A.C. No. 13132 – 934 Phil. 922 – Legal Ethics – Propriety – A lawyer must obey the laws – A lawyer committing VAWC may be disbarred
Teodora Altobano-Ruiz filed a disbarment complaint against her husband, Atty. Wilfredo Ruiz, and two other lawyers, Attys. Cherry Anne Dela Cruz and Francisco Benedicto III, for various violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). Teodora alleged that Atty. Ruiz subjected her to physical violence, emotional stress, and economic abuse, leading to the issuance of a Permanent Protection Order (PPO) by the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City in September 2008.
Despite the PPO, Wilfredo failed to provide the mandated support, prompting Teodora to seek enforcement. A writ of execution was issued in February 2015, but Wilfredo continued to evade compliance. He allegedly concealed his earnings and properties through a Memorandum of Understanding with his mistress, Radelia Sy, which included provisions excluding their son from receiving financial support.
Atty. Dela Cruz, Teodora’s former counsel, was accused of conspiring with Wilfredo to delay the enforcement of the PPO. Atty. Benedicto, who represented Wilfredo in the nullity of marriage case, was also implicated in the alleged conspiracy against Teodora.
ISSUES:
1. Whether Wilfredo violated the CPR by failing to comply with court orders regarding support and engaging in immoral conduct.
2. Whether Attys. Cherry Anne Dela Cruz and Francisco S. Benedicto III conspired with Atty. Ruiz to commit acts of harassment against Teodora and violated the CPR.
HELD:
1. The SC found that Wilfredo violated multiple provisions of the CPR, including engaging in unlawful and immoral conduct, failing to comply with court orders, and abusing legal processes. His actions demonstrated a lack of integrity and moral character, essential qualifications for membership in the Bar. Wilfredo was disbarred.
Wilfredo’s act of entering into a MAU with Radelia which contained illegal considerations is contrary to what is expected from a lawyer. The MAU contained terms and condition which are illegal, immoral and against public policy and order. It spoke volumes of his illicit relationship with Radelia during the effectivity of his marriage with Teodora; the fraudulent concealment of his properties under the name of John Paul Sy in order to repel the execution of the PPO, including the judicial order of support; and the exclusion of his child Jarren from receiving any financial support from him.
Further, during the PPO proceedings, Wilfredo used different addresses without any explanation. Worse, he was not found in any of these addresses. As it turned out, these addresses were all spurious. Wilfredo never denied this; nor the finding that he deliberately misled the court for the purpose of evading its duly issued decree for support and its consequent writ of execution.
2. The complaints against Attys. Dela Cruz and Benedicto were dismissed for lack of merit. The Court found insufficient evidence of conspiracy or misconduct on their part. Teodora may not have agreed with the legal strategy adopted by Atty. Dela Cruz but what Atty. Dela Cruz did in handling Teodora’s case was within the bounds allowable by law. As to Atty. Benedicto, the same can be said. He merely acted as counsel for Wilfredo whose right to counsel as an accused is protected by the Constitution.
NOTE: AI assistance was used in drafting this case digest
