Case Summary (CBD Case No. 176)
Relevant Cases and Facts
Sally Bongalonta filed a criminal case (Criminal Case No. 7653-55) against the spouses Luisa and Solomer Abuel for estafa, alongside a separate civil suit (Civil Case No. 56934) to enforce her claims and secure a preliminary attachment over a property registered under the spouses’ names (TCT No. 38374, Pasig, Rizal). Atty. Pablito Castillo represented the spouses Abuel in both cases. Concurrently, Gregorio Lantin filed another civil case (Civil Case No. 58650) against the same spouses for collection based on a promissory note, represented by Atty. Alfonso Martija.
Allegations of Unethical Conduct
Bongalonta alleged that Castillo and Martija conspired to frustrate satisfaction of her potential judgment by having the same property attached and levied upon under Lantin’s claim. It was further pointed out that both attorneys used identical addresses and legal identification numbers (PTR and IBP receipt numbers) in pleadings, suggesting coordinated legal maneuvers against Bongalonta’s interests.
Findings of the IBP Board of Governors
The IBP Board of Governors reviewed documentary evidence, including the Title Certificate (TCT No. 38374) which showed annotations of notices of levy. Bongalonta’s levy notice, registered February 7, 1989, was found to have priority over Lantin’s levy, dated October 18, 1989, establishing Bongalonta’s superior lien on the property. Consequently, the charge that respondents represented conflicting interests or attempted to frustrate Bongalonta’s judgment was dismissed for lack of evidence.
Misconduct Regarding IBP Membership Dues and Receipt Number
However, the Board found that respondent Castillo was negligent in using Atty. Martija’s IBP official receipt number ("246722 dated 1-12-88") in his pleadings. Castillo paid his IBP dues belatedly, after Bongalonta filed her complaint. His explanation attributing the error to his cashier-secretary was not accepted, emphasizing that compliance with IBP fee payment is the lawyer’s personal responsibility, especially for active practitioners.
Supreme Court’s Ruling and Legal Basis
Applying the 1987 Philippine Constitution and the Code of Professional Responsibility, the Court underscored that the practice of law is a privilege conditioned on maintaining integrity, honesty, and candor. Lawyers owe the judiciary full candor and must avoid falsehoods. Castillo’s negligent misrepresentation of IBP dues and use of another lawyer’s receipt number constituted a breach of his ethical duties.
Disposition
The Court suspended Atty. Pablito M. Castillo from the practice of law for six
...continue readingCase Syllabus (CBD Case No. 176)
Background and Nature of the Complaint
- Complainant Sally D. Bongalonta filed a sworn letter-complaint with the Commission on Bar Discipline, Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
- The complaint was dated February 15, 1995, and charged respondents Atty. Pablito M. Castillo and Atty. Alfonso M. Martija with unjust and unethical conduct.
- Allegations involved representing conflicting interests and abetting a scheme to frustrate the execution or satisfaction of a judgment potentially obtain by the complainant.
- Specific context involved several cases connected to the spouses Luisa and Solomer Abuel, respondents’ clients.
- Criminal Case No. 7653-55 for estafa was filed by complainant against the Abuel spouses.
- Complainant also initiated Civil Case No. 56934, wherein she secured a preliminary attachment over a real property registered under TCT No. 38374 in Pasig, Rizal, owned by the Abuel spouses.
- Atty. Castillo represented the Abuel spouses in the criminal and civil cases.
Related Cases and Allegations of Collusion
- Gregorio Lantin filed Civil Case No. 58650 in the Pasig Regional Trial Court for collection based on a promissory note against the Abuel spouses.
- Atty. Alfonso Martija represented Gregorio Lantin in this case.
- The Abuel spouses were declared in default for failure to file responses, resulting in a default judgment for Lantin.
- A writ of execution was issued, levying on the same property attached by Bongalonta.
- Complainant alleged that Civil Case No. 58650 operated as part of a fraudulent scheme to frustrate her judgment and execution efforts.
- Both respondents used identical professional details (office address, PTR number, IBP receipt number) in pleadings across the three cases.
- Complainant inferred collaboration between Castillo and Martija in the scheme to defeat her rights and encumber her attached property.
Findings of the IBP Board of Governors
- Documentary evidence included an official xerox copy of TCT No. 38374, admitted by both complainant and respondents as a true copy.
- The Memorandum of Encumbrances showed:
- Notice of levy in favor of Bongalonta and her husb