Daisy D. Panagsagan vs. Atty. Bernie E. Panagsagan, A.C. No. 864 Phil. 19
**Facts:**
1. **Marriage and Early Years**:
– Daisy D. Panagsagan married Atty. Bernie E. Panagsagan on December 18, 2000.
– Initially, their marriage was robust.
2. **Illicit Affair**:
– Bernie began an affair with Corazon Igtos, a colleague at LTFRB.
– Bernie and Igtos had two children (May 2004, July 2006).
3. **Separation and Conflict**:
– November 3, 2002: Bernie left the conjugal home claiming he wanted to live a bachelor’s life.
– December 2, 2002: Bernie temporarily returned for a month, insisted on choosing between spending weekdays with his mistress or filing for nullity of marriage.
– May 3, 2003: Daisy discovered Bernie living with Igtos, leading to physical violence in front of their child.
4. **Abandonment**:
– May 24, 2003: Bernie permanently left, ceased supporting Daisy and their child financially, including stopping the child’s educational plan.
5. **Complaint and Answer**:
– Daisy filed a disbarment complaint based on immorality, infidelity, and abandonment.
– Bernie denied the relations but admitted fathering Igtos’ children, alleging Daisy was unfaithful and had suicidal tendencies.
– Bernie remarried after converting to Islam purportedly to legitimize his relationship with Igtos.
6. **IBP’s Recommendation**:
– Found guilty of gross immoral conduct and recommended two years suspension, later changed to disbarment upon Daisy’s motion.
7. **Court Proceedings**:
– June 21, 2013: IBP adopted the Commissioner’s recommendation of suspension.
– September 5, 2014: IBP modified the recommendation to disbarment.
– October 5, 2016: OBC concurred with the findings and recommended disbarment.
**Issues:**
1. Should Atty. Bernie E. Panagsagan be disbarred due to his immoral acts and abandonment of his family?
**Court’s Decision:**
1. **Grossly Immoral Conduct**:
– Legal Standard: Rule 1.01 and Rule 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
– The Court affirmed that Bernie’s acts of leaving his wife for a mistress and fathering children out of wedlock constituted gross immorality.
– *Analysis*: His admissions and the evidence of his public flaunting of the affair established gross immorality.
2. **Abandonment and Scandalous Behavior**:
– Bernie’s abandonment of his wife and child without provision clearly violated the ethical standards.
– His defense of conversion to Islam was deemed insincere and merely a method to evade responsibility.
3. **Existing Jurisprudence**:
– Referenced cases such as *Ceniza v. Ceniza* and *Guevarra v. Eala*, showing consistent Court stance on disbarment for such conduct.
**Doctrine:**
1. **Professional Responsibility**: Lawyers are held to the highest ethical standards and must maintain good moral character as mandated by Rules 1.01 and 7.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
2. **Gross Immorality**: Living an adulterous life and abandoning one’s spouse and children are considered grossly immoral acts warranting disbarment.
**Class Notes:**
– **Key Elements:**
– *Gross Immorality*: Defined as acts that are criminal, unprincipled, or shock common decency.
– *Examples*: Adultery, concubinage, abandonment.
– *Rule 1.01*: Prohibits unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct.
– *Rule 7.03*: Prohibits conduct that adversely reflects on a lawyer’s fitness to practice law.
– **Application**:
– Thorough substantiation through evidence of immoral conduct.
– Sincere conversion defenses must align with factual timing and intent to legitimize actions.
**Historical Background:**
– **Religious and Cultural Context**:
– The case intersects legal ethics with cultural and religious dynamics (e.g., conversion to Islam).
– **Precedent**:
– Reinforces a history of strict ethical standards in the Philippine Bar.
– Emphasizes the societal role lawyers play and the expectation of their conduct, both private and professional.
This case exemplifies the rigorous ethical expectations for legal practitioners in the Philippines and serves as a reiteration of the profession’s moral standards.
Leave a Reply