A.C. No. 6490 TABANG v. GACOTT

TABANG v. GACOTT

A.C. No. 6490

July 9, 2013

FACTS: Complainant Lilia Tabang was prohibited from acquiring vast tracts of agricultural land as she already owned other parcels. Hence, Judge Gacott advised her to put the titles of the parcels under the names of fictitious persons, thus she purchased 7 lands under his advice.

Later, Tabang decided to sell the seven parcels for their medication and other expenses. Atty. Glenn Gaccot offered the parcels to prospective buyers to help her sell thus he borrowed from Tabang the TCTs.

Respondent then caused the annotation of these documents on the TCTs of the seven parcels and caused the publication of notices where he represented himself as the owner of the parcels and announced that these were for sale and succeeded in selling the seven parcels. He received a total of P3,773,675.00 from the proceeds of the sales.

Hence, pettioners alleged that respondent committed gross misconduct, dishonesty, and deceit filed a case before the IBP.

Respondent, contended that the names were not fictitious and petitioners only demanded a balato of 20% from the proceeds which in his refusal, he was threatened to be defamed and disbarred.

ISSUE: Whether or not respondent engaged in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct violating Rule 1.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, thus warranting his disbarment.

RULING: Yes, the Court concurs with and adopts the findings and recommendation of Commissioner Limpingco and the IBP Board of Governors.

While it may be true that complainant Lilia Tabang herself engaged in illicit activities, the complainant’s own complicity does not negate, or even mitigate, the repugnancy of respondent’s offense. Quite the contrary, his offense is made even graver. He is a lawyer who is held to the highest standards of morality, honesty, integrity, and fair dealing. Perverting what is expected of him, he deliberately and cunningly took advantage of his knowledge and skill of the law to prejudice and torment other individuals. Not only did he countenance illicit action, he instigated it. Not only did he acquiesce to injustice, he orchestrated it. Thus, the Court imposes upon respondent the supreme penalty of disbarment.

Respondent has fallen dismally and disturbingly short of the high standard of morality, honesty, integrity, and fair dealing required of him. Quite the contrary, he employed his knowledge and skill of the law as well as took advantage of the credulity of petitioners to secure undue gains for himself and to inflict serious damage on others. He did so over the course of several years in a sustained and unrelenting fashion and outdid his previous wrongdoing with even greater, more detestable offenses. He has hardly shown any remorse. From how he has conducted himself in these proceedings, he is all but averse to rectifying his ways and assuaging complainants’ plight. Respondent even foisted upon the IBP and this Court his duplicity by repeatedly absenting himself from the IBP’s hearings without justifiable reasons. He also vexed this Court to admit his Appeal despite his own failure to comply with the much extended period given to him, thus inviting the Court to be a party in delaying complainants’ cause. For all his perversity, respondent deserves none of this Court’s clemency.