COBB-PEREZ vs LANTIN

GR No. L-22320
Jul. 29, 1968

FACTS

A civil case was filed by Ricardo Hermoso against Damaso Perez for the latter’s failure to pay a debt of
Php 17,000.00. Hermoso won and a writ of execution was issued in his favor. The sheriff was to conduct
a public sale of a property owned by Perez worth Php 300,000.00. This was opposed by Perez as he
claimed the amount of said property was more than the amount of the debt. Respondent Judge Lantin,
issuing judge, found merit on this, hence he amended his earlier decision and issued a second writ this
time directing the sheriff to conduct a public sale of Perez’ 210 shares of stock approximately worth Php
17,000.00

Subsequently, Perez and his wife filed five more petitions for injunction trying to enjoin the public sale.
The case eventually reached the Supreme Court where the SC ruled that the petition of the Perez
spouses are without merit; that their numerous petitions for injunction are contemplated for delay. I n said
decision, the Supreme Court ordered petitioners to pay the cost of the suit but said cost should be paid by
their counsels, Atty. Baizas and Atty. Bolinao. The counsels now appeal said decision by the Supreme
Court as they claimed that such decision reflected adversely against their professionalism; that “If there
was delay, it was because petitioners’ counsel happened to be more assertive… a quality of the lawyers
(which) is not to be condemned.”

ISSUE

WON the counsels for the Spouses Perez are excused.

HELD

No. A counsel’s assertiveness in espousing with candor and honesty his client’s cause must be
encouraged and is to be commended; what is not tolerated is a lawyer’s insistence despite the patent
futility of his client’s position, as in the case at bar. It is the duty of a counsel to advise his client, ordinarily
a layman to the intricacies and vagaries of the law, on the merit or lack of merit of his case. If he finds that
his client’s cause is defenseless, then it is his bounden duty to advise the latter to acquiesce and submit,
rather than traverse the incontrovertible. A lawyer must resist the whims and caprices of his client, and
temper his client’s propensity to litigate. A lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause of justice is superior to his
duty to his client; its primacy is indisputable.

Atty. Baizas and Atty. Bolinao jointly and severally liable for the treble costs.