FIRST DIVISION

[A.C. No. 11131. March 13, 2019.]

DENNIS M. MAGUSARA , petitioner, vs. ATTY. LOUIE A. RASTICA ,

respondent.

DECISION

JARDELEZA , J : p

This is a disbarment complaint 1 led by Dennis M. Magusara (complainant) on

March 1, 2011 before the Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP-CBD) charging Atty. Louie A. Rastica (respondent) of violating Section
20 (d), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. 2

The Facts

On November 14, 2007, Yap-Siton Law O ce led a formal complaint before the
Commission on Elections (COMELEC) on behalf of its client Ramie P. Fabillar (Ramie),
charging complainant of committing an election offense punishable under Section 261,
paragraph (e) of the Omnibus Election Code. 3 Attached to the formal complaint are
Ramie's Complaint-A davit, 4 his medical certi cate, 5 a police blotter, 6 and Wilson
Fabillar's (Wilson) a davit. 7 Ramie's complaint-a davit and Wilson's a davit were
subscribed and sworn to before respondent. On February 10, 2008, Ramie led an
A davit of Desistance 8 before the COMELEC, claiming that he was surprised to nd
that there was a complaint for election offense against complainant supposedly led
by him. He narrated that he thought that what he signed was a complaint for grave
coercion against complainant. Since the contents of the complaint-a davit prepared
by respondent were not translated to him in the local dialect, he did not understand its
meaning when he signed the same. According to complainant, this alleged act of
respondent violated Section 20 (d), 9 Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
To support the present complaint, complainant attached several documents
which appear to be pleadings and supporting documents he submitted before the IBP
Negros Oriental Chapter in relation to a 2008 disbarment complaint he led against
respondent. Among these documents are: (1) two a davits 1 0 executed by Wilson
dated December 7, 2007 and August 5, 2008, respectively, showing different signatures
appearing above his name; (2) a manifestation 1 1 dated February 21, 2011 where
complainant reiterated his allegations in the 2008 disbarment complaint and accused
IBP Negros Oriental Chapter of causing delay in the proceedings for releasing the
resolution only after two years and six months from the ling of the complaint; and (3)
two documents 1 2 allegedly notarized by respondent despite the expiration of his
notarial commission.
In his answer, 1 3 respondent maintains that the allegations are baseless and the
present complaint should be dismissed outright for lack of a certi cation of non-forum
shopping. He claims that the present complaint was instituted by complainant as
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
 revenge for having been defeated by respondent's mother in the election for barangay
chairperson. Respondent pointed out that the facts stated in the complaint-a davit are
similar to those which are declared in the police and barangay blotters attached therein,
and to the complaint-a davit 1 4 led before the Provincial Prosecutor's O ce
charging complainant of grave coercion. Aside from these, the facts and circumstances
attested to by Ramie in his complaint-a davit for the election offense were
corroborated by Wilson's a davit, which was subscribed and sworn to before
Prosecutor Violeta Baldado. Moreover, Ramie graduated from high school and worked
in Metro Manila. His education and work experience show that he is capable of
managing his affairs; thus, he cannot disavow knowledge and understanding of the
contents of his complaint-a davit in the election offense. Lastly, the divergence in the
a davits of desistance Ramie executed shows the in uence and deceitful intentions of
complainant. In the a davit of desistance dated February 4, 2008 Ramie led in the
grave coercion case, he said that he was "doubtful of [his] actuations that [he was] also
a paredelicto and that being neighbor and friend, [he] absolutely withdraw the case." 1 5
On the other hand, in the a davit of desistance dated February 10, 2008 Ramie led
before the COMELEC, the reason he gave for desisting was "I was only made to sign the
Complaint-A davit and the same was not translated to me, and the person who
prepared the [same] is the son of Brgy. Chairman Lorna Rastica, Atty. Louie Rastica and
the same was not translated x x x in local dialect so as I can understand." 1 6 As
clari cation, he presented an a davit executed by Ramie on August 5, 2008 where the
latter stated that he fully understood the contents of the complaint-a davit for the
election offense. 1 7
On June 22, 2011, complainant led his preliminary conference brief, where aside
from violation of Section 20 (d), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, he included as issue the
alleged notarization of respondent without authority. 1 8
On September 9, 2011, complainant filed before the IBP-CBD a verified complaint
"in compliance" with the order of the Investigation Commissioner during the August 19,
2011 hearing. In this veri ed complaint, complainant accused respondent of violating
notarial laws and rules. Notably, the description of the two documents allegedly
notarized without authority is similar to the two documents presented in the 2008
disbarment complaint filed before the IBP Negros Oriental Chapter. 1 9
During the scheduled clari catory hearing, only respondent appeared. 2 0 Both
parties failed to submit position papers.
In his Report and Recommendation dated November 14, 2012, Investigating
Commissioner Oliver A. Cachapero (Commissioner Cachapero) recommended the
dismissal of the complaint against respondent for lack of merit. He noted that Ramie
graduated from high school, where the English language is the medium of instruction.
As such, he "must have been equipped with the basic learning of the said language and
must have fair understanding of the same whether written or spoken." 2 1 It is, thus,
incredible that he was aware of the contents of the complaint-a davit in the grave
coercion case he executed and led which is written in the English language, yet not
have any knowledge of the contents of a similar complaint for election offense he led
against complainant. Further, Ramie in his a davit 2 2 dated August 5, 2008 has already
clari ed that he understood the contents of the complaint-a davit for election offense.
There is, thus, no su cient evidence showing respondent's supposed breach of his
ethical duties. 2 3 No discussion was made regarding the alleged notarization of
documents without authority.
The IBP Board of Governors adopted and approved the recommendation to
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
 dismiss the complaint in Resolution No. XX-2013-250. 2 4 Complainant, however, led a
motion for reconsideration, alleging that the IBP Board of Governors erred in not taking
into consideration the fact that respondent engaged in notarial practice without
authority. 2 5
On May 3, 2014, the IBP Board of Governors issued Resolution No. XXI-2014-245
26 where it resolved to grant complainant's motion for reconsideration. The Board of
Governors found that respondent notarized two documents prior to the approval of his
notarial commission. Accordingly, it disquali ed respondent from being commissioned
as a notary public for a period of two years and ordered the revocation of his notarial
commission, if existing.
Respondent led a motion for reconsideration. 2 7 He claims that he was not
given the chance to be heard and defend himself because: (1) the issue on the
notarization of documents without authority was not part of the original complaint; and
(2) no investigation was ever held to give him an opportunity to verify the authenticity of
the alleged documents notarized without authority. 2 8

The Court's Ruling

We do not agree with the IBP Board of Governors.

At the outset, we note, through complainant's own submissions, that he led two
complaints against respondent. The rst is the 2008 disbarment complaint for
violation of the rules on notarial practice led before the IBP Negros Oriental Chapter.
The second is the present complaint for violation of Section 20 (d), Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court filed before the IBP-CBD.
We agree with Commissioner Cachapero's nding that there was no substantial
evidence to prove that respondent violated Section 20 (d), Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court. Respondent's narration of facts and the documentary evidence he presented,
especially the a davit of Ramie clarifying that he understood the contents of the
subject complaint-affidavit, substantiated his claim of innocence.
We also agree with the Commissioner Cachapero in excluding the allegation that
respondent engaged in notarial practice despite the expiration of his notarial
commission in his resolution of the complaint. A review of complainant's pleadings
shows that this issue, along with the documents submitted to support the charge
(speci cally the compromise agreement between the Municipal Treasurer of Bindoy,
Negros Oriental and Felix Villanueva, Jr. and the veri cation executed by Kristie Marie E.
Fernandez), 2 9 were already subject of an earlier investigation by the IBP Negros
Oriental Chapter. The records also show that the IBP-CBD did not order the
consolidation of these two complaints. From these, it is apparent that the inclusion of
the additional issue (i.e., notarizing documents without authority) in resolving this
complaint would result in a situation where two separate complaints are led against
respondent by the same complainant concerning the same offense based on the same
set of facts.
There is forum shopping when two or more actions or proceedings involving the
same parties for the same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, on
the supposition that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition. 3 0 To
include this additional ground in the present complaint would constitute forum
shopping as the same is similar to complainant's cause of action in the 2008
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
 disbarment complaint he led against respondent. Therefore, we nd that the IBP
Board of Governors erred when it took into consideration the additional ground, which,
to repeat, is identical to the charge in an earlier disbarment complaint.
In essence, we nd that respondent was able to refute complainant's claim that
he violated Section 20 (d), Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. The additional charge of
violating notarial rules, on the other hand, is already subject of an earlier disbarment
proceeding. Consequently, there is no basis to impose disciplinary action against
respondent at this time. The proceedings in the 2008 disbarment complaint led
before the IBP Negros Oriental Chapter against respondent should be allowed to run its
course to determine the latter's culpability as to the charge that he notarized
documents without authority. This will also prevent the situation of two or more courts
or agencies rendering con icting resolutions or decisions upon the same issue 3 1 and
ensure that the proceedings for the disbarment and discipline of attorneys are
followed. The procedures outlined by Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court are meant to
ensure that the innocents are spared from wrongful condemnation and that only the
guilty are meted their just due. Obviously, these requirements cannot be taken lightly. 3 2
The Court will exercise its disciplinary power only after observing due process
and upon showing of lawyer's administrative guilt by clear, convincing, and satisfactory
evidence. This norm is aimed at preserving the integrity and reputation of the Law
Profession, and at shielding lawyers, in general, due to their being o cers themselves
of the Court. 3 3 Further, ling multiple petitions or complaints constitutes abuse of
court processes, which tends to degrade the administration of justice, wreaks havoc
upon orderly judicial procedure, and adds to the congestion of the heavily burdened
dockets of the courts. 3 4
The public must be reminded that lawyers are professionals bound to observe
and follow the strictest ethical canons. Subjecting them to frivolous, unfounded, and
vexatious charges of misconduct and misbehavior will cause not only disservice to the
ideals of justice, but a disregard of the Constitution and the laws to which all lawyers
vow their enduring fealty. 3 5
WHEREFORE , Resolution No. XXI-2014-245 dated May 3, 2014 of the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines Board of Governors is SET ASIDE . The complaint led against
Atty. Louie A. Rastica is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit.
SO ORDERED .
Bersamin, C.J., Del Castillo, Gesmundo and Carandang, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

1. Rollo, pp. 3-6.

2. This disbarment complaint shall be hereinafter referred to as the present complaint.

3. Rollo, p. 48.
4. Id. at 49-50.
5. Id. at 52.

6. Id. at 51.
7. Id. at 53-54.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
 8. Id. at 7.
9. Sec. 20. Duties of attorneys. — It is the duty of an attorney:

xxx xxx xxx

  (d) To employ, for the purpose of maintaining the causes confided to him, such means
only as are consistent with truth and honor, and never seek to mislead the judge or any
judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law[.]
10. Rollo, pp. 12-13, 14-15.

11. Id. at 24-26.

12. The first document is a compromise agreement between the Municipal Treasurer of Bindoy,
Negros oriental and Felix Villanueva, Jr. (Id. at 16-17). The second document is a
verification executed by Kristie Marie E. Fernandez (Id. at 18).

13. Id. at 29-40.

14. Id. at 42-43.
15. Sic. Id. at 73.

16. Sic. Id. at 7.

17. Id. at 74-75.

18. Id. at 82.

19. Id. at 96.

20. Id. at 103-104.

21. Id. at 112.
22. Id. at 74-75.

23. Id. at 112-113.

24. Id. at 108.

25. Id. at 114-115.

26. Id. at 131-132.

27. Id. at 150-153.

28. Id.
29. See footnotes 12 and 19.

30. De la Cruz v. Joaquin, G.R. No. 162788, July 28, 2005, 464 SCRA 576, 587.
31. Pena v. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298, June 25, 2007, 525 SCRA 444, 454.

32. Cottam v. Laysa, A.C. No. 4834, February 29, 2000, 326 SCRA 614, 619.
33. Domingo v. Rubio, A.C. No. 7927, October 19, 2016, 806 SCRA 411, 422.

34. Pena v. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298, June 25, 2007, 525 SCRA 444, 454.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com
 35. Domingo v. Rubio, supra.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. 2019 cdasiaonline.com