Barandon Jr. Vs Ferrer Sr.

Atty. Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr. Vs Atty. Edwin Z. Ferrer, Sr., A.C. No.
5768, March 26, 2010
Facts:
On January 11, 2001 complainant Atty. Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr. filed a complaint-affidavit with
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) seeking the
disbarment, suspension from the practice of law, or imposition of appropriate disciplinary
action against respondent Atty. Edwin Z. Ferrer for the following offenses:
1. On November 22, 2000 Atty. Ferrer, as plaintiff‘s counsel in Civil Case 7040, filed a reply
with opposition to motion to dismiss that contained abusive, offensive, and improper
language which insinuated that Atty. Barandon presented a falsified document in court.
2. Atty. Ferrer filed a fabricated charge against Atty. Barandon in Civil Case 7040 for alleged
falsification of public document when the document allegedly falsified was a notarized
document executed on February 23, 1994, at a date when Atty. Barandon was not yet a
lawyer nor was assigned in Camarines Norte. The latter was not even a signatory to the
document.
3. On December 19, 2000, at the courtroom of Municipal Trial Court (MTC) Daet before the
start of hearing, Atty. Ferrer, evidently drunk, threatened Atty. Barandon saying, "Laban
kung laban, patayan kung patayan, kasama ang lahat ng pamilya. Wala na palang
magaling na abogado sa Camarines Norte, ang abogado na rito ay mga taga-Camarines
Sur, umuwi na kayo sa Camarines Sur, hindi kayo taga-rito."
4. Atty. Ferrer made his accusation of falsification of public document without bothering to
check the copy with the Office of the Clerk of Court and, with gross ignorance of the law,
failed to consider that a notarized document is presumed to be genuine and authentic
until proven otherwise.
5. The Court had warned Atty. Ferrer in his first disbarment case against repeating his
unethical act; yet he faces a disbarment charge for sexual harassment of an office
secretary of the IBP Chapter in Camarines Norte; a related criminal case for acts of
lasciviousness; and criminal cases for libel and grave threats that Atty. Barandon filed
against him. In October 2000, Atty. Ferrer asked Atty. Barandon to falsify the daily time
record of his son who worked with the Commission on Settlement of Land Problems,
Department of Justice. When Atty. Barandon declined, Atty. Ferrer repeatedly harassed
him with inflammatory language.
Issue:
1. Whether or not, the IBP Board of Governors and the IBP Investigating Commissioner erred in
finding respondent Atty. Ferrer guilty of the charges against him?
2. Whether or not, if in the affirmative, whether or not the penalty imposed on him is
justified?
Ruling:
No. The IBP Board of Governors and the IBP Investigating Commissioner did not erred in finding
respondent Atty. Ferrer guilty of the charges against him.
Under theCanon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility commands all lawyers to conduct
themselves with courtesy, fairness and candor towards their fellow lawyers and avoid harassing
tactics against opposing counsel. Specifically, in Rule 8.01, the Code provides:
Rule 8.01. – A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is abusive,
offensive or otherwise improper.
Atty. Ferrer‘s actions do not measure up to this Canon. The evidence shows that he imputed to
Atty. Barandon the falsification of the Salaysay Affidavit of the plaintiff in Civil Case 7040. He
made this imputation with pure malice for he had no evidence that the affidavit had been
falsified and that Atty. Barandon
authored the same.
Moreover, Atty. Ferrer could have aired his charge of falsification in a proper forum and
without using offensive and abusive language against a fellow lawyer.
The Court has constantly reminded lawyers to use dignified language in their pleadings despite
the adversarial nature of our legal system.
Atty. Ferrer had likewise violated Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which
enjoins lawyers to uphold the dignity and integrity of the legal profession at all times. Rule 7.03
of the Code provides:
Rule 7.03. – A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflect on his fitness to practice
law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life behave in scandalous manner to the discredit
of the legal profession.
Though a lawyer‘s language may be forceful and emphatic, it should always be dignified and
respectful, befitting the dignity of the legal
profession. The use of intemperate language and unkind ascriptions has no place in the dignity
of judicial forum.
All lawyers should take heed that they are licensed officers of the courts who are mandated to
maintain the dignity of the legal profession, hence they must conduct themselves honorably
and fairly.Atty. Ferrer‘s display of improper attitude, arrogance, misbehavior, and misconduct in
the performance of his duties both as a lawyer and officer of the court, before the public and
the court, was a patent transgression of the very ethics that lawyers are sworn to uphold.
ACCORDINGLY, the Court AFFIRMS the May 22, 2008 Resolution of the IBP Board of Governors
in CBD Case 01-809 and ORDERS the suspension of Atty. Edwin Z. Ferrer, Sr. from the practice of
law for one year effective upon his receipt of this Decision.

Barandon Jr. Vs Ferrer Sr.

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Barandon Jr. Vs Ferrer Sr.

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Atty. Bonifacio T. Barandon, Jr. Vs Atty. Edwin Z. Ferrer, Sr., A.C. No.

5768, March 26, 2010

You might also like