ALONSO VS. RELAMIDA, JR. A.C. NO.

8481

FACTS:

 In March 2001, Jennifer Ebanen filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Servier
Philippines, Incorporated in the NLRC.
 On July 5, 2002, the labor Arbiter ruled in favor of Servier, stating that Ebanen
voluntarily resigned. Ebanen appealed at the NLRC which only affirmed the appealed
decision.
 Ebanen filed for reconsideration but was denied. The case eventually reached the
Supreme Court.
 On February 17, 2005, the Court’s Resolution dated August 4, 2004 has already become
final and executory; thus, a corresponding Entry of Judgment has been issued
dismissing the petition and holding that there was no illegal dismissal since Ebanen
voluntarily resigned.
 However, despite the judgment, Ebanen through Atty. Relamida, Jr. filed a second
complaint on August 5, 2005 for illegal dismissal based on the same cause of action of
constructive dismissal against Servier.
 Thus, on October 13, 2005, Servier, thru counsel, filed a letter-complaint addressed to
the then Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr., praying that respondents be disciplinary
sanctioned for violation of the rules on forum shopping and res judicata.
 Respondents admitted the filing of the second complaint against Servier. However, they
opined that the dismissal did not amount to res judicata, since the decision was null and
void for lack of due process since the motion for the issuance of subpoena duces tecum
for the production of vital documents filed by the complainant was ignored by the Labor
Arbiter

ISSUE

 Wheteher or not the respondent guilty of forum shopping and res judicata thus
violating Canon 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility?

HELD:

 During the IBP hearing, Atty. Relamida is ot a lawyer but the daughter of Atty. Aurelio
the senior partner of A.M. Sison Jr. and Partners Law Offices where he is employed as
associate lawyer. Atty. Relamida reasoned out that as a courtesy to Atty. Aurelio and
Ebanen, he had no choice but to represent the latter.
 He then argued that the decision of the Labor Arbiter was null and void; thus, there
was no res judicata.
 He maintained that he did not violate the lawyer’s oath by serving the interest of his
client.
  The IBP-CBD recommended that Atty. Relamida, Jr. be suspended for 6 months for
violating the rules on forum shopping and res judicata. The Supreme Court agrees to
this finding.

 A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client, but not at the expense of truth and the
administration of justice. The filing of multiple petitions constitutes abuse of the court’s
processes and improper conduct that tends to impede, obstruct and degrade the
administration of justice and will be punished as contempt of court

 The filing of another action concerning the same subject matter, in violation of the
doctrine of res judicata, runs contrary to Canon 12 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, which requires a lawyer to exert every effort and consider it his duty to
assist in the speedy and efficient administration of justice. By his actuations, respondent
also violated Rule 12.02 and Rule 12.04 of the Code, as well as a lawyer’s mandate "to
delay no man for money or malice."

 DISPOSITIVE PORTION: WHEREFORE, Resolution No. XVIII-2008-286, dated June 5,

2008, of the IBP, which found respondent Atty. Ibaro B. Relamida, Jr. guilty of violating
the Rules on Res Judicata and Forum Shopping, is AFFIRMED. Atty. Relaminda is hereby
SUSPENDED for six (6) months from the practice of law, effective upon the receipt of
this Decision

Notes:

 FORUM SHOPPING is the filing of multiple suits involving the same parties for the
same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, for the purpose of obtaining
a favorable judgment. It exists when, as a result of an adverse opinion in one forum, a
party seeks a favorable opinion in another, or when he institutes two or more actions or
proceedings grounded on the same cause to increase the chances of obtaining a
favorable decision. An important factor in determining its existence is the vexation
caused to the courts and the parties-litigants by the filing of similar cases to claim
substantially the same reliefs.
 RES JUDICATA means "a thing adjudicated"; "a case already decided"; or "a matter
settled by a decision or judgment".
 Stare decisis means "to stand by decided cases", "to uphold precedents", "to maintain
former adjudications", or "not to disturb settled law". Those things which have been so
often adjudged ought to rest in peace.
 Res judicata relates to a specific controversy, stare decisis touches legal principle