Sonic Steel Industries vs Atty Nonnatus Chua case digest

Sonic Steel Industries vs Atty Nonnatus Chua Facts During the hearing of the case between SONIC STEEL vs. STEELCORP. Atty. Nonnatus chua was quick to answer every question not directed towards him by the judge, since the question was directed to a mr lorenzana who was the executive vice president of STEELCORP. In a TSN submitted to the court when the judge asked Mr. Lorenzana regarding the patent of the said products that STEELCORP is manufacturing Atty. Chua was quick to answer the judge “ we reserve the presentation of the trademark license, your honor.” And he also stated that “we reserve the right to present it your honor.” Was his response when the judge asked Mr. Lorenzana regarding the patent on hot dipping coat used for their product. After the hearing of that case Sonic Steel filed a complaint against Atty. Chua in the IBP which they held that he should be suspended for 3 month in the practice of law and that a repetition of the same or similar act in the future will be dealt more seriously. On august 17,2007 the IBP board of governors passed a resolution modifying the penalty that Atty. Chua should be suspended for 6 months in the practice of law. Issue W/N Atty. Chua violated canon 1 rule 1.01 and canon 10 rule 10.01 Held The court affirmed the decision in toto, Wherefore responded Atty. Nonnatus P. Chua is hereby suspended from the practice of law for 6 months with admonition that a repetition of the same or similar act in the future will be dealt with more severely.