Case Digest (A.C. No. 12424)
Facts:
Ma. Herminia T. Tiongson v. Atty. Michael L. Flores, A.C. No. 12424, September 01, 2020, the Supreme Court En Banc, Lopez, J., writing for the Court.
In 2014 a person identified as Vincent, purportedly a former court employee, handed Atty. Michael L. Flores a purported Regional Trial Court Order in Civil Case No. 1445-13 concerning the heirs of Jacinta R. Tenorio and the segregation of land covered by TCT No. T-30875. The Order, dated January 21, 2014 and bearing the name and signature of Judge Josefina Gentiles Bacal, directed the subdivision of the land "among all legitimate compulsory heirs equally" and was copied to several recipients including Arthur Tenorio.
Knowing that the document was falsified, Atty. Flores nonetheless shared it with his client, Arthur Tenorio. On March 9, 2014 Arthur, together with Beverly Tenorio and Leonard Sena, presented the Order to Ma. Herminia T. Tiongson's caretaker, Rogelio Lira, and instructed him to refrain from planting on the land because it would be subdivided, and to tell Herminia she was no longer its owner. Herminia later discovered there was no RTC case bearing that number and that the judge's signature was forged, and she filed criminal complaints for falsification and grave coercion against Arthur, et al.; the prosecutor found probable cause and informations were filed.
Leonard Sena likewise filed a criminal complaint for falsification against Atty. Flores; in his counter-affidavit Flores said Vincent gave him the document, that he shared it with Arthur but had no instruction to use it, and that the Order was "inexistent, useless, and without value." The prosecutor found probable cause against Flores and amended the informations to include him as a conspirator.
Separately, Herminia filed a disbarment complaint against Atty. Flores with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), docketed CBD Case No. 15-4595, alleging gross misconduct for obtaining and sharing the forged Order. Flores did not file an answer nor attend the mandatory conference. The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline investigated, con...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did the complainant prove, by preponderance of evidence, that Atty. Flores authored or otherwise committed falsification warranting disbarment?
- Did Atty. Flores violate Rule 19.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by failing to call upon his client to rectify the fraud and by not reporting the falsified Order?
- Did Atty. Flores's failure to answer and to attend the IBP mandatory conf...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)