SUSPENSION,

DISBARMENT
AND DISCIPLINE
OF LAWYERS
Authority of Supreme
Court to Discipline
Lawyers
 The Supreme Court shall have the power to
promulgate rules concerning the protection and
enforcement of constitutional rights, pleading,
practice, and procedure in all courts, the
admission to the practice of law, the
integrated bar, and legal assistance to the
under-privileged. (Article VIII, Section 5 of the
1987 Constitution)
 SUSPENSION is the temporary withholding of
the lawyer’s right to practice his profession.
 DISBARMENT is the act of withdrawing from
an attorney his license to practice law.

An impeachable officer who is a member of the

bar cannot be disbarred without first being
impeached.
NATURE AND
CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE
PROCEEDINGS
 It is confidential.

Atty.
  Herminio Harry L. Roque, Jr. vs. Armed Forces
of the Philippines, G.R. No. 214986, February 15,
2017

Atty. Raymund P. Palad vs. Atty. Lorna Patajo-

Kapunan, A.C. No. 9923, October 9, 2019
 It is sui generis.

  Romeo A. Zarcilla and Marita Bumanglag vs.

Atty. Jose Quesada, Jr., A.C. No. 7186, March
13, 2018
 
It is summary in nature.
  
It is imprescriptible.

Williams, et. al. vs. Icao, A.C. No. 6882, December 24,
2008
Frias vs. Bautista-Lozada, A.C. No. 6656, May 4, 2006
Heck vs. Santos, A.M. RTJ-01-1657, February 23, 2004
SCOPE:

- Lawyers can be disciplined for any misconduct, whether in

 
their professional or private capacity.

Villatuya vs. Tabalingcos, A.C. No. 6622, July 10, 2012

Virtusio vs. Virtusio, A.C. No. 6753, September 5, 2012
Garrido vs. Garrido, A.C. No. 6593, February 4, 2010
WHO MAY FILE:

- Any person may file a disciplinary case against a lawyer.

 
(Tejan vs. Cusi, 57 SCRA 154)
How Instituted
1. By verified complaint of any person to be filed before the
CBD or before the SC

2. Motu proprio by the SC or by the IBP Board of Governors

3. By referral by the SC or by a Chapter Board of Officers –

referral to be made to the IBP Board of Governors
GROUNDS: Rule 138, Sec. 27

1) Grossly immoral conduct;

2) Violation of oath of office;
3) Malpractice or gross misconduct;
4)   of a crime involving moral turpitude;
Conviction
5) Willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court;
6) Deceit;
7) Corrupt or willful appearance as an attorney for a party to case without
authority to do so. (Interadent Zahntechnik, Phil., Inc. rep. by Luis Marco
I. Avancena vs. Atty. Rebecca S. Franciso-Simbillo, A.C. No. 9464, August
24, 2016)
 
Grossly Immoral Conduct
1)Advincula vs. Advincula, A.C. No. 9226, June 14, 2016
2)Daisy D. Panagsagan vs. Atty. Bernie Y. Panagsagan,
A.C. No. 7733, October 1, 2019
3) AAA vs. Atty. Antonio N. Delos Reyes,
A.C. No. 10021, September 18, 2018
4) Oliver Fabugais vs. Atty. Bernardo C. Faundo, Jr.,
A.C. No. 10145, June 11, 2018
5) Valdez vs. Atty. Dabon, Jr., A.C. No. 7353, November 16, 2015
  Conviction of a Crime
Involving Moral Turpitude
1)Luis Marco I. Avancena vs. Atty. Rebecca S. Francisco-
Simbillo, A.C. No. 9464, August 24, 2016
2)Roman dela Rosa Verano vs. Atty. Luis Fernan Diores, A.C.
No. 8887, November 7, 2017
3)Office of the Court Administrator vs. Judge Conrado O. Alinea,
Jr., Municipal Trial Court, Iba, Zambales, A.M. No. MTJ-05-
1574, November 7, 2017
 Willful Disobedience
  Of Any Lawful Order
of a Superior Court
And Corrupt
or Willful Appearance
As an Attorney
for a Party to Case
Without Authority to Do So
1)Romeo A. Zarcilla and Marita Bumanglag vs.
Atty. Jose C. Quesada, Jr., A.C. No. 7186, March 13, 2018
2) Rosa Yap Paras vs. Justo de Jesus Paras,
A.C. No. 5333, March 13, 2017
 
Gross Misconduct
1)HDI Holdings Philippines, Inc. vs. Atty. Emmanuel N. Cruz,
A.C. No. 11724, July 31, 2018

2) Alfred Lehnert vs. Atty. Dennis L. Dino,

A.C. No. 12174, August 28, 2018
Does a lawyer enjoy the legal
presumption of innocence?
   Is disbarment case
the proper venue to attack a
lawyer’s citizenship?
BURDEN OF PROOF:

- Rests upon the complainant, who must satisfactorily

prove by substantial evidence his allegations in the
 
complaint

Edgar M. Rico vs. Attys. Jose R. Madrazo, Jr., Antonio

V.A. Tan and Leonido C. Delante, A.C. No. 7231,
October 1, 2019

Romeo A. Zarcilla and Marita Bumanglag vs. Atty. Jose

C. Quesada, Jr., A.C. No. 7186, March 13, 2018
QUANTUM OF PROOF REQUIRED:

  SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE

Nelita S.Salazar vs. Atty. Felino R. Quiambao,

A.C. No. 12401, March 12, 2019
EFFECTS OF COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS AND
AFFIDAVITS OF DESISTANCE:

 
- May proceed regardless of interest or lack of interest of the
complainant since the real question for determination in these
proceedings is whether or not the attorney is still a fit person to
be allowed the privileges of a member of the bar (Vicka Marie
D. Isalos vs. Atty. Ana Luz B. Cristal, A.C. No. 11822, November
22, 2017)
EFFECTS OF COMPROMISE AGREEMENTS AND
AFFIDAVITS OF DESISTANCE:

- An affidavit
  of desistance is not sufficient to dismiss an
administrative complaint against a lawyer. (Liang Fuji vs.
Atty. Gemma Armi M. Dela Cruz, A.C. No. 11043, March 8,
2017)

- The desistance of the complainant or withdrawal of the

complaint does not necessarily warrant the dismissal of an
administrative proceeding. (Susan Loberes-Pintal vs. Atty.
Ramoncito B. Baylosis, A.C. No. 11545, January 24, 2017)
READMISSION AND REINSTATEMENT:

- The court should see to it that only those who establish their
  moral fitness and knowledge of the law will be
present
readmitted to the bar. (Que vs. Atty. Revilla, A.C. No. 7054,
November 11, 2014)

- The basic inquiry in a petition for reinstatement to the practice

of law is whether the lawyer has sufficiently rehabilitated
himself or herself in conduct and character. (Que vs. Atty.
Revilla, A. C. No. 7054, November 11, 2014)
READMISSION AND REINSTATEMENT:

- The court will grant judicial clemency only if there is a

  that it is merited. (A.C. No. 5161, July 11, 2017)
showing

- Membership in the bar is a special privilege granted only to

those who demonstrate special fitness in intellectual attainment
and in moral character. (San Jose Homeowners Association,
Inc., as represented by Rebecca V. Labrador vs. Atty. Roberto
B. Romanillos, A.C. No. 5580, July 31, 2018)