SAIVAN R.

VALENDEZ, JD-IV
Problem Areas in Legal Ethics
Case Digest No. 6

CONRADO QUE VS. ATTY. ANASTACIO REVILLA, JR.

A.C. No. 7054
December 4, 2009
Per Curiam

FACTS:
This is a disbarment case filed by Conrado Que (complainant) against Atty. Anastacio Revilla, Jr.
(respondent) before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Committee on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD)
for committing six (6) violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility including therein Rule
138 of the Rules of Court in the Unlawful Detainer Case against complainant.

Respondent is accused for abusing the court remedies and processes to assail and overturn the
decisions of the Trial Courts by using unnecessary remedies. He is also accused for impending,
obstructing and frustrating the efficient administration of justice by committing prohibited
forum-shopping on the subject case to prevent the execution of the final judgment of such case,
deceiving the open court by fabricating an imaginary order issued by the presiding judge,
defamed the name of Atty. Alfredo Catolico, who is the previous counsel of respondent’s clients,
and the two willful and fraudulent appearances for the petition of annulment of title. Respondent
is also accused for representing fifty-two (52) litigants in a civil case without authority to do so.

In his answer, he claims that he is just protecting the interests of his clients in their property by
doing such acts and the complaint against him is just to harass, ridicule and defame his good
name and reputation and, indirectly, to harass his clients who are marginalized members of
Kalayaan Development Cooperative (KDC).

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent can be held liable for the imputed unethical infractions and
professional misconduct.

RULING:
Yes, respondent is liable for the imputed unethical infractions and professional misconduct.

Rule 10.03, Canon 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility obliged a lawyer to “observe the
rules of procedure and not to misuse them to defeat the ends of justice.” By his actions, he uses
procedural rules to thwart and obstruct the speedy and efficient administration of justice,
resulting in prejudice to the winning parties in the said case.

Rule 12.02, Canon 12 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and rule against forum shopping
are both directed against the filing of multiple actions to attain the same objective. Both violations
constitute abuse of court processes.
Rule 10.01, Canon 10 provides that “a lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing
of any in Court, nor shall he mislead or allow the Court to be misled by an artifice.” In his acts,
he conceals the truth from the court and misleads the court, which is not justifiable even how
demanding his duties to his clients may be.

Rule 19.01, Canon 19 provides that “a lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain
the lawful objectives of his clients” in which his actions are inconsistent with this rule.