View full case

MARIA FELICISIMA GONZAGA v. ATTY. EDGARDO H. ABAD

FACTS:

Gonzaga consulted Atty. Abad regarding her marital problems and engaged him as her counsel for a petition for declaration of nullity of marriage. Atty. Abad advised Gonzaga to file the petition on the ground of psychological incapacity and assured her that there will be no hearings as he knew the judge who will handle the case. Atty. Abad received payment from Gonzaga for psychological tests and filing fees. He later informed Gonzaga that the judge granted her petition and asked for an additional amount to register the decision. Atty. Abad gave Gonzaga a photocopy of the decision and an entry of judgment, both of which turned out to be fake. When confronted by Gonzaga, Atty. Abad returned the money she paid. Gonzaga filed a criminal complaint and an administrative complaint against Atty. Abad, while also filing for his disbarment. The criminal case was dismissed for lack of probable cause, and the administrative case was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Commission on Bar Discipline found Atty. Abad guilty of authoring the fake court decision and recommended his disbarment. The IBP Board of Governors adopted the recommendation. Atty. Abad sought reconsideration but it was denied.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the actions of Atty. Abad, including misrepresentation and fabrication of court documents, constitute a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

  2. Whether Atty. Abad's actions tarnished the image of the legal profession and cast doubt on the ability of the courts to administer justice.

  3. Whether the respondent is guilty of gross misconduct.

  4. Whether the respondent is unfit to continue his membership in the bar.

  5. Whether Atty. Edgardo H. Abad should be disbarred from the practice of law.

  6. Whether the name of Atty. Edgardo H. Abad should be stricken from the Roll of Attorneys.

RULING:

  1. Yes, Atty. Abad's actions constitute a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Canon 1, Rule 1.01 and Canon 7, Rule 7.03 mandate lawyers to possess good moral character and to maintain such character throughout their practice. Atty. Abad's misrepresentation and fabrication of court documents demonstrate a deficiency in moral character, honesty, probity, and good demeanor required of a lawyer.

  2. Yes, Atty. Abad's actions tarnished the image of the legal profession and cast doubt on the ability of the courts to administer justice. His fraudulent scheme not only defrauded his client but also disrespected the concerned members of the judiciary by wrongfully involving their names. Atty. Abad's infractions tainted the faith of the people in the courts, undermining their confidence in the administration of justice.

  3. The respondent is guilty of gross misconduct and is unfit to continue his membership in the bar. The respondent deceived his client and the court by possessing and benefiting from a forged decision and entry of judgment. His moral flaws bring intolerable dishonor to the legal profession. Lawyers are duty-bound to observe the highest degree of morality and integrity throughout their career in order to safeguard the reputation of the legal profession.

  4. Atty. Edgardo H. Abad is disbarred from the practice of law and his name is ordered stricken from the Roll of Attorneys.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Lawyers are required to possess good moral character and maintain such character throughout their practice.

  • Lawyers have a bounden duty to safeguard the integrity of the legal profession, free from misdeeds and acts constitutive of malpractice.

  • Any errant behavior of a lawyer that shows a deficiency in moral character, honesty, probity, or good demeanor is sufficient to warrant suspension or disbarment.

  • Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers aim to protect the administration of justice by requiring competence, honor, and reliability from those who practice law.

  • The penalty imposed on an erring lawyer must be determined by the need to scrupulously guard the purity and independence of the bar, and should not be arbitrary or motivated by personal animosity or prejudice.

CASE: Integrated Bar of the Philippines vs. Abad

  • The practice of law is a privilege burdened with conditions, and lawyers must adhere to rigid standards of mental fitness, maintain the highest degree of morality, and faithfully comply with the rules of the legal profession.

  • The court will remove an attorney from the bar when there is clear evidence of misconduct that seriously affects the lawyer's standing and character as an officer of the court and member of the bar.

  • Falsification or forgery of court documents, as well as the use of fake documents, amounts to deceit, malpractice, or misconduct in office, which are grounds for disbarment.

  • Fitness, maintenance of the highest degree of morality, and faithful compliance with the rules of the legal profession are conditions required for remaining a member of good standing of the bar and for enjoying the privilege to practice law.