1. A.C. NO. 9881 (FORMERLY CBD 10-2607), JUNE 04, 2014, ATTY. ALAN F.
PAGUIA VS. ATTY. MANUEL T. MOLINA.
Answer:
The case involves a conflict between neighbors in a four-unit compound named
"Times Square" at Times Street, Quezon City. The Mr. And Mrs. Wilson Lim, clients
of Atty. Molina, entered into a contract covered by a document titled "Times
Square Preamble," establishes a set of internal rules for the neighbors on matters
such as the use of the common right of way to the exit gate, assignment of parking
areas, and security with the other unit owners. Mr. Abreu, the client of
complainant, Atty. Paguia, was not a party to the contract since the former did not
agree with the terms concerning the parking arrangements. On 4 February 2010,
Atty. Paguia filed a Complaint for Dishonesty with the IBP Commission on Bar
Discipline against Atty. Molina for allegedly giving legal advice to the latter’s
clients to the effect that the Times Square Preamble was binding on Mr. Abreu,
who was never a party to the contract. In his Answer, Atty. Molina downplayed the
case as a petty quarrel among neighbors. He maintained that the Times Square
Preamble was entered into for purposes of maintaining order in the residential
compound. All homeowners, except Mr. Abreu, signed the document. On 3 August
2010, Investigating Commissioner Victor C. Fernandez recommended dismissal for
lack of merit, based on the following grounds: 1) the complaint consisted only of
bare allegations; and 2) even assuming that respondent Molina gave an erroneous
legal advice, he could not be held accountable in the absence of proof of malice or
bad faith. On 14 May 2011, the IBP Board of Governors passed a Resolution
adopting and approving the Report and Recommendation of the Investigating
Commissioner. Atty. Paguia filed a Motion for Reconsideration dated 2 August
2011, but was denied by the IBP Board of Governors on 29 December 2012.
Issue: WON Atty. Molina is guilty of dishonesty for giving erroneous legal advice.
Held:
No. In the present case, we find that the Complaint is without factual basis.
Complainant Atty. Paguia charges Atty. Molina with providing legal advice to the
latter's clients to the effect that the Times Square Preamble is binding on
complainant's client, Mr. Abreu, who was not a... signatory to the agreement. The
allegation of giving legal advice, however, was not substantiated in this case,
either in the complaint or in the corresponding hearings. Nowhere do the records
state that Atty. Paguia saw respondent giving the legal advice to the clients of the
latter. Bare allegations are not proof.
Even if we assume that Atty. Molina did provide his clients legal advice, he still
cannot be held administratively liable without any showing that his act was
attended with bad faith or malice.
The default rule is presumption of good faith. On the other hand, bad faith is never
presumed. It is a conclusion to be drawn from facts. Its determination is thus a
question of fact and is evidentiary.
There is no evidence, though, to show that the... legal advice, assuming it was
indeed given, was coupled with bad faith, malice, or ill-will. The presumption of
good faith, therefore, stands in this case.
The foregoing considered, complainant failed to prove his case by clear
preponderance of evidence.
WHEREFORE, the Resolution of the IBP Board of Governors adopting and approving
the Decision of the Investigating Commissioner is hereby AFFIRMED.
