In re: Petition to Sign the Roll of Attorneys Michael A.

Medado
B.M. 2540, September 24, 2013, En Banc, Sereno C.J.
DOCTRINE: Failure to sign the Roll of Attorneys disqualifies a person from practice of law.
FACTS: Medado graduated with a Bachelor of Laws from U.P. in 1979, and passed the bar
examinations with a general weighted average of 82.7. On 1980, he took the Attorney’s Oath at
the Philippine International Convention Center. He was scheduled to sign in the Roll of
Attorneys, but failed allegedly because he misplaced the Notice to Sign the Roll of Attorneys
when he went home to his province for a vacation. Years later, while rummaging through his old
college files, Medado found the Notice and realized that he had not signed the roll and that what
he probably signed was the attendance record. By the time he found it, he was already
performing corporate and taxation work undner the mistaken belief that he had already signed
the Roll of Attorneys. IN 2005, when Medado attended the MCLE and failed to provide his roll
number. Seven years later, Medado filed this Petition praying that he be allowed to sign in the
Roll of Attorneys. The Office of the Bar Confidant recommended that the petition be denied for
Medado’s gross negligence.
ISSUE: W/N Medado should be allowed to sign in the Roll of Attorneys.
RULING: YES. Medado demonstrated good faith and good moral character when he finally
filed the petition. It was Medado himself who acknowledged his own lapse, albeit after the lapse
of more than 30 years. Medado had not been subject to disqualification from the practice of law.
Medado appears to be a competent and able legal practitioner, holding various positions in a law
office and private companies. However, the lapse of 30 years shows his negligence prior to
practice of law. He has been engaged in the practice of law since 1980, a period spanning more
than 30 years, without having signed the Roll of Attorneys. He may have first operated under an
honest mistake of fact, but the moment he realized his failure, he could no longer claim this. At
that point, Medado should have known that he was not a full-fledged member of the Philippine
Bar because of his failure to sign in the Roll of Attorneys, as it was the act of signing therein that
would have made him so. When, in spite of this knowledge, he chose to continue practicing law
without taking the necessary steps to complete all the requirements for admission to the Bar, he
wilfully engaged in the unauthorized practice of law. As Medado is not yet a full-fledged lawyer,
we cannot suspend him from the practice of law. However, we see it fit to impose upon him a
penalty akin to suspension by allowing him to sign the Roll of Attorneys one year after receipt of
this Resolution.