SECOND DIVISION
[A.C. Nos. 12977 and 12978. October 6, 2021.][Formerly UE Case Nos. 17-056 and 17-059]
GAUDENCIO W. ANTONINO, JR., complainant, vs.ATTY. ROMEO S. GONZALES1and ATTY. NICOLE2GONZALES, 3 respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated06 October 2021which reads as follows: HTcADC
"A.C. Nos. 12977 and 12978 [Formerly UE Case Nos. 17-056 and 17-059] (Gaudencio W. Antonino, Jr. v. Atty. Romeo S. Gonzales and Atty. Nicole Gonzales). — Before the Court are two disbarment Complaints 4 filed by Gaudencio W. Antonino, Jr. (complainant) against Atty. Romeo S. Gonzales and Atty. Nicole Gonzales (collectively, respondents) for (1) utilizing deceitful tactics and misrepresentation; 5 and (2) serious and gross misconduct by employing fraud, deceit and falsehood in the performance and practice of the legal profession in utter violation of the pertinent ethical rules. 6
Complainant avers to be the heir of Magnolia Antonino under whose name Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) No. RT-55869 (42532) (Antonino Title) was issued. 7 Complainant further asserts that the title covers the same parcel of land purchased by Spouses Vergel and Ciremia Paulino (Spouses Paulino) from the heirs of a certain Celso Fernandez (Fernandez). The parcel of land was earlier purchased by Fernandez in a public auction conducted by the Quezon City Government for having been declared delinquent. The land was allegedly registered under the name of Lolita G. Javier under TCT No. 301617 (Javier Title) issued by the Registry of Deeds of Quezon City. 8
In sum, complainant avers that respondents, who are lawyers of Spouses Paulino, committed serious misconduct and violated the Lawyer's Oath when they continued to represent their clients in various transactions involving the disputed property covered by both the Antonino Title and the Javier Title. 9 This is notwithstanding the fact that the Court, in the consolidated cases of Sps. Paulino v. Court of Appeals, 10 docketed as G.R. Nos. 205065 and 207533, already declared the Javier Title to be null and void. 11
In the Report and Recommendation 12 of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) dated February 15, 2018, Investigating Commissioner Ethel G. Maraon-Serate (Investigating Commissioner) found that, contrary to the allegations of complainant, the Court never declared the Javier Title presented by Spouses Paulino as fake or void, or that it "vests no right whatsoever to the Paulino spouses," or "that the Antoninos are the true and legal owners of the subject property." Hence, the Investigating Commissioner recommended that the complaints against respondents be dismissed for lack of basis and complainant be sternly warned for deliberately misquoting the ruling of the Court. 13
The dispositive portion of the Report and Recommendation reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, undersigned evaluating commissioner hereby recommends that the instant disciplinary cases against Atty. Romeo S. Gonzales and Atty. Nicole Gonzales be DISMISSED FOR LACK OF BASIS in fact and in law. Undersigned evaluating commissioner further recommends that Complainant Gaudencio W. Antonino[,] [Jr.] be STERNLY WARNED, for the last and final time, to be henceforth strictly forthright and candid in all his claims and allegations, and any further attempt to mislead the Commission and the IBP will be dealt with more severely. 14
In the Resolution 15 dated October 12, 2019, the IBP Board of Governors resolved to approve and adopt the recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner to dismiss the complaints for lack of basis in fact and in law. 16
Our Ruling
The Court adopts the findings and recommendation of the IBP Board of Governors.
In filing the Complaints 17 against respondents, complainant heavily relied on the alleged pronouncement made by the Court in Sps. Paulino v. Court of Appeals18 supposedly declaring the Javier Title as null and void.
However, as the IBP correctly observed, the Court never made such declaration in its Decision 19 dated June 4, 2014. In fact, a review of the Decision shows that the Court had adamantly refrained from ruling on the validity of the Torrens title, particularly the Antonino Title covering the disputed property, as such issue can only be threshed out in a direct proceeding and not in the consolidated cases for the reconstitution of the Javier Title filed by Spouses Paulino. 20 Therefore, given that the instant Complaints are anchored entirely on a wrong premise, they must inevitably be dismissed for lack of merit.
The Court likewise agrees with the IBP that complainant must be sternly warned for deliberately misquoting the Court and making misleading statements.
ACCORDINGLY, the Complaints for disbarment against Atty. Romeo S. Gonzales and Atty. Nicole Gonzales are hereby DISMISSED. Complainant Gaudencio W. Antonino, Jr. is STERNLY WARNED, for the last time, to be henceforth strictly forthright and candid in all his claims and allegations and any further attempt to mislead the Court and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines will be dealt with more severely.
SO ORDERED."
By authority of the Court:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. "Gonzalez" in some parts of the rollo.
2. "Nichole" in some parts of the rollo.
3. "Gonzalez" in some parts of the rollo.
4.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), pp. 1-9; rollo (A.C. No. 12978), pp. 10-15.
5.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), pp. 6-7.
6.Rollo (A.C. No. 12978), p. 10.
7.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), p. 1.
8.Rollo (A.C. No. 12978), p. 11.
9.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), pp. 5-7.
10. 735 Phil. 448 (2014).
11.Rollo (A.C. No. 12978), pp. 11-12.
12.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), pp. 13-18.
13.Id. at 15-18.
14.Id. at 18.
15.Id. at 11-12.
16.Id. at 12.
17.Rollo (A.C. No. 12977), pp. 1-9; rollo (A.C. No. 12978), pp. 10-15.
18.Supra note 10.
19.Rollo (A.C. No. 12978), pp. 19-33; penned by Associate Justice Jose Catral Mendoza (now a retired member of the Court) with Associate Justices Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., (now a retired member of the Court), Diosdado M. Peralta (now a retired Chief Justice of the Court), Martin S. Villarama, Jr., (now a retired member of the Court), and Marvic Mario Victor F. Leonen, concurring.
20.Id. at 30-31.