Republic of the PhilippinesSUPREME COURT
SECOND DIVISION
A.M. No. 1270 February 27, 1976
VICTORIANA BAUTISTA and FELIPE BUCAO, complainants, ATTY. MACARIO G. YDIA respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
BARREDO, J.:
Complaint for disciplinary action against respondent, Atty. Macario G. Ydia alleging professional misconduct in that said respondent failed to take the necessary appeal against a decision of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan in the cases handled by him on behalf of complainants. Respondent's defense is that he desisted from making the appeal upon instructions of complainant Felipe Bucao himself.
The issue of fact thus emerging from the complaint and answer was referred to the Solicitor General for investigation and appropriate recommendation. After due hearing, wherein complainants and respondent submitted, their respective evidence, the Solicitor General submits that the charge has not been proven and this case should be dismissed.
We have gone over the report of the Solicitor General and the record of the evidence presented by the parties and We are satisfied that indeed it is safe to conclude that it was with the knowledge and consent of Felipe Bucao that respondent desisted from taking further action in the case 6f complainants, convinced as they were that an appeal from the adverse decision of the trial court would be futile. In any event, there is, as pointed out by the Solicitor General, a presumption that an attorney is innocent of the charge against him until the contrary is proved by convincing evidence. Complainants' evidence in this case does not appear to meet such standard.
WHEREFORE, this case is dismissed.
Fernando (Chairman), Antonio, Aquino and Concepcion, Jr., JJ., concur.
Victoriana Bautista vs. Atty. Macario G. Ydia
This is an administrative case, Victoriana Bautista and Felipe Bucao vs. Atty. Macario G. Ydia, decided by the Supreme Court in 1976. The complainants accused Atty. Ydia of professional misconduct for failing to appeal a decision of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan in their cases. However, Atty. Ydia claimed that he was instructed by Felipe Bucao not to make the appeal. After investigation, the Solicitor General recommended the dismissal of the case due to lack of evidence. The Supreme Court found no proof that Atty. Ydia was guilty of the charge and dismissed the case. The Court also noted the presumption that an attorney is innocent until proven guilty.
Case Information
- Case Number
- A.M. No. 1270
- Decision Date
- Court
- Supreme Court of the Philippines
- Jurisdiction
- Philippines
Full Decision Text
Cite This Case
Victoriana Bautista vs. Atty. Macario G. Ydia, A.M. No. 1270, Feb 27, 1976 (Supreme Court of the Philippines)
Supreme Court of the Philippines. (1976). Victoriana Bautista vs. Atty. Macario G. Ydia (A.M. No. 1270). Retrieved from https://legaldex.com/jurisprudence/victoriana-bautista-vs-atty-macario-g-ydia
Related Cases
- Bautista v. YdiaA.C. No. 1270 (Resolution) • Feb 27, 1976
- Patricio Gone vs. Atty. Macario GaA.C. No. 7771 • Apr 6, 2011
- Ong Ham v. SaavedraG.R. No. 27531 • Dec 24, 1927
- Macario Talag vs. Court of AppealsG.R. No. 84431 • Sep 2, 1990
- Eduardo G. Bautista vs. Avelino Joaquin, Jr.A.M. No. 236 • Jul 29, 1977
- Ramos v. PeopleG.R. No. 194384 • Jun 13, 2013
Need Help Understanding This Case?
Ask our AI assistant to explain the key points, implications, or related cases.
Ask AI About This Case