Subject Matter: Lawyer’s Professional Responsibility

Parks v Atty. Joaquin Misa, A.C. No. 11639, February 05, 2020

Facts of the Case:

1. Anthony Ting demolished a portion of the concrete wall of the house of Parks’
father Rosendo and inflict bodily harm against Rosendo in the presence of
Atty. Misa. This prompted Rosendo to file a criminal case for Malicious
Mischief and Less Serious Physical Injuries against Ting and Atty. Misa.

2. In the counter-affidavit made Atty. Misa, he characterized Roselyn as a drug

addict and a fraud. He also claimed that he would tell the US immigration
about Roselyn's fixed marriage and how her money had made bigger
monsters out of them.

3. Roselyn then filed an administrative case against Atty. Misa for the
defamatory remarks made by Atty. Misa in the counter-affidavit.

4. Atty. Misa then denied the claim against him claiming that the allegations
were privileged, relevant, material and required by the justice with which
he was charged.

5. The IBP determined that the remarks were not even relevant and material to
the criminal case of Malicious Mischief. It was recommended therefore that
Atty. Misa be admonished. This recommendation was adopted by the Board
of Governors.

ISSUE:

1. How should a lawyer conduct himself specifically in his language?

2. Did Atty. Misa violate the Code of Professional Responsibility by his use
of derogatory and defamatory language against Roselyn in his counter-
affidavit?

RULING:

1. In the case of Gimeno v. Zaide, the Supreme Court said that a lawyer
should not use intemperate, offensive, and abusive language in a
lawyer's professional dealings, whether with the courts, his clients, or
any other person. That a lawyer should conduct himself with courtesy,
fairness and candor toward his professional colleagues. Further, he
 should abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing language or
behavior before the Courts. This is based on Canons 8, Rule 8.01, Canon
11, Rule 11.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

A lawyer’s language may be forceful and emphatic, but it should always

be dignified and respectful.

2. Yes.

Roselyn was not a party to the case and the comments made against her
were pointless and uncalled for and shows his clear intention to
humiliated or insult Roselyn. Having failed to uphold the standards set in
the Code of Professional Responsibility by making derogatory and
defamatory language, Atty. Misa was admonished by the Supreme
Court.

Note:

Counter-affidavit: a pleading filed with the Prosecutor’s Office responding to an

affidavit-complaint. It includes defenses of a party sued in a criminal case.

[THIS IS NOT PART OF YOUR DIGEST]