THE Supreme Court (SC) has junked an administrative complaint filed by a litigant against a Court of Appeals’ (CA) employee for allegedly falsifying another lawyer’s signature.
In a full court ruling, the SC dismissed the complaint filed by a certain Noriel Michael Ramientas against Atty. Jocelyn Reyala accusing her of violating Articles 171, 182, 184, and 355 of the Revised Penal Code and Rule 10.01, Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Reyala was the counsel of one of the parties, Dante Alejandro, involved in a land dispute filed before the Regional Trial Court of Mandaluyong City.
Alejandro changed his counsel to Atty. Rodoldo Pioderoda considering that Reyala was already employed with the CA as a Court Attorney IV.
On February 16, 2004, Ramientas, one of the party to the case, filed a complaint against Reyala assailing that the latter falsified another lawyer’s signature and engaged in private practice in spite of being employed by the appeals tribunal until the case reached the high court.
In its ruling, the SC ruled that the complainant did not present sufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations against Reyala.
“In this case, the court agrees with the Board’s (IBP) findings that complainant failed to prove his allegations against respondent with clearly preponderant evident,” the SC held.
“Moreover, the Board noticed that the signature page of the alleged forged petition was merely a continuation of the previous page.”
The ruling was promulgated by Clerk of Court Felipa Anama on April 12, 2016 but was released only recently.