62) SILVA v. LEE, JR.

-Indirect contempt is the failure to do something ordered done by the court or judge,
Doctrine: Direct contempt is conduct directed against or assailing the authority and
dignity of the court or a judge, or in the doing of a forbidden act; may be punished
summarily
such as failure to appear at a hearing or in the use of disrespectful language in a
pleading; can be punished only after charge and hearing
-In the present case, the acts of Atty. Silva do not constitute direct contempt

Indirect contempt is the failure to do something ordered done by the court or judge,
such as failure to appear at a hearing or in the use of disrespectful language in a
pleading; can be punished only after charge and hearing
FACTS:
This case stemmed from a civil case where complainant Atty. Himiniano Silva was
counsel for the plaintiffs.
The defendants of such case filed a MTD and Judge German Lee, Jr. set the same
for hearing, the notice of which was duly received by Atty. Silva as counsel.
Atty. Silva filed a Motion for Inhibition stating that he could not appear before the court
because of the ff. reasons:
1. By reasons of Atty. Silva’s radio broadcast, the Presiding Judge of the Court
allegedly got so hurt about it and revealed his adverse reactions to the
President of IBP of Neg Oriental and Exec. Judge of RTC Negros Oriental
2. A previous unwholesome atmosphere between the Presiding Judge of the
court and Atty. Silva triggered by the alleged unjustified and unnecessary
threat by the Presiding Judge to hold the complainant in contempt of Court
prejudices the plaintiff’s interest in the case
-However, the mistake of respondent Judge Lee in the appreciation of his prerogative
to charge and punish for contempt does not make out a case of oppression, conduct
prejudicial to the best interest of the judiciary, violation of the anti-graft law and
ignorance of the law
-Considering the circumstances of this case — Atty. Silva aired a vehement
broadcast unduly critical of the RTC judge in Dumaguete City, filed a Motion for
Inhibition intemperately written stating that he cannot appear in the hearing if Judge
Lee will not inhibit himself, his subsequent expected non-appearance — Judge Lee
might have equated Atty. Silva’s actuations with an orchestrated assault against the
authority and dignity of the court
-Judge Lee should have first complied with the requisite of notice and hearing, the
case being indirect contempt
WHEREFORE, Judge Lee is REPRIMANDED with warning that a repetition of this
mistake would draw sterner disciplinary action.

Atty. Silva prayed that respondent Judge Lee inhibit himself from trying the case or in
alternative, should the motion not be granted, that Atty. Silva be relieved as counsel
s
Judge Lee denied the motion for inhibition after finding the same to be unmeritorious,
there being no valid and legal reason for his disqualification to try the case.

However, upon Atty. Silva’s own discretion, he filed his formal withdrawal with
conformity of his clients to enable the latter to engage the services of new counsel.

At the hearing on the MTD, Atty. Silva did not appear which prompted Judge Lee to
cite Atty. Silva for direct contempt of court, ordering his arrest and sentencing him to 5
days imprisonment  Atty. Silva was arrested

Att. Silva commenced a formal administrative complaint against respondent Judge

Lee for oppressive conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the judiciary, violation of
the anti-graft law, and ignorance of the law.

ISSUE: WON the behavior of Atty. Silva should be considered a direct contempt
which would warrant an outright order to immediately arrest and jail him- NO

RULING:
-Direct contempt is conduct directed against or assailing the authority and dignity of
the court or a judge, or in the doing of a forbidden act; may be punished summarily