Sales v. Soro

SECOND DIVISION

[A.C. No. 12952. January 3, 2022.]

ELISA UY SALES, petitioner,vs. ATTY. VON KAISER P. SORO, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated03 January 2022which reads as follows:

"A.C. No. 12952 (Elisa Uy Sales v. Atty. Von Kaiser P. Soro). — The Court NOTES the manifestation dated April 14, 2021 of Atty. Von Kaiser M. Soro, Jr. (one of the heirs of respondent) of Soro Law Offices, stating that their law office received on April 5, 2021 the Resolution 1 dated January 27, 2021 requiring respondent to comment on the complaint for disbarment within ten (10) days from notice, and that unfortunately, respondent would no longer be able to file his comment for he passed away on December 31, 2020, as shown in the attached certified copy of his death certificate.

Due to the supervening death of respondent Atty. Von Kaiser P. Soro (respondent), the Court resolves to DISMISS the administrative complaint 2 against him.

As jurisprudence shows, the Court has consistently dismissed administrative complaints against lawyers once it is duly informed of the respondent's death. 3 Notably, in the fairly recent case of Concepcion v. Judge Castañeda, 4 the Court held that the death of therein respondent judge warrants the dismissal of the administrative complaint lodged against her for the following reasons: (1) death forecloses the opportunity for the respondent to refute the charges as well as to seek for clemency; (2) the punishment for administrative infractions is personal to the respondent and is not punitive but for the purpose of public accountability; and (3) remorse is impossible when the respondent dies before this Court can hand down its judgment; thus, since there is no one left to punish, it is irrational and illogical for the Court to continue with disciplinary proceedings despite the respondent's death. It is discerned that while Concepcion involved an administrative complaint against a judge and not a lawyer (as in this case), the same considerations may be analogously applied to administrative complaints against lawyers who have died during the pendency of the proceedings.

Here, the Court was duly informed of respondent's supervening death through a death certificate submitted together with the Manifestation filed by his heirs. Thus, in line with prevailing jurisprudence, the instant administrative complaint is hereby DISMISSED.

SO ORDERED."

By authority of the Court:

(SGD.) TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDivision Clerk of Court

 

Footnotes

1.Rollo, p. 25.

2.Id. at 2-7.

3. See De Aquino v. Castellano, A.C. No. 1145, March 24, 2004; Pelejo v. Zaballero, 208 Phil. 390, 392 (1983); Orijuela v. Rosario, 201 Phil. 45, 45-47 (1982); Coronado v. Huertas, 198 Phil. 588, 588-589 (1981); Sotto v. De Guia, 187 Phil. 268, 268-269 (1980); and Mateos v. Wisco, 150-A Phil. 417, 417-418 (1972).

4. See A.M. No. RTJ-15-2438 [Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 11-3681-RTJ], September 2, 2020.