Laureta and Maravilla
G.R. No. L- 68635 May 14, 1987
FACTS:
Eva Maravilla Ilustre wrote letters to the Justices with regards to the dismissal of her case. She
accused the 1st Division that they have knowingly promulgated it. She threatens in her letter that
she would call for a press conference. She attacked Justice Pedro Yap in the first Division
because he was formerly the law partner of Atty. Ordonez who is the counsel for her opponents.
Threats to other Justices was also given stated she would “expose” them.
Atty. Laureta is Ilustre’s Counsel, he circulated the copies of said letters to the press. The
Tanodbayan dismissed the complaint.
ISSUE:
1. Whether the request for motion of Reconsideration of Atty. Laureta for his ruling of grave
professional misconduct and indefinite suspension from his law practice is Valid.
2. Whether the request for motion of Reconsideration by Eva Ilustre for her ruling of
contempt of Court and ordering her to pay 1,000 pesos fine is Valid.
RULING/DECISION:
1. The request for motion of reconsideration by Atty. Laureta for being guilty of grave
professional misconduct and the request for motion of reconsideration of Eva Maravilla
Ilustre for Contempt of Court is Denied.
RATIO DECIDENDI:
1. Atty. Laurate Insists on subordinating the Judiciary to the executive notwithstanding the
categorical pronouncement in the Per Curiam resolution of March 12, 1987. He tried to
destroy the integrity, authenticity, as well as conclusiveness of collegiate acts. He
undermined the Supreme Court’s power and role as a final arbiter. He also decreased
public confidence in the Court.
Ms. Eva on the other hand made letters that she gave to different justices, she
“investigated” the problem. Ms. Eva also gave an address where she can’t be reached
by the servers.
Both tried to take matters outside of court whether thru the letters or the circulation of it
thru press copies. They showed disrespect to two of the Highest Courts of the land and
disregarded the cardinal Doctrine of independence of the judiciary.