Title
Violago vs. Aranjuez, Jr.
Case
A.C. No. 10254
Decision Date
Mar 9, 2020
A lawyer representing a neighborhood association pro bono faced allegations of negligence after a petition for review was dismissed due to defects. The court reprimanded him, emphasizing diligence in handling cases, even pro bono.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 10254)

Respondent's Representation in Ejectment Case

The complainant, a member of the Neighborhood Association, was involved in an ejectment case against Estate of Francisco De Borja represented by Elisea S. De Borja, with Atty. Aranjuez acting as counsel. The Association lost the case at both the Municipal Trial Court and the Regional Trial Court, prompting Atty. Aranjuez to file a petition for review with the Court of Appeals.

Allegations of Negligence

Violago alleged that she was not informed about the status of the petition for review, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeals on July 25, 2013, due to several critical errors, such as failure to attach necessary pleadings and defects in the verification of non-forum shopping. She claimed that these oversights prompted her to consult various lawyers who characterized the respondent's mistakes as egregious, leading her to resign from the Neighborhood Association and request Atty. Aranjuez to withdraw as their counsel.

Respondent's Defense

Atty. Aranjuez argued that he offered his services pro bono due to the members' socioeconomic status. He contended that he maintained communication with the Neighborhood Association's officers and claimed to have met the complainant only once. The respondent denied negligence, asserting he had diligently represented the Association from trial through to the Supreme Court and had even filed an Omnibus Motion to rectify defects identified by the Court of Appeals.

Findings and Recommendations from the IBP

Commissioner Erwin L. Aguilera recommended a three-year suspension from practicing law for Aranjuez due to his failure to meet the basic standards in filing pleadings. The IBP adopted these findings but modified the penalty, suggesting instead a six-month suspension.

Court's Analysis and Conclusion

The Court determined whether Atty. Aranjuez should face administrative discipline for his alleged negligence. Although the dismissal of the petition did exhibit material defects, the Court stressed that not all negligence translates into gross or inexcusable conduct warranting suspension. It acknowledged that Atty. Aranjuez exerted efforts to rectify the i

...continue reading

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