1) The respondent, a former personnel manager and retained counsel of Taggat Industries, was charged with violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility for his role in investigating and deciding a criminal complaint filed by Taggat employees against the daughter of a former Taggat president.
2) While the Court found no conflict of interest since respondent had resigned from Taggat years prior, it did find him liable for unlawfully engaging in private practice as a government prosecutor, which was prohibited.
3) As a result, the Court suspended the respondent from practice for 6 months for violating the rule against unlawful conduct.
1) The respondent, a former personnel manager and retained counsel of Taggat Industries, was charged with violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility for his role in investigating and deciding a criminal complaint filed by Taggat employees against the daughter of a former Taggat president.
2) While the Court found no conflict of interest since respondent had resigned from Taggat years prior, it did find him liable for unlawfully engaging in private practice as a government prosecutor, which was prohibited.
3) As a result, the Court suspended the respondent from practice for 6 months for violating the rule against unlawful conduct.
1) The respondent, a former personnel manager and retained counsel of Taggat Industries, was charged with violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility for his role in investigating and deciding a criminal complaint filed by Taggat employees against the daughter of a former Taggat president.
2) While the Court found no conflict of interest since respondent had resigned from Taggat years prior, it did find him liable for unlawfully engaging in private practice as a government prosecutor, which was prohibited.
3) As a result, the Court suspended the respondent from practice for 6 months for violating the rule against unlawful conduct.
RUTHIE LIM-SANTIAGO, Complainant, vs. ATTY. CARLOS B. guilty of representing conflicting interests. Respondent, SAGUCIO, Respondent. being the former Personnel Manager and Retained CARPIO, J.: Counsel of Taggat, knew the operations of Taggat very well. Respondent should have inhibited himself from DOCTRINE: the law does not distinguish between consultancy services hearing, investigating and deciding the case filed by and retainer agreement. For as long as respondent performed acts that Taggat employees. are usually rendered by lawyers with the use of their legal knowledge, the b. Engaging in the private practice of law while working as a same falls within the ambit of the term "practice of law." government prosecutor- Engaging in the private practice of law while working as a government prosecutor. He NATURE: Disbarment complaint received retainer’s fees which respondent claims to only FACTS: consultation fees. 1. Ruthie Lim-Santiago ("complainant") is the daughter of Alfonso 6. Complainant seeks the disbarment of respondent for the violations Lim and Special Administratrix of his estate. Alfonso Lim is a committed. stockholder and the former President of Taggat Industries, Inc, a 7. Respondent claims that when the criminal complaint was filed, domestic corporation engaged in the operation of timber respondent had resigned from Taggat for more than five years and concessions from the government. PCGG sequestered it and its refutes complainant’s allegations and counters that complainant operations ceased. was merely aggrieved by the resolution of the criminal complaint 2. Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio ("respondent") was the former Personnel which was adverse and contrary to her expectation. Manager and Retained Counsel of Taggat Industries, Inc. until his 8. Respondent points out that complainant did not file a motion to appointment as Assistant Provincial Prosecutor of Tuguegarao, inhibit respondent from hearing the criminal complaint and states Cagayan. that complainant’s reason in not filing a motion to inhibit was her 3. employees of Taggat ("Taggat employees") filed a criminal impression that respondent would exonerate her from the charges complaint entitled "Jesus Tagorda, Jr. et al. v. Ruthie Lim- filed Santiago," docketed as I.S. No. 97-240 ("criminal complaint"). 9. While this disbarment case was pending, the Resolution and Taggat employees alleged that complainant, who took over the Order issued by respondent to file 651 Informations against management and control of Taggat after the death of her father, complainant was reversed and set aside by Regional State withheld payment of their salaries and wages without valid cause Prosecutor. Hence, the criminal complaint was dismissed. 4. Respondent, as Assistant Provincial Prosecutor, was assigned to conduct the preliminary investigation. He resolved the criminal ISSUE: Whether or not respondent was engaged in private practice of complaint by recommending the filing of 651 Informations for law while being a public official. violation of Article 288 in relation to Article 116 of the Labor Code of the Philippines. YES. Government prosecutors are prohibited to engage in the private 5. Complainant now charges respondent with the following violations: practice of law. The act of being a legal consultant is a practice of law. To engage in the practice of law is to do any of those acts that are characteristic of the legal profession. It covers any activity, in or out of court, which required the application of law, legal principles, practice or In the present case, we find no conflict of interests when respondent procedures and calls for legal knowledge, training and experience. handled the preliminary investigation of the criminal complaint filed by Taggat employees in 1997. The issue in the criminal complaint pertains to ISSUE: whether being a former lawyer of Taggat conflicts with his non-payment of wages that occurred from 1 April 1996 to 15 July 1997. role as Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Clearly, respondent was no longer connected with Taggat during that period since he resigned sometime in 1992. HELD: YES. A lawyer owes something to a former client. Herein Respondent owes to Taggat, a former client, the duty to "maintain inviolate However, the Court finds respondent liable for violation of Rule 1.01, the client’s confidence or to refrain from doing anything which will Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility against unlawful injuriously affect him in any matter in which he previously represented conduct. 42 Respondent committed unlawful conduct when he violated him." Section 7(b)(2) of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees or Republic Act No. 6713 ("RA 6713"). I.S. No. 97-240 was filed for "Violation of Labor Code" (see Resolution of the Provincial Prosecutors Office, Annex "B" of Complaint). Herein Respondent is mandated under Rule 1.01 of Canon 1 not to engage in Complainant, Ruthie Lim-Santiago, was being accused as having the "unlawful x x x conduct." Unlawful conduct includes violation of the "management and control" of Taggat. Clearly, as a former Personnel statutory prohibition on a government employee to "engage in the private Manager and Legal Counsel of Taggat, herein Respondent undoubtedly practice of [his] profession unless authorized by the Constitution or law, handled the personnel and labor concerns of Taggat. Respondent, provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with [his] undoubtedly dealt with and related with the employees of Taggat. official functions." Therefore, Respondent undoubtedly dealt with and related with complainants in I.S. No. 97-240. WHEREFORE, we find respondent Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio GUILTY of violation of Rule 1.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. It should not be forgotten, however, that a lawyer has an immutable duty Accordingly, we SUSPEND respondent Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio from the to a former client with respect to matters that he previously handled for practice of law for SIX MONTHS effective upon finality of this Decision. that former client. In this case, matters relating to personnel, labor policies, and labor relations that he previously handled as Personnel Manager and Legal Counsel of Taggat. I.S. No. 97-240 was for "Violation of the Labor Code." Here lies the conflict. Perhaps it would have been different had I.S. No. 97-240 not been labor-related, or if Respondent had not been a Personnel Manager concurrently as Legal Counsel. But as it is, I.S. No. 97-240 is labor-related and Respondent was a former Personnel Manager of Taggat.
RULING. The Court exonerates respondent from the charge of violation of
Rule 15.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (conflicting interest.)