• This administrative case involves a lawyer, Atty. Makilito Mahinay, who was accused of multiple violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility (now CPRA). The Supreme Court found him guilty of willful forum shopping, abuse of court processes for filing frivolous motions for inhibition, and making unjust accusations against opposing counsel. Citing his prior administrative offense as an aggravating circumstance, the Court imposed separate penalties for each violation, including a one-year suspension from the practice of law and substantial fines.

• The Dispute: The case stemmed from an intra-corporate dispute. Complainant Wilma Zamora accused Atty. Mahinay, counsel for the opposing faction, of unethical conduct.
• Forum Shopping & Abuse of Process: Zamora alleged that Atty. Mahinay repeatedly filed motions to suspend proceedings based on the same ground (prejudicial question) in different courts. She also claimed he filed motions for inhibition against judges immediately after receiving unfavorable rulings.
• Unjust Accusations: In a separate disbarment case, Atty. Mahinay filed an *Ex Parte* Manifestation accusing Zamora and her lawyers of plotting to assassinate him for a fee of PHP 2,500,000.00. He then distributed this manifestation to judges handling other related cases.

• IBP-CBD Recommendation: The Investigating Commissioner found Atty. Mahinay guilty of abuse of court processes and making unjust accusations, recommending admonition and a six-month suspension.
• IBP Board of Governors Resolution: The Board modified the findings, dismissing the charge for abuse of process but upholding the six-month suspension for the unjust accusations.
• Supreme Court Review: The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for final action.

• Did Atty. Mahinay commit forum shopping and abuse of court processes?
• Were his accusations of a murder plot against opposing counsel protected by the doctrine of privileged communication?

The Supreme Court found Atty. Mahinay GUILTY of multiple offenses and imposed separate penalties.

• On Forum Shopping: He was found guilty of willful and deliberate forum shopping for filing multiple pleadings in different forums seeking the same remedy (suspension of proceedings). Penalty: 1-year suspension.
• On Abuse of Court Processes: He was found guilty for filing frivolous motions for inhibition to "judge-shop" after receiving adverse rulings. Penalty: PHP 35,000 fine.
• On Unjust Accusations: His claim of a murder plot was not protected by privileged communication because it was irrelevant to the disbarment case where it was raised. It was an intemperate and defamatory accusation against fellow lawyers. Penalty: PHP 100,000 fine.

• Forum Shopping (CPRA, Canon II, Sec. 23): A lawyer shall not knowingly engage in filing multiple suits involving the same parties and issues to obtain a favorable judgment. It is a serious offense.
• Abuse of Court Processes (CPRA, Canon III, Sec. 7): Filing frivolous motions, such as motions for inhibition without basis and merely to find a more favorable judge, constitutes an abuse of the legal process.
• Privileged Communication: This doctrine protects statements made in judicial proceedings only if they are relevant and pertinent to the issues of the case. Irrelevant, defamatory accusations against opposing counsel are not covered.
• Penalty for Multiple Offenses (CPRA, Canon VI, Sec. 40): If a lawyer is found liable for more than one offense arising from separate acts, the Court shall impose separate penalties for each offense.