In re Almacen 31 SCRA 562
Subject: Basic Legal Ethics
FACTS
Atty. Vicente Raul Almacen
filed a "Petition to Surrender Lawyer's Certificate of Title" with
the Supreme Court of the Philippines. In his petition, Almacen alleged that the
Court had committed a great injustice against his client, Antonio H. Calero, in
a previous case. Almacen also made disparaging remarks about the Court, calling
it a "tribunal peopled by men who are calloused to our pleas for justice,
who ignore without reasons their own applicable decisions and commit culpable
violations of the Constitution with impunity."
ISSUE
Whether or not Atty. Almacen
should be given disciplinary actions for his acts.
RULING
Yes, indefinite suspension was
proper.
In this case, SC held that
there is no one to blame but Atty. Almacen himself because of his negligence.
Even if the intentions of his accusations are so noble, in speaking of the
truth and alleged injustices,so as not to condemn the sinners but the sin, it
has already caused enough damage and disrepute to the judiciary. Since this
particular case is sui generis in its nature, a number of foreign and local
jurisprudence in analogous cases were cited as benchmarks and references.
Between disbarment and suspension, the latter was imposed. Indefinite
suspension may only be lifted until further orders, after Atty. Almacen may be
able to prove that he is again fit to resume the practice of law.
No comments:
Post a Comment