Terrell v. Government
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Howard D. Terrell, an attorney-at-law, was charged with assisting in the organization of the "Centro Bellas Artes" Club, knowing it was formed to evade the law, and subsequently acting as its attorney during and after its organization. Procedural History: The Court of First Instance ordered Terrell to show cause why he should not be suspended. After reviewing testimony from a prior estafa case against Terrell and affidavits submitted in his defense, the court found the charges true and ordered his suspension. A certified copy of the order and the facts were transmitted to the Supreme Court. The Petition: The Supreme Court reviewed the facts and the order of suspension.
Issue(s)
Whether the acts of Howard D. Terrell in organizing and acting as attorney for the "Centro Bellas Artes" Club, known to be created for the purpose of evading the law, constitute grounds for suspension from the practice of law. Whether the suspension of Howard D. Terrell from the practice of law for one year is the appropriate penalty.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the suspension of Howard D. Terrell from the practice of law for a term of one year, commencing February 7, 1903. The Court found that his knowledge and acts in connection with the "Centro Bellas Artes" Club warranted suspension.
Ratio Decidendi
On the issue of whether the acts constitute grounds for suspension: The Court held that promoting organizations with knowledge of their objects for the purpose of violating or evading laws against crime constitutes misconduct on the part of an attorney. As an officer of the court, such actions amount to malpractice or gross misconduct in office, for which removal or suspension may be imposed. Assisting a client in a dishonest scheme or conniving at a violation of law are acts that justify disbarment. In this specific case, the Court found that Terrell's knowledge and actions concerning the "Centro Bellas Artes" Club were of a nature that warranted his suspension from practice. On the issue of the appropriate penalty: The Court considered that Terrell had been acquitted of the charge of estafa and thus not convicted of a crime. While his charged acts were deemed unprofessional and condemnable, they were not criminal in nature. Therefore, the Court opined that the ends of justice would be served by a suspension from the practice of law for a term of one year, rather than disbarment.
Main Doctrine
Assisting in the organization of entities known to be created for the purpose of evading the law constitutes malpractice or gross misconduct on the part of an attorney, warranting suspension from practice.