Case Summary (A.C. No. 7062)
Allegations Against Respondent
The complainants’ allegations stemmed from a consolidated labor case where the Labor Arbiter ruled in favor of the complainants, declaring the dismissal of the workers illegal and ordering their reinstatement and the payment of back wages. Following this decision, a notice of execution was issued; however, the case took a turn when it was revealed that release waivers and quitclaims signed purportedly by some complainants caused the dismissal of their claims. The complainants asserted they had never signed these waivers, which they argued were fraudulent documents facilitated by the respondent and his clients.
Investigation and Findings
The IBP conducted an investigation, wherein Commissioner Salvador B. Hababag recommended that Atty. Suing be reprimanded for negligence. The Commissioner found the allegations about the fraudulent nature of the quitclaims to be plausible but not definitively established. He noted the burden of proof rested on the complainants, as the presumption of regularity in public acts was in favor of respondent’s actions during the execution of the waivers.
The Respondent’s Defense
Respondent Atty. Suing claimed he was not familiar with the complainants and argued that it was not his responsibility to verify their identities. He posited that his role was merely to witness the execution of the waivers as directed by his clients, thus absolving himself from any malfeasance. In his statements to the IBP Commissioner, he emphasized the fact that he had previously been involved in similar proceedings without incident, suggesting that his involvement was consistent with past practices.
Court Decision and Suspension
The Supreme Court did not accept the IBP's recommendation of reprimand. It found that Atty. Suing acted with gross negligence and failed to uphold his responsibilities as a legal representative when he failed to ensure the proper identification of the signatories to the quitclaims. His actions were deemed not me
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 7062)
Case Overview
- Decision Date: September 26, 2006
- Case Citation: 534 Phil. 84
- Division: Third Division
- Case Number: A.C. No. 7062 (Formerly CBD Case No. 04-1355)
- Complainants: Renerio Sambajon, Ronald Sambajon, Crisanto Conos, and Fredilyn Baculbas
- Respondent: Atty. Jose A. Suing
- Nature of Complaint: Disbarment based on allegations of deceit, malpractice, and violations of the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Background of the Case
- The complainants were involved in NLRC Case No. 00-0403180-98, where they alleged Unfair Labor Practice (ULP) and Illegal Dismissal against Microplast, Inc. and its officers.
- Atty. Jose A. Suing represented the respondents in this labor case.
- The Labor Arbiter ruled against the employer, declaring the dismissals of the complainants illegal and ordering reinstatement and payment of back wages.
Allegations Against the Respondent
- The complainants contended that Atty. Suing colluded with his clients to present false documents, specifically Release Waiver and Quitclaims, which purportedly absolved the employer from liability.
- The complainants denied having signed these documents, claiming they had not received any consideration for them.
Administrative Complaint Process
- The complainants filed a complaint with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) against Atty. Suing for negl