This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-03-11 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| It is for the foregoing reason that the Court cannot simply yield to complainants' change of heart by refuting their own statements against the respondents and praying that the complaint for disbarment they filed be dismissed. It bears emphasizing that any misconduct on the part of the lawyer not only hurts the client's cause but is even more disparaging on the integrity of the legal profession itself. Thus, for tarnishing the reputation of the profession, a lawyer may still be disciplined notwithstanding the complainant's pardon or withdrawal from the case for as long as there is evidence to support any finding of culpability. A case for suspension or disbarment may proceed "regardless of interest or lack of interest of the complainants, if the facts proven so warrant."[23] It follows that the withdrawal of the complainant from the case, or even the filing of an affidavit of desistance, does not conclude the administrative case against an erring lawyer. | |||||
|
2006-05-04 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| A case of suspension or disbarment may proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of the complainant.[16] What matters is whether, on the basis of the facts borne out by the record, the charge of negligence has been duly proved. This rule is premised on the nature of disciplinary proceedings. A proceeding for suspension or disbarment is not in any sense a civil action where the complainant is a plaintiff and the respondent lawyer is a defendant. Disciplinary proceedings involve no private interest and afford no redress for private grievance. They are undertaken and prosecuted solely for the public welfare. They are undertaken for the purpose of preserving courts of justice from the official ministration of persons unfit to practice in them. The attorney is called to answer to the court for his conduct as an officer of the court. The complainant or the person who called the attention of the court to the attorney's alleged misconduct is in no sense a party, and has generally no interest in the outcome except as all good citizens may have in the proper administration of justice. Hence, if the evidence on record warrants, the respondent may be suspended or disbarred despite the desistance of complainant or his withdrawal of the charges.[17] Accordingly, notwithstanding the motion to withdraw evidence and testimony, the disbarment proceeding should proceed. | |||||
|
2004-03-17 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| portion" of the Union members' contributions, without more, does not suffice to hold respondent liable for misappropriation. Without clear proof detailing the complainant's claim on this point, the Court cannot give credence to such serious charge. For a charge to warrant a disciplinary action against a lawyer, the complainant must present convincing proof to substantiate the charge.[13] Otherwise, the presumption that the lawyer is innocent of the charge prevails.[14] Respondent is also Liable for his Failure to | |||||