When Lawyers Cross the Line: Intemperate Language in Pleadings

The practice of law is a privilege, not a right. It carries with it a duty to maintain the highest standards of professionalism, even when faced with hostile accusations. In Washington v. Dicen (A.C. No. 12137, July 9, 2018), the Supreme Court reminded lawyers that the language they use in pleadings must always be dignified and respectful, no matter how strongly they feel about their client's cause.

The Facts of the Case

The case began with a family dispute over a house in Dumaguete City. Pheninah Washington claimed she went to her property, then occupied by her niece's family, to perform repairs. Instead, police arrived and arrested her for trespassing. Washington alleged that her cousin, Atty. Samuel Dicen, had ordered the arrest.

Atty. Dicen denied the accusation. He explained that Washington was caught in the act of removing the roof of the house to force the occupants out, which constituted coercion.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) found no merit in the unethical practice claim against Atty. Dicen. However, it recommended that he be admonished for the offensive language he used in his pleadings against Washington.

The Issue

The sole question for the Court was whether Atty. Dicen violated Rule 8.01, Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR), which states:

A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.

The Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court agreed with the IBP's findings. Atty. Dicen was found guilty of violating Rule 8.01 and was admonished, with a stern warning that repetition would be dealt with more severely.

The Court pointed to specific language in Atty. Dicen's pleadings. In his Manifestation, he described Washington's actions as having "no sane purpose," meant to "satisfy her crazy quest for revenge," and called her a "lunatic." He also referred to her as "a puppet and a milking cow" of a man he suggested was her lover.

In his Position Paper, Atty. Dicen went further, speculating about Washington's "illicit and immoral, if not adulterous relationship" with her ex-husband while her current husband was abroad.

The Court found these statements went beyond forceful advocacy. They maligned Washington's character and even imputed a crime against her—adultery. The Court emphasized that a lawyer's language may be forceful and emphatic, but it should always be dignified and respectful, befitting the legal profession.

The Standard for Lawyers' Language

The Court cited settled jurisprudence in Torres v. Javier (501 Phil. 397, 2005): a lawyer's arguments should be gracious to both the court and opposing counsel, using words "as may be properly addressed by one gentleman to another." The Court noted that the language of advocacy "does not run short of expressions which are emphatic but respectful, convincing but not derogatory, illuminating but not offensive."

Practical Takeaways

• Advocacy has limits. A lawyer may argue forcefully but must never resort to name-calling, personal attacks, or character assassination in pleadings.
• Avoid imputing crimes without basis. Speculating about an opposing party's personal life or accusing them of criminal conduct without evidence can expose a lawyer to administrative liability.
• Stick to the facts. A lawyer can make a compelling case by stating the ultimate facts and explaining their client's position, without resorting to derogatory language.
• Offensive language in any pleading is sanctionable. This applies not only in court filings but also in pleadings before administrative bodies like the IBP.
• Professionalism protects the lawyer. Even when a lawyer prevails on the merits, intemperate language can still result in discipline.

The Washington v. Dicen case is a clear reminder that the privilege of practicing law comes with a continuing obligation to uphold the dignity of the profession. A lawyer's words carry weight—and with that weight comes responsibility.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.