Scribd
Upload
28 views2 pages

Puno

Armando Puno was disbarred following a complaint by Flora Quingwa, who accused him of gross immorality and misconduct after he allegedly promised to marry her and then denied paternity of their child. The Supreme Court ruled that Puno's actions constituted gross misconduct unfit for a lawyer, as he failed to provide satisfactory evidence of good moral character. Consequently, his name was ordered to be removed from the Roll of Attorneys.

Uploaded by

alejandriarodsheen
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
28 views2 pages

Puno

Armando Puno was disbarred following a complaint by Flora Quingwa, who accused him of gross immorality and misconduct after he allegedly promised to marry her and then denied paternity of their child. The Supreme Court ruled that Puno's actions constituted gross misconduct unfit for a lawyer, as he failed to provide satisfactory evidence of good moral character. Consequently, his name was ordered to be removed from the Roll of Attorneys.

Uploaded by

alejandriarodsheen
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

IN RE: DISBARMENT OF ARMANDO PUNO

FLORA QUINGWA VS. ARMANDO PUNO

Adm Case No. 389- February 28, 1967

FACTS:

- Flora Quingwa filed a complaint charging Armando Puno, a member of Bar, with gross
immorality and misconduct.

- Complainant is an educated woman, having been a public school teacher for a number of years.
She testified that the respondent took her to the Hotel, registered as Mr. and Mrs. Puno and
succeeded in having sexual intercourse with her on the promise of marriage. And when the
complainant got pregnant, the respondent refused to fulfil his promise.

- Thereafter, the complainant gave birth to a baby boy whom the respondent disowns to be his
child. The complainant used to give money to the lawyer whenever he asked from her.

- The respondent denied all the allegations of the complaint, and therein allegations do not
constitute grounds for disbarment or suspension under Section 25, Rule 127 of the former Rules
of Court.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the respondent be disbarred from the practice of his profession.

HELD:

- Under Section 25 of Rule 127 of the Rules of Court - it is already a settled rule that the
enumeration of grounds of disbarment or suspension is not taken as a limitation on the general
power of courts to suspend or disbar a lawyer.

- Supreme court held that an attorney be removed not only for malpractice and dishonesty in his
profession, but also for gross misconduct, which shows him to be unfit for the office and
unworthy of the privileges which his license and the law confer upon him.

- Section 2, Rule 127 of the old rules of court- now Section 2, Rule 138 of Rules of Court -One of
the requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar is that the applicant must produce
before the Supreme Court satisfactory evidence of good moral character.

- *the respondent failed to discredit complainants testimony.


- When integrity is challenged by evidence, it is not enough that he denies the charges against
him; he must meet the issue and overcome the evidence for the relator and show proofs that he
still maintains the highest degree of morality and integrity, which at all times is expected of him.

- Section 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court - grossly immoral conduct is one of the grounds for
suspension or disbarment.

- Paragraph 29 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics - profession of law must conform themselves in
accordance with the highest standards of morality.

WHEREFORE, respondent Armando Puno is hereby DISBARRED and, as a consequence, his name is
ordered stricken off from the Roll of Attorneys.

You might also like