Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 15 views

    Perito v. Baterina AC 12631

    Uploaded by

    fmrcsc2023
    The document summarizes a case digest involving a disbarment complaint filed by Atty. Fernando P. Perito against Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina and others. Perito represented clients in a kidnapping case that was dismissed, and the respondents continued pursuing legal actions on behalf of their client. Perito then filed a disbarment complaint. The Supreme Court ruled that the legal actions by the respondents were appropriate remedies to pursue their client's interests and did not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. It dismissed the disbarment petition.

    Copyright:

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

    Perito v. Baterina AC 12631

    Uploaded by

    fmrcsc2023
    15 views1 page
    The document summarizes a case digest involving a disbarment complaint filed by Atty. Fernando P. Perito against Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina and others. Perito represented clients in a kidnapping case that was dismissed, and the respondents continued pursuing legal actions on behalf of their client. Perito then filed a disbarment complaint. The Supreme Court ruled that the legal actions by the respondents were appropriate remedies to pursue their client's interests and did not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. It dismissed the disbarment petition.

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes a case digest involving a disbarment complaint filed by Atty. Fernando P. Perito against Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina and others. Perito represented clients in a kidnapping case that was dismissed, and the respondents continued pursuing legal actions on behalf of their client. Perito then filed a disbarment complaint. The Supreme Court ruled that the legal actions by the respondents were appropriate remedies to pursue their client's interests and did not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. It dismissed the disbarment petition.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    15 views1 page

    Perito v. Baterina AC 12631

    Uploaded by

    fmrcsc2023
    The document summarizes a case digest involving a disbarment complaint filed by Atty. Fernando P. Perito against Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina and others. Perito represented clients in a kidnapping case that was dismissed, and the respondents continued pursuing legal actions on behalf of their client. Perito then filed a disbarment complaint. The Supreme Court ruled that the legal actions by the respondents were appropriate remedies to pursue their client's interests and did not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility. It dismissed the disbarment petition.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 1

    Basic Legal and Judicial Ethics 1

    SY 2022 - 2023
    Atty. Chris Tenorio
    Arellano University – School of Law

    CASE DIGEST
    Atty. Fernando P. Perito v. Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina ET. AL.
    A.C. No. 12631
    July 8, 2020
    Prepared by: Fidel M. Rubias

    Complainant/Plaintiff/Petitioner:
    Atty. Fernando P. Perito
    Respondent:
    Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina, Atty. Ryan R. Besid, Atty. Richie L. Tiblani, and Atty. Mari Khris R. Pammit
    Facts:
    Complainant herewith is representing Josephine Bracamonte et. al. (Bracamontes) against
    Respondents who are private prosecutor in a kidnapping case filed at Branch 169 – Regional Trial
    Court of Malabon (RTC) which was subsequently dismissed by the DOJ in relation to the charges.
    Respondents then filed a Petition for Review to the Secretary of Justice. Meanwhile, the RTC
    provisionally dismissed the case, herein Respondents filed a Motion for Reconsideration which was
    likewise denied due to lack of conformity from the public prosecutor, this has resulted to the filing of
    by the Respondent a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Appeals.
    Due to the pertinacious nature of the filing of legal actions, the Bracamontes filed a disbarment case
    against Respondents. Respondents, believing that the Complainant is the one behind the disbarment
    case, they have filed a countersuit against Complainant of the same charge. Both Disbarment
    charges was dismissed by the IBP-BOG.
    Hence, this case was filed by the Complainant himself to disbar the Respondents in the grounds
    tirelessly persecuting the Bracamontes in the kidnapping even though it was already dismissed by
    both the DOJ and the RTC, and for filing a baseless disbarment case against him.
    Issue:
    1. Whether or not the Respondents acted out in violation of the Code of Professional
    Responsibility for lawyers.
    Held:
    1. No, the legal actions instituted by herein Respondent are appropriate remedies in the
    furtherance of the interest of their client. This in itself does not violate the Code of Professional
    Responsibility, it is even buttressed by the said code, particularly the Canons 17 and 19. The
    three (3) disbarment cases instituted stemmed from the same kidnapping cases, therefore,
    making such legal action deemed to be encouraged by bad blood among the counsel.
    Complainant, nonetheless, has failed to provide substantial evidence to establish a solid
    disbarment case in accordance to violations arising from the letters of the CPR.

    Ruling:
    WHEREFORE, the Petition for Disbarment against Atty. Bertrand A. Baterina, Atty. Ryan R. Besid,
    Atty. Riche L. Tiblani, and Atty. Mari Khris R. Pammit is hereby DISMISSED.

    FMRubias-2023-06-02-CD5

    You might also like