Case Summary (G.R. No. L-26768)
Allegations and Background
The complainant alleged that the respondent filed a criminal complaint for Estafa against her for an amount of ₱4,500. After the case was filed, the respondent sought mediation and proposed a settlement of ₱200,000 for the dismissal of the complaint. The complainant paid the respondent two installments of ₱100,000 on April 3, 2018, and April 10, 2018. However, the respondent refused to sign the Affidavit of Desistance provided by the complainant's legal counsel, instead presenting a Combined Affidavit that required the complainant to admit to guilt. This refusal to dismiss the cases led to the filing of the disbarment complaint.
Respondent's Actions and Conduct
Further accusations against the respondent include disparaging remarks made in letters to the complainant's counsel, disrespectful language directed at judges presiding over cases involving the respondent, and filing motions that were perceived as inappropriate. The respondent also failed to comply with the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) requirements and used incorrect roll numbers in his legal documents. It was revealed that he notarized documents outside of his territorial jurisdiction, as his notarial commission was confined to the RTC of Lemery, Batangas.
Investigating Commissioner's Findings
The IBP's Investigating Commissioner found considerable evidence of misconduct, including violations of the Lawyer's Oath, the CPR, and notarial laws. The commissioner recommended disbarment due to the respondent’s serious ethical breaches, including misleading the complainant regarding the nature of their settlement, using different roll numbers, and using abusive language in formal legal documents.
Respondent's Defense and Arguments
In his defense, the respondent claimed that the complainant had a criminal history, which he argued tainted her credibility. He also asserted that he had abandoned his law practice due to financial difficulties and that he had not notarized documents outside his jurisdiction. Additionally, the respondent contended that he ceased to practice once his MCLE compliance lapsed.
Resolution by IBP Board of Governors
On August 28, 2021, the IBP Board of Governors modified the Investigating Commissioner's recommendation, opting for indefinite suspension rather than disbarment, attributing this decision to the respondent's age and circum
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-26768)
Complaint Overview
- The case is a complaint filed by Vivian A. Rubio (complainant) against Atty. Jose F. Caoibes, Jr. (respondent) before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
- The complaint alleges violations of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, Bar Matter No. 850 (2004 Rules on Notarial Practice), and the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
Background of the Complaint
- The respondent filed an Estafa complaint against the complainant for an amount of P4,500.00.
- Prior to the prosecution's presentation of evidence, the respondent sought mediation, leading to an agreement where the complainant would pay P200,000.00 to have all cases dismissed.
- The complainant paid P100,000.00 on April 3, 2018, with full payment completed by April 10, 2018.
- The respondent, however, refused to sign an Affidavit of Desistance and instead prepared a Combined Affidavits of Admissions and Desistance, which required the complainant to admit guilt, a condition she refused.
Allegations Against the Respondent
- The respondent disparaged the complainant in letters to her counsel.
- The complainant was facing additional criminal cases at the time of the complaint.
- The respondent displayed disrespect towards Judge Montes in a "Manifestation and Urgent Omnibus Motion" and attacked the integrity of Judge Silang in another case's pleadings.
- The respondent's pattern of behavior included filing motions