Case Digest (A.C. No. 7421)
Facts:
Elisa V. Venterez, Genaro de Vera, Inocencia V. Ramirez, Pacita V. Mills, Antonina V. Palma and Ramon de Vera v. Atty. Rodrigo R. Cosme, A.C. No. 7421, October 10, 2007, Supreme Court Third Division, Chico‑Nazario, J., writing for the Court.The complainants engaged Atty. Rodrigo R. Cosme to represent them as defendants in Civil Case No. 981 (Sps. Daniel and Lolita Oviedo, et al. v. Eliza de Vera, et al.) pending before the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Calasiao, Pangasinan. The MTC rendered a decision adverse to the complainants on 25 February 2004; respondent admitted he was served a copy on 4 March 2004. According to the complainants, they directed respondent to file a Motion for Reconsideration or a Notice of Appeal, but respondent failed or refused to do so. The 15‑day period for filing such remedies elapsed (complainants say 18 March 2004; respondent contended the deadline was 19 March 2004).
Because no appeal or reconsideration was filed by respondent, complainant Elisa V. Venterez engaged another lawyer who filed a Motion for Reconsideration on 19 March 2004 but did not enter his appearance. The MTC denied that motion on 23 March 2004; respondent was not furnished a copy of the denial, per the court clerk’s certification. Plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 981 filed a Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution on 31 March 2004 (granted 23 April 2004), and an Entry of Judgment and Writ of Execution were recorded/issued in late April 2004.
Respondent filed a Notice of Retirement of Counsel with the MTC on 3 (or 5) May 2004, asserting that Salvador Ramirez (son of complainant Inocencia V. Ramirez) had withdrawn the case from him and taken the records to a newly engaged lawyer. Complainants then filed an administrative complaint against respondent for abandonment, gross negligence and dereliction of duty.
Respondent denied that the complainants instructed him to perfect an appeal or file a motion and maintained he had been effectively relieved by Salvador Ramirez’s withdrawal and turnover of the records. He also disputed having been served certain documents. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) conducted a hearing on 15 February 2006. Investigating Commissioner Dennis A. B. Funa recommended respondent be suspended for three months for gross negligence (Report and Recommendation, 11 April 2006)....(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did respondent commit culpable negligence/dereliction of duty in his handling of Civil Case No. 981 such as to warrant disciplinary action?
- If respondent is liable, what is the appropriate disciplin...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)