ATTY. REYES v. ATTY. CHIONG JR.
(A.C. No. 5148, July 1, 2003)
FACTS:
Complainant Atty. Reyes filed a case for disbarment against respondent Atty.
Chiong because of the latter's violation of Canon 8 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility dealing with the idea that lawyers should treat each other with courtesy,
dignity and civility. Chiong's client did not appear upon the court when Prosecutor
Salonga issued a subpoena for their preliminary investigation, the Prosecutor filed a
criminal complaint for estafa against said client. After which Chiong made an urgent
motion to quash the warrant concomitant with his filing for a civil complaint and
collection for a sum of money and damages against Atty. Reyes, Xu (the complainant's
client) and the Prosecutor. Upon their confrontation, no settlement was reached.
Chiong argues that there was no disrespect impleading Atty. Reyes as co-defendant in
Civil Case No. 4884 and no basis to conclude that the suit was groundless. He argues that
he impleaded the Prosecutor because the criminal investigation had irregularities due to
the action of the Prosecutor to file estafa case despite the pendency for his client's motion
for an opportunity to submit counter affidavit and evidence.
ISSUE:
Did respondent violate Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility?
HELD:
Yes, it was recommended by the IBP that defendant's purpose of filing for the
collection suit with damages was to be able to obtain leverage against the estafa case of
his client. Clearly there was no need to implead complainant and Prosecutor Salonga
because they never had any participation in the business transactions between Pan and
Xu, clearly it was for the mere harassment of the two. Chiong was suspended for two (2)
years from the practice of law and was implemented immediately.