This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-04-22 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| We stress that the main issue in disbarment cases is whether or not a lawyer has committed serious professional misconduct sufficient to cause disbarment. The test is whether the lawyer's conduct shows him or her to be wanting in moral character, honesty, probity, and good demeanor; or whether it renders him or her unworthy to continue as an officer of the court.[10] The burden of proof rests upon the complainant; and the Court will exercise its disciplinary power only if the complainant establishes the complaint with clearly preponderant evidence.[11] | |||||
|
2014-03-19 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| As a rule, an attorney enjoys the legal presumption that he is innocent of the charges against him until the contrary is proved.[18] The burden of proof in disbarment and suspension proceedings always rests on the complainant.[19] Considering the serious consequence of disbarment or suspension of a member of the Bar, this Court has consistently held that clear preponderant evidence is necessary to justify the imposition of administrative penalty.[20] Preponderance of evidence means that the evidence adduced by one side is, as a whole, superior to or has greater weight than that of the other.[21] Thus, not only does the burden of proof that the respondent committed the act complained of rests on complainant, but the burden is not satisfied when complainant relies on mere assumptions and suspicions as evidence.[22] | |||||