FACTS:

This case involves a petition to declare respondents Richard J. Gordon, Anacleto M. Diaz, and Orlando E. Mendiola in contempt of court. Respondents Diaz and Mendiola are the counsels of respondent Gordon in G.R. No. 134071, where the petitioners in this case are the respondents. The petition in G.R. No. 134071 was filed to prevent Gordon's removal as chairman of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) after the change of administration from President Ramos to President Estrada. Gordon argued that he had a fixed term of office until February 10, 2004. However, President Estrada issued a recall order on Gordon's appointment the day after assuming office. Instead of pursuing a temporary restraining order, Gordon filed a notice of withdrawal in the Supreme Court case and filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition in the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City. This led to the present petition to hold the respondents in contempt, alleging forum-shopping and contempt of court. Respondents argue that they complied with the rules on forum-shopping and disclose the withdrawal of their petition before the Supreme Court. The court finds in favor of the respondents and discusses the concept of forum-shopping.

ISSUES:

1. Whether respondents are guilty of forum-shopping by filing multiple petitions involving the same issues before different courts.

RULING:

1. Forum-shopping Respondents were not found guilty of forum-shopping. The Supreme Court ruled that forum-shopping consists of filing multiple suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, to obtain a favorable judgment. In this case, although respondent Richard J. Gordon filed a petition in this Court and then withdrew it to file a substantially similar petition before the Regional Trial Court of Olongapo City, no adverse decision had been rendered by this Court prior to the withdrawal. The respondents' explanation was accepted as being in good faith and no willful disregard or defiance of the Court's authority was found.

PRINCIPLES:

• Forum-shopping Defined as the act of filing multiple suits involving the same parties and cause of action in different forums to obtain a favorable judgment. It is characterized by seeking another court's decision after receiving an adverse decision.

• Hierarchy of Courts The policy requiring adherence to the hierarchy of courts was observed, leading to the withdrawal of the Supreme Court petition to refile in the appropriate lower court.

• Preservative vs. Punitive Nature of Contempt The power to punish for contempt should be exercised on a preservative principle rather than a vindictive one.

• Absence of Adverse Decision If no adverse decision has been rendered against a party in any of the cases brought before the court, the party is not seen as forum-shopping to improve chances of a favorable decision.