ADEZ REALTY, INCORPORATED, petitioner,
vs.
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, PRESIDING JUDGE, RTC, BR. 79,
Morong, Rizal, PROVINCIAL SHERIFF OF RIZAL, Morong, Rizal,
REGISTER OF DEEDS, Quezon City, and AGUENDO
EUGENIO, respondents.
October 30, 1992
FACTS:
1. In a SC resolution, it directed Atty. Benjamin Dacanay counsel for
petitioner Adez Realty, Inc., to "SHOW CAUSE within 5 days from notice
why he should not be disciplinary dealt with for intercalating a material
fact in the judgment of the court a quo thereby altering and modifying its
factual findings with the apparent purpose of misleading the SC in order
to obtain a favorable judgment, and thus failing to live up to the
standards expected of a member of the Bar.
2. In his defense, he humbly submitted to the court and threw himself at its
mercy. He explained that whenever he prepares pleadings, he dictates to
his secretary and if portions of the decision or order to be appealed from
have to be quoted, he simply instructs his said secretary to copy the
particular pages of the said decision or order. In the case at bar, he did
instruct his secretary to copy the corresponding pages in the decision of
the CA. Somehow, however, some words were intercalated on a
particular paragraph. He reasoned that it was his secretary who was at
fault.
3. His secretary attached an Affidavit supporting the explanation made by
Dacanay and admitted that it was her who committed the error.
ISSUE: WON Atty. Dacanay should be disbarred for intercalating a material
fact in a judicial decision.
HELD:
4. YES. It is the bounden duty of lawyers to check, review and recheck the
allegations in their pleadings, more particularly the quoted portions, and
ensure that the statements therein are accurate and the reproductions
faithful, down to the last word and even punctuation mark. The legal
profession demands that lawyers thoroughly go over pleadings,
motions and other documents dictated or prepared by them, typed
or transcribed by their secretaries or clerks, before filing them with
the court. If a client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with more
reason should counsel be bound by the acts of his secretary who merely
follows his orders.
5. The distortion of facts committed by counsel, with the willing assistance
of his secretary, is a grave offense and should not be treated lightly, not
only because it may set a dangerous precedent but, rather, because it is
a clear and serious violation of one’s oath as a member of the Bar. Rule
10.02, Canon 10, Chapter III, of the Code of Professional Responsibility
directs that “[a] lawyer shall not knowingly misquote or misrepresent the
contents of a paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel,
or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as a law a
provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or
assert as a fact that which has not been proved.”
6. Misquoting or intercalating phrases in the text of a court decision
constitutes willful disregard of the lawyer’s solemn duty to act at all times
in a manner consistent with the truth. A lawyer should never venture to
mislead the court by false statements or quotations of facts or laws.
Thus, in Bautista v. Gonzales, We suspended respondent for six (6)
months for, among others, submitting to the lower court falsified
documents, representing them to be true copies. In Chavez v. Viola, We
suspended respondent counsel for five (5) months after he filed an
Amended Application for Original Registration of Title which contained
false statements.
WHEREFORE, We find ATTY. BENJAMIN M. DACANAY, counsel for
petitioner, guilty of intercalating a material fact in a judicial Decision elevated
to Us on certiorari, thereby altering its factual findings with the apparent
purpose, and no other, of misleading the Court in order to obtain a favorable
judgment, and thus miserably failing to live up to the standards expected of
him as a member of the Philippine Bar. Consequently, ATTY. BENJAMIN M.
DACANAY is hereby DISBARRED effective immediately from the practice of
law.