ATTY. REYES v. ATTY. CHIONG JR.(A.C. No. 5148, July 1, 2003)

FACTS:Complainant Atty. Reyes filed a case for disbarment against respondent Atty. Chiong because of the latters violation of Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility dealing with the idea that lawyers should treat each other with courtesy, dignity and civility. Chiongs client did not appear upon the court when Prosecutor Salonga issued a subpoena for their preliminary investigation, the Prosecutor filed a criminal complaint for estafa against said client. After which Chiong made an urgent motion to quash the warrant concomitant with his filing for a civil complaint and collection for a sum of money and damages against Atty. Reyes, Xu (the complainants client) and the Prosecutor. Upon their confrontation, no settlement was reached. Chiong argues that there was no disrespect impleading Atty. Reyes as co-defendant in Civil Case No. 4884 and no basis to conclude that the suit was groundless. He argues that he impleaded the Prosecutor because the criminal investigation had irregularities due to the action of the Prosecutor to file estafa case despite the pendency for his clients motion for an opportunity to submit counter affidavit and evidence.

ISSUE:Did respondent violate Canon 8 of the Code of Professional Responsibility?

HELD:Yes, it was recommended by the IBP that defendants purpose of filing for the collection suit with damages was to be able to obtain leverage against the estafa case of his client. Clearly there was no need to implead complainant and Prosecutor Salonga because they never had any participation in the business transactions between Pan and Xu, clearly it was for the mere harassment of the two. Chiong was suspended for two (2) years from the practice of law and was implemented immediately.