G.R. No. A.C. No. 1890; August 7, 2002
Federico C. Suntay, complainant, vs. Atty. Rafael G. Suntay, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Federico C. Suntay filed a disbarment complaint against his nephew, respondent Atty. Rafael G. Suntay. Complainant alleged that from 1956 to 1964, respondent served as his legal counsel, adviser, and confidant, privy to all his legal, financial, and political affairs. After they parted ways in 1964 due to politics, respondent began filing various complaints and cases against complainant, allegedly using confidential information obtained during their attorney-client relationship to harass him. The cases enumerated include: (a) Civil Case No. 4306-M for injunction and damages (Carlos Panganiban v. Dr. Federico Suntay) involving fishponds respondent had helped administer; (b) Civil Case No. 4726-M (Narciso Lopez v. Federico Suntay) to determine the real contract involving the same fishponds; (c) Civil Case No. 112764 (Magno Dinglasan v. Federico Suntay) for damages; and (d) I.S. No. 77-1523 (Magno Dinglasan v. Federico Suntay) for false testimony and grave oral defamation. Additionally, respondent pursued a complaint (I.S. No. 74-193) against complainant for violation of P.D. No. 296, concerning the alleged disappearance of two creeks traversing complainant’s fishpond, information which complainant claimed respondent gained through his possession and examination of the property’s title and blueprint plan while acting as his counsel and part administrator.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Atty. Rafael G. Suntay violated the confidentiality of the lawyer-client relationship and engaged in unethical conduct, constituting malpractice warranting disciplinary action.

RULING

Yes. The Court adopted the findings and recommendation of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, which approved the earlier Report and Recommendation of the Office of the Solicitor General. The evidence established that respondent committed malpractice by representing conflicting interests and violating professional confidence. Specifically: (1) He committed malpractice by representing Magno Dinglasan in I.S. No. 77-1523 (for false testimony and grave oral defamation) and in Civil Case No. 112764 (for damages), as these cases were based on the same testimony by complainant about a demand for money which complainant had previously consulted respondent about during their attorney-client relationship. By representing Dinglasan, respondent represented an interest conflicting with his former client. (2) He violated the confidentiality of information obtained from the lawyer-client relationship by filing a complaint (I.S. No. 74-193) for violation of P.D. No. 296 regarding the disappearance of creeks on complainant’s fishpond. Respondent gained the information that there used to be two creeks and that they had disappeared through his possession and examination of the certificate of title and blueprint plan, and his role as part administrator, while he was complainant’s lawyer. (3) The evidence also established unethical conduct for serving as lawyer for adversaries of complainant (Panganiban and Lopez) and for himself filing criminal charges against complainant, given that complainant was not merely a client but also an uncle and political benefactor, and the cases involved properties respondent had dealt with as counsel and administrator. The Court emphasized the strict rule against representing conflicting interests to preserve public trust in the legal profession. Respondent Atty. Rafael G. Suntay was SUSPENDED from the practice of law for two (2) years.