A.C. No. 10897 - TONY PETER PARTSCH, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. REYNALDO A. VITORILLO.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, it is recommended that Respondent, ATTY. REYNALDO A. VITORILLO be suspended from the practice of law for two (2) years. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED. [28] (Citation omitted.) Per its June 18, 2019 Resolution, [29] the IBP Board of Governors adopted the findings of fact and recommendation of the Investigating Commissioner. Our Ruling Atty. Vitorillo is suspended for three years from the practice of law. The following provisions under the CPR are pertinent: CANON 1 - A LAWYER SHALL UPHOLD THE CONSTITUTION, OBEY THE LAWS OF THE LAND AND PROMOTE RESPECT FOR LAW AND LEGAL PROCESSES. Rule 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. Rule 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence in the legal system. x x x x CANON 7 - A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR. x x x x Rule 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law , nor shall he whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. (Emphasis supplied.) One's admission to the Bar is by no means a license to gloss over the loopholes in legislation, to hijack the legal processes, or to manipulate the technical decisions of those unlearned in law. [30] Among the sworn obligations of attorneys upon taking the Lawyer's Oath is to uphold the Constitution and obey the laws of the land at all times , never to waver even if vices of luxury, convenience, and worldly excesses tempt them so. [31] Of course, accusations remain mere allegations if unsupported by the requisite quantum of proof. In disciplinary cases involving members of the Bar, substantial evidence is necessary to justify the imposition of administrative penalty. [32] Substantial evidence means "that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion." [33] It is "more in keeping with the primodial purpose of and essential considerations attending this type of cases." [34] Records, however, easily establish that Atty. Vitorillo gave in to the indulgent vices of the profession. The Court finds Atty. Vitorillo guilty of deceitful conduct proscribed by Canon 1, Rule 1.01 of the CPR. In the contract to sell [35] that Atty. Vitorillo himself submitted before the Court, Atty. Vitorillo expressly named himself as the seller and absolute owner of the subject property. [36] The verity of such contractual status rests upon a single fact that Atty. Vitorillo held absolute ownership over the entire 800-square-meter subject property at the time he offered it for sale to Partsch. The facts at hand reveal that he did not. Atty. Vitorillo had never denied the grave accusations of his non-ownership in the complaint despite the opportunity to do so in his comment. His clients may have ag