Case Summary (A.C. No. 2131)
Petitioner / Complainant
Atty. Procopio S. Beltran, Jr., acting in his capacity as president of the Philippine Trial Lawyers Association, Inc., brought the charge that respondent Abad was practicing law despite not having been admitted to the Bar.
Respondent
Elmo S. Abad admitted to practicing law but offered an explanation relying on alleged acts taken in July 1979 and subsequent conduct (payment of fees, signing of an oath under circumstances he describes, inclusion in IBP lists and payment of dues) to justify belief that he was a member in good standing.
Key Dates and Procedural Posture
- July 23, 1979: Respondent alleges he paid Bar Admission Fee (P175), Certification Fee (P5), and IBP membership dues for 1979–80, supported by receipts.
- July 26, 1979: Clerk of Court Atty. Romeo Mendoza allegedly included respondent among those taking the oath; respondent alleges he was made to sign his Lawyer’s Oath by a clerk and that the Chief Justice suspended his oath to require him to file a reply in SBC No. 607.
- July 31, 1979: Respondent filed the Reply referred to.
- January 8, 1981: Complainant Jorge Uy in SBC-607 died.
- April 27, 1981: Respondent filed a verified Notice and Motion informing the Court of Uy’s death and praying to be allowed to take his oath.
- February 28, 1981 and subsequently: Respondent was included as a qualified voter by the Integrated Bar, paid further IBP dues and professional tax receipts for 1980–1982, and possessed certificates of membership and membership in good standing from the IBP and its Quezon City Chapter.
- Pending related matters: SBC No. 607 (Uy v. Abad) was dismissed on November 25, 1982 due to complainant’s death; BM No. 136 (Esperanza T. Sistoso, et al. v. Elmo S. Abad) for qualified theft remained pending with respondent required to file an answer on October 26, 1982.
- Decision: The Supreme Court, sitting En Banc, found respondent guilty of contempt and imposed penalties.
Applicable Law and Governing Rules
Because the decision was rendered in 1983, the appropriate constitution is the Constitution in force at that time (the 1973 Constitution). The Court based its ruling on the Rules of Court provisions specifically cited in the decision: Rule 138, Sections 17 and 19 (pertaining to the lawyer’s oath and signing the Roll of Attorneys as requisites to bar admission), and Rule 71, Section 3(e) (contempt provision under the Rules of Court).
Facts as Found and Respondent’s Explanation
Respondent could not deny and in fact admitted to practicing law. In exculpation, he stated: he paid bar admission and certification fees before taking his oath; he was included by the Clerk among those taking the oath on July 26, 1979; he was made to sign his Lawyer’s Oath by a clerk while waiting for his turn; the Chief Justice purportedly directed him to answer a pending complaint before administering his oath; he filed that reply on July 31, 1979; thereafter he continued to pay IBP dues, was listed as a qualified voter, paid professional tax receipts and obtained IBP membership and “good standing” certificates; following the death of the complainant in SBC-607, he filed a verified notice and motion asking to be allowed to take his oath.
Court’s Legal Analysis and Findings
The Court emphasized that the circumstances narrated by respondent do not constitute formal admission to the Philippine Bar. It reiterated the two essential requisites for becoming a lawyer under the Rules of Court: (1) the lawyer’s oath must be administered by the Supreme Court, and (2) the signature in the Roll of Attorne
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 2131)
Case Caption and Citation
- Reported at 206 Phil. 172 en banc, BM No. 139, decided March 28, 1983.
- Title as presented: RE: ELMO S. ABAD, 1978 SUCCESSFUL BAR EXAMINEE.
- Complainant: Atty. Procopio S. Beltran, Jr., President of the Philippine Trial Lawyer Association, Inc.
- Respondent: Elmo S. Abad.
- Opinion authored by Justice Abad Santos.
Charge Against Respondent
- Respondent was charged by Atty. Procopio S. Beltran, Jr. with practicing law without having been previously admitted to the Philippine Bar.
- The Court found respondent could not deny and admitted the practice of law without proper admission.
Respondent’s Explanation (as narrated by respondent)
- The respondent presented a multi-point exculpatory narrative to justify his conduct. The points, as stated by respondent, are:
- Point 1: On July 23, 1979, respondent, conformably with the Resolution of the Honorable Supreme Court En Banc dated July 10, 1979, prior to his taking the Oath of Office as a member of the bar, paid his Bar Admission Fee in the amount of P175.00 as shown by Official Receipt No. 8128792; paid his Certification Fee in the amount of P5.00 as shown by Official Receipt No. 8128793; and paid his Membership Dues for the year 1979-80 to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines as shown by Official Receipt No. 83740.
- Point 2: On July 26, 1979, Atty. Romeo Mendoza, then Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court, included respondent among those taking the Oath of Office as Member of the Bar as shown by a letter of Request dated July 23, 1979.
- Point 3: At around eleven o’clock in the morning of July 26, 1979, while waiting to take his Oath as a member of the Bar, respondent was made to sign his Lawyer’s Oath by one of the clerks in the Office of the Bar Confidant; while waiting there, Atty. Romeo Mendoza told respondent that Chief Justice Enrique M. Fernando wanted to talk to him about the Reply of Mr. Jorge Uy (deceased) to respondent’s Answer to Uy’s Complaint; the Chief Justice told respondent he had to answer the Reply and for that reason the taking of respondent’s Lawyer’s Oath was further suspended.
- Point 4: On July 31, 1979, respondent filed his Reply to Mr. Jorge Uy’s Answer with a prayer that the Supreme Court determine his fitness to be a member of the Bar.
- Point 5: While awaiting action on his prayer, respondent received a letter from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Quezon City Chapter dated May 10, 1980 informing respondent of an Annual General Meeting together with his Statement of Account for the year 1980-1981.
- Point 6: Believing that his signing of the Lawyer’s Oath on July 26, 1979 and his Reply to Mr. Jorge Uy’s Answer meant the Supreme Court did not order the striking of his name from the Roll of Attorneys and that he was therefore a member in good standing, respondent paid his membership dues and other assessments to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Quezon City Chapter as shown by Official Receipt No. 110326 and Official Receipt No. 0948; respondent also paid his Professional Tax Receipt as shown by Official Receipt No. 058033 and Official Receipt No. 4610685.
- Point 7: On February 28, 1981, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Quezon City Chapter included respondent’s name as a Qualified Voter for the election of officers and directors for the year 1981-1982.
- Point 8: Respondent’s belief and good faith were further enhanced by the fact that on January 8, 1981, complainant Jorge Uy in SBC-607 died; respondent submitted a verified Notice and Motion with the Supreme Court on April 27, 1981 notifying the Court of this fact with a prayer that respondent be allowed to take his Oath as Member of the Bar.
- Point 9: Thereafter respondent was again assessed by the Integrated Bar for his 1981-1982 membership dues and other assessments, which he paid as shown by Official Receipt No. 132734 and Official Receipt No. 3363.
- Point 10: Respondent paid his Professional Tax Receipt for 1981 as shown by Offici