Case Digest: Conrado N. Que, Complainant, v. Atty Anastacio E. Revilla, Jr., Respondent | A.C. No. 7054, 11 November 2014

Conrado N. Que, Complainant, v. Atty Anastacio E. Revilla, Jr., Respondent
A.C. No. 7054, 11 November 2014

Facts:
    Que accused Revilla, Jr. of willfully delaying the final judgment of the lower court against his client. Respondent successfully filed a petition of certiorari before the Court of Appeals, two petitions of annulment of title and a petition for annulment of judgment before the Regional Trial Court, and a petition for declaratory execution of the lower court’s decision against his client.

Issue:
    Whether or not the respondent violated various canons and provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR).

Held:
    Respondent’s abuse of court remedies by filing multiple actions praying for the same cause delayed the execution of the final judgment of the court. The respondent’s willful and revolting falsehood is also alleged by the complainant that unjustly maligned and defamed the good name and reputation of the late Atty. Alfredo Catolico who was the previous counsel of the respondent’s clients. The respondent’s repeated attempts go beyond legitimate means allowed by professional ethical rules in defending the interests of his clients. The respondent violated his duty as an attorney “never to mislead the judge or any judicial officer by an artifice or false statement of fact or law.”

    Due to the respondent’s multiple violations on the CPR, and is found liable for professional misconduct for violations of the Lawyer’s Oath; Canon 8; Rules 10.01 and 10.03, Canon 10; Rules 12.02 and 12.04, Canon 10; Rules 12.02 and 12.04, Canon 12; Rule 19.01, Canon 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR); and Sections 20 (d), 21 and 27 of Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. The Supreme Court disbarred the respondent from the practice of law.