G.R. No. 94457 June 10, 1992
VICTORIA LEGARDA, petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS, NEW CATHAY HOUSE, INC. and REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF QUEZON CITY, BRANCH 94, respondents.

FACTS

Petitioner Victoria Legarda was the defendant in a complaint for specific performance with damages filed by private respondent New Cathay House, Inc. before the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City to compel her to sign a lease contract for her property. The lower court issued a temporary restraining order and later a writ of preliminary injunction against her. Atty. Antonio P. Coronel entered his appearance as her counsel and was granted an extension to file an answer. However, Legarda failed to file her answer within the extended period, was declared in default, and a decision by default was rendered against her on March 25, 1985, ordering her to execute the lease and pay damages. Atty. Coronel received the decision on April 9, 1985, but did not appeal. The decision became final, a writ of execution was issued, and her property was levied and sold at public auction to New Cathay House, Inc. After the redemption period expired, a final deed of sale was registered. Legarda, through her attorney-in-fact, filed a petition for annulment of judgment in the Court of Appeals, alleging fraud and lack of support in the pleadings or evidence. The Court of Appeals dismissed the petition, finding her allegations improbable and attributing the case to pure and simple negligence of her counsel, Atty. Coronel. The Court of Appeals decision became final. Legarda, represented by new counsel, filed a petition for certiorari before the Supreme Court. On March 18, 1991, the Supreme Court declared null and void the decisions of the lower courts and the sheriff’s sale, and directed reconveyance of the property to Legarda. The Court also required Atty. Coronel to show cause why he should not be held administratively liable. Atty. Coronel filed motions for extension to file his explanation, citing pressure of work and later medical reasons. The Court granted the first extension but denied the second.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Antonio P. Coronel should be held administratively liable for gross negligence in his representation of petitioner Victoria Legarda.

RULING

Yes, Atty. Antonio P. Coronel is guilty of gross negligence. The Supreme Court found that his failure to file an answer, appeal the default judgment, or take appropriate remedial actions constituted gross negligence, which deprived his client of her property without due process. His subsequent failure to comply with the Court’s show-cause order in a timely manner, despite an extension, demonstrated disrespect for the Court’s authority. Accordingly, Atty. Coronel is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of six (6) months effective from the date of his receipt of the resolution.