Cabarrus, Jr. v. Bernas
REITERATIONFacts
1. The Antecedents: Complainant Jesus Cabarrus, Jr. filed an administrative complaint for disbarment against respondent Atty. Jose Antonio S. Bernas. The complaint alleged that respondent, through his client Ramon B. Pascual, Jr., committed falsification of a public document by filing a verification and certification of non-forum shopping with a complaint for reconveyance of property and damages before the Regional Trial Court (RTC). Complainant further alleged that respondent and his client also filed a criminal complaint for falsification of a public document with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) concerning the same underlying issue of fraud and forgery, thereby violating Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code and the Code of Professional Responsibility. 2. Procedural History: The administrative complaint for disbarment was filed by Jesus Cabarrus, Jr. against Atty. Jose Antonio S. Bernas. Respondent Bernas filed a Comment and a Supplemental Comment, averring that no forum shopping was committed. The core issue presented to the Court was whether respondent Atty. Bernas transgressed the circulars on forum shopping. The Supreme Court, Second Division, reviewed the records and found the administrative complaint to be without merit. 3. The Petition: The administrative complaint, in essence, alleged that respondent Atty. Bernas instigated and facilitated the violation of Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code and the Code of Professional Responsibility by filing a civil case and a criminal complaint involving the same issues, constituting forum shopping. Respondent, in his defense, argued that the criminal action did not involve the same issues as the civil action and that the NBI, being an investigatory agency without judicial or quasi-judicial powers, could not be considered a forum contemplated by the circulars on forum shopping. The Supreme Court ultimately dismissed the complaint, holding that the filing of a civil case does not preclude the institution of a criminal action and that the NBI's functions are merely investigatory, thus not falling within the purview of the forum shopping circulars.
Issue(s)
Whether the filing of a civil case for reconveyance and damages, coupled with a request for investigation by the National Bureau of Investigations (NBI) regarding alleged fraud and forgery, constitutes forum shopping. Whether Atty. Jose Antonio S. Bernas violated the Code of Professional Responsibility and Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code.
Ruling
The Supreme Court dismissed the administrative complaint, finding it bereft of merit. The Court held that there was no forum shopping in this case.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of forum shopping: The Court reiterated the definition of forum shopping as seeking a favorable opinion in another forum after an adverse opinion in one, or approaching two different fora to increase chances of a favorable decision. It clarified that the filing of a civil case for reconveyance and damages does not preclude the institution of a criminal action. The Court emphasized that Circular No. 28-91 should be interpreted to achieve substantial justice and not subvert its objective. The request for assistance from the NBI for investigation of alleged fraud and forgery was deemed permissible. The Court underscored that the functions of the NBI are merely investigatory and informational, lacking judicial or quasi-judicial powers, and therefore, it cannot be considered among the forums contemplated by the circulars on forum shopping. The NBI cannot grant any relief, nor can it determine probable cause, making its involvement distinct from the prohibited act of seeking multiple judicial reliefs. On the alleged violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code: The Court found the administrative complaint bereft of merit. The reasoning regarding forum shopping directly addressed the alleged instigation and facilitation of perversion of truth. By finding no forum shopping, the Court implicitly found no basis for the charges of instigating, abetting, or facilitating the subversion of truth in the verification and certification of non-forum shopping, as the actions taken were deemed within the bounds of legal recourse and investigative assistance. The Court's dismissal of the complaint indicates that the actions of Atty. Bernas, as counsel, in assisting his client and engaging with the NBI, did not rise to the level of unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct, nor did he counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or lessening confidence in the legal system.
Main Doctrine
The filing of a civil case for reconveyance and damages does not preclude the institution of a criminal action for falsification, and requesting the assistance of the National Bureau of Investigations (NBI) for investigation of alleged fraud and forgery does not constitute forum shopping, as the NBI is merely an investigative agency with no judicial or quasi-judicial powers.