ISSUE In the instant case, however, petitioners' motion for extension of time

was filed on September 9, 1987, more than a year after the expiration of
THE DIRECTOR OF RELIGIOUS AFFAIRS, , Does Atty Cerilla guilty on any delay occasioned by negligence or the grace period on June 30, 1986. Hence, it is no longer within the
inattention to duty by failing to submit the brief withim the extended coverage of the grace period
vs. BAYOT period given by the court

FACTS:
Charged with malpractice for having published an advertisement in the
Sunday Tribune of June 13, 1943
Respondent at first denied having published the said advertisement; but
subsequently, thru his attorney, he admitted having caused its
publication and prayed for "the indulgence and mercy" of the Court,
promising "not to repeat such professional misconduct in the future and
to abide himself to the strict ethical rules of the law profession.
ISSUE:
Did Bayot committed a flagrant violation of the ethics of his profession
by publishing the advertisement in question
RULINGS:
Section 25 of Rule 127 expressly provides among other things that "the
practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either
personally or thru paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice.
It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skill as a
merchant advertises his wares. Law is a profession and not a trade.The
most worth and effective advertisement possible, even for a young
lawyer, . . . is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for
professional capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced but must
be the outcome of character and conduct." (Canon 27, Code of Ethics.)
Suspended from a practice of law for 1 month.
PP v CERILLA
FACTS
Cerilla, counsel for appellant, to explain within ten days from notice why
he failed to file appellant's brief within the extended period which
expired on February 23, 1974
- stenograohic notes were not handed to him on time by the father in
law of the apellant
-he had reminded and informed to Mr Carable for prompt submission
-3 weekd before the expiration of date of submission, he suffered heart
ailment and seek for extension
RULINGS
What concerns this Court was his neglecting to comply with a duty owed
it He should be aware that in the pursuance of the duty owed this Court
as well as to a client, he cannot be too casual and unconcerned about
the filing of pleadings."
Even a neophyte should be aware that his responsibility to the judiciary,
especially to this Court, frowns on any delay occasioned by negligence
or inattention to duty. Respondent, therefore, clearly has merited the
appropriate disciplinary action.
reprimanded for his failure to file the brief on time and to explain
satisfactorily such occurrence.
DE ROY v CA
FACTS
firewall of a burned-out building owned by petitioners collapsed and
destroyed the tailoring shop occupied by the family of private
respondents, resulting in injuries to private respondents and the death
of Marissa Bernal, a daughter.
The respondents are being warned and asked to vacate but failed to do
so
RTC
petitioners were found guilty of gross negligence and awarding damages
to private respondents.
CA affirmed on August 17, 1987, a copy of which was received by
petitioners on August 25, 1987. On September 9, 1987, the last day of
the fifteen-day period to file an appeal, petitioners filed a motion for
extension of time to file a motion for reconsideration, which was
eventually denied by the appellate court in the Resolution of September
30, 1987. Petitioners filed their motion for reconsideration on
September 24, 1987 but this was denied in the Resolution of October 27,
1987.
The CA following the Habaluyas Ruling that that the fifteen-day period
for appealing or for filing a motion for reconsideration cannot be
extended.
Petitioners contend that the rule enunciated in the Habaluyas case
should not be made to apply to the case at bar owing to the non-
publication of the Habaluyas decision in the Official Gazette as of the
time the subject decision of the Court of Appeals was promulgated.
ISSUE
Does the decisions of the Supreme court need to be published in the
official gazette
RULING
It is the bounden duty of counsel as lawyer in active law practice to keep
abreast of decisions of the Supreme Court particularly where issues have
been clarified, consistently reiterated, and published in the advance
reports of Supreme Court decisions (G. R. s) and in such publications as
the Supreme Court Reports Annotated (SCRA) and law journals.
PCGG v SANDIGANBAYAN
FACTS
One of the first acts of President Corazon C. Aquino was to establish the
Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) to recover the
alleged ill-gotten wealth of former President Ferdinand Marcos, his
family and his cronies.
Respondents Tan were representwd by their counsel Mendoza who
isnformer solicitor general
PCGG filee for disqualification of mendoza for actively intervened in the
liquidation of GENBANK
ISSUES
RULINGS
A lawyer, having once held public office or having been in the public
employ should not, after his retirement, accept employment in
connection with any matter he has investigated or passed upon while in
such office or employ.

Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility retained the general
structure of paragraph 2, Canon 36 of the Canons of Professional Ethics
but replaced the expansive phrase 'investigated and passed upon with
the word 'intervened. It is, therefore, properly applicable to both
'adverse-interest conflicts' and 'congruent-interest conflicts.
The case at bar does not involve the 'adverse interest aspect of Rule
6.03. Respondent Mendoza, it is conceded, has no adverse interest
problem when he acted as Solicitor General in Sp. Proc. No. 107812 and
later as counsel of respondents Tan, et al. in Civil Case No. 0005 and Civil
Case Nos. 0096-0099 before the Sandiganbayan. Nonetheless, there
remains the issue of whether there exists a 'congruent-interest conflict
sufficient to disqualify respondent Mendoza from representing
respondents Tan, et al
We hold that this advice given by respondent Mendoza on the procedure
to liquidate GENBANK is not the 'matter contemplated by Rule 6.03 of
the Code of Professional Responsibility. ABA Formal Opinion No. 342 is
clear as daylight in stressing that the 'drafting, enforcing or interpreting
government or agency procedures, regulations or laws, or briefing
abstract principles of law are acts which do not fall within the scope of
the term 'matter and cannot disqualify.
Code 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility cannot apply to
respondent Mendoza because his alleged intervention while a Solicitor
General in Sp. Proc. No. 107812 is an intervention on a matter different
from the matter involved in Civil Case No. 0096.
Similarly, the Court in interpreting Rule 6.03 was not unconcerned with
the prejudice to the client which will be caused by its misapplication.
The Court has to consider also the possible adverse effect of a truncated
reading of the rule on the official independence of lawyers in the
government service
III
The question of fairness
Mr. Justices Panganiban and Carpio are of the view, among others, that
the congruent interest prong of Rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility should be subject to a prescriptive period. Mr. Justice
Tinga opines that the rule cannot apply retroactively to respondent the confidence of the public in the integrity of the legal profession and
Mendoza. Obviously, and rightly so, they are disquieted by the fact that to uplift the welfare of his brethren.
(1) when respondent Mendoza was the Solicitor General, Rule 6.03 has
not yet adopted by the IBP and approved by this Court, and (2) the bid
to disqualify respondent Mendoza was made after the lapse of time
whose length cannot, by any standard, qualify as reasonable. At bottom, Atty. Arsenio C. Villalon, Jr. is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of
the point they make relates to the unfairness of the rule if applied law for a period of SIX (6) MONTHS only with a warning that a repetition
without any prescriptive period and retroactively, at that. Their concern of the same or similar act will be dealt with more severel
is legitimate and deserves to be initially addressed by the IBP and our
Committee on Revision of the Rules of Court.
Petition Denied CORDOVA v CORDOVA
FACTS
DUCAT v VILLALLON
Salvacion Delizo charged her husband, Atty. Laurence D. Cordova, with
FACTS
immorality and acts unbecoming a member of the Bar.
Aug. 2000, Atty Villalon was guilty of gross misconduct. SUSPENDED
from the practice of law for a period of ONE (1) YEAR..
Cordova were married on 6 June 1976 and out of this marriage, two (2)
deliver to the registered owner, complainant Jose Ducat Jr., the latter's
children were born. Lived in quezon province .
TCT No. M-3023 covering the subject property within a period of sixty
(60) days from receipt of this Decision, at his sole expense; and that
failure on his part to do so will result in his disbarment
Fely G. Holgado was herself married and left her own husband and
First, complainant ducat, the registered owner , ducat sr. cannot give the children to stay with respondent. Respondent Cordova and Fely G.
propr without General power of attorney Holgado lived together in Bislig as husband and wife, with respondent
Cordova introducing Fely to the public as his wife, and Fely Holgado using
SECOND, being a lawyer, respondent knew or ought to know that
the name Fely Cordova. Respondent Cordova gave Fely Holgado funds
conveyance of a real property, whether gratuitously or for a
with which to establish a sari-sari store in the public market at Bislig,
consideration, must be in writing. Not ORAL, how many times he done
while at the same time failing to support his legitimate family.
it orally it could not be
On 6 April 1986, respondent Cordova and his complainant wife had an
Third, the deed of sale executed by ducat sr in favor of atty villalon is of
apparent reconciliation. Respondent promised that he would separate
dubious character
from Fely Holgado and brought his legitimate family to Bislig, Surigao del
ISSUE Sur
Did Atty Villalon remis in his duty to abide by his sworn oath as a member .. But would frequentlt come home from beer houses neglecting his
of the bar to "do no falsehood nor consent to its commission" and family's support
further violated the mandate of his profession to "uphold the integrity
and dignity of the legal profession?
1987, lives with another mistress, luisita Magallanes leaving one of his
daughters. Hid the child to her. Habeas corpus, custody given back to her
RULING
Atty. Villalon in his long career as a member of the bar. At one time, he
ISSUE
was even the President of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)-
Manila 1 Chapter, and as such he introduced various programs to uphold
WoN Atty Cordova's committed an immoral and misconduct for having
adulterous relationship that would result to his suspension or disbarmen
RULING
"the continued possession . . . of a good moral character is a requisite
condition for the rightful continuance in the practice of the law . . . and
its loss requires suspension or disbarment, even though the statutes do
not specify that as a ground for disbarment
the instant case, respondent Cordova maintained for about two (2) years
an adulterous relationship with a married woman not his wife, in full
view of the general public, to the humiliation and detriment of his
legitimate family which he, rubbing salt on the wound, failed or refused
to support. After a brief period of "reform" respondent took up again
with another woman not his wife, cohabiting with her, and bringing
along his young daughter to live with them. Clearly, respondent flaunted
his disregard of the fundamental institution of marriage and its
elementary obligations before his own daughter and the community at
large
Suspended indefinitely until support his own family
ARCIGA v MANIWANG
FACTS
Magdalena T. Arciga in her complaint of February 24, 1976 asked for the
disbarment of lawyer Segundino D. Maniwang (admitted to the Bar in
1975) on the ground of grossly immoral conduct because he refused to
fulfill his promise of marriage to her. Their illicit relationship resulted in
the birth on September 4, 1973 of their child, Michael Dino Maniwang.
Got acquianted in 1970 sa Cebu City. Med stud and law stud . When
magdalena refused to go with him in a motel in 1971, he stopped seeing
her.
Had sexual congress in 1971, magdalena said refused earlier sex because
shes married and has a son. She became pregnant and arranged their
marriage.
December, 1975 she made another trip to Davao but failed to see
Segundino who was then in Malaybalay, Bukidnon. She followed him
there only to be told that their marriage could not take place because he
had married Erlinda Ang on November 25, 1975. She was broken-
hearted when she returned to Davao.
ISSUE
WON respondent's refusal to marry the complainant was so corrupt and
unprincipled as to warrant disbarment?
RULING
Immoral conduct has been defined as "that conduct which is willful,
flagrant, or shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the
opinion of the good and respectable members of the community
The instant case can easily be differentiated from the foregoing cases.
This case is similar to the case of Soberano vs. Villanueva, 116 Phil. 1206,
where lawyer Eugenio V. Villanueva had sexual relations with Mercedes
H. Soberano before his admission to the bar in 1954. They indulged in
frequent sexual intercourse. She wrote to him in 1950 and 1951 several
letters making reference to their trysts in hotels.
One letter in 1951 contains expressions of such a highly sensual,
tantalizing and vulgar nature as to render them unquotable and to
impart the firm conviction that, because of the close intimacy between
the complainant and the respondent, she felt no restraint whatsoever in
writing to him with impudicity.
According to the complainant, two children were born as a consequence
of her long intimacy with the respondent. In 1955, she filed a complaint
for disbarment against Villanueva.
This Court found that respondent's refusal to marry the complainant was
not so corrupt nor unprincipled as to warrant disbarment. (See Montaña
vs. Ruado, Administrative Case No. 507, February 24, 1975, 62 SCRA 382;
Reyes vs. Wong, Administrative Case No 547, January 29, 1975, 63 SCRA
667; Viojan vs. Duran, 114 Phil. 322; Abaigar vs. Paz, Administrative Case
No. 997, September 10, 1979, 93 SCRA 91).
Considering the facts of this case and the aforecited precedents, the
complaint for disbarment against the respondent is hereby dismissed.
Sabayle v Tandayag
FACTS
In a sworn complaint for suspension or disbarment dated 15 December
l968
Judge Teodulo Tandayag ---- Misconduct in office, inefficiency and
incompetence;
Atty. Carmelito B. Gabor ---- Violation of his duties as Notary Public by
acknowledging a Deed of Sale in the absence of the purported vendors
and for taking advantage of his position as Assistant Clerk of court by
purchasing one-half (1/2) of the land covered by said Deed of Sale
knowing that that Deed of Sale was fictitious; and.
Atty. Pablo B. Badong ---- Negligence in the performance of his
professional duties by failing to file an Opposition to a Motion in Civil
Case No. IL-43 handled by him for complainant, and failing to take an
appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeals in C.A. G.R. No. 30302-
R dated 5 May 1967, to the Supreme Court after having received the sum
of P4,500.00 as court fees, transportation expenses and attorney's fees.
Required to file their answers and then referred it to solicitor general.
Fourteen (14) years later, because of the difficulty of securing the
appearance in Manila of the parties who all resided in Iligan City, then
Assistant Solicitor General Eduardo Montenegro referred the case on 28
June 1983 to the City Fiscal of Iligan City for investigation, report and
recommendation.
TAN TEK BENG v DAVID
FACTS
In said agreement lawyer David not only agreed to give one-half of his
professional fees to an intermediary or commission agent but he also
bound himself not to deal directly with the clients
The business relationship between David and Tan Tek Beng did not last.
There were mutual accusations of doublecross. No civil suit wad filed by
Tan.
In his 1974 comment, David clarified that the partnership was composed
of himself as manager, Tan Tek Beng as assistant manager and lawyer
Pedro Jacinto as president and financier. When Jacinto became ill and
the costs of office maintenance mounted, David suggested that Tan Tek
Beng should also invest some money or shoulder a part of the business
expenses but Tan Tek Beng refused.
1977 Tan Died
ISSUE
whether disciplinary action should be taken against lawyer Timoteo A.
David (admitted to the bar in 1945) for not giving Tan Tek Beng, a
nonlawyer (alleged missionary of the Seventh Day Adventists), one-half
of the attorney's fees received by David from the clients supplied by Tan
Tek Beng.
RULING
Respondent is reprimanded for being guilty of malpractice.
We hold that the said agreement is void because it was tantamount to
malpractice which is "the practice of soliciting cases at law for the
purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or brokers"
Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court). Malpractice ordinarily refers to any
malfeasance or dereliction of duty committed by a lawyer. Section 27
gives a special and technical meaning to the term "malpractice" (Act No.
2828, amending sec. 21 of Act No. 190).
That meaning is in consonance with the elementary notion that the
practice of law is a profession, not a business. "The lawyer may not seek
or obtain employment by himself or through others for to do so would
be unprofessional" (2 R.C.L. 1097 cited in In re Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37, 42;
Malcolm, J., Jayme vs. Bualan, 58 Phil. 422; Arce vs. Philippine National
Bank, 62 Phil. 569)
NARIDO v LINSANGAN
FACTS
Two administrative cases wherein respondents Jaime S. Linsangan and
Rufino B. Risma, who frepresented adverse parties in a workmen's
compensation case, did mutually hurl accusation at each other.
The charge against respondent Linsangan filed by a certain Flora Naridois
that he violated the attorney's oath by submitting a perjured statement.
When required to answer, not only did he deny the complaint but he
would also hold respondent Risma accountable for having instigated his
client, the complainant, Flora Narido, to file a false and malicious
complaint resulting in what respondent Linsangan called
"embarrassment, humiliation and defamation" of a brother in
aprofession
ISSUE
RULING
Justice Laurel, announced in Javier v. Cornejo: 4 "It should be observed,
in this connection, that mutual bickerings and unjustifiable
recriminations, between brother attorneys detract from the dignity of
the legal profession and will not receive any sympathy from this court."
The complaint against respondent Jaime S. Linsangan is dismissed for
lack of merit. Respondent Rufino B. Risma is exculpated from the charge
of having instigated the filing of an unfounded suit. He is, however,
admonished to exercise greater care in ascertaining how much under
our law he could recover by way of attorney's contract entered into
between him and his client as to his being entitled to fifteen per cent of
the award granted her in a workmen's compensation suit is declared to
be of no force and effect, the penalty imposed being that of admonition
merely only because he had made no effort to collect on the same and
had even advanced expenses for a poor client. Let a copy of this
resolution be spread on the records of
both respondents.
Sabayle v Tandayag
FACTS
In a sworn complaint for suspension or disbarment dated 15 December
l968
Judge Teodulo Tandayag ---- Misconduct in office, inefficiency and
incompetence;
Atty. Carmelito B. Gabor ---- Violation of his duties as Notary Public by
acknowledging a Deed of Sale in the absence of the purported vendors
and for taking advantage of his position as Assistant Clerk of court by
purchasing one-half (1/2) of the land covered by said Deed of Sale
knowing that that Deed of Sale was fictitious; and.
Atty. Pablo B. Badong ---- Negligence in the performance of his
professional duties by failing to file an Opposition to a Motion in Civil
Case No. IL-43 handled by him for complainant, and failing to take an
appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeals in C.A. G.R. No. 30302-
R dated 5 May 1967, to the Supreme Court after having received the sum
of P4,500.00 as court fees, transportation expenses and attorney's fees.
Required to file their answers and then referred it to solicitor general.
Fourteen (14) years later, because of the difficulty of securing the
appearance in Manila of the parties who all resided in Iligan City, then
Assistant Solicitor General Eduardo Montenegro referred the case on 28
June 1983 to the City Fiscal of Iligan City for investigation, report and
recommendation.
1984 badong died, and sabayle failed to prove charges thus recommend
for dismissal by atty padilla
ISSUES
RULING
The finding of the Trial Court, however, that the Deed of Sale is fictitious
gives credence to the charge that respondent ratified the document in
the absence of complainant and his wife, which, needless to say,
constitutes censurable conduct.
In the same vein, we do not agree with respondent's defense that he did
not participate in the preparation of the fictitious Deed of Sale.
A lawyer, who through negligence fails to discover the falsity of a
document which he uses in connect on with the performance of his
functions may be dealt with administratively for failure to exercise care,
notwithstanding lack of intent on his part to deceive (Berenguer vs.
Carranza, G.R. Adm. Case No. 716, Jan., 1969, 26 SCRA 673).
Respondent is reprimanded for being guilty of malpractice.
We hold that the said agreement is void because it was tantamount to
malpractice which is "the practice of soliciting cases at law for the
purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or brokers"
Sec. 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court). Malpractice ordinarily refers to any
malfeasance or dereliction of duty committed by a lawyer. Section 27
gives a special and technical meaning to the term "malpractice" (Act No.
2828, amending sec. 21 of Act No. 190).
the award granted her in a workmen's compensation suit is declared to
be of no force and effect, the penalty imposed being that of admonition
merely only because he had made no effort to collect on the same and
had even advanced expenses for a poor client. Let a copy of this
resolution be spread on the records of
both respondents.
PEOPLE v SESBRENO

TAN TEK BENG v DAVID

FACTS
In said agreement lawyer David not only agreed to give one-half of his
professional fees to an intermediary or commission agent but he also
bound himself not to deal directly with the clients
That meaning is in consonance with the elementary notion that the FACTS
practice of law is a profession, not a business. "The lawyer may not seek
or obtain employment by himself or through others for to do so would atty sesbreno has been filed with a case of libel
be unprofessional" (2 R.C.L. 1097 cited in In re Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37, 42;
Malcolm, J., Jayme vs. Bualan, 58 Phil. 422; Arce vs. Philippine National Based on alleged defamatory statement found in a pleading that he
Bank, 62 Phil. 569) made.
NARIDO v LINSANGAN

FACTS allegedly libelous statements imputing that Atty. Ramon B. Ceniza is an

irresponsible person, cannot be trusted, like Judas, a liar and
The business relationship between David and Tan Tek Beng did not last. Two administrative cases wherein respondents Jaime S. Linsangan and irresponsible childish prankster.
There were mutual accusations of doublecross. No civil suit wad filed by Rufino B. Risma, who frepresented adverse parties in a workmen's
Tan. compensation case, did mutually hurl accusation at each other.

In his 1974 comment, David clarified that the partnership was composed
of himself as manager, Tan Tek Beng as assistant manager and lawyer
Pedro Jacinto as president and financier. When Jacinto became ill and
the costs of office maintenance mounted, David suggested that Tan Tek
Beng should also invest some money or shoulder a part of the business
expenses but Tan Tek Beng refused.
1977 Tan Died
ISSUE
whether disciplinary action should be taken against lawyer Timoteo A.
David (admitted to the bar in 1945) for not giving Tan Tek Beng, a
nonlawyer (alleged missionary of the Seventh Day Adventists), one-half
of the attorney's fees received by David from the clients supplied by Tan
Tek Beng.
RULING
The charge against respondent Linsangan filed by a certain Flora Naridois Requested for squashal of information because accordimg to him it is
that he violated the attorney's oath by submitting a perjured statement. protected by doctrine of absolute privilge communication
When required to answer, not only did he deny the complaint but he
would also hold respondent Risma accountable for having instigated his
client, the complainant, Flora Narido, to file a false and malicious
ISSUE
complaint resulting in what respondent Linsangan called
"embarrassment, humiliation and defamation" of a brother in Does atty sesbreno's wordings in the pleading employed language that
aprofession is unbecoming of a member of the Bar and therefore would result to a
violation the CPR?
ISSUE
RULING
RULING
Justice Laurel, announced in Javier v. Cornejo: 4 "It should be observed,
in this connection, that mutual bickerings and unjustifiable However, although it is understandable, if not justifiable, that, at times,
recriminations, between brother attorneys detract from the dignity of zeal in the defense of one's clientmay be carried to the point of undue
the legal profession and will not receive any sympathy from this court." skepticism and doubts as to the motives of opposing counsel, the
spectacle presented by two members of the bar engaged in bickering
and recrimination is far from edifying (Narido v. Linsangan, 58 SCRA 85).
Mutual bickerings and recriminations between brother attorneys
The complaint against respondent Jaime S. Linsangan is dismissed for
detract from the dignity of the legal profession and will not receive any
lack of merit. Respondent Rufino B. Risma is exculpated from the charge
sympathy from this Court (Javier v. Cornejo, 63 Phil. 293).
of having instigated the filing of an unfounded suit. He is, however,
admonished to exercise greater care in ascertaining how much under
our law he could recover by way of attorney's contract entered into
between him and his client as to his being entitled to fifteen per cent of
Whatever may be the ill-feeling existing between clients, it should not
be allowed to influence counsel in their conduct and demeanor toward
each other or toward suitors in the case. All personalities between
counsel should be scrupulously avoided. In the trial of a case it is
indecent to allude to the personal history or the personal peculiarities
and idiosyncracies of counsel on the other side. Personal colloquies
between counsel which cause delay and promote unseemly wrangling
should also be carefully avoided (Canon 17, Canons of Professional
Ethics). Lawyers owe respect not only to the courts and their clients, but
also to other members of the Bar.
In keeping with the dignity of the legal profession, a lawyer's language
should likewise be dignified (In re Climaco, 55 SCRA 107, 121). Choice of
language is a important requirement in the preparation of pleadings
Appropriately, in the
assertion of their client's rights, lawyers - even those gifted with superior
intellect - are enjoined to rein up their tempers. Greater care and
circumspection must be exercised in the preparation of their pleadings
and to refrain from using abrasive and offensive language (Yangson v.
Saladanan, 68 SCRA 42). A becoming modesty is a desirable trait also of
practising attorneys
Atty Sesbreno is reprimanded and admonished to refrain from
employing language unbecoming of a member of the Bar and to extend
courtesy and respect to his brothers in the profession with a warning
that any future infraction of a nature
similar to that found in this case shall be dealt with more severely
DELOS REYES v AZNAR
FACTS
Complainant, a second year medical student of the Southwestern
University (Cebu), alleged in her verified complaint that respondent Atty.
Jose B. Aznar, then chairman of said university, had carnal knowledge of
her for several times under threat that she would fail in her Pathology
subject if she would not submit to respondent's lustful desires.
Complainant further alleged that when she became pregnant,
respondent, through a certain Dr. Gil Ramas, had her undergo forced
abortion
Denied allegations in answer, raised a special defense, averred that
complainant is a woman of loose morality.
However, substantial evidence was presented.by the complainant
ISSUES
WON Atty Aznar should be disbarred for grossly immoral conduct, by
takkng advantage of hus position as chairman of medicine in asking
complainant to go with him to Manila where he had carnal knowledge
of her under the threat that she would flunk in all her subjects in case
she refuse
RULINGS
It is the duty of a lawyer, whenever his moral character is put in issue, to
satisfy this Court that he is a fit and proper person to enjoy continued
membership in the Bar. He cannot dispense with nor downgrade the
high and exacting moral standards of the law profession
The fact that he is a rich man and does not practice his profession as a
lawyer, does not render respondent a person of good moral character.
Evidence of good moral character precedes admission to bar (Sec. 2,
Rule 138, Rules of Court) and such requirement is not dispensed with
upon admission thereto. Good moral character is a continuing
qualification necessary to entitle one to continue in the practice of law.
The ancient and learned profession of law exacts from its members the
highest standard of morality (Quingwa v. Puno, supra).
Under Section 27, Rule 138, "(a) member of the bar may be removed or
suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any
deceit, malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly
immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a crime involving
moral turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to
take before admission to practice . . ." In Arciga v. Maniwang (106 SCRA
591, [1981]), this Court had occasion to define the concept of immoral
conduct, as follows:
"A lawyer may be disbarred for grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of
his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. A member of the bar
should have moral integrity in addition to professional probity.
"Where an unmarried female dwarf possessing the intellect of a child
became pregnant by reason of intimacy with a married lawyer who was
the father of six children, disbarment of the attorney on the ground of
immoral conduct was justified .