Elpidio Javellana v. Nicolas Lutero and the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Jaro
Elpidio Javellana v. Nicolas Lutero and the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Jaro
An attorney who deliberately neglects the trial of his cases, fails in his duty to prepare for trial with diligence and deliberate speed. And should he present a frivolous and dilatory appeal to the appellate courts TREBL COSTS may be assessed against his client, said costs to be PAID by the ATTORNEY.
The case was set for trial six times. Thrice it was postponed at the behest of the said counsel. The last postponement was granted on July 24, 1963 with the unequivocal admonition by the judge that no further postponement would be countenanced. The case was reset for hearing on August 27, 1963, which means that the appellant's counsel had more than a month's time to so adjust his schedule of activities as to obviate a conflict between his business transactions and his calendar of hearings. Came August 27, and neither he nor the appellant appeared at the trial. His absence on the latter date was not occasioned by illness or some other supervening occurrence which unavoidably and justifiably prevented him from appearing in court.
Comments
Post a Comment