Case Digest (A.M. No. R-225-RTJ)
Facts:
Atty. Himiniano D. Silva v. Hon. Judge German G. Lee, Jr., Adm. Matter No. R-225-RTJ, 251 Phil. 464 (Promulgated January 26, 1989), the Supreme Court En Banc, Paras, J., writing for the Court.
The complainant, Atty. Himiniano D. Silva, was counsel for the plaintiffs in Civil Case No. 8338 pending before respondent Judge German G. Lee, Jr. of the Regional Trial Court, Negros Oriental, Branch XXXV. The defendants in that civil action filed a Motion to Dismiss which Judge Lee set for hearing on April 13, 1984; counsel Silva received notice of the hearing.
On April 9, 1984, Atty. Silva filed a Motion for Inhibition. He stated two grounds: a radio broadcast he had made over DYRM of Dumaguete City had allegedly offended the presiding judge and prompted adverse reactions reported to local IBP and RTC officials; and there existed a prior unwholesome atmosphere caused by an alleged threat from the presiding judge to hold Silva in contempt, which Silva asserted would prejudice his clients’ interests. Silva asked either that Judge Lee inhibit himself or that Silva be relieved as counsel if the motion were denied.
Judge Lee denied the motion for inhibition on April 10, 1984, finding it unfounded under Rule 137 of the Rules of Court but advising that Silva could formally withdraw with his clients’ conformity. At the April 13 hearing, Atty. Silva did not appear. In open court Judge Lee cited him for direct contempt, ordered his arrest and sentenced him to five days’ imprisonment; Silva was arrested and jailed that same afternoon for five days.
Silva sought relief by moving to quash the warrant of arrest and for reconsideration, both of which were denied. Thereafter Silva filed a formal administrative complaint against Judge Lee before the Supreme Court, charging oppression, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the judiciary, violation of the anti-graft law, and ignorance of the law. The adm...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did Atty. Silva’s non-appearance and related conduct at the April 13, 1984 hearing constitute direct contempt of court punishable by immediate arrest and summary imprisonment?
- If the contempt finding (and summary punishment) was improper, did Judge Lee’s conduct in ordering the arrest and imprisonment amount to disciplinable offenses such as oppression, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the judiciary, violation of the...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)