View full case

ALEX ONG v. ATTY. ELPIDIO D. UNTO

FACTS:

The disbarment case filed by Alex Ong against Atty. Elpidio D. Unto for malpractice of law and conduct unbecoming of a lawyer. The Commission on Bar Discipline found Atty. Unto guilty and recommended a one-month suspension or severe reprimand. Ong received a demand-letter from Unto representing Nemesia Garganian, demanding support for their child and other claims. Unto threatened legal action if Ong failed to comply. Unto also sent a second letter to Dr. Jose Bueno (Agaw), an emissary of Ong, with additional financial demands and discussing possible actions if Ong did not comply. Ong did not comply with the demands. Unto filed criminal complaints against Ong and others for alleged violations of the Retail Trade Nationalization Law and Anti-Dummy Law. Unto also initiated administrative cases against Ong before various government agencies, but these cases were dismissed. Ong filed the disbarment case, alleging that Unto fabricated the criminal and administrative cases to extort money. Ong submitted various documents to support his accusations.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not the respondent should be disbarred for his actions in handling the legal affairs of his client.

  2. Whether or not the respondent violated Canon 19, Rule 19.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

  3. Whether the respondent lawyer's actions of offering monetary rewards to obtain information against the complainant is unethical and in violation of legal professional standards.

  4. Whether the respondent lawyer's non-participation in the proceedings against him reflects a lack of respect towards the investigating public officers.

RULING:

  1. Yes, the respondent should be disbarred for his actions in handling the legal affairs of his client. The respondent attempted to coerce the complainant by threatening to file various charges against her, and when she did not comply, he followed through with the threats and filed several unfounded criminal and administrative cases against her. This malicious behavior is in violation of Canon 19, Rule 19.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

  2. The respondent lawyer's actions of offering monetary rewards to obtain information against the complainant are unethical and in violation of legal professional standards. The lawyer's tactics run counter to the rules that a lawyer shall not encourage any suit or proceeding for corrupt motives or interests and shall not do any act designed primarily to solicit legal business. The lawyer's actions are deemed improper, propelled by ill motives and malicious intentions against the other party. The lawyer's fidelity to his client must not be pursued at the expense of truth and the administration of justice.

  3. The respondent lawyer's non-participation in the proceedings against him reflects a lack of respect towards the investigating public officers. Despite being duly notified of the investigation and given several opportunities for participation, the lawyer chose not to participate. This nonchalance reflects the lawyer's utter lack of respect towards the public officers assigned to investigate the case.

PRINCIPLES:

  • The legal profession carries a high degree of integrity and respectability, and lawyers are deemed officers of the court.

  • The purpose of disbarment is not to punish a lawyer, but rather to protect the administration of justice and ensure that lawyers are competent, honorable, and reliable.

  • Lawyers are mandated to represent their clients with zeal, but within the bounds of the law.

  • Lawyers are prohibited from employing unfair and dishonest means to attain the lawful objectives of their clients, and from presenting unfounded criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage.

  • A lawyer owes absolute fidelity to the cause of his client but must act within the bounds of the law and ethical standards.

  • A lawyer's responsibility to protect and advance the interests of his client does not warrant actions propelled by ill motives and malicious intentions against the other party.

  • Lawyers should act with the highest standards of truthfulness, fair play, and nobility in the practice of law.

  • Lawyers may be disciplined or suspended for any misconduct, whether in their professional or private capacity.

  • Public confidence in the legal profession may be eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of a lawyer.

  • Lawyers should comport themselves in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity of the legal profession.

  • The lawyer's oath should not be reduced to mere recital of empty words and should reflect the high standard of professional integrity befitting an officer of the court.