Title
Supreme Court
Que vs. Revilla, Jr.
Case
A.C. No. 7054
Decision Date
Dec 4, 2009
Atty. Revilla disbarred for abuse of court processes, forum shopping, falsehood, defamation, and unauthorized appearances, violating ethical and procedural rules.

Case Summary (A.C. No. 7054)

Allegations Against the Respondent

  1. Abuse of Court Processes: The respondent allegedly abused judicial procedures by filing numerous petitions to contest and overturn unfavorable judgments related to an unlawful detainer case against his clients. He continuously claimed a lack of jurisdiction by the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) and Regional Trial Court (RTC), despite knowing these courts had proper jurisdiction.

  2. Forum Shopping: The respondent was accused of filing multiple cases in different courts to obstruct the execution of the final judgments, thereby defeating the complainant's rights. This involved seeking various forms of relief to impede judicial resolution.

  3. Dishonesty and Deception: Allegations were made that the respondent engaged in falsehoods to misguide the courts, including the fabrication of an order in his motion for reconsideration and the misrepresentation of facts regarding a fellow lawyer's conduct (the late Atty. Alfredo Catolico).

  4. Unauthorized Representation: The respondent was charged with misrepresenting himself as counsel for deceased individuals in various cases without proper authority. Additionally, he improperly claimed to represent the Republic of the Philippines in actions reserved for the Solicitor General.

Investigating Commissioner’s Findings

The findings of Investigating Commissioner Renato G. Cunanan supported several of the complainant's assertions. The Commissioner noted that while an attorney must fervently defend their clients, they must also uphold the dignity of the law and not engage in practices that promote multiplicity of suits or forum shopping. The abuse of court processes was evident, with the respondent's actions being regarded as obstructionist rather than legitimate advocacy.

Penalty Recommendation and Modification

The Board of Governors of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) initially recommended a two-year suspension for the respondent. However, upon reconsideration, this penalty was reduced to one year. The case raised questions about the appropriate consequence for the respondent’s multiple violations and his history of similar misconduct.

The Court's Ruling

The Court upheld the findings of misconduct against the respondent but ultimately concluded that a suspension was insufficient in light of the severity and recurrence of his ethical violations. Given

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.