In Re Terrell (1903)

In the matter of the suspension of Howard D. Terrell from the practice of law.

Ponente: Per Curiam

Doctrine: The promotion of an organization with the knowledge that it was created
for the purpose of violating or evading penal laws justifies an attorney’s removal or
suspension from the practice of law.

Facts: An action for the suspension of attorney-at-law Howard Terrell from the
practice of law was filed in the CFI of Manila for allegedly assisting in the
organization of “Centro Bellas Artes” and acting as attorney for such association
with full knowledge that it was created for the purpose of evading the law then in
force in said city. The CFI of Manila held that the charges against Terrell were true
and made an order suspending him from his office as a lawyer in the Philippine
Islands. Aside from the action for his suspension from the practice of law, Terrell
was also charged with estafa in a separate criminal action but was eventually
acquitted.

Issue: W/N Terrell should be suspended from the practice of law

Held/Ratio: Yes, he should be suspended. Malpractice or gross misconduct in his

office warrants a lawyer’s removal or suspension from the practice of law. Assisting
a client in a scheme which the attorney knows to be dishonest or conniving at a
violation of law are acts which are enough to justify disbarment. However, Terrell’s
acquittal on the charge of estafa serves to lower his sanction to suspension from the
practice of law in the Philippine Islands for the term of one year from February 7,
1903.