Scribd
Upload
54 views2 pages

In Re Almacen

1) Attorney Vicente Raul Almacen filed a "Petition to surrender Lawyer's certificate of title" accusing the Supreme Court of injustice against his client and indicting the Court as being "calloused to pleas of justice" and committing "culpable violations of the Constitution with impunity". 2) Almacen publicized the contents of his petition to the press, ridiculing the members of the Court. 3) The Court ruled that Almacen's language in his petition, answer, and oral arguments far exceeded permissible bounds of criticism and constituted misconduct, violating his oath and legal ethics canons. 4) While the misconduct was serious, the

Uploaded by

April Digas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
54 views2 pages

In Re Almacen

1) Attorney Vicente Raul Almacen filed a "Petition to surrender Lawyer's certificate of title" accusing the Supreme Court of injustice against his client and indicting the Court as being "calloused to pleas of justice" and committing "culpable violations of the Constitution with impunity". 2) Almacen publicized the contents of his petition to the press, ridiculing the members of the Court. 3) The Court ruled that Almacen's language in his petition, answer, and oral arguments far exceeded permissible bounds of criticism and constituted misconduct, violating his oath and legal ethics canons. 4) While the misconduct was serious, the

Uploaded by

April Digas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Respect to the courts

In Re Almacen
G.R. No. L-27654, February 18, 1970
CASTRO, J.

DOCTRINE:

Rule 11.03 Duty to abstain from scandalous, offensive or menacing language or behavior before the
Courts

FACTS:

This is about Atty. Vicente Raul Almacen's “Petition to surrender Lawyer's certificate of title” filed
in protest against what he asserts is “a great injustice committed against his client by this Supreme
Court”. Almacen indicts the court as a tribunal “peopled by men who are calloused to pleas of
justice, who ignore without reasons as their own applicable decisions and commit culpable
violations of the Constitution with impunity”.

Almacen continues, his client, who was deeply aggrieved by the Court's “unjust judgments”, has
become “one of the sacrificial victims before the altar of hypocrisy”. He also ridiculed the members
of the Court saying “that justice as administered by the present members of the Supreme Court is
not only blind, but also deaf and dumb”. He vows to argue the cause of his client “in the people's
forum” so that “people may know of the silent injustices committed by this Court”, and that
“whatever mistakes, wrongs, and injustices that were committed must never be repeated”.

He reiterated and disclosed to the press the contents of his petition thus, the Manila Times published
statements attributed to him by columnist Vicente Albano Pacis in the issue of Manila Chronicle. In
connection, Pacis commented that Atty. Almacen had “accused the high tribunal of offenses so
serious that the Court must clear itself”.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Almacen should be disciplined

RULING:

YES. As a law practitioner who was admitted to the Bar as far back as 1941, Atty. Almacen knew or
ought to have known that for a motion for reconsideration to stay the running of period of appeal,
the movant must not only serve a copy of the motion upon adverse party but to also notify of the
time and place of hearing which admittedly did not. This rule was articulated in Manila Surety and
Fidelity Co. Inc. v. Bat Construction & Co.

The virulence so blatantly evident in Atty. Almacen's petition, answer and oral argumentation
speak for itself. The vicious language used and the scurrilous innuendoes they carried far
transcend the permissible bounds of legitimate criticism. It is not a whit less than a classic
example of gross misconduct, a gross violation of the lawyer's oath, and gross transgression of
the Canons of Legal Ethics. As such, it cannot be allowed to go unrebuked. The way for the
exertion of our disciplinary powers is thus laid clear, and the need therefore is unavoidable.

The misconduct committed by Atty. Almacen is of considerable gravity cannot be


overemphasized. However, heeding the stern injunction that disbarment should never be
decreed where a lesser sanction would accomplish the end desired and believing that it may not
perhaps be futile to hope that in the sober light of some future day, Atty. Almacen will realize
that abrasive language never fails to do a disservice to an advocate and that in every
effervescence of candor there is ample room for the added glow of respect, it is our view that
suspension will suffice under the circumstances.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS THE SENSE of the Court that Atty. Vicente Raul Almacen be, as he is
hereby, suspended from the practice of law until further orders, the suspension to take effect
immediately.

You might also like