Constantino v. Aransazo, Jr. A.C. No. 9701, February 10, 2021, Third Division, (Hernando, J.)

 

Constantino v. Aransazo, Jr.

A.C. No. 9701, February 10, 2021, Third Division, (Hernando, J.)

Doctrine:

A member of the Bar may be penalized, even disbarred or suspended from his office as an attorney, for violating the lawyer's oath and/or for breaching the ethics of the legal profession as embodied in the CPR, for the practice of law is a profession, a form of public trust, the performance of which is entrusted to those who are qualified and who possess good moral character. The appropriate penalty on an errant lawyer depends on the exercise of sound judicial discretion based on the surrounding facts.

Facts:

Sometime in March 2003, Atty. Constantino engaged the services of Atty. Aransazo as counsel in Civil Case entitled "Hope Claire Aldaba vs. Eduardo Tongco, Atty. Constantino, Atty. Aransazo, Jr." for the Annulment of Extra-Judicial Proceedings. The case involved a house and lot registered in the name of Hope Claire Aldaba (Aldaba) who previously obtained a loan in the amount of P1,500,000.00 from Eduardo Tongco.

As security for the loan, Aldaba executed a Real Estate Mortgage over the property and a Promissory Note and Irrevocable Special Power of Attorney in favor of Tongco. As Aldaba failed to pay the amount of the loan on maturity date, Tongco executed a Deed of Assignment in favor of Atty. Constantino and Atty. Aransazo, for a consideration, ceding all his rights and interests under the Real Estate Mortgage, Promissory Note and Irrevocable Special Power of Attorney. When Aldaba failed to redeem the property despite oral and written demand, Attys. Constantino and Aransazo filed the abovementioned Extrajudicial Foreclosure Proceedings.

Notably, during the pre-trial in Civil Case, the counsel of Aldaba manifested before the RTC that Atty. Aransazo executed a sworn statement. Complainant insisted that Atty. Aransazo violated Canons 17 and 21 of the CPR, and Rule 138, Sections 20 (e) and 27 of the Rules of Court for disclosing matters confided during the course of a lawyer-client relationship.

In a Report and Recommendation, Investigating Commissioner Honesto A. Villamor of the Commission on Bar Discipline of the IBP recommended the dismissal of the complaint for lack of merit.

The IBP Board of Governors (IBP-BOG), in its Resolution reversed and set aside the Report and Recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner and recommended that Atty. Aransazo be "suspended from the practice of law for three (3) months on the ground that [he] breached confidentiality in violation of the rule on conflict of interest."

 

Issue:  Whether Atty. Aransazo, Jr. violated the Code of Professional Responsibility

Ruling: YES.  The Court adopts the findings of the OBC and accepts its recommendation with modification as to the period of suspension.

At the moment Atty. Constantino approached Atty. Aransazo to seek legal advice, a veritable lawyer-client relationship evolved between the two. Likewise, a lawyer-client relationship exists notwithstanding the personal relationship between Atty. Constantino and Atty. Aransazo. At this point, the relationship between them imposed upon Atty. Aransazo certain restrictions circumscribed by the profession. In this regard, Canon 17 of the CPR states that "a lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him." Having ascertained the existence of a lawyer-client relationship between Atty. Constantino and Atty. Aransazo, it is beyond cavil that the latter is enjoined to keep inviolate confidential and privileged information acquired or revealed during legal consultations.

Atty. Aransazo violated the rule on privileged communication between attorney and client when he executed the subject sworn statement

The information regarding the real estate mortgage, private documents such as the Deed of Assignment, and other pertinent facts and figures revealed in confidence to Atty. Aransazo used as basis or support in the execution of his sworn statement and the filing of the amended complaint of Aldaba against Atty. Constantino, were all acquired through an attorney-­client relationship. Such act is in direct violation of the CPR and constitutes a breach of trust sufficient to warrant imposition of disciplinary sanction against Atty. Aransazo.

Atty. Aransazo represented conflicting interests in violation of the CPR.

Atty. Aransazo represented conflicting interests in violation of Canon 15, Rule 15.03 of the CPR which provides that "a lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts."

WHEREFORE, for violating Canons 15, 17, and 21 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, Atty. Nemesio A. Aransazo, Jr. is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of one (1) year, effective upon receipt of this Decision, with a STERN WARNING that a commission of the same or similar offense in the future will result in the imposition of a more severe penalty.