PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

I. Q: What are the powers of the *upre#e Court in relation to re ulatin the practice of law? Q: Can the le islature enact laws to re ulate the practice of the law? Q: Can senate pass a law lowerin the passin rate for can$i$ates? A: Read IN R5 C'nanan, Mar%& 1), 19+/ Q: Enu#erate the initial re3uire#ents for a$#ission to the ,ar. A: Read +ections 5, 8 and 9 of Rule :;<, RRC Q: Chin was ,orn on April ./45 of Filipino #other an$ Chinese father. 6e was con$itionall" a$#itte$ to ta'e the ,ar e7a#ination ,ecause of 3uestions arisin to his citi8enship. 9pon passin the ,ar he was re3uire$ to ta'e further proof of citi8enship an$ was not allowe$ to ta'e the oath. Can he elect Philippine citi8enship) .5 "ears after reachin the a e of #a:orit" -re3uire$ un$er the ./;0 Constitution2? A: Read In Re App("%at"on 6or Adm"ss"on to t&e *&"("pp"ne #ar o6 7"%ente C&"n!, #.M. 91/, O%tober 1, 1999 Q: (acana" practice$ law until he #i rate$ to Cana$a to see' #e$ical attention to his ail#ents. 6e su,se3uentl" applie$ for Cana$ian citi8enship to a&ail of Cana$a<s free #e$ical ai$ pro ra#. 6is application was appro&e$ an$ he ,eca#e a Cana$ian citi8en. (acana" later on reac3uire$ his Philippine citi8enship ," &irtue of R.A. /==0. (i$ (acana" lose his #e#,ership in the Philippine ,ar when he a&e up his Philippine citi8enship? Can he auto#aticall" practice law upon reac3uirin Filipino citi8enship? A: Read *et"t"on 6or 0eave to Res'me *ra%t"%e o6 0a3 o6 #en8am"n 4a%anay, #.M. No. 1-$), 4e%ember 1$, 200$. Q: Att". !elen$re8 file$ a petition to $is3ualif" !elin fro# ta'in the ,ar e7a#s an$ to i#pose $isciplinar" penalt" as a #e#,er of the Philippine *hari>a 1ar. 6e alle es that !elin ) in his application to ta'e the ,ar) faile$ to $isclose the fact that he has ; pen$in cri#inal cases. Also) !elin has ,een usin the title ?Attorne"@ in his co##unications as secretar" to the !a"or. *houl$ !elin ,ar? ,e $is3ualifie$ fro# a$#ission to the

By: Atty. Enrique V. dela Cruz, Jr.1

PRACTICE OF LAW Q: What constitutes practice of law? A: Read: Cayetano v. Monsod, G.R. NO. 100113, 201 SCRA 210, September 3, 1991) Q: What is the nature of the practice of law? A: In Re Ar!os"no, #.M. $12, Mar%& 19, 199$ Q: Is the practice of law a ri ht? Q: !a" a Corporation practice law? Q: Who #a" practice law? A: Read Se%. 1, R'(e 13) RRC Q: A cri#inal case was file$ a ainst Att". %a&ellana which resulte$ to his arrest an$ te#porar" $etention at the house of the cler' of court where his case was pen$in . (espite his $etention) Att". %a&ellana continues with his nor#al acti&ities inclu$in his practice of law) in appearin as counsel for certain cases. Can Att". %a&ellana still en a e in the practice of law $espite his arrest an$ $etention? A: Read *eop(e v. Ma%eda, G.R. No. )9+91,9-, .an. 2/, 2000 A(!I**IO+ TO PRACTICE OF LAW Q: What ,ranch of the o&ern#ent has the power to a$#it persons in the practice of law? A: Read In Re A(ma%en, No. 0,2$-+/, 31 SCRA +-2, 1ebr'ary 1), 19$0 -.//0 1ar Question2

Atty. Dela Cruz is an MCLE lecturer of the B! "ational #ffice and a Bar Re$ie%er at the Al&ano Bar Re$ie% Center and the Cos'o(olitan Re$ie% Center. )e teaches la% at *+,, -E*.DL+* and the Bulacan +tate *ni$ersity. )e o&tained his !aster of Laws 23"t& 4"st"n%t"on) fro' the London Metro(olitan *ni$ersity, and a Post ra$uate (iplo#a in International Tra$e Law fro' the *ni$ersity Colle/e London 0*CL1, *.2., &oth as a Che$enin/ scholar of the British /o$ern'ent. )e co'(leted a Post ra$uate Fellowship on Leadershi( and nternational Relations fro' the John -. 2ennedy +chool of 3o$ern'ent, )ar$ard *ni$ersity, *+A. )e also holds a !asters in Pu,lic !ana e#ent de/ree fro' the Ateneo +chool of 3o$ern'ent. )e o&tained his 1achelor of Laws de/ree 23"t& &onors) and an A1 Le al !ana e#ent de/ree 2%'m (a'de) fro' the *ni$ersity of +anto ,o'as as a Rector4s +cholar. )e %as recently elected as Board Me'&er of the 5 nd District of Bulacan. )e is also the current !ana in Partner at the !once Enrile Reyes 6 Manalastas 0!ECABAR1 La% #ffice in Ma7ati City.

!a" sanctions ,e i#pose$ on !elin as #e#,er of the Philippine *hari>a 1ar?

A: Read In t&e Matter o6 t&e 4"s9'a("6"%at"on o6 #ar 5:am"nee ;aron S. Me("n!, #M No. 11+/, /31 SCRA 1/$, .'ne ), 200/ Q: Telesforo (iao was a$#itte$ to the 1ar in ./0;) after two "ears) *e&erino !artine8 char e$ hi# with ha&in falsel" represente$ in his application for such 1ar e7a#ination that he ha$ the re3uisite aca$e#ic 3ualifications. The *olAen reco##en$e$ that (iao<s na#e ,e erase$ fro# the roll of Attorne"s ,ecause (iao ha$ not co#plete$ the prescri,e$ preBle al e$ucation) to wit: (iao $i$ not co#plete his hi h school trainin an$ (iao ne&er atten$e$ Quisu#,in Colle e) an$ ne&er o,taine$ his A.A. (iplo#a therefro#. *houl$ (iao<s na#e ,e erase$ fro# the Roll of Attorne"s? A: Read 4"ao v. Mart"ne<, A.C. No. 2//, Mar%& 29, 19-3= Q: While the e7a#ination was in pro ress) the hea$watcher) Lilian !en$i orin) reporte$ that e7a#inee A#paro was foun$ rea$in a piece of paper containin notes in Cri#inal Law. 6e at first refuse$ to surren$er the paper) ,ut later a&e it to !en$i orin when she threatene$ to report the #atter to the authorities. A &er,al report was rela"e$ to the 1ar Chair#an who forthwith a&e instructions that no in&esti ation ,e then #a$e in or$er to forestall an" co##otion that #i ht $istur, the other can$i$ates. A#paro was per#itte$ to continue answerin the 3uestions. 6ea$watcher !en$i orin thereafter su,#itte$ a special report on the inci$ent. 6e was still allowe$ to ta'e the e7a#s for the last *un$a" of the 1ar. A#paro $i$ not pass the ./C5 1ar E7a#s. *houl$ A#paro ,e allowe$ to ta'e the ./C0 1ar E7a#s? A: Read 2In R5 *edro Amparo, G.R. No. 000 .'(y 1), 19$+) -./C5 1ar Question2 Q: Respon$ent Dictorio (. Lanue&o a$#itte$ ha&in re3ueste$ on his own initiati&e the fi&e e7a#iners concerne$ to reBe&aluate the fi&e note,oo's of Ra#on E. Aalan ) alias Ro#an E. Aalan ) that e&entuall" resulte$ in the increase of Aalan >s a&era e fro# 44.=0E to the passin ra$e C5..0E) or a total increase of ei ht -F2 wei hte$ points) #ore or less) that ena,le$ Aalan to hur$le the ./C. 1ar e7a#inations &ia a resolution of the Court #a'in C5E the passin a&era e for that "ear>s e7a#ination without an" ra$e ,elow fift" percent -0GE2 in an" su,:ect. Aalan thereafter too' his law"er>s oath. It is li'ewise ,e"on$ $ispute that he ha$ no authorit" fro# the Court or the Co##ittee to initiate such steps towar$s the sai$ reB e&aluation of the answers of Aalan or of other e7a#inees. *houl$ he ,e $is,arre$? A: n Re: Victorio Lanue$o, A.C. "o. ::9, Au/ust 5=, :=>8. Q: Respon$ent Ra#on E. Aalan ) conceale$ in his application to ta'e the ,ar e7a#s his pen$in cri#inal case for ph"sical in:uries. Thus) Aalan was allowe$ uncon$itionall" to ta'e the 1ar e7a#inations an$ was

allowe$ to ta'e his oath. *houl$ he ,e $is,arre$ for such conceal#ent? A: n Re: Ra'on 3alan/, A.C. "o. ::9, Au/ust 5=, :=>8. Q: Ar osino passe$ the ,ar e7a#inations hel$ in .//;. The Court howe&er $eferre$ his oathBta'in $ue to his pre&ious con&iction for Rec'less I#pru$ence Resultin to 6o#ici$e. The cri#inal case which resulte$ in petitioner>s con&iction arose fro# the $eath of a neoph"te $urin fraternit" initiation rites. *houl$ Ar osino ,e allowe$ to ta'e his law"er>s oath? A: Read Re *et"t"on o6 A( Ar!os"no to >a?e t&e 0a3yer@s Oat&, #.M. No. $12, Mar%& 19, 199$, 2$0 SCRA 2Q: 6ow #an" ti#es can a law ra$uate ta'e up the ,ar? A: Bar Matter ::9: re/ulates the conduct of &ar e?a'ination@ li'its the e?a'ination u( to fi$e ti'es only.
+ote: BM ::9:. requires su&'ission of the dean of a certification that the candidate has no dero/atory record in school and if any in detail and status thereof.

Pa"#ent of I1P (ues Q: Att". Lla#as) for a nu#,er of "ears) has not in$icate$ the proper PTR an$ I1P OR +os. an$ $ata in his plea$in s. 6e onl" in$icate$ HI1P Ri8al =0/G4GI ,ut he has ,een usin this for at least ; "ears alrea$". Att". Lla#as a&erre$ that he is onl" en a e$ in a Hli#ite$I practice of law an$ un$er RA C5;=) as a senior citi8en) he is e7e#pte$ fro# pa"#ent of inco#e ta7es an$ inclu$e$ in this e7e#ption) is the pa"#ent of #e#,ership $ues. Is Att". Lla#as correct? A: Read Santos .r. v. Atty. 0(amas, A.C. No. /$/9, .an'ary 20, 2000 Q: Att". Are&alo sou ht e7e#ption fro# pa"#ent of I1P $ues for the alle e$ unpai$ accounta,ilit" for the "ears ./CCB=GG0. 6e alle e$ that after ,ein a$#itte$ to the Philippine 1ar in ./4.) he ,eca#e part of the Philippine Ci&il *er&ice then #i rate$ to) an$ wor'e$ in) the 9*A in (ece#,er ./F4 until his retire#ent in the "ear =GG;. 6e #aintaine$ that he cannot ,e assesse$ I1P $ues for the "ears that he was wor'in in the Philippine Ci&il *er&ice since the Ci&il *er&ice law prohi,its the practice of one<s profession while in o&ern#ent ser&ice) an$ neither can he ,e assesse$ for the "ears when he was wor'in in the 9*A. Is Att". Are&alo entitle$ to e7e#ption fro# pa"#ent of his $ues $urin the ti#e that he was inacti&e in the practice of law? A: Read 0etter o6 Atty. Areva(o, .r. Re9'est"n! 5:empt"on 6rom *ayment o6 4'es, #.M. 13$0, MAA 9, 200+

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

Q: !arcial E$illon passe$ the ,ar e7a#s ,ut refuse$ to pa" the P.0G.GG #e#,ership $ues on the roun$ that he $oes not want to ,e a #e#,er of the I1P. Respon$ent) althou h conce$in the propriet" an$ necessit" of the inte ration of the 1ar of the Philippines) 3uestions the allBenco#passin ) allB inclusi&e scope of #e#,ership therein an$ the o,li ation to pa" #e#,ership $ues ar uin that the pro&isions therein -*ection . an$ / of the Court Rule .;/BA2 constitute an in&asion of his constitutional ri ht in the sense that he is ,ein co#pelle$) as a precon$ition to #aintainin his status as a law"er in oo$ stan$in ) to ,e a #e#,er of the I1P an$ to pa" the correspon$in $ues) an$ that as a conse3uence of this co#pelle$ financial support of the sai$ or ani8ation to which he is a$#itte$l" personall" anta onistic) he is ,ein $epri&e$ of the ri hts to li,ert" an$ propert" uarantee$ to hi# ," the Constitution. Respon$ent li'ewise 3uestions the :uris$iction of the *upre#e Court to stri'e his na#e fro# the Roll of Attorne"s) conten$in that this #atter is not a#on the :usticia,le cases tria,le ," the Court ,ut is of an a$#inistrati&e nature pertainin to an a$#inistrati&e ,o$". Is he correct? Q: Is the pro&ision re3uirin pa"#ent of a #e#,ership fee &oi$? A: In t&e Matter o6 I#* Members&"p d'es de("n9'en%y o6 Atty. Mar%"a( 5d"((on, A.M. No. 192), )/ SCRA ++/, A'!'st 3, 19$) APPEARA+CE OF +O+BLAWJER I+ CO9RT Q: !a" a nonBlaw"er appear in court? Q: Kanlaon Construction an$ pri&ate respon$ents< case were assi ne$ ,efore two la,or ar,iters. The En ineers as coB$efen$ant) without written authorit" to represent Kanlaon Construction) a$#itte$ the co#plaints a ainst the#. 1" &irtue of such) the la,or ar,iters a$:u$icate$ the case in fa&or of the pri&ate respon$ents. Can an en ineer represent a coB$efen$ant in a case ,efore the la,or ar,iter? A: Read Ban(aon Constr'%t"on v. N0RC, GR No. 12--2+, 2$9 SCRA 33$, September 1), 199$) Pro *e -*ection ;5) Rule .;F2 Q: !a$era$a file$ char es a ainst %u$ e !e$io$ea for @ ross i norance of the law a#ountin to ra&e #iscon$uct@ for failin @to o,ser&e an$ appl" the Re&ise$ Rule on *u##ar" Proce$ure@ in the ci&il case. On the other han$) respon$ent %u$ e !e$io$ea #aintaine$ that !a$era$a) in appearin as counsel on her own ,ehalf) faile$ to secure authorit" fro# the Court an$ to file her lea&e of a,sence e&er" ti#e she appeare$ in court. Q: !ata"o is a law"er. 6e is a partner in a pri&ate law fir#) an$ in =GGC local elections he ran for councilor an$ was electe$ in that position. (oes ,ein electe$ as pu,lic official prohi,it hi# to en a e in the pri&ate practice of law? A: Read Ramos v, Mana(a%, G.R. No. 0,2-10, )9 *&"( 2$, .'ne 1-, 19+1= In re 4av"d, Adm Case No. 9), .'(y 13, 19+3= and Nor"e!a v. S"son, G.R. No. 0, 2/+/), 12+ SCRA 293, O%tober 2$, 19)3 Q: Att". La$a a) a Cler' of Court) appeare$ as counsel for an$ in ,ehalf of his cousin in a cri#inal case for falsification of pu,lic $ocu#ents ,efore the !ETC of Que8on Cit". The appearance of Att". La$a a in sai$ case was without the pre&ious per#ission of the Court. R9LE* O+ P91LIC OFFICIAL* REAAR(I+A PRACTICE OF LAW Q: Who are the pu,lic officials who cannot en a e in the pri&ate practice of law in the Philippines? A Read .ov"to O(a<o v. .'st"%e 4ante >"n!a, A.M. No. 10, +,$,SC, 4e%ember $, 2010. Can !a$era$a appear as counsel for herself an$ her coBplaintiff e&en if she is not a law"er? A: Read Maderada v. .'d!e Med"odea, A.M. No. M>.,02, 1/+9. O%tober 1/, 2003. Q: Fer$inan$ A. Cru8 -petitioner2 sou ht per#ission to enter his appearance for an$ on his ,ehalf ,efore the RTC as the plaintiff in a Ci&il Case for A,ate#ent of +uisance. Petitioner) a fourth "ear law stu$ent) anchors his clai# on *ection ;5 of Rule .;F of the Rules of Court that a nonBlaw"er #a" appear ,efore an" court an$ con$uct his liti ation personall". %u$ e !i:ares $enie$ the #otion with finalit". In the sa#e Or$er) the trial court hel$ that for the failure of petitioner Cru8 to su,#it the pro#ise$ $ocu#ent an$ :urispru$ence an$ for his failure to satisf" the re3uire#ents or con$itions un$er Rule .;FBA of the Rules of Court) his appearance was $enie$. (oes respon$ent court acte$ with ra&e a,use of $iscretion a#ountin to lac' or e7cess of :uris$iction when it $enie$ the appearance of the petitioner as part" liti ant? A: Read Cr'< v. M"8ares, et a(., G.R. No. 1+//-/, September 11, 200) Q: !a" a part" represent hi#self? A: Read *eop(e v. Santo%"(des, .r., GR No. 1091/9, 4e%ember 21, 1999

(i$ Att". La$a a &iolate the Co$e of Con$uct an$ Ethical *tan$ar$s for Pu,lic Officials an$ E#plo"ees ," en a in in pri&ate practice? A: Read O%a v. Atty. 0ada!a, A.M. No. *,99,12)$. .an'ary 2-, 2001

Q: Att". Perenia ot #arrie$ in =GG0. Then he #et another wo#an) 6elenL the" fell in lo&e an$ starte$ li&in to ether. Att". Perenia woul$ e&en ,rin her alon social functions an$ intro$uce her as his secon$ wife. Is such act unethical?
A: Read 7"t'! v. Ron%a(, A.C. NO. -313, +01 SCRA 1--, September 200-

LIA1ILITIE* OF A LAWJER
Q: When will ci&il lia,ilit" arise? Q: When will the lia,ilit" of a law"er for H,reach of fi$uciar" o,li ation arise? Q: What are the effects of law"er<s failure to return client<s #one" or propert" after $e#an$? Q: When is a law"er not lia,le for li,elous wor$s in the plea$in s? Q: When will cri#inal lia,ilit" e7ist? Q: Can a law"er ,e $iscipline$ for pri&ate acts that $oes not relate to the practice of law? A: Read Roa v. Moreno, A.C. No. )3)2, Apr"( 21, 2010. Q: Can a law"er ,e $iscipline$ for pu,lic acts that relates to his e7ercise of official functions? A: Read Mart"n 0a&m III v. .oven%"o Mayor, et a(., A.C. No. $/30, 1ebr'ary 1+, 2012. Also Read O66"%e o6 t&e Co'rt Adm"n"strator v. 4an"e( 0"an!%o, A.C. No. +3++, 4e%ember 13, 2011. Q: Can a law"er ,e hel$ lia,le for ne li ence? A: Read So("don v. Ma%a(a(ad, A.C. No. )1+) 1ebr'ary 2/, 2010 Q: Can a law"er ,e hel$ lia,le for acts relatin ,ein a notar" pu,lic? to his

Q: The co#plainant) Dictoria 1arrientos) is sin le) a colle e stu$ent) an$ was a,out =G "ears an$ C #onths ol$ $urin the ti#e -%ul"BOcto,er ./C02 of her relationship with respon$entL while respon$ent Transfi uracion (aarol is #arrie$) Aeneral !ana er of Ma#,oan a $el +orte Electric Cooperati&e) an$ 5. "ears ol$ at the ti#e of the sai$ relationship. Respon$ent) alrea$" a #arrie$ #an an$ a,out 5. "ears ol$) propose$ lo&e an$ #arria e to co#plainant) then still a =GB"earBol$ #inor) 'nowin that he $i$ not ha&e the re3uire$ le al capacit". Respon$ent then succee$e$ in ha&in carnal relations with co#plainant ," $eception) #a$e her pre nant) su este$ a,ortion) ,reache$ his pro#ise to #arr" her) an$ then $eserte$ her an$ the chil$. *houl$ the respon$ent law"er ,e $is,arre$? A: :==;. Barrientos $s. Daarol, A.C. "o. :8:5, January 5=,

Q: Co#plainant 1acarro a&erre$ that she an$ respon$ent fell in lo&e an$ ,eca#e en a e$ while the" were stu$"in at the Liceo $e Ca a"an in Ca a"an $e Oro Cit"L that when she ,eca#e pre nant as a result of their relationship) respon$ent a,an$one$ her an$ ne&er fulfille$ his pro#ise to #arr" herL that on (ece#,er 5) ./C.) she a&e ,irth to a ,a," irl. *houl$ respon$ent ,e $enie$ a$#ission to the ,ar on account of his ,reach of pro#ise to #arr"? A: Bacarro $s. !inatacan, A.C. "o. 88=.+BC January ;:, :=<A Q: Co#plainant !a $alena T. Arci a file$ a co#plaint for $is,ar#ent a ainst law"er *e un$ino (. !aniwan on the roun$ of rossl" i##oral con$uct ,ecause he refuse$ to fulfill his pro#ise of #arria e to herB After repeate$ acts of coha,itation ,etween co#plainant an$ respon$ent) then a #e$ical technolo " stu$ent an$ a law stu$ent respecti&el") who were sweethearts) their illicit relationship resulte$ in the ,irth of their chil$) !ichael (ino !aniwan . (espite *e un$ino>s repeate$ assurance to !a $alena that he woul$ #arr" her once he passe$ the ,ar e7a#inations an$ e&en #a$e !a $alena>s father ,elie&e that the" were alrea$" #arrie$ ,ut that the church we$$in was ,ein $eferre$ until after he has passe$ sai$ e7a#inations) he #arrie$ another wo#an after his oath ta'in . *houl$ respon$ent ,e $enie$ a$#ission to the ,ar for his ,reach of pro#ise to #arr"? A: :=<:. Arci/a $s. Mani%an/, A.C. "o. :9B<, Au/ust :A,

A: Read Nesa Isen&ardt v. Atty. 0eonardo M. Rea(, A.C. No. )2+/ 1ebr'ary 1+, 2012 Q: Is the re3uire#ent of Aoo$ !oral Character a continuin re3uire#ent? A: Read >ap'%ar vs. >ap'%ar, A.C. No. /1/), 293 SCRA 331,.'(y 30, 199) Rule 7.03 A lawyer shall not engage in a conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. -=GG5 1ar Question2

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct -.//; 1ar Question2 Q: (efine unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful con$uct. A: Read Santos .r. v. Atty. 0(amas, A.C. No. /$/9, .an'ary 20, 2000 A(so Read Garr"do v. Garr"do, A.C. No. -+93, 1ebr'ary /, 2010 A(so Read G'evarra v. 5a(a, A.C. No. $13-, A'!'st 1, 200$ Q: Att". Li#on was (ocena<s law"er in a ci&il case. (urin that case) he as'e$ (ocena to post a superse$eas ,on$ to sta" e7ecution of the appeale$ $ecision. (ocena forwar$e$ the #one" to Att". Li#on. Later) the case was $eci$e$ in their fa&or. The" were una,le to reco&er the #one" ,ecause the cler' of court sai$ no such ,on$ ha$ e&er ,een file$. I1P suspen$e$ hi# for one "ear. Is $is,ar#ent warrante$? A: Read 4o%ena v. Atty. 0"mon, A.C. 23)$, 29+ SCRA 2-2, September 10, 199) Q: Att". Antonio an$ Att" Li a"a were election officers of the CO!ELEC. The" helpe$ con$uct an$ o&ersee the .//0 elections. Then *enatorial can$i$ate Pi#entel) %r. alle e$ that Att". Antonio an$ Att". Li a"a ta#pere$ with the &otes recei&e$ ,". Pi#entel %r. file$ an a$#inistrati&e co#plaint for their $is,ar#ent. The two law"ers ar ue$ that the $iscrepancies were $ue to honest #ista'e) o&ersi ht an$ fati ue. The" also ar ue$ that the I1P 1oar$ of Ao&ernors ha$ alrea$" e7onerate$ the# fro# an" offense an$ that the #otion for reconsi$eration file$ ," Pi#entel %r. was not file$ in ti#e. Are the respon$ents uilt" of &iolatin the Co$e of Professional Responsi,ilities? A: Read *"mente(, .r. v. Atty. 0(orente and Atty. Sa(ayon, A.C. No. /-90, A'!'st 29, 2000 Q: An a$#inistrati&e co#plaint for $is,ar#ent a ainst Att". Iris was file$ for alle e$l" carr"in an i##oral relationship with Carlos) hus,an$ of co#plainant Leslie. Att". Iris conten$e$ that her relationship with Carlos is licit ,ecause the" were #arrie$. An$ when she $isco&ere$ Carlos true ci&il status she cut off all her ties with hi#. Is Att". Iris uilt" of co##ittin warrantin her $is,ar#ent? ross i##oral con$uct Q: Catherine an$ Att". Ron cal #aintaine$ an illicit affair. Catherine file$ a case for $is,ar#ent a ainst Att". Ron cal ,ase$ ross i##oral con$uct alle in that he #isrepresente$ hi#self to ,e sin le when he was in fact #arrie$) an$ $ue to the false pretenses she succu#,e$ to his se7ual a$&ances. Will her petition prosper? A: Read 7"t'! v. Ron!%a(, A.C. No. -313, September $, 200Q: Resurreccion as $efen$ant $eli&ere$ to Att". *a"son an a#ount representin the co#pensation or settle#ent #one" in a case for ho#ici$e thru rec'less i#pru$ence. 6owe&er) Att". *a"son $i$ not turn o&er the a#ount to his client) forcin Resurreccion to pa" the sa#e a#ount a ain. Att". *a"son was later con&icte$ for estafa. *houl$ Att". *a"son ,e $is,arre$? A: Read Res'rre%%"on v. Atty. Sayson, 300 SCRA 129, G.R. No. ))202. 4e%ember 1/, 199) +ote: A(so read Sor"ano vs. 4"<on, A.C. No. -$92, .an'ary 2+, 200Q: (ifferentiate #oralit" fro# i##oral con$uct an$ rossl" i##oral con$uct. A: Read: Ar%"!a v. Man"3an!, A.M. No. 1-0), 10- SCRA +91, A'!'st 1/, 19)1= and 1"!'eroa v. #arran%a, GR No. 9$3-9, 2$+ SCRA //+, .'(y 31, 199$) Q: Patricia an$ *i#eon were teen sweethearts. It was after their chil$ was ,orn that *i#eon first pro#ise$ he woul$ #arr" her after he passes the ,ar e7a#inations. Their relationship continue$ an$ *i#eon alle e$l" #a$e #ore than twent" or thirt" pro#ises of #arria e. Patricia learne$ that *i#eon #arrie$ another wo#an. !eanwhile) *i#eon successfull" passe$ the ./CG ,ar e7a#inations after four atte#pts. 1ut ,efore he coul$ ta'e his Oath) Patricia file$ a Petition to $is3ualif" *i#eon to ta'e the Law"er<s Oath on the roun$ of Aross I##oral Con$uct. (oes the act of *i#eon in en a in in pre#arital relations with Patricia an$ #a'in pro#ises to #arr" her constitute Aross I##oral Con$uct? A: Read 1"!'eroa v. #arran%o, .r., GR No. 9$3-9, 2$SCRA //+, .'(y 31, 199$ Q: Att". A$a8a o,taine$ a loan fro# Or,e with interest. Att". A$a8a issue$ two chec's as install#ent. 6owe&er) the first chec' was $ishonore$. The other chec' was not accepte$ for ,ein a stale chec'. Efforts were e7erte$ ," Or,e to see Att". A$a8a ,ut her efforts turne$ to ,e futile. After a cri#inal case was file$) Att". A$a8a went to Or,e<s house an$ pro#ise$ to pa" the chec's. Or,e

A: Read C" v. Atty #on"6a%"o, A.C. No. 3319, .'ne ), 2000

then a ree$ to ha&e the ser&ice of the warrant of arrest withhel$ ,ut) a ain) Att". A$a8a faile$ to #a'e oo$ of his pro#ise. (i$ the act of Att". A$a8a<s in issuin worthless chec's constitute ross #iscon$uct? A: Read Orbe v. Atty. Ada<a, A.C. No. +2+2, May 20, 200/ Q: Aran$e was the pri&ate offen$e$ part" in a cri#inal case while Att". (e *il&a was the counsel for the accuse$. (urin the course of the procee$in s) Att". (e *il&a ten$ere$ a chec' in fa&or of Aran$e in or$er for the latter to $esist fro# participatin as a witness a ainst her client. E&entuall") Aran$e accepte$ the chec' an$ refuse$ to participate as a co#plainin witness there," lea$in to the $is#issal of the case. 6owe&er) to Aran$e<s consternation) the chec' ,ounce$ ,ecause Att". (e *il&a<s account was alrea$" close$. When the Court or$ere$ Att". (e *il&a to co##ent on the char es a ainst her) she $eli,eratel" refuses to accept all the notices co#in fro# the Court. Is Att". (e *il&a uilt" of ,reach of trust? (i$ she &iolate her oath as a law"er ," issuin a ,ouncin chec' an$ ," refusin to accept the notices sent to her co#in fro# the court? A: Read Grande v. Atty. 4e S"(va, A.C. No. /)3), .'(y 29, 2003 Q: Alau"a) a #e#,er of *hari<a 1ar an$ a cler' of court in *hari<a (istrict Court) wrote a letter to a corporation clai#in to ,e a law"erNaffi7in HAttorne"I ,efore his na#e. Can a #e#,er of the *hari<a 1ar affi7 the $esi nation law"er ,efore their na#e? A: Read A(a3" v. A(a'ya, A.M. S4C,9$,2,*, 1ebr'ary 2/, 199$

Atty. B&an .r. v. Atty. S"mb"((o, AC No. +299, A'!'st 19, 2003 Q: A pai$ a$&ertise#ent appeare$ in the %ul" 0) =GGG issue of Philippine (ail" In3uirer) which rea$s: @A++9L!E+T> OF !ARRIAAE *pecialist 0;=B5;;;P0=.B =44C.@ *i#ilar a$&ertise#ents were pu,lishe$ in the Au ust = an$ 4) =GGG issues of the !anila 1ulletin an$ Au ust 0) =GGG issue of The Philippine *tar. A staff #e#,er of the *C calle$ up the pu,lishe$ telephone nu#,er an$ preten$e$ to ,e an intereste$ part". *he spo'e to !rs. *i#,illo) who clai#e$ that her hus,an$) Att". *i#,illo) was an e7pert in han$lin annul#ent cases an$ can uarantee a court $ecree within four to si7 #onths) pro&i$e$ the case will not in&ol&e separation of propert" or custo$" of chil$ren. !rs. *i#,illo also sai$ that her hus,an$ char es a fee of P5F) GGG.GG) half of which is pa"a,le at the ti#e of filin of the case an$ the other half after a $ecision thereon has ,een ren$ere$. (oes the appearance of the followin : @A++9L!E+T> OF !ARRIAAE *pecialist 0;=B5;;;P0=.B=44C@) in a newspaper) a#ount to advertising and solicitation of legal services prohi,ite$ ," the Co$e of Professional Responsi,ilit" an$ the Rules of Court? A: Read Atty. B&an .r. v. Atty. S"mb"((o, AC No. +299, A'!'st 19, 2003 CA+O+ ; 9*E TR9E) 6O+E*T) FAIR A+( O1%ECTIDE I+FOR!ATIO+ I+ !AKI+A K+OW+ 6I* LEAAL *ERDICE* Q: Is i&in of a$&ice on le al #atters throu h the #e$iu# of a newspaper colu#n or ra$io or tele&ision ,roa$cast i#proper? Rule 3.01 A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self!laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his "ualifications or legal services. -.//C 1ar Question2 Q: Att". Lana a fa#ous fa#il" law"er) as'e$ his secretar" to $raft the contents of his new callin car$. The secretar" inserte$ in such $raft the phrase) the H,est fa#il" law"er in the PhilippinesI. The $raft was chec'e$ ," Att". Lana an$ appro&e$ it. The new callin car$s were then #a$e an$ Att". Lana a&e it to prospecti&e clients. (i$ Att". Lana co##it an" unethical act? Rule 3.0 #n the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. $he continued use of the name of a deceased partner is

A(DERTI*I+A LAW PRACTICE

Rule .03 A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designated primarily to solicit legal business. -.//C 1ar Question2 Q: Att". (a&i$ a ree$ to i&e O of his professional fees to an inter#e$iar" or co##ission a ent an$ he also ,oun$ hi#self not to $eal $irectl" with the clients. Can he ,e su,:ect to $isciplinar" action? A: Read >an >e? #en! v. 4av"d, A. C. No. 12-1, 4e%ember 29, 19)3 Q: Att". %ohn Alcasi$ is a partner at Alcasio an$ Delas3ue8 Law Fir#. The fir# is newl" esta,lishe$ an$ in or$er to attract client) he cause$ the a$&ertisin of the law fir# in #a a8ines an$ new papers. Is that act of Att". Castillo ethical? A: Rea$: C(ep v. 0e!a( C("n"%, In%., #M No. ++3, .'ne 1$, 1993)

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its communications that said partner is deceased. -.//5) .//4) =GG. 1ar Questions2 Q: What is the reason in allowin na#e of a $ecease$ partner? a fir# to use the Q: (istin uish a$&erseBinterest conflicts con ruentBinterest representation conflicts? an$

Rule &.0 A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed to practice law. QP+: a. 'here there is a pre!e(isting agreement with a partner or associate that, upon the latter)s death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time to his estate to persons specified in the agreement* or b. 'here a lawyer underta+es to complete unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer* or 'here a lawyer or law firm includes a non! lawyer employees in a retirement plan, even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing agreement.

A: Read: DIn t&e matter o6 t&e pet"t"on 6or a't&or"ty to %ont"n'e 'se o6 t&e 6"rm O<aeta, Rom'(o, 4e 0eon et%., and pet"t"on 6or a't&or"ty to %ont"n'e 'se o6 6"rm name ESy%"p, Sa(a<ar, 1e("%"ano, et%.F 2.'(y 30, 19$9) Also Read: +EC R*LE+ #" !AR,"ER+) ! "AME 0+EC Me'o Cir. No. +, s. 200))

CO+FLICT OF I+TERE*T
Rule %.03 A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service. -.//=) .//;) =GG. 1ar Questions2 Q: Att". !a$ri al wor'e$ in the *upre#e Court) un$er the $i&ision which han$les the case of !r. Ro7as) ,efore the pro#ul ation of the $ecision of the caseL Att". !a$ri al resi ne$ an$ starte$ to wor' in the law fir# which han$les the case of !r. Ro7as. Is Att". !a$ri al allowe$ to use the infor#ation he ot to help in the case han$le$ ," the fir#? A: Read *CGG v. Sand"!anbayan, G.R. No. 1+1)09,12, /++
SCRA +2-, Apr"( 200+

c.

Q: Loren8o is a law"er ,ut is suspen$e$ in the practice of law $ue to so#e unethical acts. 6e wor'e$ for a law fir# owne$ ," one of his frien$s. *ince he has so #an" cases to han$le) Att". 1eren uer assi ne$ a case to Loren8o) ,elie&in he can han$le such eas" case. (i$ Att". 1eren uer &iolate an" rule? A: G'ba((a v. Ca!'"oa, G.R. No. 0,/-+3$ $) SCRA 302 .'(y 29,
19$$

Q: For#er *olicitor Aeneral Estelito !en$o8a file$ a petition with the CFI pra"in for the assistance an$ super&ision of the court in the Aen1an'<s li3ui$ation. *u,se3uentl") Presi$ent A3uino esta,lishe$ the PCAA to reco&er alle e$ illB otten wealth of for#er Presi$ent !arcos) his fa#ilies an$ cronies. The PCAA file$ with the *an$i an,a"an a co#plaint for re&ersion) recon&e"ance) restitution) accountin an$ $a#a es a ainst respon$ent Tan et al. an$ issue$ se&eral writs of se3uestration on properties the" alle e$l" ac3uire$. Respon$ent Tan et al were represente$ ," For#er *olAen !en$o8a) who has then resu#e$ his pri&ate practice of law. The PCAA file$ #otions to $is3ualif" respon$ent !en$o8a as counsel for respon$ent Tan et al. The #otions alle e$ that respon$ent !en$o8a) as then *olAen an$ counsel to Central 1an') Hacti&el" inter&ene$I in the li3ui$ation of Aen1an') which was su,se3uentl" ac3uire$ ," respon$ents Tan et al. (oes Rule 4.G; of the CPR applica,le to respon$ent !en$o8a? A: Read *CGG v. Sand"!anbayan, G.R. Nos. 1+1)09, 12,Apr"( 12, 200+)

Rule 1,.01 ! A lawyer in conferring with a prospective client shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether the matter would involve a conflict with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform the prospective client. Q: What are the three tests to $eter#ine the e7istence of conflictin interests? Q: What are the T"pes of Conflict of interestC Q: A case was file$ ," the Philippine Pu,lic *chool Teachers Association -PP*TA2 a ainst its own 1oar$ of (irectors in which the" retaine$ the ser&ices of Att". *alunat. Att". *alunat) on the other han$ a$#itte$ that the A**A Law Fir#) of which he is the !ana in Partner) was the retaine$ counsel of PP*TA. Jet) he appeare$ as counsel of recor$ for the respon$ent 1oar$ of (irectors in the sai$ case. Att". *alunat<s ,rother) Aurelio) was a #e#,er of the PP*TA 1oar$ which appro&e$ his en a e#ent as retaine$ counsel of PP*TA. An a$#inistrati&e co#plaint was file$ with the I1P Co##ission on 1ar (iscipline) a ainst Att". *alunat for ille al an$ unethical practice an$ conflict of interest.

Can a law"er en a e$ ," a corporation $efen$ #e#,ers of the ,oar$ of the sa#e corporation in a $eri&ati&e suit? A: Read ;orn"((a v. Atty. Sa('nat, .'(y 1, 2003, A.C. No. +)0/ Q: *antos file$ a &erifie$ co#plaint a ainst Att". 1eltran ,efore the I1PBC1() alle in a#on others that Att". 1eltran represente$ conflictin interest when he entere$ his appearance as $efense counsel in an e:ect#ent case in which his for#er client was the plaintiff. Is Att". 1eltran uilt" of representin conflictin interests when he entere$ his appearance as $efense counsel in an e:ect#ent case in which his for#er client was the plaintiff? A: Read Santos v. Atty. #e(tran, A.C. +)+), 4e%ember 11, 2003 Q: Att". Lo8a$a is the retaine$ counsel an$ le al a$&iser of Frias. *he acte$ as ,ro'er in the sale of the latter<s house in A"ala Ala,an . *he intro$uce$ the latter to a client of hers) (ra. *an (ie o) a prospecti&e ,u"er. *an (ie o a&e P=! in cash an$ P.! in chec' as $own pa"#ent) instea$ of P;! in cash as a ree$. Out of the P=! in cash) Att". Lo8a$a too' P.! as her co##ission without co#plainant>s consent. *an (ie o e&entuall" ,ac'e$ out fro# the sale. Title to the propert" was alle e$l" stolen. Att". Lo8a$a prepare$ an affi$a&it of loss) which was later offere$ as e&i$ence in a petition for issuance of a $uplicate cop" of the title. A per:ur" case was then file$ ," *an (ie o a ainst co#plainant on the roun$ that the title to the propert" was ne&er reall" lost -as alle e$ ," co#plainant in the affi$a&it of loss2 ,ut was with *an (ie o all alon . (i$ Att". Lo8a$a represent conflictin interest? A: Read 1r"as v. 0o<ada, A.C. No. --+-, 4e%ember 13, 200+ Q: A#a$o Oca#po is the retaine$ counsel of !aria Tiania in all her le al pro,le#s an$ court cases. !rs. Concepcion 1la"loc' sue$ Tiania for e:ect#ent. Att". Oca#po appeare$ in this case for ,oth Tiania an$ 1la"loc'. Tiania confronte$ Oca#po a,out this ,ut the latter reassure$ Tiania that he will ta'e care of e&er"thin an$ that there was no nee$ for Tiania to hire a new law"er since he is still Tiania>s law"er. Oca#po prepare$ the answer in the sai$ e:ect#ent case) which Tiania si ne$. Then Oca#po #a$e her si n a Co#pro#ise A ree#ent) which the latter si ne$ without rea$in . Two "ears fro# the su,#ission of the Co#pro#ise A ree#ent) an or$er to &acate the propert" in 3uestion was recei&e$ ," Tiania. To hol$ off her e:ect#ent for another two "ears) Oca#po a$&ise$ Tiania to pa" hi# a certain a#ount for the sheriff. Was

the respon$ent interests?

uilt" of representin

conflictin

A: >"ana v. O%ampo, A.C. No. 22)+, A'!'st 12, 1991 Rule 1,.03 A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests e(cept by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. Read Na?p"( v. 7a(de<, A.C. No. 20/0 Mar%& /, 199) Q: What are the instances when a law"er #a" not represent conflictin interests $espite consent of ,oth parties concerne$?

6O+E*TJ I+ LAW PRACTICE

Rule 10.01 A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court* nor shall he mislead, or allow the court to be misled by any artifice. Q: !ali a"a) a $octor an$ retire$ colonel of the Air Force file$ an action for $a#a es a ainst se&eral #ilitar" officers for who# Att". (oronilla stoo$ as a counsel. (urin the hearin of the case) Att". (oronilla sa"s that he an$ (r. !ali a"a ha$ an a ree#ent that if the opposin part" with$raws the case a ainst hi# -(r. !ali a"a2) (r. !ali a"a will also with$raw all the cases. 6owe&er) (r. !ali a"a swore that that he ne&er entere$ into an" a ree#ent to with$raw his lawsuits. Att". (oronillo a$#itte$ that there was) in fact) no such a ree#ent. 6e pointe$ out that his #ain concern was to settle the case a#ica,l". (r. !ali a"a file$ a case a ainst Att". (oronilla char in hi# of unethical con$uct for ha&in uttere$ falsehoo$ in court. Is Att". (oronilla uilt" as char e$? A: Read Ma("!aya vs. 4oron"((a, A.C. No. -19), +02 SCRA 1, September 1+, 200Q: Is the law"er<s act in presentin false e&i$ence in or$er that his client woul$ win the case :ustifia,le? A Read Ao'n! v. #at'e!as, A.C.No. +3$9, /03 SCRA 123, May 9, 2003 Rule 10.0 A lawyer shall not +nowingly mis"uote or misrepresent the contents of the paper, the language or the argument of opposing counsel, or the te(t of a decision of authority, or +nowingly cite as law a provision already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been approved. Q: A law"er file$ a plea$in in court citin a law which was alrea$" repeale$) since the new law is not

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

fa&ora,le to his client<s cause. Is he unethical act? uilt" of an" Rule 1,.0% ! A lawyer shall not state nor imply that he is able to influence any public official, tribunal or legislative body. Q: (aniel Le#oine file$ a car insurance clai# with the insurer of his &ehicle which was lost. 6is frien$ arran e$ for the en a e#ent of Att". A#a$eo 1alon<s ser&ices. The latter a$&ise$ hi# throu h a letter that for his le al ser&ices he was char in =0E of the actual a#ount ,ein reco&ere$ pa"a,le upon successful reco&er"L an$ an a$&ance pa"#ent of P0G)GGG.GG to ,e $e$ucte$ fro# whate&er a#ount woul$ ,e successfull" collecte$. This proposal $oes not ,ear co#plainant>s confor#it". The insurance co#pan") afterwar$s) offere$ to settle co#plainant>s clai# in an e7B ratia ,asis of C0E of his polic" co&era e which is P0=0)GGG.GG) to which he a ree$. When Le#oine left for France) he) on the a$&ice of Att". 1alon) si ne$ an alrea$" prepare$ un$ate$ *pecial Power of Attorne" authori8in hi# to ,rin an" action a ainst the insurance co#pan" for the satisfaction of the clai#. 9pon return to the Philippines) he was infor#e$ that that the clai# was still pen$in an$ was still su,:ect of ne otiations. 6e #a$e a personal &isit to the office of the insurance co#pan" an$ was infor#e$ that his clai# ha$ lon ,een settle$. (espite written $e#an$s) respon$ent refuse$ to turn o&er the procee$s of the insurance clai#. Att". 1alon) in a letter) sai$ that he cannot i&e the a#ount until an$ unless his attorne">s fees ,e a ree$ an$ settle$ an$ e&en calle$ Le#oine as ,ar,aric an$ unci&ili8e$ with his approache$) threatene$ that he will not hesitate to #a'e a proper representation with the 1ureau of I##i ration an$ (eportation for the authenticit" of his &isa) (epart#ent of La,or an$ E#plo"#ent for his wor'in status) 1ureau of Internal Re&enue for his ta7ation co#pliance an$ the +ational 1ureau of In&esti ation with which he has a oo$ networ'. What ethical stan$ar$ $i$ Att". 1alon &iolate$? A: Read 0emo"ne v. #a(on .r., A.C. No. +)29, O%tober 2), 2003 Q: E$ ar Al#ar&e8) a utilit" wor'er) was char e$ with &iolation of the AntiBAraft an$ Corrupt Practices Act ," %u$ e Estrellita Paas) Presi$in %u$ e of the Pasa" Cit" !etropolitan Trial Court. Al#ar&e8 $enie$ the char es an$ alle e$ that the case was file$ a ainst hi# ,ecause %u$ e Paas suspecte$ hi# of helpin her hus,an$) Att". Renerio Paas) a pri&ate practitioner) conceal his #arital in$iscretions. In a separate case for inhi,ition of %u$ e Paas in a cri#inal case) it was foun$ that Att". Renerio Paas) was usin his wife>s office as his office a$$ress in his law

A: Read A(("ed #an?"n! Corporat"on v. CA and Ga(an"da, G.R. No. 1///12, /1- SCRA -+, November 1), 2003 Rule 10.03 ! A lawyer shall observe the rules of procedure and shall not misuse them to defeat the ends of -ustice. Read: A(onso v. Re(am"nda, A.C. No. )/)1, A'!'st 3, 2010. Q: A law"er ha,ituall" as's for the reBsettin of the case of his client for no apparent reason) in or$er for the co#plainant) to et frustrate$ an$ ,eco#e unintereste$ in the prosecution of the case) is that act consi$ere$ unethical? A: Read Gar%"a v. 1ran%"s%o, A.C. No. 3923, 220 SCRA

+12, Mar%& 30,1993

Rule 1 .0. A lawyer shall avoid testifying in behalf of his client, e(cept/ a. 0n formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of an instrument and the li+e. b. 0n substantial matters, in cases where his testimony is essential to the ends of -ustice, in which event he must, during his testimony, entrust the trial of the case to another counsel. Q: What are the instances when a law"er may not testif" as a witness in a case which he is han$lin for a client? Q: What are the instances when a law"er may testif" as a witness in a case which he is han$lin for a client? CA+O+ .; ADOI( I!PROPRIETJ T6AT TE+(* TO I+FL9E+CE T6E CO9RT Rule 13.01 A lawyer shall not e(tend e(traordinary attention or hospitality to, nor see+ opportunity for, cultivating familiarity with -udges. Rule 13.0 A lawyer shall not ma+e public statements in the media regarding a pending case tending to arouse public opinion for or against a party. Rule 13.03 A lawyer shall not broo+ or invite interference by another branch or agency of the government in the normal course of -udicial proceedings. Read 4e #'man(a! v. #'man(a!, AM No. 1)), November 29, 19$-

practice. %u$ e Paas a$#itte$ that Att". Paas $i$ use her office as his return a$$ress for notices an$ or$ers in = cri#inal cases) lo$ e$ at the Pasa" Cit" RTC) ,ut onl" to ensure an$ facilitate $eli&er" of those notices) ,ut after the cases were ter#inate$) all notices were sent to his office a$$ress in Escolta. Was Att". Paas< act of usin his wife<s office as his office a$$ress unprofessional an$ $ishonora,le? A: Read *aas v. A(marve<, A.M. No. *,03,1-90, Apr"( /, 2003 Rule 1,.07 ! A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws and the principles of fairness. Q: +icanor Aon8ales an$ *alu$ Pantanosas were infor#e$ ," the Re ister of (ee$s that their owner>s $uplicate of title co&erin their lan$s were entruste$ to the office secretar" of Att". !i uel *a,aca:an) who in turn entruste$ the sa#e to sai$ attorne". The latter a$#itte$ that the titles are in his custo$" an$ has e&en shown the sa#e to the two. When $e#an$e$ to #a'e $eli&er" of sai$ titles) he refuse$ an$ e&en challen e$ the co#plainants to file an" case in an" court e&en in the 6onora,le *upre#e Court. (i$ Att". *a,aca:an $ef" le al an$ #oral o,li ations e#anatin fro# his professional capacit" as a law"er? A: Read Gon<a(es v. Saba%a8an, A.C. No. /3)0. O%tober 13, 199+. Q: !aria Cielo *u8u'i entere$ into contracts of sale an$ real estate #ort a e with se&eral persons. The sale an$ #ort a e transactions were facilitate$ ," Att". Erwin Tia#son) counsel of the sellers. *u8u'i pai$ PFG) GGG as her share in the e7penses for re istration. 6e retaine$ in his possession the su,:ect $ee$s of a,solute sale an$ #ort a e as well as the owner>s cop" of the title. 6owe&er) he ne&er re istere$ the sai$ $ocu#ents an$ $i$ not cause the transfer of the title o&er the su,:ect propert" in the na#e of *u8u'i. Att". Tia#son sai$ that he $i$ not re ister the $ee$ of sale to protect the interest of his client an$ e&en if the sa#e has ,een re istere$) he cannot i&e hi# the owner>s $uplicate cop" until purchase price for the su,:ect propert" has ,een full" pai$ an$ the real estate #ort a e cancelle$. Is Att". Tia#son :ustifie$ in not re isterin the transaction? A: Read S'<'?" v. >"amson, A.C. No. -+/2. September 30, 200+
+ote: A la%yer %ho ad$ises his client not to o&ey the order of the courts is /uilty of conte'(t and 'isconduct. 0 Con!e v. 4eret, CA, GR No. 0))/) CR, Mar%& 2+, 19$/)

-.//4 1ar Question2 Q: Attorne" Pa uia) spea'in for petitioner) asserts that the inhi,ition of the #e#,ers of the *upre#e Court fro# hearin the petition is calle$ for un$er Rule 0..G of the Co$e of %u$icial Con$uct prohi,itin :ustices or :u$ es fro# participatin in an" partisan political acti&it" which proscription) accor$in to hi#) the :ustices ha&e &iolate$ ," atten$in the >E(*A = Rall"> an$ ," authori8in the assu#ption of DiceBPresi$ent !acapa al Arro"o to the Presi$enc" in &iolation of the ./FC Constitution. The su,se3uent $ecision of the Court in Estra$a &. Arro"o -;0; *CRA 50= an$ ;04 *CRA .GF2 is) as petitioner states) a patent #oc'er" of :ustice an$ $ue process. Attorne" Pa uia went on to state that N >The act of the pu,lic officer) if lawful) is the act of the pu,lic office. 1ut the act of the pu,lic officer) if unlawful) is not the act of the pu,lic office. Conse3uentl") the act of the :ustices) if lawful) is the act of the *upre#e Court. 1ut the act of the :ustices) if unlawful) is not the act of the *upre#e Court. It is su,#itte$ that the (ecision in Estra$a &s. Arro"o ,ein patentl" unlawful in &iew of Rule 0..G of the Co$e of %u$icial Con$uct) is not the act of the *upre#e Court ,ut is #erel" the wron or trespass of those in$i&i$ual %ustices who falsel" spo'e an$ acte$ in the na#e of the *upre#e Court. -9r,ano &s. Cha&e8) .F; *CRA R;5CS2. Further#ore) it woul$ see# a,sur$ to allow the %ustices to use the na#e of the *upre#e Court as a shiel$ for their unlawful act. Are Att". Pa uia<s co##ents within the ,oun$s of Hfair an$ wellBfoun$e$ criticis#sI re ar$in $ecisions of the *C? A: Read 5strada v. Sand"!anbayan, G.R. Nos. 1+9/)-,)), November 2+, 2003 Q: The Court 1n 2anc issue$ a Resolution $irectin respon$ent Att". (e Dera to e7plain wh" he shoul$ not ,e cite$ for in$irect conte#pt of court for utterin so#e alle e$l" conte#ptuous state#ents in relation to the case in&ol&in the constitutionalit" of the Plun$er Law which was then pen$in . Respon$ent a$#itte$ the report in the +o&e#,er 4) =GG= issue of the Philippine (ail" In3uirer that he Hsu este$ that the Court #ust ta'e steps to $ispel once an$ for all these u l" ru#ors an$ reportsI that Hthe Court woul$ &ote in fa&or of or a ainst the &ali$it" of the Plun$er LawI to protect the cre$i,ilit" of the Court. Is the state#ent of Att". (e Dera $isrespectful to the courts? A: Read In Re *'b("s&ed A((e!ed >&reats by Atty. 0eonard de 7era, A.M 01,12,03,SC .'(y 29, 2002 Q: Can a law"er critici8e the courts?

CRITICI*!* 1J LAWJER*
CA+O+ .. O1*ERDE RE*PECT (9E TO T6E CO9RT*

A: Read Ga(d"var vs. Gon<a(es, G.R. No. $9-90,$0$, 1-SCRA 31-, 1ebr'ary 1, 19)9 A(so Read #arandon v. 1errer, A.C. +$-), Mar%& 2-, 2010.

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

Rule 11.03 A lawyer shall abstain from scandalous, offensive, or menacing language or behavior before the courts. Q: After the parties ha$ file$ their respecti&e ,riefs with the Court of Appeals an$ ,efore the latter>s resolution su,#ittin the case for $ecision was release$) respon$ent law"ers) Att". (epasucat) an$ others file$ a plea$in @!anifestation of 9surpation of Authorit" of the 6on. Court of Appeals fro# a *elfBConfesse$ 1ri,er of %u$ es@) which state$ that plaintiffBappellant 9" ha$) in fact) confesse$ to ,ri,in :u$ es. Conse3uentl") 9" file$ a &erifie$ co#plaint a ainst respon$ent law"ers for ross #iscon$uct. *houl$ the respon$ents ,e $iscipline$ for ha&in authore$ an$ file$ the H!anifestation of 9surpation of Authorit" of the 6on. Court of Appeals fro# a *elfBConfesse$ 1ri,er of %u$ esI? A: Read Cy v. 4epas'%at, A.C. No. +332, .'(y 29, 2003 L and #'enaseda v. 1(av"er, G.R. No. 10-$19, 22- SCRA -/+, September 21, 1993 +o'e instances of disres(ectful lan/ua/e: :. 5. +tatin/ that Dustice is E&lindF and also Edeaf and du'&F@ 2In re A(ma%en, 0,2$-+/, 31 SCRA +-2, 1ebr'ary 19$0) Attri&utin/ to the +C acts of dis'issin/ Dud/es E%ithout rhy'e and reasonF and dis&arrin/ la%yers E%ithout due (rocessF 2Ga(d"var vs. Gon<a(es, G.R. No. $9-90,$0$, 1-- SCRA 31-, 1ebr'ary 19)9) !oreo&er) accor$in to hi#) instea$ of resortin to pu,lic criticis#s throu h #e$ia e7posure) he chose to &entilate his criticis#s in a &er" $iscreet an$ pri&ate #anner ," writin a personal letter confine$ to the hallowe$ walls of the court an$ within the ,oun$s of $ecenc" an$ propriet". *houl$ Att". Ro7as ,e punishe$ for the contents of his letter? A: Ro:as et a(. v. Anton"o 4e G'<'arre!'", et a(, G.R. No. 1+20$2, +2$ SCRA //-, .'(y 12, 200$ Rule 11.0,! A lawyer shall submit grievances against a 4udge to the proper authorities only. T6E LAWJER A+( T6E CLIE+T Attorne"Bclient Relationship Q: Is a contract necessar" in or$er to ha&e a professional relationship ,etween a law"er an$ a client? A: Read 4ee v. Co'rt o6 Appea(s, G.R. No. $$/39, A'!'st 2/, 19)9 A(so Read *a%ana v. *as%'a(,0ope<, A.C. No. )2/3, .'(y 2/, 2009 Q: What are the eneral rules protectin Attorne"BClient relationship? A: Read Rule 11.03 A lawyer shall not attribute to a -udge motives not supported by the record or have no materiality to the case. Read: Ma%eda v. 7as9'e<, G.R. No. 102$)1, 221 SCRA /-/, Apr"( 22, 1993 Q: Att"s. Ro#eo Ro7as was char e$ for conte#pt when he) in a letter a$$resse$ to Associate %ustice ChicoB+a8ario) state$ that %ustice +a8ario $eci$e$ the cases in fa&or of Mu8uarre ui) or$erin Att"s. Ro7as an$ Pastor to pa" the for#er P.C)GC;)==5.F5 on consi$erations other than the pure #erits of the case an$ calle$ the *C a H$ispenser of in:usticeI. 6e en$e$ his letter ," #oc'in her when he sai$ Hsleep well if "ou still canI an$ that Hher earthl" life will ,e :u$ e$ ," the *upre#e (ispenser of %ustice where onl" the #erits of "our honor<s life will ,e rele&ant an$ #aterial an$ where technicalities can shiel$ no one fro# his or her wron $oin sI. In the written e7planation of Att". Ro7as) he e7ten$e$ apolo ies to %ustice +a8ario an$ to the other #e#,ers of the hi h court. 6e sai$ he was #erel" e7ercisin his ri hts to e7press a le iti#ate rie&ance or articulate ,ona fi$e an$ fair criticis#s of the court<s rulin . Q: 9" en a e$ the ser&ices of Att". Aon8ales to prepare an$ file a petition for the issuance of a new certificate of title. 9" confi$e$ with hi# the circu#stances surroun$in the lost title an$ $iscussin the fees an$ costs. When the petition was a,out to ,e file$) Att". Aon8ales went to 9"<s office an$ $e#an$e$ a certain a#ount fro# hi# other than what the" ha$ pre&iousl" a ree$ upon. 9" foun$ out later that instea$ of filin the petition for the issuance of a new certificate of title) Att". Aon8ales file$ a letterB co#plaint a ainst hi# with the Office of the Pro&incial Prosecutor for HFalsification of Pu,lic (ocu#ents.I The letterBco#plaint containe$ facts an$ circu#stances pertainin to the transfer certificate of title that was the su,:ect #atter of the petition which respon$ent was suppose$ to ha&e file$. *houl$ Att". Aon8ales ,e suspen$e$ for &iolatin the law"erBclient relationship when he file$ a co#plaint for HFalsification of Pu,lic (ocu#entsI a ainst his client usin facts connecte$ with the latter<s petition? A: Read Cy v. Atty. Gon<a(es, AC +2)0, Mar%& 30, 200/ CA+O+ .5 +OT TO REF9*E 6I* *ERDICE* TO T6E +EE(J

11

Q: (oes a law"er ha&e a ri ht to $ecline e#plo"#ent? Q: Police officers A) 1) an$ C were in&ol&e$ in a shootin inci$ent. Infor#ations were file$ a ainst the#) to which the" plea$e$ not uilt". *an$i an,a"an foun$ the accuse$ uilt" of = counts of ho#ici$e an$ one count of atte#pte$ ho#ici$e. At that :uncture) the" en a e$ the ser&ices of Att". %ai#e %uanito Portu al. The latter then file$ a !R ,ut it was $enie$. The ; ne&er hear$ fro# respon$ent a ain $espite the fre3uent telephone calls the" #a$e to his office. The" went to respon$ent>s last 'nown a$$ress onl" to fin$ out that he ha$ #o&e$ out without an" forwar$in a$$ress. Att". Portu al $i$ not file a notice of with$rawal nor infor#e$ the court that he ha$ with$rawn as their counsel. Was Att". Portu al ne li ent in han$lin the case of the ;? A: Read 1ran%"s%o vs *ort'!a(, A.C. No. -1++. Mar%& 1/, 200Q: Are there instances where a law"er has the duty to decline e#plo"#ent? Q: What are the ethical consi$erations in ta'in case? Q: *houl$ a law"er represent a A9ILTJ client? Rule 13.01 ! A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account of the latter)s race, se(, creed or status of life, or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person. Rule 13.0 A lawyer shall not decline, e(cept for serious and sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel de oficio or as amicus curiae or a re"uest from the #ntegrated 2ar of the 5hilippines or any of its chapters for rendition of free legal aid. Q: What is the protection i&en ," law to poor liti ants who cannot affor$ the ser&ices of a law"er? Q: Who #a" ,e appointe$ as counsel de officio6 Q: When #a" refusal of a counsel to act as counsel de oficio ,e :ustifie$ on roun$s asi$e fro# the reasons of health) e7tensi&e tra&el a,roa$) or si#ilar reasons of ur enc"? Q: Att". %. 1onan8a) a se#iBretire$ !etro !anila practitioner has a cattle ranch in the re#ote #unicipalit" of +ue&a Eci:a. 6e atten$s to his law office in !anila on !on$a"s) Tues$a"s an$ We$nes$a"s) an$ the rest of the wee' he spen$s in his cattle ranch raisin horses. a ,a$

In a cri#inal case pen$in ,efore the !unicipal Trial Court of Carran lan) the onl" other license$ #e#,er of the ,ar in the place is representin the co#plainant. The accuse$ is a $etention prisoner. The :u$ e wants to e7pe$ite procee$in s. What #ust the :u$ e $o to e7pe$ite procee$in s? If Att". 1onan8a is re3ueste$ to act as counsel for the accuse$) coul$ he or shoul$ he refuse ," sa"in that in the pro&ince) he wants to $o nothin e7cept ri$e horses an$ castrate ,ulls? E7plain. Q: What is assaile$ in this certiorari procee$in is an or$er of respon$ent %u$ e Cli#aco $en"in a #otion file$ ," petitioner Le$es#a to ,e allowe$ to with$raw as counsel de oficio. One of the roun$s for such a #otion was his alle ation that with his appoint#ent as Election Re istrar ," the Co##ission on Elections) he was not in a position to $e&ote full ti#e to the $efense of the two accuse$. The $enial ," respon$ent %u$ e of such a plea) notwithstan$in the confor#it" of the $efen$ants) was $ue @its principal effect of $ela"in the case. Is the $enial of %u$ e Cli#aco correct? A: Read 0edesma v. C("ma%o, 0,23)1+, .'ne 2), 19$/ Q: %err" Ferrer was accuse$ of ha&in rape$ his ..B "earBol$ step$au hter. %err"<s counsel of recor$ was PAO>s Att". !aca,an$in . (urin the preBtrial) ,oth of the# faile$ to appear. %err" was consi$ere$ ," the court as ha&in :u#pe$ ,ail. Trial in a,sentia followe$ where %err" was assiste$ ," another PAO law"er) Att". Alonto. Att". !aca,an$in $i$ not appear in all the su,se3uent hearin s of the case. 6e $i$ not infor# the court of his wherea,outs. %err" was foun$ uilt" ,e"on$ reasona,le $ou,t of the cri#e char e$ an$ i#pose$ upon hi# the $eath penalt". (i$ Att". !aca,an$in li&e up to the $e#an$s e7pecte$ fro# a counsel $e oficio? A: Read *eop(e v. 1errer, G.R. No. 1/))21, .'(y 1), 2003. Rule 13.03 A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent client unless/ a. 7e is in no position to carry out the wor+ effectively or competently* b. 7e labors under a conflict of interest between him and the prospective client or between a present client and a prospective client. Rule 13.03 A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay his professional fees shall observe the same standard of conduct governing his relations with paying clients. Q: Att". !ariano (a:o"a ) %r. is Ernesto Ra#os< counsel. 6e faile$ to perfect their appeal ,efore the *C. 6e file$ the petition for certiorari within the =GB$a" perio$ of e7tension that he sou ht in his =n$ #otion for

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

e7tension. 6e learne$ that the perio$ of e7tension rante$ in his .st #otion for e7tension was ine7ten$i,le onl" after the e7piration of the = perio$s of e7tension that he pra"e$ for. A co#plaint for ne li ence an$ #alpractice was file$ a ainst hi#) to which he ple$ oo$ faith an$ e7cusa,le ne lect of $ut". Is Att". (a:o"a %r. uilt" of ne lect of $ut"? A: Read Ramos v 4a8oya!, .r., A.C. No. +1$/, 1ebr'ary 2), 2002
+ote: ,he fact that his ser$ices are rendered %ithout re'uneration should not occasion a di'inution in his zeal. 20edesma v. C("ma%o, 0,23)1+, +$ SCRA /$2, .'ne 2), 19$/)

e7chan e for the help he woul$ e7ten$ to Ta'ao in securin a per#anent &isa in the Philippines. Att". Ace:as $i$ nothin . (i$ Att". Ace:as &iolate the le al ethics of the profession? A: Read A%e8as III v. *eop(e, G.R. No. 1+--/3, .'ne 2$, 200Q: !a" a law"er in&o'e pri&ile e$ co##unication to refuse re&ealin his clients secrets confi$e$ to hi# ," such client in the course of professional e#plo"#ent? Read: ;ad8'(a v. Mad"anda, A.C. No. -$11, .'(y 3, 200$ CA+O+ =. A LAWJER *6ALL PRE*ERDE CO+FI(E+CE* A+( *ECRET* OF 6I* CLIE+T EDE+ AFTER T6E ATTOR+EJBCLIE+T RELATIO+ I* TER!I+ATE(
+ote: ,he (rotection /i$en to the client is (er(etual and does not cease %ith the ter'ination of the liti/ation nor is affected &y the (arty ceasin/ to e'(loy the attorney and e'(loy another or any other chan/e of relation &et%een the'. It even s'rv"ves t&e deat& o6 t&e %("ent.

PRIDILEAE( CO!!9+ICATIO+
Rule 1,.0 .A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in respect of matters disclosed to him by a prospective client. Q: Rosa !erca$o<s hus,an$ file$ an annul#ent a ainst her. Att". %ulito Ditriolo represente$ her. Thereafter) a cri#inal action a ainst her was file$ ," the latter for falsification of pu,lic $ocu#ent. Accor$in to hi#) she in$icate$ in Certificates of Li&e 1irth of her chil$ren that she is #arrie$ to a certain Fer$inan$ Fernan$e8) an$ that their #arria e was sole#ni8e$ on April ..) ./C/) when in truth) she is le all" #arrie$ to Ru,en !erca$o an$ their #arria e too' place on April ..) ./CF. !erca$o clai#s that the cri#inal co#plaint $isclose$ confi$ential facts an$ infor#ation relatin to the ci&il case for annul#ent han$le$ ," Ditriolo as her counsel. (i$ Att". %ulito Ditriolo &iolate the rule on pri&ile e$ co##unication ,etween attorne" an$ client? A: Read Mer%ado v. 7"tr"("o, A.C. No. +10), May 2-, 200+ Q: 1ureau of I##i ration an$ (eportation -1I(2 Intelli ence A ent Dla$i#ir 6ernan$e8) to ether with a reporter) went to the house of Ta'ao Ao"a i) a %apanese national. 6ernan$e8 tol$ Ta'ao Ao"a i) throu h his wife) that there were co#plaints a ainst hi# in %apan an$ that he was suspecte$ to ,e a Ja'u8a ,i ,oss) a $ru $epen$ent an$ an o&ersta"in alien. To pro&e that he ha$ $one nothin wron ) Ta'ao Ao"a i showe$ his passport to 6ernan$e8 who confiscate$ the sa#e. A Contract for Le al *er&ices was entere$ into ," Ta'ao Ao"a i an$ Att". Francisco Ace:as III. Ta'ao Ao"a i pai$ Att". Ace:as P5G)GGG.GG) P=0)GGG of which is 0GE of the acceptance fee) an$ the P.0)GGG.GG is for filin P$oc'et fee. 6ernan$e8) in the presence of Att". Ace:as) propose$ that Ta'ao Ao"a i pa" the a#ount of P. #illion in

Rule 1.01 A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his clients e(cept/ a. 'hen authori8ed by the client after ac"uainting him of the conse"uences of the disclosure*
+ote: ,here is a %ai$er of the (ri$ile/e &y the client. ,he on(y instance %here the %ai$er of the client alone is insufficient is %hen the (erson to &e e?a'ined %ith reference to any (ri$ile/ed co''unication is the attorney4s secretary, steno/ra(her or cler7, in res(ect to %hich the consent, too, of the attorney is necessary.

b. c.

'hen re"uired by law* 'hen necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his employees or associates by -udicial action. -=GGF 1ar Question2

Rule 1.0 ! A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use information ac"uired in the course of employment, nor shall he use the same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the client with full +nowledge of the circumstances consents thereto. Q: 1un *ion Jao is a #a:orit" stoc'hol$er of *olar Far#s T Li&elihoo$ Corporation an$ *olar Te7tile Finishin Corporation. Att". Leonar$o Aurelio is also a stoc'hol$er an$ the retaine$ counsel of ,oth the corporation an$ 1un *ion Jao.

13

The latter purchase$ se&eral parcels of lan$ usin his personal fun$s ,ut were re istere$ in the na#e of the corporations upon the a$&ice Att". Aurelio. After a $isa ree#ent ,etween Att". Aurelio an$ 1un *ion Jao<s wife) the for#er $e#an$e$ the return of his in&est#ent in the corporations ,ut when Jao refuse$ to pa") he file$ F char es for estafa an$ falsification of co##ercial $ocu#ents a ainst Jao an$ his wife an$ the other officers of the corporation. Jao alle e$ that the series of suits is a for# of harass#ent an$ constitutes an a,use of the confi$ential infor#ation which Att". Aurelio o,taine$ ," &irtue of his e#plo"#ent as counsel. Att". Aurelio howe&er sai$ that he onl" han$le$ isolate$ la,or cases for the sai$ corporations. (i$ Att". Aurelio a,use the confi$ential infor#ation he o,taine$ ," &irtue of his e#plo"#ent as counsel? A: Read #'n S"on! Aao vs. A're("o, A.C. No. $023, /)+ SCRA /0-, Mar%& 30, 200Rule 1.03 ! A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give information from his files to an outside agency see+ing such information for auditing, statistical, boo++eeping, accounting, data processing, or any other similar purposes. Q: What are Co##unication? the re3uisites of Pri&ile e$

Rule 1,.03 A lawyer may, with the written consent of all concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes. Rule 1,.0, ! A lawyer, when advising his client, must give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and probable results of the client)s case, neither overstating nor understating the prospects of the case. Q: Consorcia Rollon went to the office of Att". Ca#ilo +ara&al to see' his assistance in a case file$ a ainst her ," Rosita %ulaton for Collection of *u# of !one" with Pra"er for Attach#ent. After oin o&er the $ocu#ents she ,rou ht with her) Att". +ara&al a ree$ to ,e her law"er an$ she was re3uire$ to pa" PF)GGG.GG for the filin an$ partial ser&ice fee. Att". +ara&al $i$ not infor# her that the sai$ ci&il suit has ,een $eci$e$ a ainst her an$ which :u$ #ent has lon ,eco#e final an$ e7ecutor". Att". +ara&al was not a,le to act on the case. 1ecause of this) she wante$ to with$raw the a#ount she has pai$ an$ to retrie&e the $ocu#ents pertainin to sai$ case. 9nfortunatel") $espite se&eral followBups) Att". +ara&al alwa"s sai$ that he cannot return the $ocu#ents ,ecause the" were in their house) an$ that he coul$ not i&e us ,ac' the PF)GGG.GG ,ecause he has no #one". (i$ Att". +ara&al fail to fulfill his un$erta'in s? A: Read Ro((on v. Narava(, A.C. No. -/2/, Mar%& /, 200+ CA+O+ .4 A LAWJER *6ALL 6OL( I+ TR9*T ALL !O+EJ A+( PROPERTJ OF 6I* CLIE+T T6AT !AJ CO!E I+ 6I* PO**E**IO+ Q: Luis $e Au8#an as $efen$ant in a ci&il case) o,tain an a$&erse :u$ #ent. 6is counsel was Att". E##anuel 1asa. 6e wants to challen e the $ecision throu h a petition for certiorari. It was a ree$ that Luis will pa" P.0)GGG for sai$ le al ser&ice. Att". 1asa collecte$ a $own pa"#ent of P0)GGG. 6owe&er) no such petition was file$. 6e $i$ not seasona,l" file with the CA the re3uire$ appellant<s ,rief resultin in the $is#issal of the appeal. (espite se&eral e7tensions to file the appellant<s ,rief) Att". 1asa faile$ to $o so. Instea$) he file$ two #ore #otions for e7tension. When he file$ the appellant<s ,rief) it was late) ,ein ,e"on$ the last e7tension rante$ ," the Appellate Court. Was Att". E##anuel 1asa ne li ent in the perfor#ance of his professional $ut" to Luis $e Au8#an? A: Read 4e G'<man v. Atty. 5mman'e( #asa, A.C. No.

Q: Who are the persons entitle$ to clai# the pri&ile e? Q: When is co##unication not pri&ile e$? Rule 1.03 ! A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by the client. Rule 1.0, A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be re"uired to prevent those whose services are utili8ed by him, from disclosing or using confidences or secrets of the client. Rule 1.0% A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client)s affairs even with members of his family. Rule 1.07 A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a particular case e(cept to avoid possible conflict of interest. Q: Can the law"er refuse fro# $isclosin i$entit"? his client<s

Rea$: Re!a(a v. Sand"!anbayan, GR No. 10+93), September 20, 199-

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

+++/, .'ne 29, 200/ Q: *al&a$or Dillanue&a hire$ Att". Ra#on Ishiwata to han$le his case a ainst %.T. Transport) Inc. for pa"#ent of his unpai$ wa es) separation pa") an$ other ,enefits. (ue to the latter<s insistence he e7ecute$ a *pecial Power of Attorne" $esi natin hi# as his attorne"BinBfact. The parties entere$ into a co#pro#ise a ree#ent where," for a consi$eration of P==0) GGG) Dillanue&a a ree$ to release %.T. Transport fro# all its o,li ations to hi#. As a result) Att". Ishiwata si ne$ a @Quitclai# an$ Release@ for an$ on ,ehalf of co#plainant. +LRC then consi$ere$ the case close$ an$ ter#inate$. %.T. Transport $eli&ere$ 5 chec's to respon$ent in the su# of P==0)GGG as pa"#ent of co#plainant>s clai#s. 6owe&er) Att". Ishiwata a&e co#plainant onl" P50)GGG as first install#ent) without a$&isin hi# that the settle#ent awar$ ha$ ,een pai$ in full. When he learne$ that the o,li ation ha$ ,een full" settle$ he #a$e repeate$ $e#an$s upon Att". Ishiwata to $eli&er to hi# the ,alance. 1ut the latter refuse$ to pa". (i$ Att". Ishiwata &iolate an" ethical rule? A: Read 7"((an'eva v. Is&"3ata, A.C. No. +0/1, November 23, 200/ Q: Is a law"er prohi,ite$ fro# ac3uirin his client? properties of Q: 1PI file$ two co#plaints for reple&in an$ $a#a es a ainst Esphar !e$ical Center Inc. an$ its presi$ent Cesar Espiritu. Espiritu en a e$ the ser&ices Att". %uan Ca,re$o ID. While these cases were pen$in in court) the latter a$&ise$ Esphar to re#it #one" an$ up$ate pa"#ents to the ,an' throu h the trial court. Accor$in l") Esphar>s representati&e $eli&ere$ a total of P0.) .4. to Att". Ca,re$o>s office. 6owe&er) the #ana e#ent of Esphar foun$ out that he $i$ not $eli&er sai$ #one" to the court or to the ,an'. (i$ Att". Ca,re$o co##it a ,reach of trust? A: Read 5sp"r"t' v. Cabredo, A.C. No. +)31. .an'ary 13, 2003 Attorne"<s Lien Q: Co#plainants were awar$e$ P4) 0GG in a case for unpai$ o&erti#e an$ separation pa". Alle in $ifficulties in collectin the full a#ount) Att". Francisco An eles) without authorit" fro# his clients) co#pro#ise$ the awar$ an$ was a,le to collect onl" P0) 0GG fro# the losin part". Co#plainants #a$e se&eral $e#an$s upon respon$ent to turn o&er to the# the a#ount less the a ree$ attorne">s fees of ;GE) ,ut the respon$ent refuse$ an$ onl" offere$ to re#it to co#plainants an a#ount less than that) insistin that he shoul$ ,e allowe$ to $e$uct sheriff>s fees an$ other a$#inistrati&e e7penses ,efore $eli&erin the #one" to the clients. Is Att". An eles :ustifie$ in his action? A: Read 2Mana(an! v. An!e(es, A.C. No. 1++), Mar%& 10, 2003 Q: (efine an attorne"<s retainin lien. Q: (efine an attorne"<s char in lien.
Char in Lien "ature !assi$e lien. t cannot &e Acti$e lien. t can &e acti$ely enforced. t is a enforced &y e?ecution. t /eneral lien. is a s(ecial lien. Basis La%ful (ossession of +ecurin/ of a fa$ora&le (a(ers, docu'ents, 'oney Dud/'ent for (ro(erty &elon/in/ to the client. client. Co$era/e Co$ers (a(ers, Co$ers all Dud/'ents for docu'ents, and the (ay'ent of 'oney (ro(erties in the la%ful and e?ecution issued in (ossession of the (ursuance of such attorney &y reason of his Dud/'ents. (rofessional e'(loy'ent. Effect As soon as the attorney As soon as the clai' for Retainin Lien

A: Read Ramos v. N!aseo, A.C. No. -210 4e%ember 9, 200/ Q: What are ele#ents of Article .5/. of the +ew Ci&il Co$e? Q: What are the effects of the &iolation of such prohi,ition? Q: (oes the rule inclu$e #ort a e? A: Read Ordon"o v. 5d'arte, A.M. No. 321- March :9, :==5 Q: Can a law"er $o ,usiness with his client? A: Read Cr'< v. .a%"nto, A.M. No. +23+, March 55, 5BBB Q: Can a law"er len$ #one" to his client? A: Read 0"nsan!an v. >o(ent"no, A.C. No. --$2 September /, 2009 Rule 1%.01 A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client. Rule 1%.0 A lawyer shall +eep the funds of each client separate and apart from his own and those of others +ept by him.

15

/ets (ossession of attorney4s fees had &een (a(ers, docu'ents, or entered into the records (ro(erty. of the case. A((lica&ility May &e e?ercised &efore 3enerally, e?ercised only Dud/'ent or e?ecution or %hen the attorney had re/ardless thereof. already secured a fa$ora&le Dud/'ent for his client. E?tin/uish'ent Ghen (ossession Ghen client loses action la%fully ends as %hen as lien 'ay only &e la%yer $oluntarily (arts enforced a/ainst %ith funds, docu'ents, Dud/'ent a%arded in and (a(ers of client or fa$or of client, (roceeds offers the' as e$idence. thereofHe?ecuted thereon.

there was no nee$ to refer the co#plaint to ,aran a" conciliation. Three #onths later) Att". Flores instructe$ hi# to file his co#plaint with the Lupon Ta apa#a"apa. On refuse$ to appear at the conciliation hearin s) ar uin that the Lupon ha$ no :uris$iction o&er his person ,ecause he was a resi$ent of another ,aran a". Thus) *chul8 ,rou ht the co#plaint ,efore the ,aran a" in which On is a resi$ent. 1" that ti#e) howe&er) *chul8 learne$ that On ha$ alrea$" file$ a case for *pecific Perfor#ance a ainst hi#. *chul8 ar ue$ that Att". Flores< inor$inate $ela" in actin on his case resulte$ in his ,ein $efen$ant rather than a co#plainant a ainst On . Is the actuation of Att". Flores in causin the $ela" of ,rin in the $ispute un$er the s"ste# of ,aran a" conciliation reprehensi,le as to warrant the suspension of the respon$ent? A: Read S%&'(< v. Atty. 1(ores, 4e%ember ), 2003, AC /219 Q: !atias La ra#a$a resi$in with his uncle) Apolonio La ra#a$a) was in&ite$ ," the latter to acco#pan" hi# to the police station) suppose$l" to pic' up a refri erator the" were to repair. 9pon their arri&al there) appellant was i##e$iatel" ta'en in an$ loc'e$ ,ehin$ ,ars. Two Infor#ations were file$ a ainst hi# onl" .G #onths after the first $a" of his incarceration. With the assistance of counsel) appellant plea$e$ not uilt" when arrai ne$. Was the case properl" han$le$?

Rule 1%.03 A lawyer shall not barrow money from his client unless the client)s interests are fully protected by the nature of the case or by independent advice. 9either shall a lawyer lend money to a client e(cept, when in the interest of 4ustice* he has to advance necessary e(penses in a legal matter he is handling for the client. CA+O+ .C OWE* FI(ELITJ TO T6E CA9*E OF 6I* CLIE+T A+( 1E !I(F9L OF T6E TR9*T A+( CO+FI(E+CE REPO*E( I+ 6I! Q: When $oes the law"er<s $ut" of fi$elit" to his client<s cause co##ence? A: Read Rollon v. Atty. Naraval, A.C. No. 6424, 452 SCRA 675, March 4, 2005 Q: Aenato file$ a $is,ar#ent case a ainst respon$ent Att". *ilapan for alle e$l" ,rea'in their confi$ential law"erBclient relationship ," $isclosin confi$ential infor#ation a ainst hi#. In his answer) Att". *ilapan conten$e$ that he use$ the confi$ential state#ents in the course of :u$icial procee$in s in or$er to $efen$ his case an$ to $iscre$it Aenato<s cre$i,ilit" ," esta,lishin his cri#inal propensit" to co##it frau$) tell lies an$ &iolate the laws. Att". *ilapan also ar ue$ that he is not uilt" of ,rea'in the confi$entialit" principle of law"erBclient relationship as he #a$e the $isclosure in $efense of his honor an$ reputation. Is Att". *ilapan uilt" of ,reach of trust an$ confi$ence ," i#putin to Aenato ille al practices an$ $isclosin Aenato<s alle e$ intention to ,ri,e o&ern#ent officials in connection with a pen$in case? A: Read Genato v. Atty. S"(apan, A.C /0$), .'(y 1/, 2003 Q: *chul8) a Aer#an national file$ a &erifie$ co#plaint for $is,ar#ent a ainst Att". Flores. 6e alle e$ that he en a e$ the ser&ices of Att". Flores for the purpose of filin a co#plaint a ainst On for re&ocation of contract an$ $a#a es. Att". Flores a$&ise$ hi# that

A: Read *eop(e o6 t&e *&"("pp"nes v. 0a!ramada, G.R. Nos. 1/-3+$ H 1/)1$0, A'!'st 29, 2002 CA+O+ =G A LAWJER *6ALL C6ARAE O+LJ FAIR A+( REA*O+A1LE FEE* Q: Who are entitle$ to Attorne"<s fees? Q: What are the factors in $eter#inin fees? the attorne"<s

Q: Aurora Pine$a file$ an action for $eclaration of nullit" of #arria e a ainst Dinson Pine$a) who was represente$ ," Att"s. Clo$ual$o $e %esus) Carlos A#,rosio an$ E##anuel !ariano. The parties> proposal for settle#ent re ar$in Dinson>s &isitation ri hts o&er their #inor chil$ an$ the separation of their properties was appro&e$ ," the court. The #arria e was su,se3uentl" $eclare$ null an$ &oi$. Throu hout the procee$in s counsels an$ their relati&es an$ frien$s) a&aile$ of free pro$ucts an$ treat#ents fro# Dinson<s $er#atolo " clinic. This notwithstan$in ) the" ,ille$ hi# a$$itional le al fees a#ountin to P.4.0 #illion which he) howe&er) refuse$ to pa". Instea$) he issue$ the# se&eral chec's totalin P...= #illion as full pa"#ent for settle#ent. *till not satisfie$) respon$ents file$ in the sa#e court a #otion

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

for pa"#ent of law"ers> fees for P0G #illion) which is e3ui&alent to .GE of the &alue of the properties awar$e$ to petitioner in the case. Are their clai# :ustifie$? A: Read *"neda v. de .es's, G.R. No. 1++22/, A'!'st 23, 200Q: (OJ !ercantile Inc refuse$ to satisf" Att". Aa,riel) %r.<s attorne"<s fees) pro#ptin the latter to file with the RTC a !otion to Allow Co##ensurate Fees an$ to Annotate Attorne"<s Lien on certain T.C.Ts. The RTC fi7e$ Att". Aa,riel) %r.<s fees an$ or$ere$ that a lien ,e annotate$ on the TCTs. A Writ of E7ecution was later issue$ ," the trial court in Att". Aa,riel) %r.<s fa&or. 9pon Att". Aa,riel %r.<s #otion for reconsi$eration) the RTC increase$ his fees. It then issue$ another Writ of E7ecution to enforce the new awar$ ,ut $enie$ the !otion to Annotate the Awar$ at the ,ac' of the TCTs. (OJ) for its part) file$ se&eral petitions to set asi$e the RTC Or$ers in&ol&in the awar$ of attorne"<s fees. E&entuall") CA ren$ere$ a (ecision) fi7in Att". Aa,riel) %r.<s fees at P=GG)GGG.GG an$ affir#in the su,se3uent Or$er of the RTC not to annotate such awar$ on the TCTs. *houl$ the court rel" on the i#portance of the su,:ect #atter in contro&ers" an$ the professional stan$in of counsel in awar$in attorne"<s fee? A: Read 4OA Mer%ant"(e, In%. v. AMA Comp'ter Co((e!e, G.R. No. 1++311, Mar%& 31, 200/ Q: 6ow are Attorne">s Fees cate ori8e$? Q: What are the 'in$s of pa"#ent which #a" ,e stipulate$ uponC Q: E&an elina !as#u$<s hus,an$) the late Ale7an$er %. !as#u$) file$ a co#plaint a ainst his e#plo"er for nonBpa"#ent of per#anent $isa,ilit" ,enefits) #e$ical e7penses) sic'ness allowance) #oral an$ e7e#plar" $a#a es) an$ attorne"<s fees. Ale7an$er en a e$ the ser&ices of Att". Rolan$o 1. Ao) %r. as his counsel. Ale7an$er a ree$ to pa" attorne"<s fees on a contin ent ,asis) as follows: twent" percent -=GE2 of total #onetar" clai#s as settle$ or pai$ an$ an a$$itional ten percent -.GE2 in case of appeal. La,or Ar,iter ren$ere$ a (ecision rantin the #onetar" clai#s of Ale7an$er. E&entuall") after se&eral appeals) the $ecision ,ein fa&ora,le to E&an elina -su,stitute$ her $ecease$ hus,an$2) the $ecision ,eca#e final an$ e7ecutor". 9pon #otion of Att". Ao) the suret" co#pan" $eli&ere$ to the +LRC Cashier) throu h the +LRC *heriff) the chec' a#ountin to P;)505)GC/.=G. Thereafter) Att". Ao #o&e$ for the release of the sai$ a#ount to E&an elina. Out of the sai$ a#ount) E&an elina pai$ Att". Ao the su# of P4FG)GGG.GG. (issatisfie$) Att". Ao file$ a #otion to recor$ an$ enforce the attorne"<s lien alle in that E&an elina rene e$ on their contin ent fee a ree#ent. E&an elina pai$ onl" the a#ount of P4FG)GGG.GG) e3ui&alent to =GE of the awar$ as attorne"<s fees) thus) lea&in a ,alance of .GE) plus the awar$ pertainin to the counsel as attorne"<s fees. E&an elina #anifeste$ that Att". Ao<s clai# for attorne"<s fees of 5GE of the total #onetar" awar$ was null an$ &oi$ ,ase$ on Article ... of the La,or Co$e. Is her contention correct? A: Read 5van!e("na Masm'd v. N0RC, et a(, G.R. No. 1)33)+, 1ebr'ary 13, 2009 Q: What $oes "uantum meruit #ean? Q: When is the #easure of :uantum ;eruit resorte$ to? Q: In the a,sence of such fee arran e#ent) how woul$ the ser&ices of an attorne" ,e co#pensate$? Q: What is a retainer? Q: Concept Place#ent retaine$ the ser&ices of Att". Fun'. 9n$er their retainer contract) the respon$ent is to ren$er &arious le al ser&ices e7cept liti ation) 3uasiB :u$icial an$ a$#inistrati&e procee$in s an$ si#ilar actions for which there will ,e separate ,illin s. Thereafter) Att". Fun' represente$ Concept Place#ent in the case file$ a ainst the petitioner for ille al $is#issal. While the la,or case was still pen$in ) Concept Place#ent ter#inate$ the ser&ices of Att". Fun'. +e&ertheless) Att". Fun' continue$ han$lin the case. Att". Fun' then a$&ise$ Concept Place#ent of the POEA<s fa&ora,le $ecision an$ re3ueste$ the pa"#ent of his attorne"<s fees. Concept Place#ent refuse$. Is Att". Fun' is entitle$ for attorne"<s fees for assistin petitioner as counsel in the la,or case e&en if the ser&ices of the respon$ent were alrea$" ter#inate$? A: Read Con%ept *(a%ement Reso'r%es In%. v. Atty. 1'n?, G.R. No. 13$-)0, 1ebr'ary -, 200/ Q: What are the 'in$s of Retainer A ree#ents on Attorne"<s fees? Q: What are the instances when counsel cannot reco&er full a#ount $espite written contract for attorne"s< fees? Q: What is a cha#pertous contract?

17

Contin ent Contract !aya&le in cash La%yers do not underta7e to (ay all e?(enses of liti/ation Valid

Cha#pertous Contract !aya&le in 7ind on(y La%yers underta7e to (ay all e?(enses of liti/ation Void

ATTOR+EJ* FEE* A* (A!AAE* Q: What are the two concepts of attorne"<s fees? Q: *tate the rule on attorne"<s fees ,ein awar$e$ as $a#a es an$ its e7ceptions. Q: What are the $ifferent t"pes of fee arran e#ents an attorne" #a" enter into with his client? CA+O+ == WIT6(RAWAL OF *ERDICE* Q: When is a law"er allowe$ to with$raw his ser&ices? Q: What are the instances when a law"er #a" with$raw his ser&ices without the consent of his client? Read Sante%o v. Atty. Avan%e, AC +)3/, 4e%ember 11, 2003 Q: What is the proce$ure when with$rawal is without client<s consent? Q: (oes the written consent of the client re3uire appro&al of the court to ,e effecti&e? (ischar e of the Attorne" ," the client ) Q: Can a client $ischar e the ser&ices of his law"er without a cause? Q: What are the li#itations on client<s ri ht to $ischar e the ser&ices of his law"er? Q: Is notice of $ischar e necessar"? Q: What shoul$ a law"er $o if no notice of $ischar e was file$ ," the client with the court? Q: What are the con$itions for su,stitution of counsel? Read: Go(d%rest Rea(ty Corp., v. Cypress Gardens Condom"n"'m Corp., GR No. 1$10$2, Apr"( 1$, 2009. Rule .0 ! A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, sub-ect to a retaining lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and shall cooperate with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter. Q: When is the attorne"Bclient relationship consi$ere$ ter#inate$?

Rule 0.0 ! A lawyer shall, in cases of referral, with the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of fees in proportion to the wor+ performed and responsibility assumed. Q: What shoul$ a law"er $o if he 'nows or shoul$ 'now that he is not 3ualifie$ to ren$er the le al ser&ices re3uire$? Rule 0.03 ! A lawyer shall not, without the full +nowledge and consent of the client, accept any fee, reward, costs, commission, interest, rebate or forwarding allowance or other compensation whatsoever related to his professional employment from anyone other than the client. -.//C) =GG; 1ar Questions2 Rule 0.03 ! A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to -udicial action only to prevent imposition, in-ustice or fraud. -.//F 1ar Question2 Q: Can a law"er file a case a ainst his client for the enforce#ent of attorne"<s fees? Q: Where an$ how #a" attorne">s fees ,e clai#e$ ," the law"er? Q: What are the instances when an independent civil action to reco&er attorne"<s fees is necessar"? Q: What are the effects of the nullit" of contract on the ri ht to attorne"<s fees? Q: Can the Court of Appeals re&iew the $ecision of lower courts fi7in attorne"<s fees?