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 Bunyis 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.