BY ATTY. JULIUS GREGORY B. DELGADO
ROSSINIE FERRER-SPJUTH AND FOLKE HARRY SPJUTH VS. ATTY. JOSELITO C. FRIAL, A.C. NO. 10770, JULY 8, 2025: LAWYER DISBARRED FOR GROSS NEGLIGENCE IN HANDLING CASES
Spouses Rossinie Ferrer-Spjuth and Folke Harry Spjuth alleged that they engaged the services of Atty. Joselito C. Frial for two (2) civil cases before the Regional Trial Court of Calapan City, Oriental Mindoro for Cancellation of Real Estate Mortgage and Cancellation of Auction Sale.
In the first case, Atty. Frial presented Folke Harry Spjuth, the husband, but was objected to by the defendants based on marital disqualification rule. Folke’s testimony was stricken off the record since no SPA was shown, making him a disqualified witness. The defendants filed a demurrer to evidence which was granted dismissing the case. Atty. Frial filed a petition for certiorari before the Court of Appeals assailing the trial court’s ruling which disqualified Folke; however, the appellate court denied the petition noting that the trial court has already dismissed the complaint. For failing to file an appeal, the order of dismissal attained finality, rendering the petition moot.
On the second case, Atty. Frial filed a Withdrawal of Appearance with the written conformity of Rossinie. The trial court eventually dismissed the case for failure to prosecute. Atty. Frial did not file an appeal, hence, a Certificate of Finality was issued.
Respondent was also accused of not reporting an agent using his name in illegal transactions with the Bureau of Immigration.
The Investigating Commissioner Alissa Ann T. Lim found Atty. Frial liable and recommended suspension from the practice of law for two (2) years. The Report and Recommendation was adopted by the Board of Governors. The Supreme Court sustained the findings of Investigating Commissioner Lim as affirmed by the Board of Governors. However, the Supreme Court increased the penalty to disbarment.
The Supreme Court affirmed the findings of Commissioner Lim and held: “As determined by Commissioner Lim, in Civil Case No. R-4747, respondent not only misplaced and failed to submit the sole witness’s SPA, but also neglected to timely appeal the order granting the demurrer to evidence, ultimately leading to the case’s dismissal due to insufficient evidence. Respondent also failed to obtain Rossinie’s written conformity before withdrawing as her counsel and again neglected to timely appeal in Civil Case No. R-4899, which the trial court eventually dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Likewise, Commissioner Lim found that respondent’s failure to report the dishonest, deceitful, and misleading activities of his liaison officer with the Bureau as another violation of the Code.”
For gross negligence in the two civil cases, he was meted the penalty of two (2) years suspension each. For terminating legal services without good cause and written notice, he was meted the penalty of one (1) year suspension. For failing to report illegal activities of his agent which was considered as simple negligence, he was meted one (1) year suspension. Considering aggravating circumstances – Atty. Frial was previously suspended twice – 1 year for infidelity in the custody of properties in custodia legis and for 6 months for another case, Atty. Frial was meted the supreme penalty of disbarment pursuant to Section 40, Canon VI of the CPRA which provides that “should the aggregate of the imposed penalties exceed five (5) years of suspension from the practice of law or Php1,000,000.00 in fines, the respondent may, in the discretion of the Supreme Court, be meted with the penalty of disbarment.”