SECOND DIVISION
[A.C. No. 12221. June 10, 2019.](Formerly CBD Case No. 15-4860)
RUPERTO G. CASTRO, JR., * complainant, vs.ATTY. BARTOLOME G. MALDE, JR., respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames:
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated10 June 2019which reads as follows:
"A.C. No. 12221 (Formerly CBD Case No. 15-4860) — RUPERTO G. CASTRO, JR. versus ATTY. BARTOLOME G. MALDE, JR.
This resolves the complaint filed by Ruperto G. Castro, Jr. (Castro) against Atty. Bartolome G. Malde, Jr. (Atty. Malde) for violation of the Lawyer's Oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Castro is a seafarer who worked for Interorient Maritime Enterprises (Interorient), a Greek shipping firm. Castro alleged that he was illegally dismissed from said employment due to illness that was not serious or contagious. 1 He subsequently received from Interorient the amount of P15,000.00, which he believed was for his accrued salaries while on sick leave and was also made to sign a document. 2 When Interorient refused Castro's reinstatement in spite of the medical findings that he was fit to work, Castro sought the assistance of Atty. Malde to seek legal advice and initiate the necessary complaint with the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC). 3 Atty. Malde supposedly assured Castro that he "had a case." 4
Incident to the filing of the said case, Castro entrusted his employment records to Atty. Malde and made payments of professional fees in the aggregate sum of P6,200.00 in various occasions from November 10, 2008 to August 10, 2010. 5 He repeatedly asked for updates from Atty. Malde and was made to believe that the case was filed, and Castro just had to wait for the NLRC decision. 6
After some time, Castro inquired with Atty. Malde. However, despite repeated requests, Atty. Malde failed and refused to provide the necessary information to Castro, specifically the case number of his pending case. Atty. Malde also told him that he could not find his file. 7
Suspecting that his documents were lost and that the case was never filed, Castro wrote three (3) letters addressed to Atty. Malde dated October 12, 2011, 8 August 8, 2012, 9 and May 17, 2013, 10 to request for the return of his documents and information relating to the case. However, Atty. Malde avoided Castro and never bothered to answer his letters or at least call him up, considering that Castro left his mobile number with Atty. Malde.
Castro filed a verified complaint dated December 16, 2015 11 against Atty. Malde for violating Canon 17, 12 Rule 18.04 13 and Rule 22.02 14 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Lawyer's Oath. Castro prays that Atty. Malde be administratively sanctioned and held guilty of gross misconduct.
In an Order 15 dated January 6, 2016, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD) ordered Atty. Malde to submit his answer. Since there was no record that Atty. Malde received the order, and since he failed to attend the mandatory conference and submit his brief beforehand, the CBD asked the IBP Negros Occidental Chapter to furnish Atty. Malde's address in an Order 16 dated May 26, 2016.
Now equipped with the correct address, the CBD required Atty. Malde to submit his duly verified answer in an Order 17 dated June 29, 2016. Pursuant to said order, Atty. Malde filed an Answer 18 dated July 27, 2016. Atty. Malde claims that the labor case referred to by Castro was actually filed by the latter alone. Since Castro could not afford to spend for Atty. Malde's travel expenses, Castro had to travel to Manila unaccompanied by Atty. Malde. The latter allegedly instructed Castro not to sign any document coming from his employer without first consulting him. 19 Thereafter, Castro informed Atty. Malde that he had voluntarily accepted settlement money in the amount of P15,000.00. Atty. Malde then instructed Castro to secure copies of the documents he signed so they could send the necessary manifestation with Interorient. 20 No documents were given to him, however, until a copy of the Quitclaim and Release 21 was forwarded to him as annexes of Castro's Comment 22 dated September 2, 2016. According to Atty. Malde, this is the first time he came to know the case/docket number of the NLRC case that Castro had been asking from him, implying that Castro was hiding this fact.
After Atty. Malde explained to him that it would be very difficult to pursue the case, Castro supposedly wanted to withdraw the documents. Since Atty. Malde was out of town, he instructed his staff to pull out Castro's documents and release them to Castro after signing the office logbook. These documents were released by a staff member to Castro. However, the logbook which Castro had signed could not be found and is presumed lost. 23
In the Report and Recommendation 24 dated April 5, 2017, Investigating Commissioner Rogelio N. Wong found that Atty. Malde was not able to meet the prescribed standards in dealing with clients under the Code of Professional Responsibility, namely Rules 18.03, 18.04, and 22.02. Hence, it was recommended that Atty. Malde be suspended from the practice of law for six (6) months with a warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts in the future shall be dealt with severely.
In Resolution No. XXIII-17-032 25 dated August 31, 2017, the IBP Board of Governors adopted the findings of fact and recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner. No motion for reconsideration or petition for review was filed thereto by Atty. Malde.
The Court adopts and approves the findings of the IBP.
In the case at bar, Castro clearly requested for updates regarding the labor case and the return of the documents entrusted to Atty. Malde on several occasions. However, Atty. Malde failed to act and respond to his client's repeated requests. As quoted from the IBP findings:
Records show that [Atty. Malde] was able to receive the following letters:
a) Letter dated October 12, 2011:
1. Reiterating the return of the documents of [Castro] relative to the labor case which he filed against [Interorient] Maritime Enterprises, for illegal dismissal;
2. Stressing that despite the lapse of time from the date of filing, the same still remain[s] unresolved; [and]
3. [Requesting] [t]he return of the complainant's documents x x x including the other documents x x x in [relation to Castro's] father['s] claim with the SSS;
b) Hand written letter dated August 8, 2012 to the law office of [Atty. Malde], requesting the docket number for follow-up with the NLRC case against [Interorient] Maritime Enterprises. This letter was stamped received by the law office of [Atty. Malde];
c) Letter dated May 17, 2013, addressed to [Atty. Malde's] office reiterating and demanding the return of all documents pertaining to the case of the complainant, although no proof of service is apparent showing that this letter was received by [Atty. Malde].
Notwithstanding, [Atty. Malde] never replied x x x. Not even to one [of] these letters. Such reply could have made a difference in the resolution of the instant case. x x x 26
Atty. Malde likewise failed to inform his client of his new address and failed to file a required Manifestation, which was paid for by Castro. 27
In light of the foregoing, Atty. Malde violated the following provisions under the Code of Professional Responsibility:
Rule 18.03 — A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.
Rule 18.04 — A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client's request for information.
Rule 22.02 — A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter.
As aptly discussed in the case of Solidon v. Macalalad: 28
x x x A lawyer so engaged to represent a client bears the responsibility of protecting the latter's interest with utmost diligence. The lawyer bears the duty to serve his client with competence and diligence, and to exert his best efforts to protect, within the bounds of the law, the interest of his or her client. Accordingly, competence, not only in the knowledge of law, but also in the management of the cases by giving these cases appropriate attention and due preparation, is expected from a lawyer. 29 (Citations omitted)
WHEREFORE, premises considered, Atty. Bartolome G. Malde, Jr. is hereby SUSPENDED for six (6) months from the practice of law, effective upon the receipt of this Resolution. He is WARNED that a repetition of the same or a similar act will be dealt with more severely.
Atty. Malde is DIRECTED to report the date of his receipt of this Resolution to enable this Court to determine when his suspension shall take effect.
Let a copy of this Resolution be furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to the personal record of Atty. Malde as a member of the Bar; the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, for distribution to all its chapters; and the Office of the Court Administrator, for circulation to all courts in the country for their information and guidance.
SO ORDERED. (REYES, J., JR., J., on leave)"
Very truly yours,
MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
* Also referred to as "Ruperto G. Castro" in some parts of the rollo.
1.Rollo, p. 4.
2.Id. at 66.
3.Id.
4.Id.
5.Id. at 4, 8-10.
6.Id. at 4.
7.Id. at 5.
8.Id. at 11.
9.Id. at 12.
10.Id. at 13.
11.Id. at 4-6. Erroneously dated December 16, 2016.
12. CANON 17 — A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him.
13. Rule 18.04 — A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client's request for information.
14. Rule 22.02 — A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter.
15.Rollo, p. 15.
16.Id. at 19.
17.Id. at 22-23.
18.Id. at 48-54.
19.Id. at 49.
20.Id. at 50.
21.Id. at 108.
22.Id. at 65-68.
23.Id. at 50-51, 55, 249.
24.Id. at 244-253.
25.Id. at 242-243.
26.Id. at 250-251.
27.Id. at 252.
28. 627 Phil. 284 (2010).
29.Id. at 290-291.