PATRICK A. CARONAN v. RICHARD A. CARONAN A.K.A. "ATTY. PATRICK A. CARONAN
A.C. No. 11316, July 12, 2016
Facts:
Complainant and respondent are siblings. Respondent is the older of the two. Both of them completed their secondary education at the Makati High School. Upon his graduation, complainant enrolled at the University of Makati where he obtained a degree in Business Administration in 1997.
Complainant and respondent are siblings. Respondent is the older of the two. Both of them completed their secondary education at the Makati High School. Upon his graduation, complainant enrolled at the University of Makati where he obtained a degree in Business Administration in 1997.
Meanwhile, upon graduating from high school, respondent enrolled at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila, where he stayed for one year before transferring to the PMA. In 1993, he was discharged from the PMA. In 1997, he moved to Nueva Vizcaya with his wife and their 3 children. Since then, respondent never went back to school to earn a college degree.
In 2004, their mother informed complainant that respondent passed the Bar Examinations and that he used complainant's name and college records from the University of Makati to enroll at St. Mary's University's College of Law in Bayombong, Nueva Vizcaya and take the Bar Examinations. Complainant brushed these aside as he did not anticipate any adverse consequences to him.
Sometime in May 2009, however, after his promotion as Store Manager, complainant was ordered to report to the head office of PSC in Mandaluyong City where, upon arrival, he was informed that the NBI was requesting his presence at its office in Taft Avenue, Manila, in relation to an investigation involving respondent who, at that point, was using the name "Atty. Patrick A. Caronan." Complainant later learned that the reason why he was invited by the NBI was because of respondent's involvement in a case for qualified theft and estafa filed by Mr. Joseph G. Agtarap, who was one of the principal sponsors at respondent's wedding.
Realizing that respondent had been using his name to perpetrate crimes and commit unlawful activities, complainant took it upon himself to inform other people that he is the real "Patrick A. Caronan" and that respondent's real name is Richard A. Caronan.
However, problems relating to respondent's use of the name "Atty. Patrick A. Caronan" continued to hound him.
Hence, complainant filed the present Complaint-Affidavit to stop respondent's alleged use of the former's name and identity, and illegal practice of law.
Issues
Whether or not the IBP erred in ordering that:
(a) the name "Patrick A. Caronan" be stricken off the Roll of Attorneys; and
(b) the name "Richard A. Caronan" be barred from being admitted to the Bar.
You can support our page by clicking any of the following links:
|
Ruling:
As correctly observed by the IBP, complainant has established by clear and overwhelming evidence that he is the real "Patrick A. Caronan" and that respondent, whose real name is Richard A. Caronan, merely assumed the latter's name, identity, and academic records to enroll at the St. Mary's University's College of Law, obtain a law degree, and take the Bar Examinations.
To the Court's mind, the foregoing indubitably confirm that respondent falsely used complainant's name, identity, and school records to gain admission to the Bar. Since complainant - the real "Patrick A. Caronan" - never took the Bar Examinations, the IBP correctly recommended that the name "Patrick A. Caronan" be stricken off the Roll of Attorneys.
The IBP was also correct in ordering that respondent, whose real name is "Richard A. Caronan," be barred from admission to the Bar. Under Section 6, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, no applicant for admission to the Bar Examination shall be admitted unless he had pursued and satisfactorily completed a pre-law course.
In the case at hand, respondent never completed his college degree. Respondent has not completed the requisite pre-law degree.
The Court does not discount the possibility that respondent may later on complete his college education and earn a law degree under his real name. However, his false assumption of his brother's name, identity, and educational records renders him unfit for admission to the Bar. The practice of law, after all, is not a natural, absolute or constitutional right to be granted to everyone who demands it. Rather, it is a privilege limited to citizens of good moral character.
Here, respondent exhibited his dishonesty and utter lack of moral fitness to be a member of the Bar when he assumed the name, identity, and school records of his own brother and dragged the latter into controversies which eventually caused him to fear for his safety and to resign from PSC where he had been working for years. Good moral character is essential in those who would be lawyers.61 This is imperative in the nature of the office of a lawyer, the trust relation which exists between him and his client, as well as between him and the court.62chanrobleslaw
Penalties:
(1) the name "Patrick A. Caronan" with Roll of Attorneys No. 49069 is ordered DROPPEDand STRICKEN OFF the Roll of Attorneys;
(2) respondent is PROHIBITED from engaging in the practice of law or making any representations as a lawyer;
(3) respondent is BARRED from being admitted as a member of the Philippine Bar in the future;
(4) the Identification Cards issued by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines to respondent under the name "Atty. Patrick A. Caronan" and the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education Certificates issued in such name are CANCELLED and/or REVOKED; and
(5) the Office of the Court Administrator is ordered to CIRCULATE notices and POST in the bulletin boards of all courts of the country a photograph of respondent with his real name, " Richard A. Caronan," with a warning that he is not a member of the Philippine Bar and a statement of his false assumption of the name and identity of "Patrick A. Caronan."
You can support our page by clicking any of the following links:
|
0 comments:
Post a Comment