G.R. No. A.C. No. 778; August 14, 1936
Benedicto M. Javier, complainant, vs. Silverio Q. Cornejo, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Atty. Benedicto M. Javier charged respondent Atty. Silverio Q. Cornejo with malpractice on two grounds: (1) for attempting to collect a sum of money from him (Javier) through a threatening letter, and (2) for allegedly instigating a client, Severina Paz Teodoro, to file a previous administrative complaint (A.C. No. 757) against Javier, which was later dismissed. The demand letter from Cornejo required Javier to deliver P195 allegedly collected for Teodoro, threatening court action if unpaid.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Atty. Silverio Q. Cornejo is guilty of malpractice warranting disciplinary action.

RULING

No. The Court dismissed the complaint for lack of merit. First, the demand letter was a proper extra-judicial effort by Cornejo to serve his client’s interest, consistent with a lawyer’s duty of zeal and devotion. Second, the evidence showed that Teodoro had been demanding the money from Javier years before Cornejo’s involvement, negating the claim of malicious instigation. The Court cautioned against mutual bickerings between attorneys, which detract from the profession’s dignity.

AI Generated by Armztrong.