Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 3K views

    Verified Answer Disbarment

    Uploaded by

    John Michael Babas
    1. Attorney Luna B. Avance filed a verified answer to an administrative disbarment case filed against her by Teresita D. Santeco, denying the allegations and raising several defenses. 2. Avance argues that she was not validly served the resolution at issue and that there was no clear and convincing evidence that she practiced law in violation of a court order. 3. Avance requests that the case be dismissed on equitable grounds, as disbarment would be an excessive penalty, and asks for leniency as she supports her sick family members.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Verified Answer Disbarment

    Uploaded by

    John Michael Babas
    3K views4 pages
    1. Attorney Luna B. Avance filed a verified answer to an administrative disbarment case filed against her by Teresita D. Santeco, denying the allegations and raising several defenses. 2. Avance argues that she was not validly served the resolution at issue and that there was no clear and convincing evidence that she practiced law in violation of a court order. 3. Avance requests that the case be dismissed on equitable grounds, as disbarment would be an excessive penalty, and asks for leniency as she supports her sick family members.

    Original Description:

    Verified Answer Disbarment

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Attorney Luna B. Avance filed a verified answer to an administrative disbarment case filed against her by Teresita D. Santeco, denying the allegations and raising several defenses. 2. Avance argues that she was not validly served the resolution at issue and that there was no clear and convincing evidence that she practiced law in violation of a court order. 3. Avance requests that the case be dismissed on equitable grounds, as disbarment would be an excessive penalty, and asks for leniency as she supports her sick family members.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    3K views4 pages

    Verified Answer Disbarment

    Uploaded by

    John Michael Babas
    1. Attorney Luna B. Avance filed a verified answer to an administrative disbarment case filed against her by Teresita D. Santeco, denying the allegations and raising several defenses. 2. Avance argues that she was not validly served the resolution at issue and that there was no clear and convincing evidence that she practiced law in violation of a court order. 3. Avance requests that the case be dismissed on equitable grounds, as disbarment would be an excessive penalty, and asks for leniency as she supports her sick family members.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 4

    REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES SUPREME COURT-EN BANC-Manila In re: Administrative/Disbarment Case filed by Teresita D. Santeco against Atty.

    Luna B. Avance docketed under Administrative Case No. 5834. VERIFIED ANSWER/COMMENT The undersigned respondent, Atty. Luna B. Avance, most respectfully depose and say, that: 1. Respondent admits the allegations of the complainant stated the defenses; 1.1. That Resolution dated September 29, 2009 was not duly served to the respondent as it was received by one Lota Cadete, who is unknown to the respondent, as stated in the complaint; 1.2. That rule on substituted service under Sec. 7, Rule 14, of the Rules of Court should have been complied with; 1.3. That disobedience to court order, which is a ground for disbarment or suspension, is impossible to be committed by the respondent since there was no valid service of such Resolution dated September 29, 2009; in the complaint/letter-affidavit but stated in numbers numbers _________________________, allegations specifically denies

    __________________________, and state the following

    1.4. That the allegation of appearing in court, specifically in the Sala of Honorable Judge Amog-Bocar, was not supported required with under clear the and Rules convincing on evidence, as to Evidence,

    constitute practice of law that would amount to consummation of alleged disobedience order; 1.5. That in the case of Advincula v. Macabata, the Supreme Court said that the burden of proof rests on the complainant, and she must establish the case against the respondent by clear, convincing and satisfactory proof, disclosing a case that is free from doubt as to compel the exercise by the Court of its disciplinary power. Thus, the adage that he who asserts not he who denies, must prove. As a basic rule in evidence, the burden of proof lies on the party who makes the allegationsei incumbit probation, qui decit, non qui negat; cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probation nulla sit. A mere charge or allegation of wrongdoing does not suffice. Accusation is not synonymous with guilt; 1.6. That in the same case of Advincula v. Macabata, it was ruled that The power to disbar or suspend ought always to be exercised on the preservative and not on the vindictive principle, with great caution and only for the most weighty reasons and only on clear cases of misconduct which seriously affect the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of the court and member of the Bar; 1.7. That in several cases (Luthar Schuls v. Atty. Flores, Villafuerte v. Cortez, Canoy v. Ortiz, In re: Atty. to court

    Briones, In re: Atty. Adriano) which is similar in the case at bar, the Supreme Court sanctioned the erring Attorneys suspension and not disbarment; 1.8. That negligence of respondent on not filing answer/comment timely and alleged violation, if any, was done in good faith and does not warrant disbarment; 2. In view of the foregoing, it is respectfully prayed that the case of disbarment be dismissed on ground of equity, as the penalty of disbarment is severe, harsh and excessive and not commensurate to the infraction he committed in good faith. Respondent further pleads to leniency and compassion, considering that he is the sole bread winner of her bed-ridden mother and sick sister. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I signed this answer/comment on the disbarment case this 27th day of February, 2013 at Makati City.

    ATTY. LUNA B. AVANCE Respondent, on behalf of herself, by herself No. 123 Binay St. Makati City SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, on this 27th day of February, 2013 here at Makati City, affiant exhibited to me his SSS ID No. 11232323 issued in Makati City. DOC. No. 122 Book no. 244

    Page No. 122 CONSTANCIA E. FAJARDO Notary Public Until December 31, 2013 PTR No. 176356713 ATTY. Roll No. 24873294 IBP OR No. 72625, Makati City

    You might also like