In 2011, the Supreme Court suspended Atty. Macario from the practice of law for a period of six (6) months. In the same Decision, the highest court ordered him to return to his client the copy of land title immediately upon receipt of the said Decision.

However, Atty. Macario still refused to return the land title to his client prompting the Court to issue a Resolution requiring him to show cause why he should not be held in contempt.

In his explanation letter addressed to the Court, he stated that “he was always ready to return the owner’s duplicate of OCT No. 0-94.” He explained, however, that it was complainant who failed to claim the said title from him. He reasoned that he cannot release the said title to anyone but only to the complainant in the interest of security.

Still, the Court meted another 6-months suspension from the practice of law upon Atty. Macario.


“[Atty. Macario] cannot escape the fact that he disobeyed the order of the Court by reasoning that it was complainant’s fault for not personally claiming the copy of the said OCT from him. The order of the Court was clearly directed at him, and for him alone, to comply. He cannot simply pass this obligation to the complainant.

“It may be noted that respondent maintains a law office, which is more than capable to effect the delivery of the said document to [his client], either personally or through mail.”, the Court said.

Source: http://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/1/65803