Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 87 views

    13 - Lao Vs Medel

    Uploaded by

    nica
    This case involved attorney Robert Medel being charged with dishonesty and misconduct for issuing worthless checks in payment of a loan. The Supreme Court found Medel guilty of gross misconduct for failing to pay his financial obligations and for disrespectfully leaving a disciplinary hearing before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. As attorneys must uphold the values of the legal profession and respect the authority of regulatory bodies, the Court suspended Medel from practicing law for one year.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    13 - Lao Vs Medel

    Uploaded by

    nica
    87 views2 pages
    This case involved attorney Robert Medel being charged with dishonesty and misconduct for issuing worthless checks in payment of a loan. The Supreme Court found Medel guilty of gross misconduct for failing to pay his financial obligations and for disrespectfully leaving a disciplinary hearing before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. As attorneys must uphold the values of the legal profession and respect the authority of regulatory bodies, the Court suspended Medel from practicing law for one year.

    Original Description:

    Lao vs Medel

    Original Title

    13_Lao vs Medel

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This case involved attorney Robert Medel being charged with dishonesty and misconduct for issuing worthless checks in payment of a loan. The Supreme Court found Medel guilty of gross misconduct for failing to pay his financial obligations and for disrespectfully leaving a disciplinary hearing before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. As attorneys must uphold the values of the legal profession and respect the authority of regulatory bodies, the Court suspended Medel from practicing law for one year.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    87 views2 pages

    13 - Lao Vs Medel

    Uploaded by

    nica
    This case involved attorney Robert Medel being charged with dishonesty and misconduct for issuing worthless checks in payment of a loan. The Supreme Court found Medel guilty of gross misconduct for failing to pay his financial obligations and for disrespectfully leaving a disciplinary hearing before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. As attorneys must uphold the values of the legal profession and respect the authority of regulatory bodies, the Court suspended Medel from practicing law for one year.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Lao v Medel

    Code of Professional Responsibility


    Case No. 13 | July 1, 2003 | J. Panganiban

    KEY TAKE-AWAY OR DOCTRINE TO REMEMBER

    1. Canon 1 of the Code of Professional Responsibility mandates all members of the bar to obey
    the laws of the land and promote respect for law. Rule 1.01 of the Code specifically provides
    that [a] lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
    2. We stress that membership in the legal profession is a privilege. It demands a high degree of
    good moral character, not only as a condition precedent to admission, but also as a continuing
    requirement for the practice of law.
    3. Verily, lawyers must at all times faithfully perform their duties to society, to the bar, to the
    courts and to their clients. As part of those duties, they must promptly pay their financial
    obligations. Their conduct must always reflect the values and norms of the legal profession as
    embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility. On these considerations, the Court may
    disbar or suspend lawyers for any professional or private misconduct showing them to be
    wanting in moral character, honesty, probity and good demeanoror to be unworthy to
    continue as officers of the Court.

    FACTS

    Background:

    This administrative case stems from a Complaint-Affidavit1 filed with the


    Integrated Bar of the Philippines-Commission on Bar Discipline (IBP-CBD) by
    Selwyn F. Lao.
    Atty. Robert W. Medel was charged therein with dishonesty, grave misconduct
    and conduct unbecoming an attorney.
    In the present case, respondent has been brought to this Court for failure to pay
    his debts and for issuing worthless checks as payment for his loan from
    complainant. While acknowledging the fact that he issued several worthless
    checks, he contends that such act constitutes neither a violation of the Code of
    Professional Responsibility; nor dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
    On July 4, 2002, both parties appeared before the IBP-CBD for their scheduled
    hearing. But, while waiting for the case to be called, respondent suddenly
    insisted on leaving, supposedly to attend to a family emergency. Complainants
    counsel objected and Commissioner Cunanan, who was still conducting a
    hearing in another case, ordered him to wait. He, however, retorted in a loud
    voice, Its up to you, this is only disbarment, my family is more important.6
    And, despite the objection and the warning, he arrogantly left. He made no
    effort to comply with his undertaking to settle his indebtedness before leaving.
    ISSUES / RATIO

    1. WON Atty. Medel will be disbarred for B.P. 22

    YES.
    In Co v. Bernardino,14 the Court considered the issuance of worthless checks
    as a violation of this Rule and an act constituting gross misconduct

    Verily, lawyers must at all times faithfully perform their duties to society, to the
    bar, to the courts and to their clients. As part of those duties, they must promptly
    pay their financial obligations. Their conduct must always reflect the values
    and norms of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of Professional
    Responsibility. On these considerations, the Court may disbar or suspend
    lawyers for any professional or private misconduct showing them to be wanting
    in moral character, honesty, probity and good demeanoror to be unworthy to
    continue as officers of the Court.

    * We likewise take notice of the high-handed manner in which respondent dealt


    with Commissioner Cunanan during the July 4, 2002 hearing, when the former
    was expected to settle his obligation with complainant. We cannot
    countenance the discourtesy of respondent. He should be reminded that the
    IBP has disciplinary authority over him by virtue of his membership therein.

    WHEREFORE, Atty. Robert W. Medel is found guilty of gross misconduct and is


    hereby SUSPENDED for one year from the practice of law, effective upon his
    receipt of this Decision. He is warned that a repetition of the same or a similar act will
    be dealt with more severely.

    You might also like