DELA VICTORIA V. ORIG-MALOLOY-ON (JUDICIAL CONDUCT)

The Court will never shirk its responsibility to impose discipline upon erring court employees and magistrates, nor hesitate to shield them from unfounded suits that serve only to disrupt, rather than promote, the orderly administration of justice.

Considering that he was a former judge and had been engaged in the practice of law for 30 years, Dela Victoria is expected to be conversant with the scope and application of Rule 114, Section 17(c) of the Rules of Court which he invokes. He should have known that he could not insist on the acceptance of the cash bond in favor of his clients without the necessary order from the court granting his motion to post the same. In fact, his assertion that he had already made arrangements with the MTCC Executive Judge when there was actually no proper court order amounts to an attempt to mislead Maloloy-on into processing the unauthorized temporary release of his clients.

Lawyers are required to act with the highest standard of truthfulness, fair play, and nobility in the conduct of the litigation and their relations with the clients, the opposing parties, the other counsel, and the courts. They are duty-bound to avoid improprieties, which give the appearance of influencing the court. Dela Victoria failed in this regard.