View full case

PILAR IBANA-ANDRADE v. ATTY. EVA PAITA-MOYA

FACTS:

Complainants Pilar Ibana-Andrade and Clare Sinforosa Andrade-Casilihan filed an administrative case against Atty. Eva Paita-Moya, alleging that she continued to practice law despite being suspended by the Supreme Court. The first complainant filed a case wherein Atty. Paita-Moya appeared as counsel for all the respondents. The second complainant also filed a separate case and Atty. Paita-Moya acted as counsel for the defendants. Furthermore, Atty. Paita-Moya represented various parties in another illegal dismissal case. The complainants discovered that Atty. Paita-Moya had been suspended for one month from the practice of law, starting from June 27, 2008, based on a Supreme Court resolution. However, despite the suspension, she continued to practice law and filed pleadings and papers as counsel. The complainants presented certifications from court officials and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines confirming Atty. Paita-Moya's continued practice of law despite her suspension. On the other hand, Atty. Paita-Moya claimed that she began serving the suspension order on May 20, 2009.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether Atty. Eva Paita-Moya violated the suspension order imposed against her by the Supreme Court.

  2. Whether Atty. Eva Paita-Moya should be held administratively liable for her continued practice of law during her suspension.

RULING:

  1. Yes, Atty. Eva Paita-Moya violated the suspension order imposed against her by the Supreme Court. Despite being aware of her suspension from the practice of law, she continued to file papers and pleadings as counsel in various cases.

  2. Atty. Eva Paita-Moya should be held administratively liable for her continued practice of law during her suspension. Her actions constitute willful disobedience of the Supreme Court's suspension order.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Lawyers are bound by the orders and decisions of the Supreme Court, including suspension orders. Willful disobedience of a suspension order constitutes a violation of the standards of ethical conduct for lawyers.

  • Lawyers have a duty to maintain the integrity of the legal profession and must refrain from engaging in any act that undermines the public's confidence in the legal system.