Case Summary (A.C. No. 188)
Case Background
The Supreme Court, in its decision dated September 24, 1973, found the respondent guilty of gross immoral conduct, resulting in a two-year suspension from the practice of law. This decision was made after extensive consideration and was officially documented, indicating the Court's decision was not merely an informal ruling.
Motions for Reconsideration
Following the suspension, the respondent filed several motions for reconsideration, all of which were denied by the Court in its resolutions dated November 20, 1973; December 19, 1973; January 9, 1974; and October 30, 1974. These denials highlight the Court’s firm position on the initial finding of guilt and suspension.
Petition to the President
On March 31, 1975, the Clerk of Court received a communication from Assistant Executive Secretary Ronaldo B. Zamora, which included a petition from the respondent asking the President of the Philippines to intervene and set aside the Supreme Court's order of suspension. The respondent sought a decree to allow him to resume practice as a member of the New Society.
Court's Resolution on Presidential Petition
In response to this petition, the Supreme Court, via its Resolution dated June 16, 1975, instructed the Clerk of Court to provide copies of the previous decision and resolutions regarding the denial of the respondent's motions for reconsideration. The Court also required the respondent to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him for making misleading statements in his petition and for misunderstanding the separation of powers.
Withdrawal of Petition
On June 18, 1975, the Assistant Executive Secretary forwarded a response from the respondent who acknowledged his mistake in filing the petition to the President. The respondent expressed his realization regarding the inappropriate nature of his request, emphasizing his understanding of the principle of separation of powers.
Apology from the Respondent
In his Explanation dated July 23, 1975, the respondent reiterated his withdrawal of the petition and expressed remorse, assuring that he had learned from this incident and would not repeat such actions. He recognized the President's lack of authority to alter Supreme Court decisions and formally apologized to the Court.
Administrative Action
The Court acknowledged the respondent's service of his two-year suspension and took into consideration his apology and recognition of his error. While the Court viewed his actions with a degree of leniency, it opted to administer a reprimand rather than more severe penalties, warning that any future missteps would be met with stringent disciplinary mea
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.C. No. 188)
Case Background and Initial Findings
- The case involves Ricarda Gabriel De Bumanglag as the complainant and Esteban T. Bumanglag as the respondent.
- On September 24, 1973, the Supreme Court found the respondent guilty of gross immoral conduct.
- The Court imposed a penalty of suspension from the practice of law for a period of two years.
Motions for Reconsideration
- Following the initial ruling, the respondent filed several motions for reconsideration.
- All motions were denied by the Court through resolutions dated November 20, 1973, December 19, 1973, January 9, 1974, and October 30, 1974.
Petition to the President
- On March 31, 1975, the Clerk of Court received a 1st Indorsement from Assistant Executive Secretary Ronaldo B. Zamora.
- The Indorsement requested comments and/or appropriate action regarding a petition from the respondent to the President of the Philippines.
- The respondent's petition requested that the President promulgate a decree to set aside the Supreme Court's suspension order and allow him to return as an active member of the legal profession.
Court's Response to the Petition
- On June 16, 1975, the Court directed the Clerk of Court to send copies of the September 24, 1973