G.R. No. A.M. No. 2017-07-SC / A.C. No. 12323. March 14, 2022
Presiding Judge Suzanne D. Cobarrubias-Nabaza, Metropolitan Trial Court, Br. 93, Marikina City, Complainant, vs. Atty. Albert N. Lavandero, Court Attorney IV, Legal Office, Office of the Court Administrator, Respondent.

FACTS

Presiding Judge Suzanne D. Cobarrubias-Nabaza filed a letter dated October 12, 2016, accusing Atty. Albert N. Lavandero, a Court Attorney IV in the OCA, of violating the Code of Professional Responsibility. The complaint stemmed from a BP 22 case pending before Judge Nabaza’s court, where Lavandero was a co-plaintiff. After a ruling favorable to Lavandero, certain properties of the defendant, including a Black Hyundai Accent vehicle, were placed under custodia legis for levy, execution, and auction sale. Judge Nabaza discovered through CCTV footage that Lavandero had taken the vehicle in and out of court premises on three occasions without her prior knowledge or approval, despite no public auction having been conducted. Lavandero defended himself by claiming he had authority as the highest bidder in a public auction held on August 19, 2016, and shifted blame to the sheriff for any irregularities. The Office of Administrative Services – Supreme Court (OAS-SC) investigated and found irregularities, including non-compliance with auction procedures, unauthorized removal of the vehicle, and lack of documentary evidence supporting the auction. The OAS-SC recommended finding Lavandero guilty of Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service and imposing a P10,000 fine, while also referring the matter to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) for potential violations of the Lawyer’s Oath and CPR. Lavandero resigned from his position on November 17, 2019. The OBC later recommended a one-year suspension from the practice of law for violating CPR provisions.

ISSUE

Whether or not Atty. Albert N. Lavandero should be administratively sanctioned for his actions regarding the vehicle under custodia legis.

RULING

The Court found Atty. Albert N. Lavandero administratively liable. In A.M. No. 2017-07-SC (administrative case as a court employee), the Court held that Lavandero’s resignation during the pendency of the case did not moot the proceedings, as jurisdiction had already attached. The Court agreed with the OAS-SC’s findings that Lavandero, in connivance with the sheriff, committed irregularities by skirting procedures for properties in custodia legis. The vehicle was not validly auctioned, as shown by the Notice of Levy and Sale not including it, yet Lavandero repeatedly removed it without court approval. However, these acts were not committed in relation to his official duties as Court Attorney IV, so they constituted Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service, not Grave or Simple Misconduct. The Court modified the penalty, imposing a fine equivalent to one month’s salary (based on his SG-25 salary at the time) instead of the OAS-SC’s recommended P10,000, as the latter lacked legal basis. In A.C. No. 12323 (administrative case as a lawyer), the Court adopted the OBC’s recommendation, finding that Lavandero violated Rule 1.01, Canon 1 and Rules 10.01 and 10.03, Canon 10 of the CPR by blatantly disregarding custodia legis rules. As a lawyer with extensive court experience, he should have known better. The Court suspended him from the practice of law for one year, with a warning that repetition would be dealt with more severely. He was also ordered to pay the fine imposed in A.M. No. 2017-07-SC.