Saturday, March 28, 2026

AM 1343; (August, 1980)

🔎 Search our Comprehensive Legal Repository...

A.M. 1343

SECOND DIVISION

A.M. 1343 August 6, 1980

PAUL T. NAIDAS, complainant,

vs.

VALENTIN C. GUANIO and AUGUSTO SANCHEZ, respondents,

AQUINO, J.:

Paul T. Naidas in his verified complaint of June 19, 1974 charged lawyers Valentin C. Guanio and Augusto Sanchez with deceit, malpractice, misconduct and violation of the attorney’s oath in connection with the two applications for land registration filed by Angelina C. Reynoso covering a parcel of land with an area of 3,606 square meters located at Barrio Aromahan, Antipolo, Rizal (Land Registration Cases Nos. N6165 [CA-G.R. No. 47924-R] and N-7993 of the Court of First Instance of Rizal). Naidas had opposed the first application of Reynoso.

Respondent Sanchez in his answer denied the charges. He alleged that Naidas filed this disbarment proceeding because (1) Sanchez “continued a criminal prosecution” for usurpation of real rights against Naidas, (2) Sanchez was the lawyer of Reynoso in the ejectment suit wherein Naidas was adjudged liable to pay damages, (3) Sanchez was the lawyer in the theft case filed against Naidas and (4) another ejectment suit would be filed against Naidas.

Respondent Guanio in his answer also denied the charges. He adopted the answer of Sanchez insofar as relevant to his (Guanio’s) defense and branded Naidas’ complaint as motivated by “pure vindictiveness”.

The case was referred to the Solicitor General for investigation, report and recommendation.

On May 9, 1980, while the case was still pending investigation, Naidas filed a manifestation wherein he said that after reading respondents’ answers he came to the conclusion that they might have “acted improperly but not with malice and deceit”. He confessed that he “had lost interest in the matter” and that he had no intention of continuing the prosecution of his complaint.

In view of that manifestation, the Solicitor General’s Office, as directed by this Court, returned the record of this case.

WHEREFORE this case is dismissed and considered closed.

SO ORDERED.

Barredo, Conception, Jr., Guerrero and De Castro, JJ., concur.

Justices Guerrero and De Castro, JJ., were designated to sit in the Second Division.


Batas Pinas

spot_img

Hot this week

GR 3257; (March, 1907)

PETRONA CAPISTRANO, ET AL. vs. ESTATE OF JOSEFA GABINO

The Lien and the Legacy: Fidelity to the Word in GR L 2024

The Lien and the Legacy: Fidelity to the...

GR 223572; (November, 2020)

JENNIFER M. ENANO-BOTE, VIRGILIO A. BOTE, JAIME M. MATIBAG, WILFREDO L. PIMENTEL, TERESITA M. ENANO, PETITIONERS, VS. JOSE CH. ALVAREZ, CENTENNIAL AIR, INC. AND SUBIC BAY METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY, RESPONDENTS

The Prophetic Mandate and the Weight of Judgment in G.R. No. 272006

The Prophetic Mandate and the Weight of Judgment in...

The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones)

SUBJECT: The Rule on Collision (The Three Zones) I. INTRODUCTION...

Popular Categories

spot_imgspot_img