Pimentel vs. Llorente Case Digest Pale

PIMENTEL, JR. V. LLORENTE SALAYON ( FINE ---- P1,000.00/ STERNLY WARNED) RULE 1.01, LAWYER’S OATH FACTS: Complaint for disbarment against respondents who were members of the Pasig BOC in the May 8, 1995 elections for gross misconduct, serious breach of trust, and violation of the lawyer’s oath in connection with the discharge of their duties Salayon--- Chairman of the Board

Llorente---- Vice-Chairman

filed by complainant who was a SENATORIAL candidate alleged tampering the votes received by them either adding or reducing the number of votes of particular candidates in their SOV’s. Denied allegations---- the preparation of the SOV’s was made by the 12 canvassing committee which the Board had constituted to assist in the canvassing. ---- claimed that errors pointed out by complainant could be attributed to honest mistake, oversight, and/or fatigue. ISSUE: W/N RESPONDENTS ARE GUILTY OF MISCONDUCT HELD: YES. A lawyer who holds a government position may not be disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as government official. However, if the misconduct also constitutes a violation of the CPR or lawyer’s oath or is of such character as to affect his qualification as a lawyer or shows moral delinquency on his part, such individual may be disciplined as member of the bar for such misconduct. By certifying as true and correct the SOV’s in question, respondents committed a breach of RULE 1.01 of the CODE. By express provision of CANON 6, this is made applicable to lawyers in government service. Likewise violated their oath of office as lawyers to do no falsehood. As lawyers in government service, respondents were under greater obligation to observe this basic tenet of the profession because a public officer is a public trust.