Collantes v.

Renomeron
SCR Ruling LEGETH Discussion
No. Ponente Person Involved When Where Details Issue Decision
A No.
35 A.C. PER Complainant: A complaint for disbarment is Whether or not YES. For his Attorney Vicente C. “A lawyer shall not
No. CURIAM Fernando T. charged by Collantes against Renomeron is guilty of misconduct as a public Renomeron be engage in conduct that
3056 decision Collantes Renomeron due to the Malpractice. official also constituted disbarred from the adversely reflects on
following offenses: a violation of his oath practice of law in the his fitness to practice
Respondent: 1. Neglecting or refusing as a lawyer. The Philippines, and that law, nor shall he,
Atty. Vicente inspite (sic) repeated lawyer’s oath (Rule his name be stricken whether in public or
C. Renomeron requests and without 138, Section 17, Rules off the Roll of private life, behave in a
sufficient justification, of Court: People vs. De Attorneys. scandalous manner to
to act within Luna, 102 Phil. 968), the discredit of the
reasonable time (sic) imposes upon every legal
the registration of 163 lawyer the duty to delay profession.” (Rule
Deeds of Absolute no man for money or 7.03, Code of
Sale with Assignment malice. The lawyer’s Professional
and the eventual oath is a source of his Responsibility.)
issuance and transfer obligations and its
of the corresponding violation is a ground
163 transfer for his suspension,
certificates of titles to disbarment or other
the GSIS, for the disciplinary action.
purpose of obtaining
some pecuniary or
material benefit from
the person or persons
interested therein.

2. Conduct unbecoming
of public official

3. Dishonesty.

4. Extortion.

5. Directly receiving
pecuniary or material
benefit for himself in
Collantes v. Renomeron
connection with
pending official
transaction before
him.

6. Causing undue injury

to a party, the GSIS
[or] Government
through manifest
partiality, evident bad
faith or gross
inexcusable
negligence.

7. Gross ignorance of the

law and procedure.”