NextGen Day

After suspending a lawyer for three months as a result of a grievance brought up by a widow, the Supreme Court (SC) warned attorneys not to overlook the truth in the efficient administration of justice.

The high tribunal issued an 11-page resolution on August 18 that was posted online, suspending attorney Oscar G. Serrano from the practice of law for three months and issuing a stern warning that future offenses of this nature will be dealt with harsher.

The widow of the late attorney Juvenal Alma Jose, who passed away in 1983 before his parents, Sylvia M. Ramirez-Alma Jose, filed the lawsuit against Serrano for conduct unbecoming of professional and egregious misconduct.

The complaint was a result of Ramirez’s attempt to recoup her children’s interests from her deceased husband’s inheritance.

Serrano acted as the opposing party’s representative during the proceedings. She was Priscilla M. Alma Jose, the late husband of Ramirez’s sister.

Ramirez asserted in her complaint that Serrano encouraged his client to engage in “deceitful acts of dissipating and concealing the estate in order to deprive her and her children” of their rights to the estate, including facilitating the sale of property, and instead of fostering harmony within the family of her late husband.

The lawyer’s behavior of pursuing the allegation that the complaint is not the spouse of the deceased attorney Juvenal “despite fully knowing that it was baseless,” the court ruled in its decision to discipline Serrato, is “surely incongruous with his oath as a member of the bar.”

Respondent has a duty to promote the fair administration of justice and refrain from provoking further conflict between any of the parties in his capacity as a court officer. Therefore, any fraudulent act supported by a lawyer—such as the respondent’s inability to preserve the estate as an administrator by supporting its dissolution through a forged document—runs counter to this principle, it stated.

Serrano’s failures to uphold his obligations as a court representative were also recognized by the court for “unnecessary utterances made, such as his claims that complainant is not the wife of Atty. Juvenal while within her hearing distance.”

The act “was just meant to further demoralize the other party,” it was noted.

Save/Share this story with QR CODE

---

Disclaimer

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute endorsement of any specific technologies or methodologies and financial advice or endorsement of any specific products or services.

Need to get in touch?

Feel free to Contact NextGenDay.com for comments, suggestions, reviews, or anything else.

---

We appreciate your reading. Simple Ways To Say Thanks & Support Us:
1.) GIVE A TIP. Send a small donation thru Paypal
Your DONATION will be used to fund and maintain NEXTGENDAY.com
Subscribers in the Philippines can make donations to mobile number 0917 906 3081, thru GCash.
3.) BUY or SIGN UP to our AFFILIATE PARTNERS.
4.) Give this news article a THUMBS UP, and Leave a Comment (at Least Five Words).

---

AFFILIATE PARTNERS

World Class Nutritional Supplements - Buy Highest Quality Products, Purest Most Healthy Ingredients, Direct to your Door! Up to 90% OFF.
Join LiveGood Today - A company created to satisfy the world's most demanding leaders and entrepreneurs, with the best compensation plan today.

---