View full case

IN RE: PETITION TO SIGN IN ROLL OF ATTORNEYS MICHAEL A. MEDADO

FACTS:

Partial Digest:

Petitioner Michael A. Medado graduated from the University of the Philippines with a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1979 and passed the bar examinations with a general weighted average of 82.7. He took the Attorney's Oath in 1980 but failed to sign the Roll of Attorneys on his scheduled date due to misplacing the Notice to Sign the Roll of Attorneys. Several years later, he found the notice and realized that he had not signed in the roll. He operated under the mistaken belief that the signing of the roll was not urgent or crucial to his status as a lawyer. In 2005, when he attended Mandatory Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) seminars, he was unable to provide his roll number as he had not signed in the Roll of Attorneys. In 2012, Medado filed a petition to be allowed to sign in the Roll of Attorneys. The Office of the Bar Confidant recommended the denial of the petition, citing Medado's gross negligence and lack of justification for his negligence. However, the Court granted Medado's prayer in the petition, subject to the payment of a fine and the imposition of a penalty equivalent to suspension from the practice of law. The Court noted that not allowing Medado to sign in the Roll of Attorneys would be akin to imposing the penalty of disbarment, which was not warranted in this case. Medado demonstrated good faith and good moral character by acknowledging his lapse and filing the petition himself. He also had not been subject to any action for disqualification from the practice of law.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not Medado should be allowed to sign in the Roll of Attorneys after more than 30 years of delay.

  2. Whether or not Medado's long period of unauthorized practice of law merits any penalty.

RULING:

  1. Medado is allowed to sign in the Roll of Attorneys one year after the receipt of this Resolution.

  2. Medado is fined P32,000 for his unauthorized practice of law and cannot practice law during the one-year waiting period.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Unauthorized Practice of Law Engaging in the practice of law without having completed all the requirements for admission to the Bar (e.g., signing the Roll of Attorneys) constitutes unauthorized practice of law.

  • Ignorance of the Law Ignorantia legis neminem excusat (Ignorance of the law excuses no one).

  • Ethical Standards Aspiring members of the Bar must comport themselves in accordance with the ethical standards of the legal profession.

  • Penalty for Unauthorized Practice Unauthorized practice of law can result in penalties such as fines, suspension, or other disciplinary actions depending on the circumstances and severity of the misconduct.

  • Good Faith and Moral Character Demonstrating good faith and adhering to ethical standards may mitigate penalties, but does not fully exempt one from liability.