View full case

LIGAYA MANIAGO v. ATTY. LOURDES I. DE DIOS

FACTS:

The case involves a disbarment complaint filed by Ligaya Maniago against Atty. Lourdes I. de Dios. Maniago alleged that she filed a criminal case against Hiroshi Miyata, with Atty. De Dios as Miyata's counsel. Maniago later found out that Atty. De Dios had a suspension order from the Supreme Court and was prohibited from appearing in court. Maniago also mentioned that Atty. De Dios appeared as counsel in a civil case and a special proceeding involving Miyata. Atty. De Dios admitted representing Miyata in cases but denied being under suspension during that time. She explained that she was suspended in a previous case but had already served the suspension. A problem arose when Judge Josefina Farrales ordered Atty. De Dios to desist from practicing law and revoked her notarial commission for 2007 and 2008. Despite questioning it, Atty. De Dios complied and filed a Motion for Clarification with the Supreme Court. The Court resolved that Atty. De Dios had completed her suspension and could resume her law practice. Atty. De Dios claimed that she was not under suspension during the period in question and asserted that the complaint was baseless and malicious. The matter was referred to the Office of the Bar Confidant for evaluation, report, and recommendation. Complainant provided a supplemental affidavit specifying the dates and courts where Atty. De Dios appeared as counsel in the mentioned cases.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether Atty. Lourdes I. de Dios engaged in the practice of law despite being suspended by the Court.

  2. Whether Atty. Lourdes I. de Dios should be disbarred for her alleged violation and disobedience of a lawful order of the Supreme Court.

RULING:

  1. Atty. Lourdes I. de Dios did not engage in the practice of law during the period stated in the affidavit of complainant Maniago when she allegedly practiced law. The Court resolved to deem Atty. de Dios to have served her six (6) month suspension and her recommencement of law practice on November 17, 2001, as proper pursuant to the Resolution dated January 30, 2002.

  2. Atty. Lourdes I. de Dios should not be disbarred for her alleged violation and disobedience of a lawful order of the Supreme Court, as there was no evidence to prove that she engaged in the practice of law while under suspension.

PRINCIPLES:

  • A lawyer who engages in the practice of law despite being suspended by the Court may be subject to disciplinary action, which may include disbarment.

  • The Court has the authority to clarify and determine whether a lawyer has served a suspension and has properly resumed the practice of law.

  • Disbarment should only be imposed when there is clear and convincing evidence to prove the charges against a lawyer and when the misconduct is grave, serious, and involves moral turpitude.