Mitchell gets another lashing from court

Supreme Court Associate Justice Alexandro C. Castro yesterday ordered suspended lawyer Theodore R. Mitchell to stop the use of dilatory tactics in his effort to delay the resolution of the contempt case filed against him.

Justice Castro warned that failure to comply with the directive shall result in appropriate sanctions against Mr. Mitchell.

“The court will not tolerate an attorney’s attempt to make a mockery of our justice system and the rule of law in this Commonwealth,” he emphasized.

At the same time, Justice Castro threw out the notice of deposition on oral examination issued to him and the two other justices by Mr. Mitchell. The notice of deposition filed last Sept. 15, 2000 directed the panel members to appear at his office.

The three separate notices asked Justice Castro to appear on Sept. 21, Justice Pro Tem Pedro Atalig on Sept. 25 and Special Judge Alberto C. Lamorena III on Sept. 22 in Mr. Mitchell’s office at Chalan Laulau for depositions regarding an earlier order suspending Mr. Mitchell from the practice of law.

Mr. Mitchell claimed in a memorandum he filed also last Sept. 15 that the court’s order of suspension contained several accusations made without factual basis thus, he insists on a right to discovery including the depositions in which he even inserted his name into the caption as a real party in interest.

Obviously irked by the actions of Mr. Mitchell, Justice Castro directed the suspended lawyer’s name in the caption be stricken.

Said Justice Castro: “The court will not allow Mitchell or any other attorney to continue to waste judicial resources by forcing the court and its staff to conduct research which Mitchell himself should have conducted before presenting his argument.”

Justice Castro noted that it was not the first time that the embattled lawyer has advanced an argument without providing the court with any supporting legal authority.

Assuming that there exists any authority to depose sitting justices, Justice Castro said the depositions were conveniently scheduled to interfere with the hearing on the petition for writ of mandamus and defendants’ motion for contempt on Friday.

Although the deposition schedule is not in conflict with the actual hearing time, the depositions would undoubtedly interfere with the preparation for the hearing and deliberation of the case, he added.

“Deposing a justice or judge before he or she is set to hear a case and strategically scheduling his or her deposition will not advance the ends of justice. Rather, it is clearly an attempt to delay and obstruct the orderly disposition of this matter,” Justice Castro said.

The Supreme Court ordered the suspension of Mr. Mitchell last Aug. 1 for disobeying an earlier order in connection with the lawsuit filed by golfer Juan San Nicolas against the owners of Saipan Lao Lao golf course.

The high court has earlier directed Mr. Mitchell and his client Juan San Nicolas to turn over $800,056.38 plus interest to the court taken from the bank account of Saipan Lau Lau Development and Shimizu Corp.

Mr. Mitchell and Mr. San Nicolas took the money after a jury at the Superior Court awarded Mr. San Nicolas some $1.5 million in compensatory damages when he fell into a pit at the edge of the white tee box at the 5th hole, causing him leg injuries. However, the two continued to defy the high court’s order. (Lindablue F. Romero)