Title
Dumlao, Jr. vs. Camacho
Case
A.C. No. 10498
Decision Date
Sep 4, 2018
A lawyer attempted to influence a judge through fraternization, bribery, and threats, violating ethical standards and undermining judicial integrity. Suspension imposed.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 10498)

Summary Judgment and Subsequent Appeal

RTC Order (Jan. 30, 2014) granted Pathways’ summary judgment for ₱16 million plus fees. Defendants secured new counsel and filed a notice of appeal. Respondent then directly contacted Judge Dumlao, offering to share attorney’s fees in exchange for denying appeal and issuing execution writ, while threatening a disbarment complaint if refused.

Execution Proceedings and Intrusion

After denial of appeal and issuance of writ on April 28, 2014, respondent demanded Sheriff Nabua to serve garnishment notwithstanding defendants’ offer of personal property satisfaction. On May 22, 2014, he barged into the judge’s chambers with a self-prepared garnishment order for ₱18.69 billion, threatened both judge and sheriff with dismissal and disbarment, and sent multiple menacing text messages alleging graft charges.

Procedural History and IBP Investigation

Judge Dumlao filed an incident report with the OCA. Despite notice, respondent failed to file a comment. The Court deemed waiver of his right to comment and referred the matter to the IBP for investigation. The IBP Commission on Bar Discipline found clear, convincing proof of multiple Code violations; the IBP Board adopted the findings but reduced penalty recommendation to six-month suspension.

Violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility

  • Influence peddling (Canon 13; Rule 13.01): cultivating familiarity with judge and invoking high-level connections
  • Attempted bribery (Canon 10; Rule 10.01): offering share of fees for favorable rulings
  • Disrespect and threats (Canon 11; Rule 11.03): menacing language before court officers
  • Unfair tactics (Canon 19; Rule 19.01): threatening unfounded criminal charges to coerce court personnel
  • Breach of Lawyer’s Oath: falsehoods, intimidation, undermining judicial integrity

En Banc Ruling on Guilt

The Supreme Court, affirming applicable ethical canons under the 1987 Constitution, adopted factual findings of misconduct. It held that respondent’s conduct—bribery offers, influence peddling, threats to dismiss court officers and filing spurious charges—undermined public confidence and violated multiple professional canons and rules.

Penalty Assessment

Noting prior

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.