VDA. DE BARRERA V.

LAPUT
Gross Misconduct as ground for discipline of lawyer
(Lawyer suspended for intimidating his client to sign papers by placing his revolver on his lap when she
refused to do so)
Facts:
Respondent Atty. Laput represented petitioner Vda. de Barrera (Mrs. Barrera) in the estate
proceedings of her late husband. Laput presented to her several papers or pleadings for her signature.
However, Mrs. Barrera refused to sign the pleadings but requested Laput to leave them so that she may
ask somebody to translate the same for her (she was from Cebu). Laput got angry and drew his
revolver from its holster and placed it on his lap to intimidate the 72-year-old woman into signing
the papers. Mrs. Barrera was compelled to sign them, but is now before the court seeking the
disbarment of Laput.
Issue:
W/N Laput should be disbarred for gross misconduct
Held:
Yes. The acts are inherently improper and censurable, more so considering that they were
performed by a man dealing with a 72-year-old woman. The offense is compounded by the
circumstance that, being a member of the BAR, the offender should have set an example of a man
of peace and champion of the Rule of Law. Worse still is the fact that the offended party is the very
person whom the offender had pledged to defend and protect his client. He was suspended from the
practice of law for 1 year.
154 VDA DE BARRERA v LAPUT
Facts:

Casiano Laput was Nieves Rillas Vda de Barreras counsel in the settlement proceedings for the estate of de
Barreras husband.
One time, Laput presented a Notice for Rendition of Final Accounting and Partition of Estate to de
Barrera. Barrerra refused to signed and asked Laput to just leave the document in order that she may ask
someone to interpret it for her.
But Laput became angry and even placed a revolver on the lap of de Barrera (who actually was 72 years
old). This compelled the old lady to sign the document.
Laput denied the charges

Issue:
Should Laput be disciplined?
Held:
Naku po naman! Of course. Laput was suspended for 1 year.
It was found by the court that the documents were made by the counsel to end the proceedings and be able to
collect his fees. The act of placing the gun on the clients lap cannot be interpreted other than as an act of
threatening such client.
Laputs acts were improper and censurable (especially considering that de Barrerra was 72 years old). Being a
member of the Bar, Laput should have set the example as a man of peace and a champion of the Rule of Law. An
attorneys client is a person who is supposed to be defended and protected by such counsel.