Case Summary (A.C. No. 6273)
Procedural History
The allegations initiated a chain of legal responses, including a Motion to Quash filed by the complainant, which the trial court granted, leading to the denial of the respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration. The respondent then filed six other criminal complaints against the complainant. Following a Notice of Special General Assembly sent by the respondent on October 10, 2001, a crucial assembly took place on October 14, where actions were taken that resulted in the purported removal of four members of the Board of Directors, including the complainant.
Actions Leading to Disbarment Complaint
On October 16, 2001, the complainant lodged a complaint with the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) challenging the legitimacy of the assembly's proceedings. The CDA initially ruled the assembly as null and void due to violations of GEMASCO's By-Laws and the Cooperative Code of the Philippines. However, this resolution was later vacated for lack of jurisdiction.
Subsequently, the complainant filed a disbarment complaint against the respondent, outlining several serious allegations: promoting groundless legal suits, violating laws, engaging in disrespectful conduct toward a professional colleague, and violating several canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Respondent's Non-Compliance and Investigation
Despite being granted an extension to submit a comment on the disbarment complaint, the respondent failed to comply, resulting in the referral of this matter to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). During an ensuing mandatory conference, the complainant's issues were examined, focusing on whether the respondent's conduct constituted violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the lawyer's oath.
The respondent was represented by counsel, who questioned the existence of misconduct based on the allegations. Following the conference, both parties were instructed to file position papers, but the respondent did not submit any despite being allowed additional time.
Findings and Recommendations
The Investigating Commissioner conducted a thorough review and found the respondent guilty of various breaches, including violations of Canons 1, 8, 10, and Rule 12.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The Commissioner recommended a two-year suspension from practice. However, the IBP Board of Governors ultimately dismissed the complaint for lack of merit initially but later recommended a six-month suspension after a motion for reconsideration.
Court's Conclusion and Sanctions
The Court concluded that the respondent's involvement in unlawfully taking over the Board of Directors and the GEMASCO facilities viol
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 6273)
Case Background
- An Information for Estafa was filed on June 21, 2001 against Atty. Iluminada M. Vaflor-Fabroa (complainant) and others, based on a joint affidavit-complaint prepared and notarized by Atty. Oscar Paguinto (respondent).
- The joint affidavit-complaint did not include the complainant's involvement, prompting her to file a Motion to Quash the Information which the trial court granted.
- Respondent's Motion for Reconsideration regarding the quashal of the Information was subsequently denied.
- Respondent initiated six other criminal complaints against the complainant for violations of Article 31 of Republic Act No. 6938 (Cooperative Code of the Philippines) but later withdrew them.
Special General Assembly Events
- On October 10, 2001, the complainant, serving as Chairperson of the General Mariano Alvarez Service Cooperative, Inc. (GEMASCO), received a Notice of a Special General Assembly scheduled for October 14, 2001, aimed at discussing the removal of four members from the Board of Directors, including herself.
- The notice was signed by respondent, leading to the assembly being presided over by both respondent and PNP Sr. Supt. Angelito L. Gerangco, who were not part of the current Board.
- During the assembly, Gerangco declared himself Chair, appointed replacements for the removed directors, and designated respondent as Board Secretary.
Takeover of GEMASCO Facilities
- On October 15, 2001, respondent and his group occupied the GEMASCO office and facilities, including water operations.
- Respondent sent letters to complainant and the removed directors, notifying them of their removal from both the Board and GEMASCO membership, instructing them to cease performing their duties.
Complaint to Cooperative Development Authority (CDA)
- On October 16, 2001, complainant filed a complaint with the CDA-Calamba for annulment of the assembly's proceedings.
- The CDA Actin