ADEZ REALTY, INCORPORATED, vs. HONORABLE COURTOF APPEALS G.R. No. 100643 October 30, 1992
FACTS: In a resolution of the Supreme Court, AttyDacanay was required to show cause why he should notbe disciplinary dealt with by intercalating a material factin the quoted judgment of the Court of Appeals,inserting “without notice to the actual occupants of theproperty, Adez Realty” when in fact it did not make suchfinding.ISSUE: Whether or not Atty Dacanay, by inserting phrasewhich is in fact not true, should be disbarred.RULING: YES. In the case at bar, the Supreme Court heldthat the inserted phase “without notice to the actualoccupants of the property, Adez Realty,” was just theright phrase intercalated at the right place, making ithighly improbable to be unintentionally, making itappear that respondent Court of Appeals found that nonotice was given to the occupants of subject property–– when in fact it did not make such a finding –– is aclear indication not merely of carelessness in lifting aportion of the assailed decision but a malicious attemptto gain undue advantage in the sporting arena offairplay and, more importantly, to deceive and misguidethis Court, which is the final arbiter of litigations.He then violated Rule 10.02, Canon 10, Chapter III, ofthe Code of Professional Responsibility which directsthat “[a] lawyer shall not knowingly misquote ormisrepresent the contents of a paper, the language orthe argument of opposing counsel, or the text of adecision or authority, or knowingly cite as a law aprovision already rendered inoperative by repeal oramendment, or assert as a fact that which has not beenproved”Assuming it was the carelessness of his secretary,it is theduty of lawyers to check, review and recheck theallegation in their pleadings, more particularly thequoted portions, and ensure that the statementstherein are accurate and the reproductions faithful,down to the last word and even punctuation mark. Thelegal profession demands that lawyers thoroughly goover pleadings, motions and other documents dictatedor prepared by them, type or transcribed by theirsecretaries or clerks, before filing them with the court. Ifa client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with morereason should counsel be bound the acts of hissecretary who merely follow his orders.DOMINADOR P. BURBE VS. ATTY. ALBERTO C. MAGULTAAC NO. 99-634. JUNE 10, 2002Facts: Petitioner engaged the services of the respondentto help him recover a claim of money against a creditor.Respondent prepared demand letters for the petitioner,which were not successful and so the former intimatedthat a case should already be filed. As a result,petitioner paid the lawyer his fees and included alsoamounts for the filing of the case. A couple of months passed but the petitioner has notyet received any feedback as to the status of his case.