8/6/2019 2.2 DANTES VS. DANTES
1/2
DANTES VS. DANTES
FACTS:
Emma the complainant married with Crispin the respondent when
hewas still in his fourth year in law school. To support their
needs she engaged inbuy and sell business and also relied from his
mothers dole- out. They alsolived with her (his mother). After the
birth of their three (3 ) children they hadfrequent quarrels
because of his extra- marital affairs.
Further, she alleged that he abandoned them and failed to
support them.And this drived her to work abroad. To sustain her
allegations she presentedboth oral and documentary evidences, like
the birth certificates of his three (3)illegitimate children.
On his version, they had mutual agreement to separate for 18
yearsbefore after complainant abandoned him on their Balintawak
residence.Further, he even gave financial support to
complainant.
Respondent avowed that complainant filed this case in order to
force himto remit seventy percent (70%) of his monthly salary to
her.
ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent commits grossly immoral conduct
andviolation of his oath as a lawyer and must be disbarred.
RULING:
Based on the Code of Professional Responsibility which
provides:
Rule 1.01- A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest,
immoral ordeceitful conduct.
Canon 7- A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and
dignity of thelegal profession, and support the activities of the
Integrated Bar.
Rule 7.03- A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely
reflects on hisfitness to practice law, nor should he, whether in
public or private life, behavein a scandalous manner to the
discredit of the legal profession.
The Code of Professional Responsibility forbids lawyers from
engaging inunlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
Immoral conduct has beendefined as that conduct which is so
willful, flagrant, or shameless as to show
8/6/2019 2.2 DANTES VS. DANTES
2/2
indifference to the opinion of good and respectable members of
the community.To be the basis of disciplinary action, the lawyers
conduct must not only beimmoral, but grossly immoral. That is, it
must be so corrupt as to constitute acriminal act or so
unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a high degree orcommitted
under such scandalous or revolting circumstances as to shock
the
common sense of decency.
The respondent on his acts of abandoning his family and having
illicitaffairs to different women and even fathered to them his
children clearlyviolates the CPR.
Lawyers are expected to abide by the tenets of morality, not
only uponadmission to the Bar but also throughout their legal
career, in order tomaintain their good standing in this exclusive
and honored fraternity. Theymay be suspended from the practice of
law or disbarred for any misconduct,even if it pertains to his
private activities, as long as it shows him to be wantingin moral
character, honesty, probity or good demeanor.
For the violations he commits, suspension is only a minimal
penalty andthus it is right to disbarred.
NOTE:
It should be noted that the requirement of good moral character
hasthree ostensible purposes, namely:
(i) to protect the public;
(ii) to protect the public image of lawyers; and
(iii) to protect prospective clients. A writer added a fourth:
to protect errantlawyers from themselves.
