A.C. No. 12875 - Portuguese, Jr. vs. Centro

Case Summary (A.C. No. 12875)

Factual Background

Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. retained Atty. Jerry R. Centro as counsel in Civil Case No. 7177, captioned "Gloria V. Libarnes v. Prudencio Portugues," filed as a complaint for injunction, damages, and attorney’s fees in RTC, Branch 32, Surigao City. Atty. Jerry R. Centro drafted and filed an Answer. At the conclusion of trial the parties were required to file memoranda; respondent represented to the client that he had filed the memorandum but did not do so. The client first learned of the RTC’s July 10, 2017 Decision only when, on January 25, 2018, he and his family were served a sheriff’s notice to comply with a Writ of Execution. Respondent allegedly received a copy of the July 10, 2017 Decision on August 10, 2017, failed to advise the client, did not file any pleading to appeal or otherwise contest the Decision, did not inform the client of the Motion for Execution or its hearing or the trial court’s resolution granting execution, and later told the client that he was "giving up the case for good."

Procedural History before the IBP

The complaint alleging gross negligence, abandonment, and dereliction of duty was investigated by Commissioner Jose Alfonso M. Gomos of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. The Investigating Commissioner filed a Report and Recommendation dated April 29, 2019, which recommended suspension. The IBP Board of Governors adopted that Report and Recommendation in a Resolution dated June 17, 2019. Atty. Jerry R. Centro failed to file an Answer to the administrative complaint despite notice.

IBP Findings and Recommendation

The Investigating Commissioner found that Atty. Jerry R. Centro’s inaction deprived Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. of any opportunity to obtain relief from the adverse RTC Decision. The Investigating Commissioner concluded that respondent neglected his duty to exert efforts to avail of every remedy and defense authorized by law, breached Rule 12.03 by failing to seasonably file a memorandum and to offer an explanation, and violated Rule 18.04 by failing to keep his client informed of the status of the case. The Investigating Commissioner also viewed respondent’s failure to answer the administrative complaint as demonstrating nonchalance and disrespect in violation of Canon 11. On these grounds the Investigating Commissioner recommended suspension from the practice of law for three years, a recommendation the IBP adopted.

The Parties' Contentions

Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. alleged that Atty. Jerry R. Centro misrepresented that a memorandum had been filed, concealed the adverse RTC Decision, failed to file any appellate or other remedial pleading, neglected to inform him of the Motion for Execution or its hearing and resolution, and failed to oppose execution. The complaint also noted that respondent faced separate administrative charges, including A.C. No. 11421 and another matter allegedly filed by respondent’s spouse. Atty. Jerry R. Centro did not file a responsive pleading to the complaint before the IBP and therefore offered no defense in the investigative record.

Issues Presented

The principal issues were whether Atty. Jerry R. Centro committed professional misconduct by neglecting and abandoning his client’s cause and by failing to inform his client of material developments; whether his conduct violated the Lawyer's Oath and provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility identified by the IBP; and what disciplinary sanction, if any, was proper.

Ruling of the Supreme Court

The Court adopted the findings and recommendation of the IBP. The Court held that Atty. Jerry R. Centro was guilty of professional misconduct for: failing to file a memorandum and misrepresenting that he had filed it; failing to inform Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. of the RTC’s July 10, 2017 Decision; failing to protect the client’s interests against the adverse Decision; failing to inform the client of the Motion for Execution, the hearing, and the resolution granting execution; and failing to file an Answer to the administrative complaint. For these transgressions the Court suspended Atty. Jerry R. Centro from the practice of law for three years and warned him that repetition would be dealt with more severely.

Legal Basis and Reasoning

The Court reasoned that the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility require that a lawyer serve the client with competence and diligence, keep the client informed, and exert all remedies authorized by law to protect the client’s cause. The Court found that respondent’s unjustifiable negligence and abandonment violated Canon 17 and Canon 18, and that his failure to file pleadings and to explain such failures contravened Rule 12.03 and Rule 18.04. The Court emphasized that unexplained disregard for orders of the IBP demonstrated irresponsibility and disrespect to the IBP and the process, in breach of Canon 11. The Court applied settled disciplinary principles that a member of the Bar may be penalized for violation of the Lawyer's Oath and breaches of the ethical rules because the practice of law is a public trust; the appropriate penalty depends on the exercise of sound judicial discretion in light of the facts.

Sanction Imposed

As commensurate discipline for respondent’s negligent and abandoned representation and for his misrepresentations, the Court ordered a suspension from the practice of law for three years and imposed

Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 12875)

Parties and Posture

Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr., Complainant engaged Atty. Jerry R. Centro, Respondent as counsel in Civil Case No. 7177 pending before the Regional Trial Court, Branch 32, Surigao City.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines assigned Commissioner Jose Alfonso M. Gomos to investigate the administrative complaint against Atty. Jerry R. Centro, Respondent.
The Investigating Commissioner submitted a Report and Recommendation dated April 29, 2019 recommending disciplinary suspension.
The Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines adopted the Investigating Commissioner’s findings and recommended suspension in a Resolution dated June 17, 2019.
The Court, acting en banc, reviewed and adopted the IBP findings and recommendations and entered the present decision.

Key Facts

Atty. Jerry R. Centro filed an Answer on behalf of Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. in Civil Case No. 7177.
The parties were required to file memoranda at the close of proceedings, and Atty. Centro repeatedly told his client that the memorandum had been filed.
Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr. received, through a sheriff on January 25, 2018, a Notice requiring compliance with a Writ of Execution and thereby first learned of the rendition of an adverse judgment.
Atty. Centro allegedly received a copy of the RTC’s July 10, 2017 Decision on August 10, 2017 but failed to inform his client of the adverse decision.
Atty. Centro did not file any pleading to appeal or otherwise question the RTC’s July 10, 2017 Decision.
Atty. Centro did not file a memorandum despite representing to his client that one had been filed.
Atty. Centro failed to notify his client of the Motion for Execution, the scheduled hearing thereon, and the trial court’s resolution granting the motion.
Atty. Centro failed to file an Answer to the administrative complaint despite notice from the IBP.

IBP Recommendation

The Investigating Commissioner found that Atty. Centro’s inaction deprived his client of relief from an adverse decision and demonstrated neglect of duty.
The Investigating Commissioner concluded that Atty. Centro violated Rule 12.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by failing to seasonably file pleadings and failing to offer an explanation for such omission.
The Investigating Commissioner concluded that Atty. Centro violated Rule 18.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by failing to keep his client informed of the status of the case.
The Investigating Commissioner found that Atty. Centro violated Canon 11 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by failing to respond to IBP notices and thereby showing nonchalance toward lawful orders.
The Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines adopted the foregoing findings and recommended a three-year suspension from the practice of law.

Issues

Whether Atty. Jerry R. Centro committed gross negligence, abandonment, and dereliction of duty as counsel to Prudencio B. Portuguese, Jr..
Whether Atty. Centro’s acts or omissions violated the Lawyer’s Oath and specific provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
What disciplinary sanction, if any, was appropriate for the proven misconduc