Rogelio H. Villanueva vs. Atty. Amado B.

Deloria

FACTS: A disbarment complaint against Atty. Deloria filed by Villanueva in connection with the case De Gracia Vs. estate of Jaime Gonzales. Deloria acts as counsel of De Gracia In the De Gracia case the estate of Jaime Gonzales was required to pay the De Gracia with P69,000 with interest, but Atty. Deloria filed a motion for Issuance of Substitute Judgment claiming that the estate of Jaime Gonzales does not want to pay. Atty. Delorias misinterpretation is allegedly a violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility, particularly Canons 1, 10, 12, 19, and 11 because he sought the substitution of a decision which he knew had already become final and executory Moreover, according o Villanueva, Atty. Deloria offered him 50% of the recoverable amount in the case if he resolves the latters motions favorably Atty. Delorias conduct allegedly violates previously cited Cannons of the Code, Cannon 13 and 15, Rule 15.06, Art. 212 of RPC, Attorneys Oath of Office and Art. 19 of RPC Case was referred to IBP, Atty. Deloria was recommended for suspension of practice for 2 years and a fine of P20,000. But investigating officer did not conduct a hearing to hear both parties.

HELD Complaints against lawyers are normally addressed to the Court. If court sees that case needs more inquiry it will refer it to the IBP Instant administrative case is REMANDED to IBP for further proceedings.