DISPOSITIVE:
ACCORDINGLY, the Court finds Atty. Makilito B. Mahinay
GUILTY of violating Canon II, Sections 2, 4 and 23 and Canon III, Section 7
of A.M. No. 22-09-01-SC, or the Code of Professional Responsibility and
Accountability. From the foregoing and considering the presence of two
aggravating circumstances, i.e. previous administrative liability and lack of
remorse, he is hereby meted out the following penalties for each offense:
(a) For willful and deliberate forum shopping in violation of Canon
II, Section 23, Atty. Makilito B. Mahinay is SUSPENDED from the practice of
law for a period of one year; •
(b) For abuse of court processes in filing frivolous motions for
inhibition, in violation of Canon III, Section 7, Atty. Makilito B. Mahinay is
hereby FINED PHP 35,000.00; and
(c) For violation of Canon II, Sections 2 and 4, Atty. Makilito B.
Mahinay is hereby FINED PHPl00,000.00.
Atty. Makilito B. Mahinay is WARNED that a repetition of the same or
similar offenses in the future shall be dealt with more severely.
He is DIRECTED to file a Manifestation to the Court that his
suspension has started, copy furnished all courts and quasi-judicial bodies
where he has entered his appearance as counsel.
Let copies of this Decision be furnished to the Office of the Bar
Confidant, to be appended to the personal record of Atty. Makilito B. Mahinay,
as an attorney-at-law; to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; and to the Office
of the Court Administrator for dissemination to all courts throughout the
country for their guidance and information.
SO ORDERED.
SUBJECTS/DOCTRINES/DIGEST:
It has not escaped the attention of the Court that Mahinay filed for
inhibition when he failed to obtain favorable judgments. Upon receiving an
unfavorable resolution from Judge Forrosuelo in her Order dated May 25,
2016, Mahinay filed a Manifestation with Motion for Inhibition dated June 9,
2016.36 As a result, Judge Forrosuelo voluntarily inhibited herself from the
proceedings.37 Similarly, when Judge Andrino ruled in accord with the findings
of the Office of the City Prosecutor that “there exists no prejudicial question
that would warrant the suspension of the proceedings,”38 Mahinay prayed for
his inhibition in his Opposition to Motion for Issuance of Warrant of Arrest
with Prayer for Inhibition dated March 18, 2014.39 Judge Andrino also
voluntarily recused himself from the case.40
If a party is prejudiced by the orders of a judge, his remedy is not to file
for the judge’s inhibition. A party cannot intimidate judges or strongly suggest
their inhibition in order to get a favorable outcome. The parties and their
lawyers cannot simply impute bias or partiality to a judge whenever they
receive an unfavorable judgment for to do so is to disrespect the judicial officer
and the judicial system as a whole.
……………………………………………………………..
The language of a lawyer must be respectful and restrained to preserve
the dignity of the legal profession.53 Mahinay’s statements imputing a crime
against his fellow lawyers manifestly falls short of this criterion. Despite the
seriousness of his accusations, he chose to voice the same in a wrong forum.
His lack of remorse is also apparent in how he reiterates that his accusations are
justified.
TO READ THE DECISION, JUST CLICK/DOWNLOAD THE FILE BELOW. IF FILE DOES NOT APPEAR ON SCREEN GO TO DOWNLOAD. IT IS THE FIRST ITEM. OPEN IT.
NOTE: TO RESEARCH ON A TOPIC IN YAHOO OR GOOGLE SEARCH JUST TYPE “attybulao and the topic”. EXAMPLE: TO RESEARCH ON FORUM SHOPPING JUST TYPE “attybulao and forum shopping”.
J.A.B. Bulao & Associates 