Title
Murillo vs. Superable, Jr.
Case
Adm. Case No. 341
Decision Date
Mar 23, 1960
Atty. Superable faced disbarment allegations from Delia Murillo, who claimed he fathered her child. *Eastern Star* published the charges, violating court confidentiality. Murillo and the publisher were fined for contempt.

Case Summary (Adm. Case No. 341)

Administrative Complaint and Allegations

Delia Murillo's administrative complaint arose from claims made in a letter addressed to the Chief Justice on April 1, 1958. Murillo accused Superable of employing her, exploiting her vulnerability, proposing marriage despite her marital status, and abandoning her and their child named Nicolas Superable III after cohabitation. She contended that Superable assured her of marriage, which he subsequently neglected, prompting her to file charges against him.

Superable's Response and Counterclaims

In response to the complaint, Superable admitted to employing Murillo but denied fathering the child. He claimed Murillo misrepresented herself as single while asserting that he was unaware of her marital status until informed by friends. He accused Murillo of being involved with other men and insinuated that her complaint was instigated by his antagonism toward the Tacloban Electric Light and Ice Company, a publication target of his writings.

Dismissal of Initial Complaint

On May 26, 1958, the Tribunal dismissed Murillo's complaint for lack of merit based on Superable's answer. However, Superable's subsequent letter lodged allegations against Murillo and others for allegedly publishing details about his disbarment case, claiming such disclosures violated legal confidentiality.

Subsequent Allegations and Contempt Proceedings

Upon Superable's accusations, the Tribunal initiated contempt proceedings against the parties involved, including Murillo and the owners of the Eastern Star newspaper. The respondents claimed their publication was intended to assist the court's investigation but later faced charges of contempt for breaching confidentiality provisions outlined in the Rules of Court.

Publication and Legal Implications

It was determined that the publication by the Eastern Star included headlined accusations against Superable, thus violating Rule 128, Section 10, which mandates confidentiality in disbarment proceedings until a final order is made public. The Court emphasized that such breaches could undermine trust in judicial proceedings and have reputational implications for attorneys.

Differentiation of Guilt and Sentencing

The Court reviewed the motives behind the publication, noting that while Murillo might have acted out of desperation or ignorance regarding the implications of her actions, Generoso Herrera, the newsp

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.