Title
Guanzon vs. Dojillo
Case
A.C. No. 9850
Decision Date
Aug 6, 2018
Atty. Guanzon accused Atty. Dojillo of breaching confidentiality by using disbarment case affidavits in Garcia's defense; SC upheld dismissal, citing lack of evidence and permissible use.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 9850)

Overview of Allegations

Atty. Guanzon filed a complaint against Atty. Dojillo for disbarment, alleging violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility concerning confidentiality, gross misconduct, discourtesy, unfairness, and unethical conduct. This originated from Atty. Guanzon’s representation of Rosalie Jaype-Garcia in a case for a Temporary Protection Order under R.A. No. 9262 against her husband, Jesus Chua Garcia.

Background of the Dispute

The Regional Trial Court granted a temporary protection order in favor of Atty. Guanzon’s clients, prompting Garcia to retaliate with a disbarment complaint against Atty. Guanzon, which included affidavits alleging improper motives. Atty. Guanzon subsequently filed multiple cases against Garcia, to which Atty. Dojillo responded by attaching documents from the disbarment proceedings, leading to the current complaint against him for violating confidentiality rules.

Atty. Dojillo's Defense

In his answer to the IBP, Atty. Dojillo contended that attaching the documents was necessary to establish Atty. Guanzon’s motives in pursuing the various cases against his client. He highlighted that Atty. Guanzon had also used the same documents in other legal proceedings without consequence, arguing that this indicated that his actions were not improper.

IBP Investigation and Findings

The IBP-Commission on Bar Discipline recommended dismissing the complaint against Atty. Dojillo, citing insufficient evidence. They concluded that Atty. Dojillo acted out of necessity to defend his client and that the multiple filings by Atty. Guanzon appeared retaliatory. The IBP further suggested that Atty. Guanzon should be censured for initiating what they termed harassment and baseless lawsuits.

Court's Ruling on the Appeal

The Court adopted the findings of the IBP, affirming that Atty. Guanzon did not meet the burden of proof to substantiate her claims against Atty. Dojillo. It emphasized that Atty. Dojillo’s use of disbarment records was an exercise of his duty to defend his client, and the lack of evidence demonstrating malice or ill intent reinforced the dismissal of the complaint.

Legal Implications of Confidentiality

The Court clarified that confidentiality rules pertaining to disciplinary actions are not absolute. They are designed to maintain privacy regarding proceedings but do not prevent the necessity of disclosing relev

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.