A.C. No. 1741 - DECEMBER 1984 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE A.C. No. 1741December 26,1984Agustin S. Vitualla, Sr. vs. Wenceslao I. Ponferrada A.C. No. 1858December 26, 1984Anatalio Solidum vs. Cesar Sta. Maria A.C. No. 1613December 26, 1984Andres B. Morales. vs. Dionisio Maneja, Jr. G. R. No. L-51084December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Carlito F. Dunca G.R. No. L-27735December 26, 1984Lamberto Tan vs. Republic of the Philippines G.R. No. L-30805December 26, 1984Domingo Ang vs. Compañía Maritima, , et al. G.R. No. L-37652December 26, 1984Virginia B. Prado vs. People of the Phil., et al. G.R. No. L-38308December 26, 1984Milagros Donio-Teves, et al. vs. Cipriano Vamenta, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-42505December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Angel Manalo, et al. G.R. No. L-43280December 26, 1984Florentino R. Matta vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-43554December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-45292December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Jose Prudente, et al. G.R. No. L-47940December 26, 1984Heirs of Moro Balabagan, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. L-48070December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Medardo C. Castelo G.R. No. L-48669December 26, 1984Perfecto De Vera vs. Employees' Compensation Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-49395December 26, 1984Green Valley Poultry & Allied Products, Inc. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. L-50340December 26, 1984Director of Lands vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-52064December 26, 1984Juliana Caragay-Layno vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-52305December 26, 1984Angela Martir Vda. De Guanzon vs. Odon C. Yrad, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-55252December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Marcial Abucay, et al. G.R. No. L-55950December 26, 1984Lourdes R. Ramos, et al. vs. Our Lady of Peace School, et al. G.R. No. L-58530December 26, 1984Concordia Astorga, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-59221December 26, 1984Engineering Equipment, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-59664December 26, 1984Patrocinio Santulan, et al. vs. Hector C. Fule, et al. G.R. No. L-59758December 26, 1984Advertising Associates, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals , et al. G.R. No. L-60092December 26, 1984Encarnacion C. Lumantas, et al. vs. Commission on Elections, et al. G.R. No. L-61623December 26, 1984People's Homesite & Housing Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-62095December 26, 1984Eligio C. Dajao, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-62925December 26, 1984Manila Banking Corporation vs. Tmbc Emp. Council, et al. G.R. No. L-63510December 26, 1984Aurelio Aleman vs. Melecio Genato, et al. G.R. No. L-64261December 26, 1984Jose Burgos, Sr., et al. vs. Chief of Staff, et al. G.R. No. L-65334December 26, 1984Municipality of Antipolo vs. Aquilina Zapanta, et al. G.R. No. L-65424December 26, 1984People of the Philippines vs. Anselmo Germino, et al. G.R. No. L-67145December 26, 1984Aurea M. Nerona, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. L-68568December 26, 1984Gimenez Stockbrokerage and Company vs. Securities and Exchange Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-66782December 20, 1984Eliodoro Ponio vs. Intermediate Appellate Court G.R. No. L-26969December 19, 1984Carpio Phua, et al. vs. Board of Commissioners G.R. No. L-55684December 19, 1984Chrysler Philippines Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-60015December 19, 1984Patrick Chua Peng Hian vs. Court of Appeals G.R. Nos. L-55245-46December 19, 1984Jesus A. Ramos vs. Court of First Instance of Zamboanga Del Norte, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Agustin S. Vitualla, Sr. vs. Wenceslao I. PonferradaAnatalio Solidum vs. Cesar Sta. MariaAndres B. Morales. vs. Dionisio Maneja, Jr.People of the Philippines vs. Carlito F. DuncaLamberto Tan vs. Republic of the PhilippinesDomingo Ang vs. Compañía Maritima, , et al.Virginia B. Prado vs. People of the Phil., et al.Milagros Donio-Teves, et al. vs. Cipriano Vamenta, Jr., et al.People of the Philippines vs. Angel Manalo, et al.Florentino R. Matta vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Jose Prudente, et al.Heirs of Moro Balabagan, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Medardo C. CasteloPerfecto De Vera vs. Employees' Compensation Commission, et al.Green Valley Poultry & Allied Products, Inc. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.Director of Lands vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Juliana Caragay-Layno vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Angela Martir Vda. De Guanzon vs. Odon C. Yrad, Jr., et al.People of the Philippines vs. Marcial Abucay, et al.Lourdes R. Ramos, et al. vs. Our Lady of Peace School, et al.Concordia Astorga, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Engineering Equipment, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al.Patrocinio Santulan, et al. vs. Hector C. Fule, et al.Advertising Associates, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals , et al.Encarnacion C. Lumantas, et al. vs. Commission on Elections, et al.People's Homesite & Housing Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Eligio C. Dajao, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Manila Banking Corporation vs. Tmbc Emp. Council, et al.Aurelio Aleman vs. Melecio Genato, et al.Jose Burgos, Sr., et al. vs. Chief of Staff, et al.Municipality of Antipolo vs. Aquilina Zapanta, et al.People of the Philippines vs. Anselmo Germino, et al.Aurea M. Nerona, et al. vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al.Gimenez Stockbrokerage and Company vs. Securities and Exchange Commission, et al.Eliodoro Ponio vs. Intermediate Appellate CourtCarpio Phua, et al. vs. Board of CommissionersChrysler Philippines Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al.Patrick Chua Peng Hian vs. Court of AppealsJesus A. Ramos vs. Court of First Instance of Zamboanga Del Norte, et al.The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
A.C. No. 1741 December 26,1984
AGUSTIN S. VITUALLA, SR., deceased, substituted by his son, ANDRES V. VITUALLA,complainant,
vs.
WENCESLAO I. PONFERRADA,respondent.
AQUINO,J.:
The question in this case is whether disciplinary action should be taken against respondent Wenceslao I. Ponferrada for his alleged failureto appeal the judgment of convictionin a case of slight physical injuries rendered against his client complainant Agustin S. Vitualla, Sr.
Ponferrada claims that Vitualla never told him to appeal the conviction. Even if he was requested to appeal, he would have politely denied the request.
The fistic encounter between Vitualla and Jaime Tano, two sexagenarians, in the public market of Mangagoy, Bislig, Surigao del Sur at about six-thirty in the morning of May 20, 1976 spawned three cases: one case oflesiones levesand another case of grave oral defamation filed by Tano against Vitualla and one counter-charge oflesiones levesfiled by Vitualla against Tano. Ponferrada was Vitualla's counsel in the three cases.
They were tried jointly by the municipal court of Bislig on August 4 and 5, 1976. A decision dated December 13, 1976 was promulgated on December 21 or 23, 1976. Two of the cases were dismissed but Vitualla was convicted oflesiones levesand sentenced to pay a fine of P50 with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
After the promulgation of the decision and in the presence of the judge and some court employees, Vitualla shook hands with Tano and distributed candies among the persons present. However, he realized sometime later that the stigma of conviction was not good for a man in his position: a prosperous businessman with properties and a drugstore and blessed with six children, two of whom are doctors, three are engineers and one a pharmacy graduate. His wife found him moody and disturbed at lunchtime,
There is no question that Ponferrada did not appeal the judgment of conviction. The factual issue, on which the parties introduced voluminous oral evidence (more voluminous than the evidence introduced in the criminal cases) was whether Vituallarequested Ponferrada to appealand the latter did not comply with that request.
We find that the preponderance of the evidence shows that Ponferrada was told to appeal but, to suit his purpose, he did not do so. To avoid subsidiary imprisonment, Vitualla had to pay the fine of P50 on January 17, 1977, more than three weeks after the decision (Exh. J). He wrote the following note (with its misspellings) on his copy of the decision (Exh. K):
This decision was given last Dec. 23/77, my legal council promised to file in the Court of First Instance before 15 days. My legal council disappeared unknown residence Complainant Agustin S. Vitualla Sr. (sic).ℒαwρhi৷
Ponferrada said that he would appeal on or before January 15, 1977 but on that date he could not be contacted by Vitualla at his residence. Anyway, the 15-day period had already expired,
Vitualla paid Ponferrada P2,000 for his services. On February 12, 1977 he wrote a letter sent by registered mail to Ponferrada but it was returned to the sender as unclaimed. In that letter, Vitualla asked for the refund of P1,400 on the ground that Ponferrada's services were worth only P600 (Exh. F, p. 56, Rollo).
He filed this disbarment case on April 6, 1977. He died during the pendency of the case on December 12, 1979. His eldest son was substituted for him. The persistence of Vitualla and his heirs in prosecuting this case is one indication that he was telling the truth when he said that Ponferrada reneged on his commitment to appeal the decision in thelesiones levescase.
All that Ponferrada was to do was to file in the municipal court a one-sentence notice of appeal. He did not have to handle the appeal. He could have advised Vitualla that he was filing the notice of appeal against his better judgment if in his opinion the appeal would not be prosper. After all, the appeal may be withdrawn later, But the point is that he did not perform the simple task of appealing for reasons known only to himself.
WHEREFORE,respondent Ponferrada is severely censured. He is warned that a more drastic penalty will be imposed on him for subsequent misconduct as a lawyer. A copy of this decision should be attached to his file in the Bar Confidant's office.
SO ORDERED.
Makasiar (Chairman), Concepcion, Jr., Abad Santos, Escolin and Cuevas, JJ., concur.