SURIGAO MINERAL RESERVATION BOARD V.

CLORIBEL

GR. NO. L-27072

JANUARY 9, 1970

FACTS:

In the first contempt case, the third motion for reconsideration drafted in response to the
Supreme Court decision against McArthur International Minerals Corp., Atty. Vicente
Santiago and John Beltran Sotto made use of language that are disrespectful to the court
and has insinuated favoritism and partisanship of the members of the Court, Chief Justice
Conception and Justce Castro. The court demanded for a “show cause” why they shouldn’t
be cited in contempt for the said disrespectful language. Santiago insisted that the
statements he made were only meant to be in the MR’s rough draft but was accidentaly
included in the copy sent to the Court.

In the second contempt case, a fourth motion for reconsideration was drafted with Atty.
Juanito Caling as counsel, which again contained disrespectful language to the Court. The
MR assailed the decision saying he was out of town when the decision was written and
included threats of elevating the issue to the World Court and allegations of rise of graft and
corruption in the judiciary. As defense, Caling said that the motion was already prepared by
Santiago when he took the case as was verified by Meads, an employee from MacArthur
International Minerals Corp.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the lawyers should be cited in contempt?

HELD:

For the first contempt case, the Supreme Court held Yes. The language employed by
Santiago and Sotto degrades the administration of justice which violated Section 3(d) of Rule
71 of the Rules of Court as well as Sec. 20 (f) of Rule 138 of the RoC which states that "a
lawyer's language should be dignified in keeping with the dignity of the legal profession".
The inadvertence of Santiago’s use of words cannot be used as a reason to absolve him from
such violation.
As for the second contempt case, the SC also held Yes. Even if the idea of the language used
in the 4th motion for reconsideration came from Meads, both lawyers should have still
adhered to Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which states: “"a lawyer
should use his best efforts to restrain and to prevent his clients from doing those things
which a lawyer himself ought not to do, particularly with reference to their conduct towards
courts, judicial officers, jurors, witnesses and suitors. If a client persists in such wrongdoing,
the lawyer should terminated their relation”. Santiago is as well liable since Caling’s
representation as new counsel for the 4th motion for reconsiderationl still didn’t relieve him
from his capacity as counsel for MacArthur International Minerals Corp.