Asean Pacific Planners V City of Urdaneta

GR No.
162525, September 23, 2008 After pre-trial, the Lazaro Law Firm
entered its appearance as counsel for Urdaneta
ASEAN Pacific Planners, App Construction and City In its Order dated September 11, 2002, the
Development Corporation and Cesar Goco, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Urdaneta City,
petitioners vs. City of Urdaneta, Ceferino J. Pangasinan, Branch 45, admitted the entry of
Capalad, Waldo C. Del Castillo, Norberto M. appearance of the Lazaro Law Firm and granted
Del Prado, Jesus A. Ordono and Aquilino the withdrawal of appearance of the City
Maguisa, Prosecutor. It also granted the prayer to drop
the city as defendant and admitted its
QUISUMBING, J.: complaint for consolidation with Del Castillo’s
complaint, and directed the defendants to
This case stemmed from a Complaint for answer the city’s complaint.
annulment of contracts with prayer for
preliminary prohibitory injunction and temporary It also granted Capalad’s motion to
restraining order filed by respondent Waldo C. expunge all pleadings filed by Atty. Sahagun in
Del Castillo, in his capacity as taxpayer, against his behalf. Capalad was dropped as defendant,
respondents City of Urdaneta and Ceferino J. and his complaint filed by Atty. Jorito C. Peralta
Capalad doing business under the name JJEFWA was admitted and consolidated with the
Builders, and petitioners Asean Pacific Planners complaints of Del Castillo and Urdaneta City.
(APP) represented by Ronilo G. Goco and Asean
Pacific Planners Construction and Development ISSUE: Atty. Sahagun violated rule 11.04
Corporation (APPCDC) represented by Cesar D. of the Code of Prof. Responsibility.
Goco.
HELD. Yes. At first, Atty. Sahagun
Del Castillo alleged that then Urdaneta represents petitioners who claim that the
City Mayor Rodolfo E. Parayno entered into five contracts are valid. On the other hand, Capalad
contracts for the preliminary design, filed a complaint for annulment of the
construction and management of a four-storey contracts. Certainly, Atty. Sahagun cannot
twin cinema commercial center and hotel represent totally conflicting interests. Thus, we
involving a massive expenditure of public funds should expunge all pleadings filed by Atty.
amounting to P250 million, funded by a loan Sahagun in behalf of Capalad.
from the Philippine National Bank (PNB). For
minimal work, the contractor was allegedly paid Before we close, notice is taken of the
P95 million. offensive language used by Attys. Oscar C.
Sahagun and Antonio B. Escalante in their
In their Answer, APP and APPCDC pleadings before us and the Court of Appeals.
claimed that the contracts are valid. Urdaneta They unfairly called the Court of Appeals a
City Mayor Amadeo R. Perez, Jr., who filed the “court of technicalities”1[45] for validly dismissing
city’s Answer, joined in the defense and their defectively prepared petition. They also
asserted that the contracts were properly accused the Court of Appeals of protecting, in
executed by then Mayor Parayno with prior their view, “an incompetent judge.” 2[46] In
authority from the Sangguniang Panlungsod. explaining the “concededly strong language,”
For respondent Ceferino J. Capalad, Atty. Oscar Atty. Sahagun further indicted himself. He said
C. Sahagun filed an Answer with compulsory that the Court of Appeals’ dismissal of the case
counterclaim and motion to dismiss on the shows its “impatience and readiness to punish
ground that Del Castillo has no legal standing to
sue. 1[45]
CA rollo, p. 238.
2[46]
Id.
petitioners for a perceived slight on its dignity”
and such dismissal “smacks of retaliation and
does not augur for the cold neutrality and
impartiality demanded of the appellate court.”
Accordingly, we impose upon Attys. Oscar

C. Sahagun and Antonio B. Escalante a fine of
P2,0003[48] each payable to this Court within ten
days from notice and we remind them that they
should observe and maintain the respect due to
the Court of Appeals and judicial officers; abstain
from offensive language before the courts; and
not attribute to a Judge motives not supported by
the record. Similar acts in the future will be dealt
with more severely.
WHEREFORE, we (1) GRANT the

petition; (2) SET ASIDE the Resolutions dated
April 15, 2003 and February 4, 2004 of the
Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 76170; (3)
DENY the entry of appearance of the Lazaro
Law Firm in Civil Case No. U-7388 and EXPUNGE
all pleadings it filed as counsel of Urdaneta City;
(4) ORDER the City Prosecutor to represent
Urdaneta City in Civil Case No. U-7388; (5)
AFFIRM the RTC in admitting the complaint of
Capalad; and (6) PROHIBIT Atty. Oscar C.
Sahagun from representing Capalad and
EXPUNGE all pleadings that he filed in behalf of
Capalad.
Finally, we IMPOSE a fine of P2,000

each on Attys. Oscar C. Sahagun and Antonio B.
Escalante for their use of offensive language,
payable to this Court within ten (10) days from
receipt of this Decision.
3[48]
Nuñez v. Astorga, A.C. No. 6131, February
28, 2005, 452 SCRA 353, 364.

Asean Pacific Planners V City of Urdaneta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Asean Pacific Planners V City of Urdaneta

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Asean Pacific Planners V City of Urdaneta

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GR No.

Accordingly, we impose upon Attys. Oscar

WHEREFORE, we (1) GRANT the

Finally, we IMPOSE a fine of P2,000

You might also like