Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Nuezca VS Atty. Villa Garcia

    Uploaded by

    Dennis Dwane Macanas
    150 views2 pages
    This document summarizes a case involving a demand letter sent by an attorney, Atty. Villagarcia, to the Nuezca spouses. The letter allegedly contained threatening and libelous statements against the spouses. It accused them of issuing worthless checks, estafa, fraud, and other crimes. The issue is whether Atty. Villagarcia should be administratively liable based on the allegations. The ruling was yes, as the demand letter violated rules regarding using abusive, offensive, or improper language when dealing with others professionally. Imputing unproven criminal offenses against someone in a demand letter is inappropriate.

    Original Description:

    Problem Areas in Legal Ethics

    Original Title

    NUEZCA VS ATTY. VILLA GARCIA

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document summarizes a case involving a demand letter sent by an attorney, Atty. Villagarcia, to the Nuezca spouses. The letter allegedly contained threatening and libelous statements against the spouses. It accused them of issuing worthless checks, estafa, fraud, and other crimes. The issue is whether Atty. Villagarcia should be administratively liable based on the allegations. The ruling was yes, as the demand letter violated rules regarding using abusive, offensive, or improper language when dealing with others professionally. Imputing unproven criminal offenses against someone in a demand letter is inappropriate.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    150 views2 pages

    Nuezca VS Atty. Villa Garcia

    Uploaded by

    Dennis Dwane Macanas
    This document summarizes a case involving a demand letter sent by an attorney, Atty. Villagarcia, to the Nuezca spouses. The letter allegedly contained threatening and libelous statements against the spouses. It accused them of issuing worthless checks, estafa, fraud, and other crimes. The issue is whether Atty. Villagarcia should be administratively liable based on the allegations. The ruling was yes, as the demand letter violated rules regarding using abusive, offensive, or improper language when dealing with others professionally. Imputing unproven criminal offenses against someone in a demand letter is inappropriate.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    A.C. No. 8210 SPOUSES NUEZCA v. ATTY. ERNESTO V.

    VILLAGARCIA
    FACTS: ISSUE: Whether respondent should be
    In their verified complaint, Nuezca held administratively liable based on the
    averred that Atty. Villagarcia sent them a allegations of the verified complaint. 
    demand letter copy furnished to various
    offices and persons, which contained not
    only threatening but also libelous RULING: Yes   
    utterances. The demand letter seriously →Code of Professional Responsibility,
    maligned and ridiculed them and such
    caused them sleepless nights, wounded Rule 8.01, Canon 8 provides: A lawyer
    feelings, and besmirched reputation.  shall not, in his professional dealings,
    use language which is abusive, offensive
    or otherwise improper.
    The demand letter stated that Nuezca
    issued BDO checks but were all un- The demand letter that respondent sent
    encashed because they were proved to to complainants contained not merely a
    be "worthless and unfounded." By law, demand for them to settle their monetary
    you are liable under BP 22 and Art. obligations to respondent's client, but
    315, Par. 2 (d) SWINDLING/ESTAFA, also used words that maligned their
    RPC. For all your deceit, fraud, character. It also imputed crimes against against them, especially considering
    schemes and other manipulations to them, i.e., that they were criminally liable that there is a proper forum therefor
    defraud Mrs. Arcilla, taking advantage for worthless checks, estafa and other and they have yet to be found
    of her helplessness, age and deceits.  criminally liable by a court of proper
    handicaps to her grave and serious The respondent could have simply jurisdiction. Respondent's use of
    damage, you are also criminally liable stated the ultimate facts, made the demeaning and immoderate
    under ART. 318, OTHER DECEITS. demand for settlement and refrained language put complainants in shame
    RPC. from the imputation of criminal offenses and disgrace. →

    You might also like