G.R. No. 20993A – 45 Phil. 580 – Legal Ethics – Criticisms of Counsel
This case is one of the several cases filed against Umberto de Poli. De Poli was a businessman engaged in the sale of hemp and was also a licensed warehouseman. Due to depression, weakness and sickness, among others, he was not able to manage his business well and he was later declared insolvent and his assets were assigned to Herridge. Asia Banking questioned Herridge’s authority to represent the creditors of de Poli. The bank contends that Herridge as an assignee is only there to represent the interest of de Poli alone. The case reached the Supreme Court where their respective counsels submitted their briefs and some oral arguments were also held. Said arguments and briefs however contained criticisms against each other’s counsel.
ISSUE: Whether or not such criticism against a counsel by another counsel should be well taken.
HELD: No. The Supreme Court noted that such criticisms are wholly immaterial and of no value to the court. The Supreme Court stated that no attorney ought to be criticized for the making of an honest legal effort to protect the interest of his client.