[ OCA CIRCULAR NO. 84-2016, April 04, 2016 ]

[ OCA CIRCULAR NO. 84-2016, April 04, 2016 ]

[ OCA CIRCULAR NO. 84-2016, April 04, 2016 ]

TO : THE COURT OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN, COURT OF TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, SHARI'A DISTRICT COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI'A CIRCUIT COURTS, THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF STATE " PROSECUTOR, PUBLIC ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES

SUBJECT : SUSPENSION FROM THE PRACTICE OF LAW FOR THREE (3) MONTHS OF ATTY. CONRADO LASQUITE

For your information and guidance, quoted hereunder is the Resolution of the Second Division dated 11 November 2015 in Administrative Case No. 10614, entitled "Re: Order dated 12 August 2014 in LRC Case No. R-QZN-13-01608, Regional Trial Court, Br. 81, Quezon City; Atty. Conrado Lasquite, respondent," to wit:

Considering the, comment dated 19 December 2014 of respondent Atty. Conrado O. Lasquite on the Order dated 12 August 2014 of Presiding Judge Madonna C. Echiverri, Regional Trial Court (RTC), Br. 81, Quezon City, pursuant to LRC Case No. R-QZN-13-01608, which held him in contempt for his unruly behavior and imposed upon him a fine of £2,000.00, and "it appearing that respondent's decorum demonstrated lack of professionalism and displayed a sense of immaturity, and considering that a lawyer should always maintain his composure especially when inside the courtroom and during hearings, and must be able to act appropriately no matter what the circumstance may be; that the Court is not convinced with the respondent Lasquite's defenses and explanations, as it is true that the principal purpose of the exercise of the power to cite for contempt is to safeguard the functions and integrity of the court and should thus be used sparingly on a preservative and not on the vindictive principle; that however, the principal purpose of the. exercise of disciplinary authority by the Supreme Court is toassure respect for orders of such court by attorneys who, as much as judges, are responsible for orderly administration of justice, and considering further that under the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, the Court introduced a new provision granting a remedy to a person adjudged in direct contempt by any court, that such person may not appeal therefrom but may avail himself of certiorari or prohibition, and since respondent failed to use the proper remedy, the Court resolves SUSPEND respondent Atty. Conrado 0. Lasquite from the practice of law for three (3) months, pursuant to his charges for direct contempt. Let this serve as a warning to him and to other lawyers that due respect should be given to the Courts and fellow counsels at all times, and attacks on courts, malicious or otherwise, are never taken lightly.

On 11 January 2016, respondent received the Resolution of the Court dated 11 November 2015.

4 April 2016

(SGD.) JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ Court Administrator