G.R. No. 34882 ; February 12, 1931
CRISPINIANO V. LAPUT and CATALINO SALAS, petitioners, vs. JOSE BERNABE, Judge, First Branch, Municipal Court, City of Manila, respondent.

FACTS

Catalino Salas was charged with damage to property through reckless imprudence in the Municipal Court of Manila. He authorized Crispiniano V. Laput, a law student not a member of the Philippine Bar, to represent him. The respondent judge refused to allow Laput to act as counsel. Petitioners filed for a writ of mandamus to compel the judge to recognize the right of an accused to be aided by a non-lawyer agent or friend.

ISSUE

Whether a party in the Municipal Court of the City of Manila has the right to conduct his litigation with the aid of an agent or friend who is not a licensed attorney-at-law.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court granted the writ of mandamus. The Municipal Court of Manila, having succeeded to the jurisdiction and powers of the former justice of the peace courts of the city, is considered a “court of a justice of the peace” within the meaning of Section 34 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That section allowed a party to conduct litigation in a justice of the peace court “in person or with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for that purpose, or with the aid of a lawyer.” This right applies to both civil and criminal cases in that court. The Court noted that the criminal case had civil features (fixing damages) and that safeguards existed, as no person could engage in such representation without authorization from the judge of first instance, which was unlikely to be granted in Manila.

AI Generated by Armztrong.