Republic
of the
Supreme
Court
|
A-1
FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., Complainant,
- versus - ATTY. LAARNI N. VALERIO, Respondent. |
A.C. No. 8390 [Formerly CBD 06-1641] Present: CARPIO, CARPIO-MORALES, VELASCO, JR., NACHURA, LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, BRION,* PERALTA, BERSAMIN,
ABAD,
VILLARAMA, JR., PEREZ, and MENDOZA, JJ. Promulgated: July 2, 2010 |
x - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
PERALTA, J.:
Before us is a Complaint[1]
dated January 18, 2006 for disciplinary
action against respondent Atty. Laarni N. Valerio filed by A-1 Financial
Services, Inc., represented by Diego S. Reunilla, its account officer, with the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD),
docketed as CBD Case No. 06-1642, now A.C. No. 8390, for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 (B.P. 22) and
non-payment of debt.
On P50,000.00. To secure the payment of the
loan obligation, Atty. Valerio issued a postdated check, to wit: Check No.
0000012725; dated P50,000.00.[2]
However, upon presentation at the bank for payment on its maturity date, the
check was dishonored due to insufficient funds. As of the filing of the instant
case, despite repeated demands to pay her obligation, Atty. Valerio failed to
pay the whole amount of her obligation.
Thus, on
On
On
Thus, in its Report and Recommendation dated
The IBP-CBD gave no credence to the medical certificate submitted by
Atty. Valerio’s mother, in view of the latter’s failure to appear before the
IBP-CBD hearings to affirm the truthfulness thereof or present the physician
who issued the same. The IBP-CBD, further,
pointed out that Atty. Valerio’s failure to obey court processes, more
particularly her failure to appear at her arraignment despite due notice and to
surrender to the Court despite the issuance of a warrant of arrest, showed her
lack of respect for authority and, thus, rendered her morally unfit to be a
member of the bar.[8]
On
Nevertheless, to provide Atty.
Valerio further opportunity to explain her side, the Court, in a Resolution
dated December 15, 2010, directed Atty. Valerio and/or her mother, to submit a
duly notarized medical certificate issued by a duly licensed physician and/or
certified copies of medical records to support the claim of schizophrenia
on the part of Atty. Valerio within a non-extendible period of ten (10) days
from receipt hereof.
However,
despite the lapse of considerable time after the receipt of notice[9] to
comply with the said Resolution, no medical certificate or medical records were
submitted to this Court by either respondent and/or her mother. Thus, this
resolution.
We
sustain the findings and recommendations of the IBP-CBD.
In Barrientos v. Libiran-Meteoro,[10]
we held that:
x x x [the] deliberate failure to pay just debts and the issuance of worthless checks constitute gross misconduct, for which a lawyer may be sanctioned with suspension from the practice of law. Lawyers are instruments for the administration of justice and vanguards of our legal system. They are expected to maintain not only legal proficiency but also a high standard of morality, honesty, integrity and fair dealing so that the people’s faith and confidence in the judicial system is ensured. They must at all times faithfully perform their duties to society, to the bar, the courts and to their clients, which include prompt payment of financial obligations. They must conduct themselves in a manner that reflects the values and norms of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility. Canon 1 and Rule 1.01 explicitly states that:
Canon 1— A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and for legal processes.
Rule 1.01—A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
In
the instant case, there is no denial of the existence of the loan obligation
despite respondent’s failure to cooperate before any proceedings in relation to
the complaint. Prior to the filing of the complaint against her, Atty. Valerio’s
act of making partial payments of the loan and interest suffices as proof that
indeed there is an obligation to pay on her part. Respondent’s mother, Mrs.
Valerio, likewise, acknowledged her daughter’s obligation.
The
Court, likewise, finds unmeritorious Mrs. Valerio’s justification that her
daughter, Atty. Valerio, is suffering from a health condition, i.e. schizophrenia, which has
prevented her from properly answering the complaint against her. Indeed, we
cannot take the “medical certificate” on its face, considering Mrs. Valerio’s
failure to prove the contents of the certificate or present the physician who
issued it.
Atty.
Valerio’s conduct in the course of the IBP and court proceedings is also a
matter of serious concern. She failed to answer the complaint against her.
Despite due notice, she failed to attend the disciplinary hearings set by the
IBP. She also ignored the proceedings before the court as she likewise failed
to both answer the complaint against her and appear during her arraignment,
despite orders and notices from the court. Clearly, this conduct runs counter
to the precepts of the Code of Professional Responsibility and violates the
lawyer’s oath which imposes upon every member of the Bar the duty to delay no
man for money or malice. Atty. Valerio has failed to live up to the values and
norms of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
In
Ngayan v. Tugade,[11]
we ruled that “[a lawyer’s] failure to answer the complaint against him and his
failure to appear at the investigation are evidence of his flouting resistance
to lawful orders of the court and illustrate his despiciency for his oath of
office in violation of Section 3, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
We come to the penalty imposable in
this case.
In Lao v. Medel,[12]
we held that the deliberate failure to pay just debts and the issuance of
worthless checks constitute gross misconduct for which a lawyer may be
sanctioned with one-year suspension from the practice of law. The same sanction
was imposed on the respondent-lawyer in Rangwani v. Dino,[13]
having found guilty of gross misconduct for issuing bad checks in payment of a
piece of property, the title to which was only entrusted to him by the
complainant.
However, in this case, we deem it
reasonable to affirm the sanction imposed by the IBP-CBD, i.e., Atty.
Valerio was ordered suspended from the practice of law for two (2) years,[14]
because, aside from issuing worthless checks and failing to pay her debts, she
has also shown wanton disregard of the IBP’s and Court Orders in the course of
the proceedings.
WHEREFORE, Resolution No. XVIII-2008-647 dated
Let
a copy of this Decision be furnished to the Office of the Bar Confidant, to be
appended to the personal record of Atty. Valerio as a member of the Bar; the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and the Office of the Court Administrator
for circulation to all courts in the country for their information and
guidance.
This
Decision shall be immediately executory.
SO ORDERED.
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
RENATO C. CORONA
Chief Justice
|
|
|
ANTONIO T. CARPIO Associate Justice |
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES Associate Justice |
|
PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, JR. Associate Justice |
ANTONIO EDUARDO B. NACHURA Associate
Justice |
|
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO Associate
Justice |
On Leave ARTURO D. BRION Associate
Justice |
|
LUCAS P. BERSAMIN Associate
Justice |
MARIANO C. Associate
Justice |
|
ROBERTO A. ABAD Associate
Justice |
MARTIN S. VILLARAMA, JR. Associate
Justice |
|
JOSE Associate
Justice |
JOSE
CATRAL Associate
Justice |
* On leave.
[1] Rollo, pp. 1-2.
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9] The
Resolution dated
[10] 480 Phil. 661, 671 (2004).
[11] A.C.
No. 2490,
[12] 453 Phil. 115, 121, citing Co v. Bernardino, 285 SCRA 102 (1998).
[13] 486 Phil. 8 (2004).
[14] Wong
v. Atty. Moya, A.C. No. 6972,