In Re Gomez 43 Philippine Report 376

Doctrine:
Canon 11 mandates a lawyer to observe and maintain the respect due to the courts and
to judicial officers
Rule 11.05 states that a lawyer shall submit grievances against a judge to the proper
authorities
Lawyer’s Oath
FACTS:
Feliciano Gomez and Juan Cailles were rival candidates in the 1991 election for the
position of governor of Laguna. Gomez was proclaimed elected. Cailles then contested
the election in the Court of First Instance and in Supreme Court successfully. The
judgement of the higher tribunal was rendered and finaled on 1921.
Thereafter, at a public meeting to celebrate the municipal fiesta of Lumban, Laguna,
Gomez was charged with contempt alleging that the Supreme Court had decided in
favor with the protest of Cailles because Governor-General Wood, friends with Cailles,
had invited the members of the court of Malacanang before the decision in a secret
conference and had offered them a banquet. These remarks of Gomez was published in
La Nacion, a newspaper in Manila and has been substantiated by four affidavits.
In response, the Supreme Court outright deny the allegations of Gomez and
emphasized that it would not sell its birthright judicial integrity for a mere social courtesy
and to favor the Chief Executive. In fact, the election case of Att. Gomez was taken up
piece by piece and decided by principles so there would be no members that would
know the outcome until it has been tabulated and finished.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the Atty. Gomez violated his Code of Ethics as an officer of the
court and is guilty of contempt of court?

RULING:
Yes. Atty. Gomez violated his duty and obligations to the court when he made the
malicious remarks against the Supreme Court. He, as an officer of the court has to
maintain a respectful attitude not for the sake of the temporary incumbent of the judicial
office but for the maintenance if its supreme importance as stated in the Code of Ethics.