Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

FELISA M. ANGELES v. ATTY. ROBERTO L. FIGUEROA

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AC. NO. 7204 2007-03-07	CYNTHIA ADVINCULA v. ATTY. ERNESTO M. MACABATA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Complainant's bare allegation that respondent made use and took advantage of his position as a lawyer to lure her to agree to have sexual relations with him, deserves no credit. The burden of proof rests on the complainant, and she must establish the case against the respondent by clear, convincing and satisfactory proof,[28] disclosing a case that is free from doubt as to compel the exercise by the Court of its disciplinary power.[29] Thus, the adage that "he who asserts not he who denies, must prove."[30] As a basic rule in evidence, the burden of proof lies on the party who makes the allegations-ei incumbit probation, qui decit, non qui negat; cum per rerum naturam factum negantis probation nulla sit.[31] In the case at bar, complainant miserably failed to comply with the burden of proof required of her. A mere charge or allegation of wrongdoing does not suffice. Accusation is not synonymous with guilt.[32]
	AC. NO. 5839 2006-08-22	ARTURO C. SAMPANA v. ATTY. EDGARDO J. ANGARA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The power to disbar or suspend a lawyer should be used with utmost caution and only for serious reasons so as not to unjustly deprive him of his means of livelihood and distinct reputation in the society. It must be exercised only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously affect the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of the court. In disbarment proceedings, the complainant has the burden of proving his case against respondent. In the case of Angeles v. Figueroa[46] we held:It is settled that the power to disbar or suspend ought always to be exercised on the preservative and not on the vindictive principle, with great caution and only for the most weighty reasons. The burden of proof rests on the complainant and the case against the respondent must be established by clear, convincing and satisfactory proof. Thus, the adage that "he who asserts, not who denies, must prove."
	AC. NO. 6850 2006-07-27	ATTY. MINIANO B. DELA CRUZ v. ATTY. TEODORICO N. DIESMOS AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
As the Court explained in Angeles v. Figueroa:[34]