Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 12

AUGUST 2017 A.C. No.

11504
August 1, 2017 ARIEL G. PALACIOS, for and in behalf of the AFP
Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-
A.M. No. RTJ-10-2219 RSBS),Complaint,
OFFICE OF THE COURT vs.
ADMINISTRATOR, Complaint, ATTY. BIENVENIDO BRAULIO M. AMORA,
vs. JR., Respondent
Retired Judge PABLO R. CHAVEZ, Former Presiding CASE:
Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch 87, Rosario,
Batangas, Atty. TEOFILO A. DIMACULANGAN, JR., The instant administrative case arose from a Complaint dated
Clerk of Court VI, Mr. ARMANDO ERMELITO M. March 11, 20081 filed by Ariel G. Palacios, in his capacity as
MARQUEZ, Court Interpreter III, Ms. EDITHA E. the Chief Operating Officer and duly authorized representative
BAGSIC, Court Interpreter III, and Mr. DAVID of the AFP Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-
CAGUIMBAL, Process Server, all of Regional Trial RSBS), seeking the disbarment of respondent Atty. Bienvenido
Court, Branch 87, Rosario, Batangas,, Respondents. Braulio M. Amora, Jr. for alleged violation of: (1) Canon 1,
x-----------------------x Rules 1.01 to 1.03; Canon 10, Rules 10.01to10.03; Canon 15,
Rule 15.03; Canon 17; Canon 21, Rule 21.01 and 21.02 of the
Re: Undated Anonymous LetterComplaint against the
Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR); (2) Section 20,
Presiding Judge, Clerk of Court and Court Stenographer
of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 87, Rosario, Batangas. Rule 138 of the Rules of Court; (3) Lawyer's Oath; and (4)
Article 1491 of the Civil Code.
CASE:
We adjudged Judge Chavez guilty of gross neglect of duty and
undue delay in rendering decisions and imposed on him the A.M No. P-09-2649
penalty of forfeiture of all his retirement benefits, except OFFICE OF THE COURT
accrued leave credits, in lieu of dismissal from service which ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant,
can no longer be imposed due to Judge Chavez's retirement. vs.
EDUARDO T. UMBLAS, Legal Researcher, and ATTY.
RIZALINA G. BALTAZARAQUINO, Clerk of Court IV,
A.C. No. 10562 both of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 33, Ballesteros
Cagayan, Respondents.
JEAN MARIE S. BOERS, Complaint,
vs. CASE:
ATTY. ROMEO CALUBAQUIB, Respondent
The instant administrative case arose from a
CASE: Memorandum1 dated January 15, 2009 filed before the
complainant Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) by then
On May 28, 2009, Jean Marie S. Boers (Boers) filed before the
Deputy Court Administrator Reuben P. De La Cruz (DCA De
Commission on Bar Discipline (Commission) a complaint-
La Cruz) reporting the commission of malversation thru
affidavit1 against Atty. Romeo Calubaquib (Calubaquib ).
falsification of official documents committed by employees of
Boers claims that Calubaquib violated the Rules on Notarial
the Regional Trial Court of Ballesteros, Cagayan, Branch 33
Practice and prays that he be given the appropriate disciplinary
(RTC-Cagayan Br. 33).2
action. The Commission directed Calubaquib to file his
answer.2 It then conducted a mandatory conference and
thereafterordered the parties to submit their position
AUGUST 15, 2017
papers.3 On May 23, 2011, the Commission submitted its
Report and Recommendation4 to the Integrated Bar of the A.C. No. 11149
Philippines Board of Governors (IBP Board of Governors). The
LAURENCE D. PUNLA and MARILYN
IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved the SANTOS, Complainants,
Commission's report and recommendation5 and forwarded the vs.
resolution to this Court.6 ATTY. ELEONOR MARA VILLA-ONA,, Respondent.
CASE:
The present administrative case stemmed from a Complaint-
Affidavit1 filed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
Commission on Bar Discipline (IBPCBD) by complainants
Laurence D. Punla and Marilyn Santos against respondent Atty.
Eleonor Maravilla-Ona, charging the latter with violation of the
lawyer's oath, for neglecting her clients' interests.
AUGUST 16, 2017 AUGUST 29, 2017
A.C. No. 10245 A.C. No. 7253
ELIBENA A. CABILES, Complainant, ATTY. PLARIDEL C. NAVA II, Complainant,
vs. vs.
ATIY. LEANDRO S. CEDO,, Respondent. PROSECUTOR OFELIA M. D. ARTUZ,* Respondent.
CASE: x-----------------------x
DEL CASTILLO, J.: A.M. No. MTJ-08-1717
Complainant Elibena Cabiles (Elibena) filed this administrative ATTY. PLARIDEL C. NAVA II, Complainant,
complaint1 before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) vs.
seeking the disbarment of Atty. Leandro Cedo (respondent JUDGE OFELIA M. D. ARTUZ, MUNICIPAL TRIAL
lawyer) for neglecting the two cases she referred to him to COURT IN CITIES of ILOILO CITY,
handle. BRANCHS, Respondent.
CASE:
A.C. No. 8574 For resolution are the two (2) consolidated cases filed by
complainant Atty. Plaridel C. Nava II (Nava) against
CARMELO IRINGAN, Complainant,
respondent then Prosecutor, now Presiding Judge, Ofelia M. D.
vs.
Artuz (Artuz) of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities of Iloilo
ATTY. CLAYTON B. GUMANGAN,, Respondent.
City, Branch 5, (MTCC, Br. 5): (a) A.C. No. 7253 that sought
CASE: to disbar Artuz, then a Prosecutor at the time of the filing of the
petition; and (b) A.M. No. MTJ-08-1717 (formerly OCA IPI
This is an administrative complaint for disbarment or No. 07-1911- MTJ) that sought to nullify the nomination and
suspension filed by complainant Carmelo Iringan (Carmelo) appointment of Artuz as Presiding Judge of the MTCC, Br. 5,
against respondent Atty. Clayton B. Gumangan (Atty. for being patently illegal, improper, and irregular.
Gumangan) relative to Civil Case No. 518-09, entitled Sps.
Renato and Carmen A. lringan v. Carmelo A. lringan, for
Illegal Detainer and Ejectment with Damages, before the
AUGUST 30, 2017
Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) of the City of Tabuk,
Kalinga. A.C. No. 6980
CESAR O. STA. ANA, CRISTINA M. STA. ANA and
ESTHER STA. ANA-SILVERIO, Complainants,
AUGUST 22, 2017
vs.
A.C. No. 10253 ATTY. ANTONIO JOSEF. CORTES,, Respondent.
RAFAEL PADILLA, Complainant, CASE:
vs.
This is a complaint for disbarment filed by complainants against
ATTY. GLENN SAMSON,, Respondent.
Atty. Antonio Jose F. Cortes (respondent) against whom they
CASE: imputed deceit and falsification of public documents in the sale
This case stemmed from a complaint filed by Rafael Padilla of two parcels of property located at Bo. Lantic, Carmona,
against his former lawyer, Atty. Glenn Samson, for behavior Cavite and covered by Transfer Certificates of Title (TCT) Nos.
unbecoming of a lawyer. T-1069335 and T-1069336; and in the donation of 66 pieces of
property by Atty. Cesar Casal (Atty. Casal) and his wife, Pilar
Complainant Rafael Padilla filed a Complaint on November 25, P. Casal (Pilar).
2013 against his former counsel, respondent Atty. Glenn
Samson, in connection with his case, entitled Indelecia Balaga
and Enrique Balaga v. Rafael Padilla, Case No. 00-05-07038-
08. Padilla contends that Samson suddenly cut all
communications with him, which almost caused him to miss the
due date for the filing of a required pleading. He even wrote a
demand letter asking Samson to withdraw his appearance and
return all the documents pertinent to his case, but to no avail.
A.M. No. RTJ-10-2223
MS. FLORITA PALMA and MS. FILIPINA
MERCADO, Complainants,
vs.
JUDGE GEORGE E. OMELIO, Regional Trial Court, Br.
14, Davao City (then of Municipal Trial Court in Cities,
Br. 4, Davao City), JUDGE VIRGILIO G. MURCIA,
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Br. 2, and Clerk of Court
MA. FLORIDA C. OMELIO, Municipal Trial Court in
Cities, Office of the Clerk of Court, both of the Island
Garden City of Samal,, Respondents.
CASE:
DEL CASTILLO, J.:
On July 8, 2007, a certain Filipina Mercado (Mercado) sent an
electronic mail1 (e-mail) to the pio@supremecourt.gov
.ph regarding an alleged "marriage scam" in Davao City
perpetrated by Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) Judges
George E. Omelio (Judge Omelio) and Rufino Ferraris (Judge
Ferraris).2 Mercado claimed to have personal knowledge of the
illegal activities of the said judges as she was once a "fixer".
We agree with the OCA that the following acts of respondents
amounted to gross misconduct constituting violation of the
Code of Judicial Conduct, a serious charge46 punishable by (a)
dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part of the
benefits as the Court may determine, excluding accrued leave
credits; and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment
to any public office, including government-owned or controlled
corporations; (b) suspension from office without salary or other
benefits for more than three (3) but not exceeding six (6)
months; or (c) a fine of more than ₱20,000.00 but not exceeding
₱40,000.00.
SEPTEMBER 2017 SEPTEMBER 19, 2017
A.M. No. 17-08-01-SC
SEPTEMBER 4, 2017 RE: REQUESTS FOR SURVIVORSHIP PENSION
BENEFITS OF SPOUSES OF JUSTICES AND JUDGES
A.M. No. p-16-3521 WHO DIED PRIOR TO THE EFFECTIVITY OF
HON. MARIA CRISTINA C. BOTIGAN-SANTOS, REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9946
Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court, San CASE:
Ildefonso, Bulacan, Complainant
vs. For resolution are the applications for survivorship benefits of
LETICIA C. GENER, Clerk of Court of the Municipal spouses of justices and judges who died prior to the
Trial Court, San Ildefonso, Bulacan,, Respondent effectivity1 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9946, which introduced
CASE: substantial amendments to the benefits provided in R.A. No.
910.
Before us is a Letter1 dated August 28, 2014 sent by Judge
Maria Cristina C. Botigan-Santos (Judge Botigan-Santos),
Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court (MI'C), San
Ildefonso, Bulacan which reported a robbery incident that took
place in her court on August 7, 2014.

SEPTEMBER 5, 2017
A.C. No. 11478
SPOUSES ANDRE CHAMBON AND MARIA FATIMA
CHAMBON, Complainants
vs.
ATTY. CHRISTOPHER S. RUIZ, Respondent
CASE
This administrative case arose from a verified Complaint1 for
gross violation of Section 2 (b ), paragraph 2 of Rule IV and
Section 2, paragraphs (a), (d), and (e) of Rule VI of the 2004
Rules on Notarial Practice filed by complainant Spouses Andre
and Maria Fatima Chambon (Spouses Chambon) against Atty.
Christopher S. Ruiz (respondent) before the Integrated Bar of
the Philippines(IBP).

A.M. No. 16-05-142-RTC


Re: Report on the Preliminary Results of the Spot Audit in
the Regional Trial Court, Branch 170, Malabon City.,
CASE:
DEL CASTILLO, J.:
This administrative matter refers to the report on the
preliminary results of the spot audit conducted by the Office of
the Court Administrator (OCA) in the Regional Trial Court,
Branch 170, Malabon City.
OCTOBER 2017
OCTOBER 3, 2017
OCTOBER 2, 2017 A.C. No. 11754

A.C. No. 10243 JOAQUIN G. BONIFACIO, Complainant


vs.
MYRNA OJALES, Complainant ATTY. EDGARDO O. ERA and ATTY. DIANE KAREN
vs. B. BRAGAS, Respondents
ATTY. OBDULIO GUY D. VILLAHERMOSA III,
Respondent This administrative case arose from a verified Affidavit-
Complaint1 filed before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
CASE: (IBP) by complainant Joaquin G. Bonifacio (Bonifacio) against
Complainant Myrna Ojales filed a Complaint1 against respondents Atty. Edgardo O. Era (Atty. Era) and Atty. Diane
Karen B. Bragas (Atty. Bragas) for violating the Code of
respondent Atty. Obdulio Guy Villahermosa III with the
Professional Responsibility (CPR).
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
Further, respondent failed to answer the complaint filed against
him with the Committee on Bar Discipline of the IBP Negros OCTOBER 10, 2017
Oriental Chapter and the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline. A.M. No. p-17-3756
He did not attend the mandatory conference held on December
1, 2011 despite notice. Respondent's failure to comply with the JUDGE LITA S. TOLENTINO-GENILO, Complainant
orders of the IBP without justifiable reason manifests his vs.
ROLANDO S. PINEDA, Respondent
disrespect of judicial authorities.17 As a lawyer, he ought to
know that the compulsory bar organization was merely CASE:
deputized by this Court to undertake the investigation of This refers to the sworn Complaint-Affidavit,1 dated October
complaints against lawyers.18In short, his disobedience to the 18, 2016, filed by complainant Judge Lita S. Tolentino-Genilo
IBP is in reality a gross and blatant disrespect of the Court. 19 (complainant), Presiding Judge, Branch 91, Regional Trial
Court of Quezon City (RTC), against Rolando S.
Pineda (respondent), Court Aide of the same branch, filed
OCTOBER 3, 2017 before the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), an
administrative case for grave misconduct and dishonesty.
A.C. No. 11483
LUZVIMINDA S. CERILLA, Complainant
vs. A.M. No. P-12-3092
ATTY. SAMUEL SM. LEZAMA, Respondent
OFFICE OF THE COURT
CASE: ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant
vs.
On November 22, 2010, complainant Luzviminda S. Cerilla REMEDIOS R. VIESCA, CLERK OF COURT II,
filed an administrative complaint1 for gross misconduct against MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF SAN ANTONIO,
respondent Atty. Samuel SM. Lezama with the Integrated Bar NUEVA ECIJA,, Respondent
of the Philippines (IBP).
CASE:
Respondent, in his Answer and Motion for Reconsideration of
For resolution is the motion for reconsideration1 filed by
Resolution No. XXI-2014-386, stated that his action was based
respondent Remedios R. Viesca (Viesca) of the Court's
on an honest belief that he was serving both the interest of his Decision2 dated April 14, 2015.
client and the policy of the law to settle cases amicably.
However, his justification does not persuade, because his The Court adjudged Viesca guilty of Gross Neglect of Duty,
alleged honest belief prejudiced his client, since the property Grave Misconduct, and Serious Dishonesty and imposed on her
she was not willing to sell was sold at a price decided upon by the following penalties: (i) dismissal from
service; (ii) forfeiture of all her retirement benefits, except
respondent on his own, which caused his client and her co-
accrued leave benefits; (iii) perpetual disqualification from re-
owners to file further cases to recover their property that was employment in any government-owned and controlled
sold due to respondent's mistake. He overlooked the fact that he corporation or government financial
was not authorized by his client to sell the property. institution; (iv) cancellation of her civil service eligibility; and
Canon 5 of the Code of Professional Responsibility states: (v) disqualification from taking the civil service examination. 3

CANON 5 - A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments,


participate in continuing legal education programs, support
efforts to achieve high standards in law schools as well as in the
practical training of law students and assist in disseminating
information regarding the law and jurisprudence.
OCTOBER 18, 2017
A.M. No. rtj-16-2467
ATTY. EDDIE U. TAMONDONG, Petitioner
vs.
JUDGE EMMANUEL P. PASAL, Presiding Judge,
Branch 38, Regional Trial Court, Cagayan De Oro City,
Respondent
CASE:
This is an administrative complaint1 for gross ignorance of the
law, gross incompetence, gross inefficiency and/or neglect of
duty filed by Atty. Eddie U. Tamondong (Atty. Tamondong)
against Judge Emmanuel P. Pasal (Judge Pasal), Presiding
Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Cagayan de Oro City,
Branch 38, relative to Special Civil Action No. 2013-184,
entitled Henmar Development Property, Inc. v. Judge Michelia
O. Capadocia, Judge, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Opal,
Misamis Oriental and Heirs of Enrique Abada represented by
his wife and children, et al.
NOVEMBER 2017
A.M. No. P-05-1938
NOVEMBER 6, 2017 THE OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant
A.C. No. 10333 vs.
CORNELIO V. YAGONG, Complainant MR. CRISPIN C. EGIPTO, JR., CLERK OF COURT IV,
vs. MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES, PAGADIAN
CITY PROSECUTOR NEOPITO ED G. MAGNO and CITY, Respondent
ASSISTANT CITY PROSECUTOR DON S. GARCIA, The custody and handling of funds and other assets by Judiciary
Respondents officers and employees entrusted therewith are both a
CASE: responsibility and an accountability that must be faithfully
discharged. Any act or omission in relation thereto may be
The present case is an administrative complaint filed by
condignly sanctioned according to the attendant circumstances.
Cornelio V. Yagong against City Prosecutor Neopito Ed G.
Where the failure to deposit daily collections is committed by a
Magno and Assistant City Prosecutor Don S. Garcia for alleged
clerk of court previously sanctioned for the same omission, the
violation of the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional
sanction is dismissal from the service and forfeiture of all
Responsibility (CPR).
retirement benefits (except earned leave credits), with prejudice
to re-employment in the Government, including government-
owned and government-controlled corporations.
A.M. No. P-15-3329
PROSECUTOR FILIPI NA C.
CABAUATAN, Complainant A.M. No. RTJ-17-2508
vs.
DOMINGO B. UVERO, SHERIFF IV, BRANCH 12, MARIE ROXANNE G. RECTO, Complainant
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, LIGAO CITY, ALBAY, vs.
Respondent HON. HENRY J. TROCINO, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, BRANCH 62, BAGO CITY, NEGROS
CASE: OCCIDENTAL, Respondent
Before us is the Affidavit-Complaint1 of complainant Filipina CASE:
C. Cabauatan, Associate Provincial Prosecutor of the Province
Before the Court is an administrative complaint1 against Judge
of Al bay against Domingo Uvero, Sheriff IV, Branch 12,
Henry J. Trocino (Judge Trocino), former Executive Judge and
Regional Trial Court of Ligao City, Albay, for· grave
Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court, Branch 62, Bago
misconduct due to the latter's inappropriate conduct in
City (RTC), filed by Marie Roxanne G.
connection with Criminal Case No. 10141-L, entitled "People
Recto (Complainant) for bias and partiality, ignorance of the
of the Philippines v. Edgar Velasco" filed before the Municipal
law, grave oppression, and violation of the Code of Judicial
Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Polangui, Albay. (ALLEGED
Conduct for issuing an ex parte Temporary Protection
BRIBERY)
Order (TPO) in relation to Civil Case No. 1409, a case for Child
Custody under the Family Code.
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
A.M. No. MTJ-05-1574 A.C. No. 10532
OFFICE OF THE COURT REYNALDO A. CABUELLO (DECEASED),
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant SUBSTITUTED BY BEATRIZ CABUELLO CABUTIN
vs. , Complainant
JUDGE CONRADO O. ALINEA, JR., MUNICIPAL vs.
TRIAL COURT, IBA, ZAMBALES, Respondent ATTY. EDITHA P. TALABOC, Respondent
CASE: CASE:
This administrative matter filed by the Office of the Court On October 12, 2010, complainant Reynaldo A. Cabuello filed
Administrator (OCA) stemmed from a news report in the June an administrative complaint against respondent Atty. Editha P.
19, 2004 issue of the Philippine Daily Inquirer 1 regarding an Talaboc with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
entrapment operation conducted by the National Bureau of
The records show that as counsel of the complainant's parents,
Investigation (NBI) against Respondent Judge Conrado O.
respondent was remiss in her duty toward them by never
Alinea, Jr. (Judge Alinea) of the Municipal Trial Court of Iba,
appearing in the hearings of the criminal case, which
Zambales (MTC), for demanding and receiving the amount of
contributed to the delay of the pre-trial of the case for eleven
₱15,000.00 from the plaintiffs in a land dispute case pending in
months or almost a year until the trial court finally appointed a
the said court.
counsel de oficio for respondent's clients so the pre-trial and A.M. No. P-17-3731
trial on the merits could proceed. Respondent kept on filing a
FERDINAND E. TAURO, Court Interpreter, Regional
motion to reset the scheduled pre-trial, including those dates of Trial Court, Branch 122, Caloocan City, Complainant
hearings requested by her, from the start until her withdrawal as vs.
counsel. RACQUEL O. ARCE, Clerk III, Regional Trial Court,
Branch 122, Caloocan City, Respondent
CASE:
A.C. No. 10564
MANUEL L. VALIN AND HONORIO L. For resolution is the Complaint Affidavit1 dated May 8, 2012
VALIN, Complainants filed by complainant Ferdinand E. Tauro (complainant), Court
vs. Interpreter, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 122, Caloocan
ATTY. ROLANDO T. RUIZ, Respondent City, charging respondent Racquel O. Arce (respondent); Clerk
III of the same court, with serious misconduct.
CASE:
The Court will not countenance and finds reprehensible the
Before the Court is an Administrative Complaint1 filed by
altercation that ensued between complainant and respondent,
complainants Manuel L. Valin (Manuel) and Honorio L.
more so since it happened within the premises of the
Valin (Honoria) with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines-
court.26 In Ginete v. Caballero,27 where a verbal argument
Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) committing forgery
occurred between therein respondent Clerk of Court and
and falsification of a deed of absolute sale, in breach of his
respondent Process Server, the Court deemed it proper to fine
lawyer's oath and in violation of the laws.
both transgressors ₱l,000.00 each..

A.C. No. 8887


A.M. No. RTJ-16-2478
ROMAN DELA ROSA VERANO* , Complainant
DOMINADOR I. FERRER, JR., Complainant
vs.
vs.
ATTY. LUIS FERNAN DIORES, JR., Respondent
JUDGE ARNIEL A. DATING, Regional Trial Court,
CASE: Bra.ncb 41, Daet, Camarines Norte, Respondent
This administrative case stemmed from a letter-complaint1 filed CASE:
with the Court on February 2, 2011 by complainant Roman For resolution is the Administrative Complaint1 dated April 18,
Dela Rosa Verano (Verano) against respondent Atty. Luis 2011 filed by Atty. Dominador I. Ferrer, Jr. against Judge
Fernan Diores, Jr. (Atty. Diores) for deceit, malpractice, gross Arniel A. Dating, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 41, Daet,
ignorance of the law and violation of the Lawyer's Oath for Camarines Norte, for "abuse of authority, judicial oppression
surreptitiously using Verano's parcel of land to secure bail and unreasonable/malicious acts to delay raffle of cases,"
bonds in connection with at least 61 cases of Estafa and relative to Special Civil Action (SCA) No. 77882 (subject case),
Violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (B.P. Blg. 22) that had entitled, "Cesar E. Barcelona and Jose Vargas vs. Atty. Freddie
been filed against Atty. Diores.2 A. Venida and Atty. Dominador Ferrer, Jr." for Quo Warranto
with prayer for temporary restraining order and/or injunction. 3

NOVEMBER 8, 2017
A.C. No. 10547 NOVEMBER 21, 2017
FREDDIE A. GUILLEN, Complainant A.C. No. 5573
vs.
GIZALE O. TUMBAGA, Complainant
ATTY. AUDIE ARNADO, Respondent
vs.
The instant case is brought about by an administrative ATTY. MANUEL P. TEOXON, Respondent
complaint which Freddie Guillen filed against his former CASE:
business partner, Atty. Audie Arnado, for alleged violation of
the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). Before the Court is an administrative complaint filed by
complainant Gizale O. Tumbaga against respondent Atty.
Here, Arnado has certainly fallen short of the high standard of Manuel P. Teox.on, charging him with gross immorality,
morality, honesty, integrity, and fair dealing required of deceitful and fraudulent conduct, and gross misconduct. The
him.1âwphi1 On the contrary, he employed his knowledge and parties hereto paint contrastive pictures not only of their
skill of the law as well as took advantage of Guillen to secure respective versions of the events but also of their negative
undue gains for himself and to inflict serious damage on others. portrayals of each other's character. They are, thus, separately
outlined below.
A.C. No. 11836
CARLINA P. ROBIÑOL, Complainant NOVEMBER 22, 2017
vs.
ATTY. EDILBERTO P. BASSIG, Respondent A.C. No. 11822

CASE: VICKA MARIE D. ISALOS, Complainant


vs.
This is a disbarment case against respondent Atty. Edilberto P. ATTY. ANA LUZ B. CRISTAL, Respondent
Bassig (Atty. Bassig) for violation of Code of Professional
CASE:
Responsibility and Lawyer's Oath.
This administrative case arose from a verified complaint1 for
Verily, Atty. Bassig's conduct is unbecoming of a lawyer, for
disbarment filed by complainant Vicka Marie D. Isalos
lawyers are particularly called upon to obey court orders and
(complainant) against respondent Atty. Ana Luz B. Cristal
processes and are expected to stand foremost in complying with
(respondent) for violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 1 and Rules
court directives being themselves officers of the court.24 In
16.01, 16.02, and 16.03, Canon 16 of the Code of Professional
disregarding the orders of the IBP, he exhibited a conduct which
Responsibility (CPR) arising from respondent's alleged failure
runs contrary to his sworn duty as an officer of the court.
to account for the money entrusted to her.

A.M. No. P-16-3527


A.C. No. 11828
ATTY. RENATO E. FRADES, Clerk of Court VI,
SPOUSES VICENTE and PRECYWINDA
Regional Trial Court, Gapan City, Nueva
GIMENA, Complainants
Ecija, Complainant
vs.
vs.
ATTY. JOJO S. VIJIGA, Respondent
JOSEPHINE A. GABRIEL Clerk III, Office of the Clerk
of Court, Regional Trial Court, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija, CASE:
Respondent
The relationship between lawyers and clients is a professional
CASE: relationship as well as a fiduciary and confidential one. One
For resolution is the complaint1 dated October 25, 2012 filed by consequence of such professional relationship is the obligation
Atty. Renato E. Frades (Frades), Clerk of Court VI, in the Office of a lawyer to efficiently manage his cases and update his clients
of the Clerk of Court (OCC), Regional Trial Court (R TC), of the status of the same.
Gapan City, Nueva Ecija, against Ms. Josephine A. Gabriel
(Gabriel), Clerk III, in the OCC, RTC, Gapan City, Nueva
Ecija, for grave misconduct, dishonesty, gross insubordination, A.C. No. 11750
abandonment of work and conduct prejudicial to the best REMEDIOS C. BALBIN, Complainant
interest of the service. vs.
ATTY. WILFREDO R. CORTEZ, Respondent
CASE:
A.M. No. P-17-3763
The present case is brought about by a disbarment complaint
ENGR. DARWIN A. RECI, Complainant
which Atty. Remedios M. Balbin filed against Atty. Wilfredo
vs.
R. Cortez, for purportedly violating Rule 8.02 and Canon 9 of
ATTY. EMMANUEL P. VILLANUEVA, Former Clerk of
Court V and SONIA S. CARREON, Former Court the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).
Stenographer III, both of the Regional Trial Court of On April 11, 2016, the Commission on Integrity and Bar
Manila, Branch 9, Respondents Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the
CASE: Philippines (IBP)recommended the dismissal of the
administrative complaint against Cortez, to wit:1
This case stemmed from the Sworn Complaint1 dated March 8,
2012 of complainant Engr. Darwin Azuela Reci (Engr. Reci), PREMISES CONSIDERED, [i]t is hereby recommended that
the administrative charges against Respondent, ATTY.
addressed to Court Administrator Midas Marquez, expressing
WILFREDO R. CORTEZ be DISMISSED for insufficiency
his disappointment over the inaction of Judge Amelia Tria- of evidence.
Infante (Judge Tria-Infante) in the transmittal of the court
records to the Court of Appeals (CA), relative to Criminal Case RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.
No. 05-236956, entitled People of the Philippines v. PO2
Dennis Reci y Azuela, Feliciano Manansala y Pangilinan and
John Doe alias "Mommy Angel" for violation of Republic Act
(R.A.) No. 92082 also known as the Anti-Trafficking in Persons
Act of 2003 in relation to R.A. No. 9231. 3
A.M. No. P-15-3379 Branch 31, Regional Trial Court, Guimba, Nueva Ecija, be
DISMISSED from the service with FORFEITURE of all
OFFICE OF THE COURT
retirement benefits except their accrued leave credits and with
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant
prejudice to re-employment in any branch or instrumentality of
vs.
the government, including government-owned and controlled
MR. ALDEN P. COBARRUBIAS,* Clerk III; and MR.
corporations.
VLADIMIR** A. BRAVO, Court Interpreter II, both of
Metropolitan Trial Court, Respondents
CASE:
An undated anonymous letter-complaint1 was sent to the Office
of the Court Administrator (OCA) against the following
personnel of the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC), Branch 24,
Manila: Alden Cobarrubias (Clerk III), Vladimir Bravo (Court
Interpreter II), Teodora Balboa (Clerk of Court III), and
Antonio Abad, Jr. (Clerk III).2 Abad, Cobarrubias, and Bravo
allegedly falsified their respective daily time record (DTR),
while Balboa tolerated the same.3 In an Indorsement4 dated
September 21, 2011, the OCA referred the said complaint to
then Executive Judge Marlo A. Magdoza-Malagar of MeTC-
Manila for discreet investigation and report.

A.M. No. RTJ-15-2407


EDGAR R. ERICE, Complainant
vs.
PRESIDING JUDGE DIONISIO C. SISON, REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 125, CALOOCAN CITY,
Respondent
CASE:
This is an administrative matter1 filed by Edgar R. Erice (Erice)
against the now-retired Judge Dionisio C. Sison (Judge Sison)
of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 125, Caloocan City,
for violation of Section 8, paragraphs 3, 4 and 9 of A.M. No.
01-8-10-SC,2 in particular: (i) gross misconduct constituting
violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, (ii) knowingly
rendering an unjust judgment or order as determined by a
competent court in an appropriate proceeding, and (iii) gross
ignorance of the law or procedure.3

NOVEMBER 28, 2017


A.M. No. 14-10-314-RTC
Anonymous Complaint dated May 3, 2013, Re: Fake
Certificates of Civil Service Eligibility of MARIVIC B.
RAGEL, EVELYN C. RAGEL, EMELYN B. CAMPOS,
and JOVILYN B. DAWANG,
CASE:
For the consideration of the Court is the Administrative Matter
for Agenda dated July 4, 20171 prepared by the Office of the
Court Administrator (OCA) with the following
recommendation:
RECOMMENDATION: It is respectfully recommended for the
consideration of the Honorable Court that Evelyn Corpus
Ragel, Stenographer I, Municipal Trial Court, Sto. Domingo,
Nueva Ecija, and Emelyn Borillo Campos, Stenographer III,
DECEMBER 2017 A.C. No. 10758
ATTY. ROSITA L. DELA FUENTE TORRES, ET
AL, Petitioner
DECEMBER 5, 2017
vs.
A.M. No. 14-11-350-RTC ATTY. BAYANI P. DALANGIN, Respondent
RE: JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE x-----------------------x
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 20, CAGAY AN
GLENDA ALVARO, Petitioner
DE ORO CITY, MISAMIS ORIENTAL
vs.
CASE: ATTY. BAYANI P. DALANGIN, Respondent
DEL CASTILLO, J.: x-----------------------x
The present administrative matter arose from the judicial audit ATTY. BAYANI P. DALANGIN, Petitioner
conducted on March 12 and 13, 2013, of Branch 20 of the vs.
Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cagayan de Oro City, Misamis ATTY. ROSITA L. DELA FUENTE TORRES AND
Oriental, then presided by Judge Bonifacio M. Macabaya ATTY. AVE.LINO ANDRES, Respondent
(Judge Macabaya).
x-----------------------x
In sum, Judge Macabaya must be held to account for acts
ATTY. BAYANI P. DALANGIN, Petitioner
constitutive of serious misconduct and gross ignorance of the
vs.
law and/or procedure.
ATTY. ROSITA L. DELA FUENTE TORRES, Respondent
CASE:
A.M. No. 14-10-322-RTC
These are four administrative complaints that were separately
RE: HABITUAL ABSENTEEISM OF RABINDRANATH filed with the Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated
A. TUZON, OFFICER-IN-CHARGE (OIC)/COURT Bar of the Philippines (IBP) by and against substantially the
LEGAL RESEARCHER II, BRANCH 91, REGIONAL same parties, particularly:
TRIAL COURT, BALER, AURORA,
(l) CBD Case No. 11-3215 for gross immorality, malpractice
A Report1 submitted by the Leave Division, Office of the Court and gross misconduct filed by Atty. Rosita L. Dela Fuente-
Administrator (OCA) dated 16 October 2014, shows that Torres (Atty. Torres). et al., against Atty. Bayani P. Dalangin
respondent Rabindranath A. Tuzon (Tuzon), OIC/Legal (Atty. Dalangin) and docketed before the Court as A.C. No. l
Researcher II, Branch 91, Regional Trial Court (RTC),Baler, 0758:
Aurora, had incurred unauthorized absences for the months of
(2) CBD Case No. 12-3292 for gross misconduct filed by
June to November 2013,.. (ABSENTEEISM)
Glenda Alvaro (Alvaro) against Atty. Dalangin and docketed
before the Court as A.C. No. 10759;
(3) CBD Case No. 12-3369 for gross misconduct, violation of
the lawyer’s oath and violation of Canon 1 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility (CPR) filed by Atty. Dalangin
against Atty. Torres and Atty. Avelino Andres (Atty. Andres),
docketed in this Court as A.C. No. 10760 ; and
(4) CBD Case No. 12-3458 for grave misconduct, dishonesty
and violation of Canon 1 of the CPR filed by Atty. Dalangin
against Atty. Torres and docketed in this Court as A.C. No.
10761.
DECEMBER 13, 2017
A.M. No. RTJ-16-2479[Formerly OCA IPI No. 10-3567-
RTJ]
DANIEL G. FAJARDO, Complaint
vs.
JUDGE ANTONIO M. NATINO, REGIONAL TRIAL
COURT, BRANCH 26, ILOILO CITY, Respondent
CASE:
For Our resolution is an Amended Letter Complaint 1 dated
November 27, 2010, filed by Daniel G. Fajardo (Fajardo) of
Panay News, Inc. against. Judge Antonio M. Natino (Judge
Natino), Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iloilo
City, Branch 26.
It is undisputed in this case that Judge Natino failed to decide
Civil Case No. 20225 within the 90-day period provided in the
Constitution. Records show that the said case was filed on
January 30, 1992, submitted for decision on January 23, 2007,
and decided only in August 2010 or after more than three years
from the time it was submitted for decision.