AC 2837; (October, 1994) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.C. No. 2837 October 7, 1994
Esteban M. Libit, complainant, vs. Attys. Edelson G. Oliva and Florando A. Umali, respondents.
FACTS
In Civil Case No. 84-24144 of the Court of First Instance of Manila, the presiding judge ordered the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to investigate a falsified Sheriff’s Return of Summons. The NBI, through complainant Esteban M. Libit, charged respondents Attys. Edelson G. Oliva and Florando A. Umali, as counsels for plaintiff Pedro Cutingting, with knowingly presenting the falsified Sheriff’s Return as evidence to obstruct justice. Respondents denied involvement. The case was referred to the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline. The case against Atty. Umali was agreed to be dismissed after an NBI report found the signature on the complaint was not his. Regarding Atty. Oliva, the IBP found ample evidence: the Sheriff’s Return was falsified (not signed by the deputy sheriff); the summons was received from the court by a messenger from respondents’ law office; Atty. Oliva filed a Motion to Declare Defendant in Default based on the falsified return; Atty. Oliva had sent a prior demand letter to the defendant; and forensic analysis showed the demand letter, complaint, falsified Sheriff’s Return, and the Motion to Declare in Default were all typed on the same typewriter.
ISSUE
Whether Atty. Edelson G. Oliva committed acts of misconduct warranting disciplinary action for presenting a falsified Sheriff’s Return in court.
RULING
Yes. The Supreme Court found Atty. Edelson G. Oliva committed acts of misconduct warranting disbarment. The evidence indubitably revealed his failure to live up to his duties under the lawyer’s oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility, and the Canons of Professional Ethics. He violated his oath not to do any falsehood and Rule 10.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which prohibits a lawyer from doing any falsehood, consenting to any in court, or misleading the court. The practice of law is a privilege requiring observance of honesty and candor, with a lawyer’s first duty being to the courts. Accordingly, the Court imposed the supreme penalty of DISBARMENT. His license to practice law was CANCELLED and his name was ordered stricken from the Roll of Attorneys. The case was dismissed as against Atty. Florando Umali.