G.R. No. A.C. No. 5768; March 26, 2010
ATTY. BONIFACIO T. BARANDON, JR., Complainant, vs. ATTY. EDWIN Z. FERRER, SR., Respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Atty. Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr. filed a disbarment complaint against respondent Atty. Edwin Z. Ferrer, Sr. before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD). The charges included: (1) using abusive and offensive language in a court pleading (a reply with opposition to a motion to dismiss in Civil Case 7040) that insinuated Atty. Barandon presented a falsified document; (2) filing a fabricated falsification charge against Atty. Barandon based on a notarized document executed in 1994, when Atty. Barandon was not yet a lawyer, assigned in Camarines Norte, or a signatory; (3) uttering threatening remarks on December 19, 2000, in the courtroom of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Daet, while allegedly drunk, stating, “Laban kung laban, patayan kung patayan, kasama ang lahat ng pamilya. Wala na palang magaling na abogado sa Camarines Norte, ang abogado na rito ay mga taga-Camarines Sur, umuwi na kayo sa Camarines Sur, hindi kayo taga-rito”; (4) making accusations without verifying documents and ignoring the presumption of genuineness of notarized documents; and (5) having a history of unethical conduct, including pending disbarment, criminal cases for acts of lasciviousness, libel, and grave threats, and allegedly harassing Atty. Barandon after the latter refused to falsify a daily time record. Atty. Ferrer denied the allegations, claiming the falsification case was based on his client’s complaint, the courtroom incident was improbable as the court was in session, and the criminal cases were pending and did not prove guilt. The IBP Investigating Commissioner found Atty. Ferrer guilty of violating Canons 8.01 and 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommended a two-year suspension, which the IBP Board of Governors reduced to one year.

ISSUE

1. Whether the IBP Board of Governors and Investigating Commissioner erred in finding respondent Atty. Ferrer guilty of the charges.
2. Whether the penalty of one-year suspension is justified.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the IBP’s findings and penalty. Atty. Ferrer violated Canon 8, Rule 8.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility by using abusive, offensive, and improper language in his pleading, falsely accusing Atty. Barandon of falsification without evidence. He also violated Canon 7, Rule 7.03 by engaging in scandalous conduct, as evidenced by his drunken and threatening remarks in the courtroom, which were confirmed by disinterested persons and aimed at humiliating Atty. Barandon before lawyers, court personnel, and litigants. The Court emphasized that lawyers must maintain dignity, courtesy, and respect in their professional dealings. Atty. Ferrer was accorded due process through ample opportunity to defend himself before the IBP. The one-year suspension from the practice of law was deemed appropriate. The decision was ordered entered into Atty. Ferrer’s personal record and circulated to all courts.