Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad
OCA Circular No. 38-11 informs relevant judicial bodies about the six-month suspension of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad from practicing law due to violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility, specifically Rules 16.03 and 18.03. This decision, stemming from Administrative Case No. 8158, modifies a previous resolution and requires Atty. Macalalad to return P50,000.00 to Atty. Elmer C. Solidon, with interest, from the date of the decision. The court has denied Atty. Macalalad's motions for reconsideration, emphasizing that no further pleadings will be entertained in this case. Atty. Macalalad has been sternly warned against repeating similar violations in the future.
Quick Answers
- What is Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad about?
- OCA Circular No. 38-11 informs relevant judicial bodies about the six-month suspension of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad from practicing law due to violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility, specifically Rules 16.03 and 18.03. This decision, stemming from Administrative Case No. 8158, modifies a previous resolution and requires Atty. Macalalad to return P50,000.00 to Atty. Elmer C. Solidon, with interest, from the date of the decision. The court has denied Atty. Macalalad's motions for reconsideration, emphasizing that no further pleadings will be entertained in this case. Atty. Macalalad has been sternly warned against repeating similar violations in the future.
- What type of law is OCA Circular No. 38-11?
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad (OCA Circular No. 38-11) is a Philippine Supreme Court Issuances enacted by the Congress of the Philippines.
- When was Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad enacted?
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad (OCA Circular No. 38-11) was enacted on Mar 1, 2011.
- What is the citation for Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad?
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad, OCA Circular No. 38-11, Mar 1, 2011 (Philippines)
Law Information
- Reference Number
- OCA Circular No. 38-11
- Date Enacted
- Category
- Supreme Court Issuances
- Subcategory
- Office of the Court Administrator Circulars
- Jurisdiction
- Philippines
- Enacting Body
- Congress of the Philippines
Full Law Text
March 1, 2011
OCA CIRCULAR NO. 38-11
| TO | : | The Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals, Regional Trial Courts, Shari'a District Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts, Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, Shari'a Circuit Courts, the Office of the Chief State Prosecutor, Public Attorney's Office and the Integrated Bar of the Philippines |
| SUBJECT | : | Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad |
For your information and guidance, quoted hereunder is the dispositive portion of the Decision of the Second Division dated 24 February 2010, in Administrative Case No. 8158, entitled "Atty. Elmer C. Solidon vs. Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad", to wit: TaEIcS
"WHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby AFFIRM WITH MODIFICATION Resolution No. XVIII-2008-336 dated July 17, 2008 of the Board of Governors of the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline. We impose on Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad the penalty of SIX (6) MONTHS SUSPENSION from the practice of law for violations of Rule 16.03 and Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, effective upon finality of this Decision. Atty. Macalalad is STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt with more severely.
Atty. Macalalad is also ORDERED to RETURN to Atty. Elmer C. Solidon the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) with interest of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the date of promulgation of this Decision until the full amount is returned."
The Court, in a Resolution dated 21 July 2010, DENIED the respondent's motion for reconsideration for lack of merit. Further, the Court, in a Resolution dated 10 January 2011, DENIED for lack of merit, respondent's second motion for reconsideration for being a prohibited pleading under Section 2, Rule 52 in relation to Section 4, Rule 56 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended. The Court further resolved that no further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case.
(SGD.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZCourt AdministratorOffice of the Court Administrator
Cite This Law
Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad, OCA Circular No. 38-11, Mar 1, 2011 (Philippines)
Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad, OCA Circular No. 38-11 (Phil. 2011)
Related Laws
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Benito B. NateOCA Circular No. 02-11 • Jan 5, 2011 • Supreme Court Issuances
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Braulio RG TansinsinOCA Circular No. 36-11 • Mar 1, 2011 • Supreme Court Issuances
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Emmanuel F. ElaydaOCA Circular No. 92-11 • Jul 13, 2011 • Supreme Court Issuances
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Candido GutierrezOCA Circular No. 33-12 • Apr 20, 2012 • Supreme Court Issuances
- Suspension from the Practice of Law for Six (6) Months of Atty. Victor C. AvecillaOCA Circular No. 104-11 • Jul 25, 2011 • Supreme Court Issuances
- Suspension of Atty. Santiago F. Marcos from Practice of LawAdministrative Supervision of Courts Circular No. 1-88 • Jan 6, 1988 • Supreme Court Issuances
Browse More Supreme Court Issuances
Explore other laws in the Supreme Court Issuances category.
View All Supreme Court IssuancesNeed Help Understanding This Law?
Ask our AI assistant to explain provisions, implications, or related laws.
Ask AI About This Law