In Re - Suspension From The Practice of Law in The Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquera

IN RE: SUSPENSION FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN THE TERRITORY OF GUAM OF
ATTY. LEON G. MAQUERA
TOPIC: Canon 17
FACTS: The District Court of Guam informed this Court of the suspension of Atty. Leon G.
Maquera (Maquera) from the practice of law in Guam for two (2) years pursuant to the Decision
rendered by the Superior Court of Guam in a disciplinary case filed by the Guam Bar Ethics
Committee against Maquera.
Under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court, the disbarment or suspension of a
member of the Philippine Bar in a foreign jurisdiction, where he has also been admitted as an
attorney, is also a ground for his disbarment or suspension in this realm, provided the foreign
courts action is by reason of an act or omission constituting deceit, malpractice or other gross
misconduct, grossly immoral conduct, or a violation of the lawyers oath.
The IBP found that Maquera was admitted to the Philippine Bar on February 28, 1958. On
October 18, 1974, he was admitted to the practice of law in the territory of Guam. He was
suspended from the practice of law in Guam for misconduct, as he acquired his clients property
as payment for his legal services, then sold it and as a consequence obtained an unreasonably
high fee for handling his clients case.
The Guam Ethics Committee claimed that Maquera obtained an unreasonably high fee for his
services. The Committee further alleged that Maquera himself admitted his failure to comply
with the requirement in Rule 1.8 (a) of the Model Rules that a lawyer shall not enter into a
business transaction with a client or knowingly acquire a pecuniary interest adverse to a client
unless the transaction and the terms governing the lawyers acquisition of such interest are fair
and reasonable to the client, and are fully disclosed to, and understood by the client and
reduced in writing.
Maquera did not deny that Castro executed a quitclaim deed to the property in his favor as
compensation for past legal services and that the transaction, except for the deed itself, was
oral and was not made pursuant to a prior written agreement. However, he contended that the
transaction was made three days following the alleged termination of the attorney-client
relationship between them, and that the property did not constitute an exorbitant fee for his legal
services to Castro.
The IBP concluded that although the said court found Maquera liable for misconduct, there is no
evidence to establish that [Maquera] committed a breach of ethics in the Philippines.[26]
However, the IBP still resolved to suspend him indefinitely for his failure to pay his annual dues
as a member of the IBP since 1977, which failure is, in turn, a ground for removal of the name of
the delinquent member from the Roll of Attorneys under Section 10, Rule 139-A of the Revised
Rules of Court.
Section 27. Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by Supreme Court, grounds therefor.A

member of the bar may be disbarred or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme
Court for any deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral
conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any violation
of the oath which he is required to take before admission to practice, or for a willful
disobedience appearing as attorney for a party to a case without authority to do so. The practice
of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or
brokers, constitutes malpractice.
The disbarment or suspension of a member of the Philippine Bar by a competent court or other
disciplinatory agency in a foreign jurisdiction where he has also been admitted as an attorney is
a ground for his disbarment or suspension if the basis of such action includes any of the acts
hereinabove enumerated.
The judgment, resolution or order of the foreign court or disciplinary agency shall be prima facie
evidence of the ground for disbarment or suspension
ISSUE: May a member of the Philippine Bar who was disbarred or suspended from the practice
of law in a foreign jurisdiction where he has also been admitted as an attorney be meted the
same sanction as a member of the Philippine Bar for the same infraction committed in the
foreign jurisdiction?
HELD: Yes.
The Superior Court of Guam found that Maquera acquired his clients property by exercising the
right of redemption previously assigned to him by the client in payment of his legal services.
Such transaction falls squarely under Article 1492 in relation to Article 1491, paragraph 5 of the
Civil Code of the Philippines. Paragraph 5 of Article 1491[28] prohibits the lawyers acquisition by
assignment of the clients property which is the subject of the litigation handled by the lawyer.
Under Article 1492,[29] the prohibition extends to sales in legal redemption.
It bears stressing that the Guam Superior Courts judgment ordering Maqueras suspension from
the practice of law in Guam does not automatically result in his suspension or disbarment in the
Philippines. Under Section 27,[34] Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court, the acts which led to
his suspension in Guam are mere grounds for disbarment or suspension in this jurisdiction, at
that only if the basis of the foreign courts action includes any of the grounds for disbarment or
suspension in this jurisdiction.[35] Likewise, the judgment of the Superior Court of Guam only
constitutes prima facie evidence of Maqueras unethical acts as a lawyer.[36] More
fundamentally, due process demands that he be given the opportunity to defend himself and to
present testimonial and documentary evidence on the matter in an investigation to be conducted
in accordance with Rule 139-B of the Revised Rules of Court. Said rule mandates that a
respondent lawyer must in all cases be notified of the charges against him. It is only after
reasonable notice and failure on the part of the respondent lawyer to appear during the
scheduled investigation that an investigation may be conducted ex parte.[37]
The Court notes that Maquera has not yet been able to adduce evidence on his behalf
regarding the charges of unethical behavior in Guam against him, as it is not certain that he did
receive the Notice of Hearing earlier sent by the IBPs Commission on Bar Discipline. Thus,
there is a need to ascertain Maqueras current and correct address in Guam in order that
another notice, this time specifically informing him of the charges against him and requiring him
to explain why he should not be suspended or disbarred on those grounds (through this
Resolution), may be sent to him.
Nevertheless, the Court agrees with the IBP that Maquera should be suspended from the
practice of law for non-payment of his IBP membership dues from 1977 up to the present.[38]
Under Section 10, Rule 139-A of the Revised Rules of Court, non-payment of membership dues
for six (6) months shall warrant suspension of membership in the IBP, and default in such
payment for one year shall be ground for removal of the name of the delinquent member from
the Roll of Attorneys.
The Court must therefore determine whether Maqueras acts, namely: acquiring by assignment
Castros right of redemption over the property subject of the civil case where Maquera appeared
as counsel for him; exercising the right of redemption; and, subsequently selling the property for
a huge profit, violate Philippine law or the standards of ethical behavior for members of the
Philippine Bar and thus constitute grounds for his suspension or disbarment in this jurisdiction.

In Re - Suspension From The Practice of Law in The Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquera

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Re - Suspension From The Practice of Law in The Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquera

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

In Re - Suspension From The Practice of Law in The Territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquera

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN RE: SUSPENSION FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW IN THE TERRITORY OF GUAM OF

ATTY. LEON G. MAQUERA

Section 27. Disbarment or suspension of attorneys by Supreme Court, grounds therefor.A

You might also like