Sunteți pe pagina 1din 3

A.C. No.

6057

June 27, 2006

PETER T. DONTON, Complainant, vs. ATTY. EMMANUEL O. TANSINGCO, Respondent. DECISION CARPIO, J.: The Ca e This is a disbarment complaint against respondent Atty. Emman el O. Tansingco !"respondent"# $or serio s miscond ct and deliberate violation o$ Canon %,% R les %.&%' and %.&'( o$ the Code o$ )ro$essional Responsibility !"Code"#. The !a"# In his Complaint dated '& *ay '&&(, )eter T. Donton !"complainant"# stated that he $iled a criminal complaint $or esta$a thr $alsi$ication o$ a p blic doc ment + against D ane O. Stier !"Stier"#, Emelyn A. *aggay !"*aggay"# and respondent, as the notary p blic ,ho notari-ed the Occ pancy Agreement. The disbarment complaint arose ,hen respondent $iled a co nter.charge $or per/ ry 0 against complainant. Respondent, in his a$$idavit.complaint, stated that1 0. The OCC2)ANC3 A4REE*ENT dated September %%, %550 $a %&e%a&e' an' no#a&()e' *+ ,e un'e& #he -o..o$(n/ "(&"u, #an"e 0 A. *r. D ane O. Stier is the o,ner and long.time resident o$ a real property located at No. (( Don 6ose Street, 7gy. San Ro8 e, * rphy, C bao, 9 e-on City. 7. Sometime in September %550, M&. S#(e& 1 a U.S. "(#()en an' #he&e*+ '( 2ua.(-(e' #o o$n &ea. %&o%e&#+ (n h( na,e : agreed that the property be trans$erred in the name o$ *r. Donton, a ;ilipino. C. *r. Stier, in the presence o$ *r. Donton, re8 ested me to prepare several doc ments that ,o ld g arantee recognition o$ him being the act al o,ner o$ the property despite the trans$er o$ title in the name o$ *r. Donton. D. ;or this p rpose, I prepared, among others, the OCC2)ANC3 A4REE*ENT, recogni-ing *r. Stier<s $ree and ndist rbed se o$ the property $or his residence and b siness operations. The OCC2)ANC3 A4REE*ENT ,as tied p ,ith a loan ,hich *r. Stier had e=tended to *r. Donton.> Complainant averred that respondent<s act o$ preparing the Occ pancy Agreement, despite ?no,ledge that Stier, being a $oreign national, is dis8 ali$ied to o,n real property in his name, constit tes serio s miscond ct and is a deliberate violation o$ the Code. Complainant prayed

that respondent be disbarred $or advising Stier to do something in violation o$ la, and assisting Stier in carrying o t a dishonest scheme. In his Comment dated %5 A g st '&&(, respondent claimed that complainant $iled the disbarment case against him pon the instigation o$ complainant<s co nsel, Atty. 7oni$acio A. Alenta/an,@ beca se respondent re$ sed to act as complainant<s ,itness in the criminal case against Stier and *aggay. Respondent admitted that he "prepared and notari-ed" the Occ pancy Agreement and asserted its gen ineness and d e e=ec tion. In a Resol tion dated % October '&&(, the Co rt re$erred the matter to the Integrated 7ar o$ the )hilippines !I7)# $or investigation, report and recommendation. The I3P4 Re%o&# an' Re"o,,en'a#(on In her Report dated '> ;ebr ary '&&+ !"Report"#, Commissioner *ilagros A. San 6 an !"Commissioner San 6 an"# o$ the I7) Commission on 7ar Discipline $o nd respondent liable $or ta?ing part in a "scheme to circ mvent the constit tional prohibition against $oreign o,nership o$ land in the )hilippines." Commissioner San 6 an recommended respondent<s s spension $rom the practice o$ la, $or t,o years and the cancellation o$ his commission as Notary ) blic. In Resol tion No. BAI.'&&+.''' dated %> April '&&+, the I7) 7oard o$ 4overnors adopted, ,ith modi$ication, the Report and recommended respondent<s s spension $rom the practice o$ la, $or si= months. On 'C 6 ne '&&+, the I7) 7oard o$ 4overnors $or,arded the Report to the Co rt as provided nder Section %'!b#, R le %(5.7C o$ the R les o$ Co rt. On 'C 6 ly '&&+, respondent $iled a motion $or reconsideration be$ore the I7). Respondent stated that he ,as already @> years old and ,o ld already retire by '&&0 a$ter the termination o$ his pending cases. De also said that his practice o$ la, is his only means o$ s pport $or his $amily and his si= minor children. In a Resol tion dated @ October '&&+, the I7) denied the motion $or reconsideration beca se the I7) had no more / risdiction on the case as the matter had already been re$erred to the Co rt. The Ru.(n/ o- #he Cou&# The Co rt $inds respondent liable $or violation o$ Canon % and R le %.&' o$ the Code. A la,yer sho ld not render any service or give advice to any client ,hich ,ill involve de$iance o$ the la,s ,hich he is bo nd to phold and obey. 5 A la,yer ,ho assists a client in a dishonest scheme or ,ho connives in violating the la, commits an act ,hich / sti$ies disciplinary action against the la,yer.%& 7y his o,n admission, respondent admitted that Stier, a 2.S. citi-en, ,as dis8 ali$ied $rom o,ning real property.%%3et, in his motion $or reconsideration,%' respondent admitted that he ca sed the trans$er o$ o,nership to the parcel o$ land to Stier. Respondent, ho,ever, a,are o$

the prohibition, 8 ic?ly recti$ied his act and trans$erred the title in complainant<s name. 7 t respondent provided "some sa$eg ards" by preparing several doc ments, %(incl ding the Occ pancy Agreement, that ,o ld g arantee Stier<s recognition as the act al o,ner o$ the property despite its trans$er in complainant<s name. In e$$ect, respondent advised and aided Stier in circ mventing the constit tional prohibition against $oreign o,nership o$ lands %+ by preparing said doc ments. Respondent had s,orn to phold the Constit tion. Th s, he violated his oath and the Code ,hen he prepared and notari-ed the Occ pancy Agreement to evade the la, against $oreign o,nership o$ lands. Respondent sed his ?no,ledge o$ the la, to achieve an nla,$ l end. S ch an act amo nts to malpractice in his o$$ice, $or ,hich he may be s spended.%0 In Balinon v. De Leon,%> respondent Atty. De Eeon ,as s spended $rom the practice o$ la, $or three years $or preparing an a$$idavit that virt ally permitted him to commit conc binage. In In re: Santiago,%@ respondent Atty. Santiago ,as s spended $rom the practice o$ la, $or one year $or preparing a contract ,hich declared the spo ses to be single again a$ter nine years o$ separation and allo,ed them to contract separately s bse8 ent marriages. 56ERE!ORE, ,e $ind respondent Atty. Emman el O. Tansingco GUILTY o$ violation o$ Canon % and R le %.&' o$ the Code o$ )ro$essional Responsibility. Accordingly, ,e SUSPEND respondent Atty. Emman el O. Tansingco $rom the practice o$ la, $or SI7 MONT6S e$$ective pon $inality o$ this Decision. Eet copies o$ this Decision be $ rnished the O$$ice o$ the 7ar Con$idant to be appended to respondent<s personal record as an attorney, the Integrated 7ar o$ the )hilippines, the Department o$ 6 stice, and all co rts in the co ntry $or their in$ormation and g idance. SO ORDERED.

S-ar putea să vă placă și