Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

VICTORIA C. HEENAN v. ATTY. ERLINDA ESPEJO

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	AC. No. 8776 2015-03-22	ANTONINA S. SOSA v. ATTY. MANUEL V. MENDOZA BRION, J.
We are aware that jurisprudence has allowed a complainant in a disbarment case to collect an outstanding debt from a lawyer.[32] However, in the recent case of Heenan v. Atty. Espejo,[33] this Court sitting en banc did not agree with the IBP's recommendation to order the erring lawyer to return the money he borrowed from the complainant. We said in this case: In disciplinary proceedings against lawyers, the only issue is whether the officer of the court is still fit to be allowed to continue as a member of the Bar. Our only concern is the determination of respondent's administrative liability. Our findings have no material bearing on other judicial action which the parties may choose to file against each other. Furthermore, disciplinary proceedings against lawyers do not involve a trial of an action, but rather investigations by the Court into the conduct of one of its officers. The only question for determination in these proceedings is whether or not the attorney is still fit to be allowed to continue as a member of the Bar. Thus, this Court cannot rule on the issue of the amount of money that should be returned to the complainant.[34] [Emphasis supplied and citations omitted.]
	AC. No. 10679 2015-03-10	PO1 JOSE B. CASPE v. ATTY. AQUILINO A. MEJICA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
In Heenan v. Espejo,[42] a lawyer's unjustified refusal to heed the directives of the IBP and to appear at the scheduled mandatory conference constituted a blatant disrespect for the IBP amounting to conduct unbecoming a lawyer. We looked back on our ruling in Almendarez, Jr. v. Atty. Langit,[43] where we stated that: The misconduct of respondent is aggravated by his unjustified refusal to heed the orders of the IBP requiring him to file an answer to the complaint-affidavit and, afterwards, to appear at the mandatory conference x x x he is justly charged with conduct unbecoming a lawyer, for a lawyer is expected to uphold the law and promote respect for legal processes. Further, a lawyer must observe and maintain respect not only to the courts, but also to judicial officers and other duly constituted authorities, including the IBP. Under Rule 139-B of the Rules of Court, the Court has empowered the IBP to conduct proceedings for the disbarment, suspension, or discipline of attorneys.[44]
	AC. No. 7676 2014-06-10	AMADO T. DIZON v. ATTY. NORLITA DE TAZA REYES, J.
The Court in Victoria C. Heenan v. Atty. Erlinda Espejo[33] suspended the respondent from the practice of law for two years when the latter issued checks which were dishonored due to insufficiency of funds. In A-1 Financial Services, Inc. v. Valerio,[34] the same penalty was meted out by this Court to the erring lawyer who issued worthless checks to pay off her loan.