Case Digest (A.C. No. 11668) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In October 2012, Joy T. Samonte (complainant) received summons from the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Regional Arbitration Branch XI, Davao City, concerning an illegal dismissal case filed by four individuals claiming to be workers in her banana plantation (NLRC Case RAB-XI-10-00586-12). Samonte engaged Atty. Vivencio V. Jumamil (respondent) to prepare her position paper and paid him attorney’s fees amounting to Php 8,000. Despite repeated reminders on the approaching deadline, Jumamil failed to file the position paper. As a result, a Labor Arbiter rendered a decision on January 25, 2013, holding Samonte liable for Php 633,143.68. When confronted, Jumamil casually advised her to sell her farm to pay the workers. Feeling neglected and defenseless, Samonte filed a formal complaint dated March 15, 2013, with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), praying for Jumamil’s disbarment for acts unbecoming of a lawyer and betrayal of trust.
In response, Jumamil admitte
Case Digest (A.C. No. 11668) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the Complaint
- In October 2012, complainant Joy T. Samonte received summons from the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC), Regional Arbitration Branch XI in Davao City, concerning an illegal dismissal case (NLRC Case RAB-XI-10-00586-12) filed by four persons claiming to be workers in complainant’s banana plantation.
- Complainant engaged respondent Atty. Vivencio V. Jumamil to prepare her position paper and paid him attorney’s fees amounting to ₱8,000.00.
- Acts and Omissions of Respondent
- Despite repeated reminders from complainant regarding the deadline for filing the position paper, respondent failed to submit the required pleading.
- On January 25, 2013, the Labor Arbiter rendered a decision holding complainant liable to the workers in the amount of ₱633,143.68, based on the evidentiary records.
- When confronted, respondent dismissively advised complainant to sell her farm to pay the workers.
- Complainant alleged that respondent’s neglect left her defenseless and without remedies to challenge the adverse ruling, compelling her to file an administrative complaint for disbarment for acts unbecoming of a lawyer and betrayal of trust.
- Respondent’s Defense
- Respondent admitted he failed to file the position paper but justified his omission by citing complainant’s failure to provide credible witnesses.
- He claimed complainant instructed him to prepare an affidavit for a witness named Romeo P. Baol but told him not to explain it in the Visayan dialect to prevent Romeo from knowing the contents.
- Another intended witness, complainant’s uncle Nicasio Ticong, allegedly refused to execute an affidavit or testify, framing complainant as deceitful.
- Respondent thus implored for dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit.
- Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Proceedings
- The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) issued an order directing respondent to file an answer, which he did on April 19, 2013.
- After investigation, the IBP-CBD found respondent administratively liable for violating Rule 10.01, Canon 10 and Rule 18.03, Canon 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), as well as the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, recommending suspension for one (1) year.
- The IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation on December 13, 2014.
Issues:
- Whether respondent Atty. Vivencio V. Jumamil is administratively liable for acts unbecoming of a lawyer, betrayal of trust, and violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Rules on Notarial Practice.
- What is the appropriate penalty for respondent’s misconduct.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)