Lantoria v. Bunyi

Cesar Lantoria v. Atty. Irineo Bunyi (1992) Facts:  An administrative complaint was filed by Lantoria against Bunyi, a member of the Philippine Bar, on the ground that Bunyi committed acts of graft and corruption, dishonesty and conduct unbecoming of a member of the IBP, and corruption of the judge and bribery  This is in relation to Bunyi’s handling of a civil case wherein Bunyi was counsel of Mrs. Mascarinas. The latter was the owner of the farm and Lantoria is the supervisor and manager of the said farm. The 3 civil cases presided by Judge Galicia involved an ejectment suit of squatters in the said farm. The defendants in the said cases were declared in default.  Correspondences between Lantoria and Bunyi showed that Bunyi initially enclosed a letter in an envelope addressed to Judge Galicia in a confidential and private manner. Judge Galicia thru the mediation of Lantoria informed Bunyi that he is willing to let Bunyi write the decisions for th 3 civil cases. Lantoria informed the same to Bunyi which later delivered the 3 decisions thru Lantoria.  Three years later, Lantoria file the present case against Bunyi alleging that they won the said cases because Bunyi wrote the decisions in those cases.  Bunyi contends that Lantoria had knowledge of the request of Judge Galicia to Bunyi as the said judge had two salas before him. Also, Bunyi contends that the drafting of the decision was not an idea spawned by him. Furthermore, he contends that his participation is merely on revision.  The solicitor general investigated the matters and found that Bunyi prepared the draft of the decisions and that he had previous communications with the judge regarding drafting the same. Moreover, Bunyi admitted that he prepared the said decisions and that the subject letters do exist.  The Solicitor General found Bunyi guilty of highly unethical and unprofessional conduct for failure to perform his duty, as an officer of the court, to help promote the independence of the judiciary and to refrain from engaging in acts which would influence judicial determination of a litigation in which he is counsel. The Solicitor General recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of one (1) year.  Lantoria did not attend hearing of the case and later filed his withdrawal of the same. Bunyi gave an apology but he denied the allegations of offering a gift to judge Galicia. Issue: WON Bunyi violated the code of professional responsibility for lawyers? Held: YES.  The determination of the merits of the instant case should proceed notwithstanding withdrawal of complaint due to the Bunyi having admitted that the letters in question truly exist, and that he even asked for an apology from the Court, for whatever effects such letters had on his duty as a lawyer.  Clearly, respondent violated Canon No. 3 of the Canons of Professional Ethics on attempts to exert personal influence on the court - A lawyer should not communicate or argue privately with the judge as to the merits of a pending cause and deserves rebuke and denunciation for any device or attempt to gain from a judge special personal consideration or favor.

 In the new Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer's attempt to influence the court is rebuked, as shown in Canon No. 13 and Rule 13.01. CANON 13 — A lawyer shall rely upon the merits of his cause and refrain from any impropriety which tends to influence, or gives the appearance of influencing the court. Rule 13.01 — A lawyer shall not extend extraordinary attention or hospitality to, nor seek opportunity for, cultivating familiarity with judges.  Court finds Bunyi guilty of unethical practice in attempting to influence the court where he had pending civil case. Suspended for 1 year.