Lack of common sense, sloth clog up the courts

Preparatory to our bar review some 20 years ago, we were told that about 60 percent of the bar questions would call for stock knowledge learned in four years of law school. If one studied reasonably enough during those years, those questions would be quite tractable. Our bar reviewers wisely advised us to deal with the tractable questions first and leave space for the really tough ones. That way, even if the last few of the difficult questions remained unanswered when the time was up, the chance of passing would still be good. Considering the number of questions and the very strict time limits, that was the only way to go. I should know. I had a few questions left unanswered in some subjects. I passed with a grade of 84.

What spurred me to write this letter was an article I read about a lawyer who was “disbarred for duping (a) client” (“Lawyer disbarred for duping client,” Metro, Inquirer, 6/24/13). The “duping” took place in 1986, and the final decision to disbar the schmuck came out only in June 2013, i.e., after about 27 years!? Regardless of where in the process it got stuck, the point is that the matter actually took that long to put to rest.

What was the issue in that case? Very, very simple. According to the report, the lawyer sold a client’s property without any authority. This simply involved checking whether or not such written authority existed. If there was none, as was in fact the case, it was totally a no-brainer. Why the decision took that long to make seriously defies all reason and logic.

That was by no means an isolated case. Many more are still pending over the past 30, 40 or more years without any end in sight. The saddest part is, the aggrieved parties may already be dead. Of what good is any vindication to one already in the graveyard?

My main point is this: Court magistrates are said to be swamped with more cases than they can handle with efficiency. Given the sheer volume, delays in disposition are said to be inevitable. I say, not so! On the general assumption that 50 percent or 60 percent of the cases being filed involve really simple questions of fact and law, there is no excuse for the delay in disposing of them more quickly. That should amount to and account for a lot of case disposals in so short a time. By a cursory reading of the cases, a diligent magistrate would at once know which ones are easy and which ones are difficult (and therefore require more time and study to resolve). The trouble is, many magistrates lack the management skills to winnow the chaff from the grain, as it were. Actually, more often than not, plain common sense should do the trick! But then again, there is that thing, too: slothfulness.—GEORGE DEL MAR, gdmlaw111@gmail.com