ABNER R. MANGUBAT, COMPLAINANT, vs. . ATTY. REYNALDO L. HERRERA.
- G.R. Number: A.C. No. 9457
- Promulgated: 2022-04-05
- Ponente: PER CURIAM
Doctrine
Complainant Abner Mangubat, an heir of Gaudencio Mangubat, filed a disbarment case against Atty. Reynaldo L. Herrera. Atty. Herrera was initially hired by Gaudencio to file a civil case, and he included the other heirs as plaintiffs represented by one heir, Raquel Azada, without securing a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) from all of them. After Gaudencio's death, Atty. Herrera continued to represent the deceased and the heirs without authority, entered into a compromise agreement, and received settlement money, which he failed to promptly deposit with the court. Furthermore, he represented the adverse party in a related transaction, creating a conflict of interest.
Facts
Complainant Abner Mangubat, an heir of Gaudencio Mangubat, filed a disbarment case against Atty. Reynaldo L. Herrera. Atty. Herrera was initially hired by Gaudencio to file a civil case, and he included the other heirs as plaintiffs represented by one heir, Raquel Azada, without securing a Special Power of Attorney (SPA) from all of them. After Gaudencio's death, Atty. Herrera continued to represent the deceased and the heirs without authority, entered into a compromise agreement, and received settlement money, which he failed to promptly deposit with the court. Furthermore, he represented the adverse party in a related transaction, creating a conflict of interest.
Issues
1. Whether Atty. Herrera is administratively liable for indicating that the heirs of Aurelia were represented by Raquel in the complaint when it was not true. 2. Whether Atty. Herrera is administratively liable for his failure to timely inform the court about Gaudencio’s death. 3. Whether Atty. Herrera is administratively liable for filing pleadings in court without authority. 4. Whether Atty. Herrera is administratively liable for failing to promptly account for the funds he received from the Compromise Agreement. 5. Whether Atty. Herrera is administratively liable for failing to observe the rule on conflict of interest.
Ruling
The Supreme Court found Atty. Reynaldo L. Herrera liable for multiple violations. The Court ruled that he committed falsehood by representing heirs without their authority, failed in his duty to promptly inform the court of his client's death, and continued to file pleadings without proper authorization. He also violated rules on holding client funds in trust by failing to promptly remit the money he collected and acted in a conflict of interest. Concluding that his collective acts showed a disregard for his sworn duties and tarnished the integrity of the legal profession, the Court ordered his disbarment.
Keywords
Section 16, Rule 3, Rules of Court, Section 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court, Section 9, Rule 39, Rules of Court, Canon 1, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 5, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 10, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 15, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 16, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 19, Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 11, Code of Professional Ethics, Rule 10.01, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 15.03, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 16.01, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 16.02, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 18.03, Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 18.04, Code of Professional Responsibility, Administrative case for disbarment, Legal Ethics, Attorney-client relationship, Conflict of Interest