Case Summary (A.C. No. 10782)
Case Background
The complaint stemmed from a vehicular accident on January 25, 2009, involving Atty. Aseron and a bus operated by Nova Auto Transport, Inc. (NATI), driven by Jerry Garcia. Following the accident, Atty. Aseron initiated both a criminal case against Garcia for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Damage to Property with Serious Physical Injuries and a civil case for damages against Garcia and NATI, wherein Atty. Diao represented the defendants.
Allegations
Atty. Aseron alleged that a reply letter from Atty. Diao, dated March 20, 2009, contained abusive and disrespectful language that tarnished his reputation. The letter accused Atty. Aseron of improperly using his previous influence as a public prosecutor to manipulate the legal proceedings. In response to the insinuations from Atty. Diao, Atty. Aseron filed a libel case against him. Additionally, he accused Atty. Diao of employing dilatory tactics in the legal cases, noting he submitted numerous motions that the courts eventually dismissed for lack of merit.
Disciplinary Proceedings
On February 11, 2010, the IBP-CBD ordered Atty. Diao to submit an answer; however, he failed to do so. Consequently, the IBP-CBD scheduled a mandatory conference for August 9, 2010, to which Atty. Diao also failed to attend. The case was later submitted for resolution due to Atty. Diao's continued absence from proceedings.
Initial Recommendations
On November 6, 2011, Commissioner Oliver A. Cachapero recommended censuring Atty. Diao for his failure to conduct himself with courtesy toward a fellow lawyer. The IBP Board of Governors approved this recommendation on February 12, 2013, affirming Atty. Diao's ethical breaches. Despite filing a motion for reconsideration, Atty. Diao's request was denied as repetitive of previously decided arguments. The penalty was adjusted from censure to reprimand by the IBP.
Legal Issues and Court Rulings
The central issue in this disbarment case is whether sufficient evidence exists to hold Atty. Diao liable for violations of the CPR. The Court clarified that a second motion for reconsideration is not recognized under existing rules and that the appropriate remedy for an aggrieved party is to proceed with a petition for review. However, considering the principles of substantial justice, Atty. Diao's second motion was treated as a petition for review.
Findings on Ethical Violations
Upon reviewing the case, the Court affirmed the IBP's assessment that Atty. Diao violated CPR, particularly Canon 8, which mandates courtesy and respect among lawyers. His use of intemperate language and unfounded allegations against Atty. Aseron constituted an abuse of professional conduct. The Court noted that such behavior not only reflects poorly on the individual attorney but al
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 10782)
Introduction to the Case
- This case involves a verified complaint filed by Atty. Delio M. Aseron against Atty. Jose A. Diao, Jr. for disbarment based on alleged violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
- The complaint was submitted to the Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD) of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
Background Facts
- On January 25, 2009, Atty. Aseron was involved in a vehicular accident with a bus operated by Nova Auto Transport, Inc. (NATI), driven by Jerry Garcia.
- Following the incident, Atty. Aseron initiated two legal actions:
- A criminal case against Garcia for Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Damage to Property with Serious Physical Injuries (Criminal Case No. 025403).
- A civil case for Damages against Garcia and NATI (Civil Case No. Q-09-64558).
- Atty. Diao served as the counsel for both Garcia and NATI in these proceedings.
Allegations Against the Respondent
- Atty. Alberto H. Habitan, representing Atty. Aseron, demanded damages of not less than Two Million Pesos from NATI on March 3, 2009.
- The respondent's reply letter dated March 20, 2009, was described as abusive and disrespectful, containing unfounded accusations against Atty. Aseron.
- Specific allegations made by Atty. Diao included insinuations that Atty. Aseron used his influence as a former public prosecutor to manipulate the judicial process.
- Atty. Aseron claimed that the respondent's statements damaged his reputation and