2013 (Criminal Law) Bar Exam Questions: Multiple Choice Question 17

[Answer/discuss the question below. Or jump to Criminal Law Essay Question 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11; Criminal Law Multiple Choice Question 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 1618, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25; See also 2013 Bar Exam: Information, Discussions, Tips, Questions and Results]

XVII.

In his Answer to a complaint, Atty. Jose (counsel for the defendant) stated that Atty. Agrada (counsel for the plaintiff) is “bobo, inutile, good for nothing, stupid, and a menace to clients.”

Can Atty. Jose be held criminally liable for libel? (1%)

(A) No, because an Answer to a complaint is a court pleading where communications made are privileged; the writer cannot be held liable for libel.

(B) Yes, because the statement casts aspersion on the character,integrity and reputation of Atty. Agrada as a lawyer and exposed him to public ridicule.

(C) Yes, although a court pleading is a privileged communication, malicious statements that are irrelevant and impertinent to the issue in the pleading may be libelous.

(D) Yes, there was a malicious intent to ridicule Atty. Agrada as a lawyer.

(E) No, because the statement is in a pleading, but Atty. Jose can be charged administratively for misconduct before the Supreme Court.

One comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *