recommended respondent's guilt for filing repeatedly to delay execution and recommended a four-month suspension. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation in Resolution No. XX-2013-251 dated March 20, 2013 and later denied respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration i...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did respondent Atty. Andres C. Villaruel, Jr. commit abuse of court processes and thereby violate the Lawyer’s Oath and Rules 10.03 and 12.04 (and related provisions) of the Code of Professional Responsibility?
- If respondent is administratively liable, what penalty is appropriate given the facts and any claimed ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)