A|nna Irancene Maca|os-Iath| Lega| rofess|on

Iune 27, 2014 Atty. 8adando

CASLS:

1. CCNS1I1U1ICNAL CCMMISSICNS C. CCMMISSICN CN LLLC1ICNS CAL1ANC v. MCNSCD
G.k. NC. 100113 SL1LM8Lk 3, 1991
IAC1S: 8espondenL ChrlsLlan Monsod was nomlnaLed by resldenL Aqulno Lo Lhe poslLlon of
Chalrman of Lhe CCMLLLC. eLlLloner opposed Lhe nomlnaLlon because allegedly Monsod does
noL possess Lhe requlred quallflcaLlon of havlng been engaged ln Lhe pracLlce of law for aL leasL
Len years pursuanL Lo ArLlcle lx-C, SecLlon 1 (1) of Lhe 1987 ConsLlLuLlon.
1he Commlsslon on AppolnLmenLs conflrmed Lhe nomlnaLlon. SubsequenLly, respondenL Look
hls oaLh and assumed offlce as Chalrman of Lhe CCMLLLC.
Challenglng Lhe valldlLy of Lhe conflrmaLlon by Lhe Commlsslon on AppolnLmenLs of Monsod's
nomlnaLlon, peLlLloner, as a clLlzen and Laxpayer, flled Lhe lnsLanL peLlLlon for cerLlorarl and
rohlblLlon praylng LhaL sald conflrmaLlon and Lhe consequenL appolnLmenL of Monsod as
Chalrman of Lhe Commlsslon on LlecLlons be declared null and vold.
ISSUL: WheLher or noL ChrlsLlan Monsod has been engaged ln Lhe pracLlce of law for aL leasL
Len years as requlred by Lhe ConsLlLuLlon?
nCLDINGS: ?LS. racLlce of law means any acLlvlLy, ln or ouL of courL, whlch requlres Lhe
appllcaLlon of law, legal procedure, knowledge, Lralnlng and experlence. 1o engage ln Lhe
pracLlce of law ls Lo perform Lhose acLs whlch are characLerlsLlcs of Lhe professlon. Cenerally, Lo
pracLlce law ls Lo glve noLlce or render any klnd of servlce whlch devlce or servlce requlres Lhe
use ln any degree of legal knowledge or sklll (lll AL8 23)."
lnLerpreLed ln Lhe llghL of Lhe varlous deflnlLlons of Lhe Lerm pracLlce of law," parLlcularly Lhe
modern concepL of law pracLlce, and Laklng lnLo conslderaLlon Lhe llberal consLrucLlon lnLended
by Lhe framers of Lhe ConsLlLuLlon, ALLy. Monsod's pasL work experlences as a lawyer-
economlsL, a lawyer-manager, a lawyer-enLrepreneur of lndusLry, a lawyer- negoLlaLor of
conLracLs, and a lawyer-leglslaLor of boLh Lhe rlch and Lhe poor - verlly more Lhan saLlsfy Lhe
consLlLuLlonal requlremenL - LhaL he has been engaged ln Lhe pracLlce of law for aL leasL Len
years.
1he Commlsslon on Lhe basls of evldence submlLLed dollng Lhe publlc hearlngs on Monsod's
conflrmaLlon, lmpllclLly deLermlned LhaL he possessed Lhe necessary quallflcaLlons as requlred
by law. 1he [udgmenL rendered by Lhe Commlsslon ln Lhe exerclse of such an acknowledged
power ls beyond [udlclal lnLerference excepL only upon a clear showlng of a grave abuse of
dlscreLlon amounLlng Lo lack or excess of [urlsdlcLlon. (ArL. vlll, Sec. 1 ConsLlLuLlon). 1hus, only
where such grave abuse of dlscreLlon ls clearly shown shall Lhe CourL lnLerfere wlLh Lhe
Commlsslon's [udgmenL. ln Lhe lnsLanL case, Lhere ls no occaslon for Lhe exerclse of Lhe CourL's
correcLlve power, slnce no abuse, much less a grave abuse of dlscreLlon, LhaL would amounL Lo
lack or excess of [urlsdlcLlon and would warranL Lhe lssuance of Lhe wrlLs prayed, for has been
clearly shown.

2. nILIINL LAWLk'S ASSCCIA1ICN v! CLLLDCNIC AGkAVA G.k. No. L-12426. Iebruary 16,
19S9.

IAC1S: Cn May 27, 1937, respondenL - ulrecLor lssued a clrcular announclng LhaL he had
scheduled an examlnaLlon for Lhe purpose of deLermlnlng who are quallfled Lo pracLlce as
paLenL aLLorneys before Lhe hlllpplnes aLenL Cfflce. Accordlng Lo Lhe clrcular, members of Lhe
hlllpplne 8ar, englneers and oLher persons wlLh sufflclenL sclenLlflc and Lechnlcal Lralnlng are
quallfled Lo Lake Lhe sald examlnaLlon. 1he peLlLloner conLends LhaL one who has passed Lhe
bar examlnaLlon sand ls llcensed by Lhe Supreme CourL Lo pracLlce law ln Lhe hlllpplnes and
who ls ln good sLandlng ls duly quallfled Lo pracLlce before Lhe hlllpplnes aLenL Cfflce and
LhaL Lhe respondenL ulrecLor's holdlng an examlnaLlon for Lhe purpose ls ln excess of hls
[urlsdlcLlon and ls ln vlolaLlon of Lhe law. 1he respondenL, ln reply, malnLalns Lhe prosecuLlon of
paLenL cases does noL lnvolve enLlrely or purely Lhe pracLlce of law buL lncludes Lhe
appllcaLlon of sclenLlflc and Lechnlcal knowledge and Lralnlng as a maLLer of acLual pracLlce so
as Lo lnclude englneers and oLher lndlvlduals who passed Lhe examlnaLlon can pracLlce before
Lhe aLenL offlce. lurLhermore, he sLressed LhaL for Lhe long Llme he ls holdlng LesLs, Lhls ls Lhe
flrsL Llme LhaL hls rlghL has been quesLloned formally.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL Lhe appearance before Lhe paLenL Cfflce and Lhe preparaLlon and Lhe
prosecuLlon of paLenL appllcaLlon, eLc., consLlLuLes or ls lncluded ln Lhe pracLlce of law.

nCLDINGS: 1he Supreme CourL held LhaL Lhe pracLlce of law lncludes such appearance before
Lhe aLenL Cfflce, Lhe represenLaLlon of appllcanLs, opposlLors, and oLher persons, and Lhe
prosecuLlon of Lhelr appllcaLlons for paLenL, Lhelr opposlLlon LhereLo, or Lhe enforcemenL of
Lhelr rlghLs ln paLenL cases. Moreover, Lhe pracLlce before Lhe paLenL Cfflce lnvolves Lhe
lnLerpreLaLlon and appllcaLlon of oLher laws and legal prlnclples, as well as Lhe exlsLence of
facLs Lo be esLabllshed ln accordance wlLh Lhe law of evldence and procedure. 1he pracLlce of
law ls noL llmlLed Lo Lhe conducL of cases or llLlgaLlon ln courL buL also embraces all oLher
maLLers connecLed wlLh Lhe law and any work lnvolvlng Lhe deLermlnaLlon by Lhe legal mlnd of
Lhe legal effecLs of facLs and condlLlons. lurLhermore, Lhe law provldes LhaL any parLy may
appeal Lo Lhe Supreme CourL from any flnal order or declslon of Lhe dlrecLor. 1hus, lf Lhe
LransacLlons of buslness ln Lhe aLenL Cfflce lnvolved excluslvely or mosLly Lechnlcal and
sclenLlflc knowledge and Lralnlng, Lhen loglcally, Lhe appeal should be Laken noL Lo a courL or
[udlclal body, buL raLher Lo a board of sclenLlsLs, englneers or Lechnlcal men, whlch ls noL Lhe
case.

3. kLGALA L1 AL v. SANDIGAN8AAN Gk. No. 10S938 September, 20, 1996

IAC1S: CorporaLlon cllenLs of peLlLloner consulLed Lhem regardlng corporaLe sLrucLure and
flnanclal maLLers upon whlch legal advlce were glven by peLlLloners. Sald corporaLlon ls sub[ecL
Lo lnvesLlgaLlon by Lhe CCC lnvolvlng lll goLLen wealLh. eLlLloner refuses Lo provlde
lnformaLlon on fear LhaL lL may lmpllcaLe Lhem ln Lhe very acLlvlLy from whlch legal advlce was
soughL from Lhem and lL may breach Lhe flduclary relaLlonshlp of Lhe peLlLloner wlLh Lhelr
cllenL.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL flduclary duLy may be asserLed by peLlLloner on refusal Lo dlsclose
names of Lhelr cllenLs (prlvllege lnformaLlon)

nCLDINGS: SC upheld Lhe rlghL of peLlLloners Lo refuse dlsclosure of names of Lhelr cllenLs
under Lhe paln of breach of flduclary relaLlonshlp wlLh Lhelr cllenL.

As a general rule, a lawyer MA? nC1 lnvCkL 1PL 8lvlLLCL 8LCAuSL:

1. 1he courL has Lhe rlghL Lo know LhaL Lhe cllenL whose prlvllege ls soughL Lo be proLecLed
ls flesh and blood.
2. rlvllege beglns Lo exlsL only afLer Lhe aLLy-cllenL relaLlonshlp has been esLabllshed.
3. rlvllege generally perLalns Lo be Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe relaLlonshlp.
4. WlLh due process conslderaLlon, Lhe opposlng parLy should know hls adversary.

LxCL1lCn: LAW?L8S MA? lnvCkL 1PL 8lvlLLCL WPLn:

1. SLrong probablllLy exlsLs LhaL reveallng Lhe cllenL's name would lmpllcaLe Lhe cllenL ln
Lhe very acLlvlLy for whlch he soughL Lhe lawyer's advlce.
2. ulsclosure would open Lo clvll llablllLy of cllenL. (presenL ln Lhls case)
3. CovernmenL lawyers have no case agalnsL Lhe lawyer's cllenL unless by reveallng Lhe
cllenL's name lL would provlde Lhem Lhe only llnk LhaL would form Lhe chaln of
LesLlmony necessary Lo convlcL an lndlvldual of a crlme. (presenL ln Lhls case)
4. 8elevanL Lo Lhe sub[ecL maLLer of Lhe legal problem on whlch cllenL seeks legal
asslsLance. (presenL ln Lhls case)
3. naLure of aLLy-cllenL relaLlonshlp has been prevlously dlsclosed and lL ls Lhe ldenLlLy
whlch ls lnLended Lo be confldenLlal.

Cld Code of Clvll rocedure enacLed by Lhe hlllpplne Commlsslon on AugusL 7, 1901:SecLlon
383 of Lhe Code speclflcally "forblds counsel, wlLhouL auLhorlLy of hls cllenL Lo reveal any
communlcaLlon made by Lhe cllenL Lo hlm or hls advlce glven Lhereon ln Lhe course of
professlonal employmenL." 28 assed on lnLo varlous provlslons of Lhe 8ules of CourL, Lhe
aLLorney-cllenL prlvllege, as currenLly worded provldes: Sec. 24. ulsquallflcaLlon by reason of
prlvlleged communlcaLlon. - 1he followlng persons cannoL LesLlfy as Lo maLLers learned ln
confldence ln Lhe followlng cases: An aLLorney cannoL, wlLhouL Lhe consenL of hls cllenL, be
examlned as Lo any communlcaLlon made by Lhe cllenL Lo hlm, or hls advlce glven Lhereon ln
Lhe course of, or wlLh a vlew Lo, professlonal employmenL, can an aLLorney's secreLary,
sLenographer, or clerk be examlned, wlLhouL Lhe consenL of Lhe cllenL and hls employer,
concernlng any facL Lhe knowledge of whlch has been acqulred ln such capaclLy. 29 lurLher,
8ule 138 of Lhe 8ules of CourL sLaLes: Sec. 20. lL ls Lhe duLy of an aLLorney: (e) Lo malnLaln
lnvlolaLe Lhe confldence, and aL every perll Lo hlmself, Lo preserve Lhe secreLs of hls cllenL, and
Lo accepL no compensaLlon ln connecLlon wlLh hls cllenL's buslness excepL from hlm or wlLh hls
knowledge and approval. 1hls duLy ls expllclLly mandaLed ln Canon 17 of Lhe Code of
rofesslonal 8esponslblllLy whlch provldes LhaL: Canon 17. A lawyer owes fldellLy Lo Lhe cause
of hls cllenL and he shall be mlndful of Lhe LrusL and confldence reposed ln hlm. Canon 13 of Lhe
Canons of rofesslonal LLhlcs also demands a lawyer's fldellLy Lo cllenL: 1he lawyers owes
"enLlre devoLlon Lo Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe cllenL, warm zeal ln Lhe malnLenance and defense of hls
rlghLs and Lhe exerLlon of hls uLmosL learnlng and ablllLy," Lo Lhe end LhaL noLhlng be Laken or
be wlLhheld from hlm, save by Lhe rules of law, legally applled. no fear of [udlclal dlsfavor or
publlc popularlLy should resLraln hlm from Lhe full dlscharge of hls duLy. ln Lhe [udlclal forum
Lhe cllenL ls enLlLled Lo Lhe beneflL of any and every remedy and defense LhaL ls auLhorlzed by
Lhe law of Lhe land, and he may expecL hls lawyer Lo asserL every such remedy or defense. 8uL
lL ls sLeadfasLly Lo be borne ln mlnd LhaL Lhe greaL LrusL of Lhe lawyer ls Lo be performed wlLhln
and noL wlLhouL Lhe bounds of Lhe law. 1he offlce of aLLorney does noL permlL, much less does
lL demand of hlm for any cllenL, vlolaLlon of law or any manner of fraud or chlcanery. Pe musL
obey hls own consclence and noL LhaL of hls cllenL.


4. kCSA I. MLkCADC v. A11. IULI1C D. VI1kICLC A.C. No. S108 May 26, 200S

IAC1S : 8osa Mercado ls seeklng for Lhe dlsbarmenL of ALLy. !ullLo vlLrlolo as he allegedly
mallclously flled a crlmlnal case for falslflcaLlon of publlc documenLs agalnsL her Lhereby
vlolaLlng Lhe aLLorney cllenL prlvllege.

lL appears LhaL vlLrlolo flled a case agalnsL complalnanL as she apparenLly made false enLrles ln
Lhe cerLlflcaLe of llve blrLh of her chlldren. More speclflcally she allegedly lndlcaLed LhaL she ls
marrled Lo a cerLaln lerdlnand lernandez when ln facL her real husband ls 8uben Mercado.
Mercado clalms LhaL by flllng Lhe complalnL Lhe aLLorney cllenL prlvllege has been vlolaLed.
Mercado flled a case for vlLrlolos' dlsbarmenL.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL Lhe respondenL vlolaLed Lhe rule on prlvlleged communlcaLlon beLween
aLLorney and cllenL when he flled Lhe crlmlnal case for falslflcaLlon

nCLDINGS: no. 1he evldence on record falls Lo subsLanLlaLe complalnanL's allegaLlons.
ComplalnanL dld noL even speclfy Lhe alleged communlcaLlon dlsclosed by Lhe respondenLs. All
her clalms were couched ln general Lerms and lacked speclflclLy. lndeed Lhe complalnL falled Lo
aLLend Lhe hearlngs aL Lhe l8. WlLhouL any LesLlmony from Lhe complalnanL as Lo Lhe speclflc
confldenLlal lnformaLlon allegedly dlvulged by respondenL wlLhouL her consenL, lL would be
dlfflculL lf noL lmposslble Lo deLermlne lf Lhere was any vlolaLlon of Lhe rule on prlvlleged
communlcaLlon. Such lnformaLlon ls a cruclal llnk ln esLabllshlng a breach of Lhe rule on
prlvlleged communlcaLlon beLween aLLorney and cllenL. lL ls noL enough Lo merely asserL Lhe
aLLorney cllenL prlvllege. 1he burden of provlng LhaL Lhe prlvllege applles ls placed upon Lhe
parLy asserLlng Lhe prlvllege.


S. nLIkS CI MAkIMC kLGCSC v. 1nL nCN. CCUk1 CI ALALS and 8LLLN CkU2 kLGCSC
G.k. No. 91879. Iu|y 6, 1992

IAC1S: 1he helrs of Maxlmo 8egoso seek a revlew of Lhe resoluLlon daLed CcLober 9, 1989 of
Lhe CourL of Appeals ln CA-C.8. no. 20183 dlsmlsslng Lhe appeal flled by 8egoso's former
counsel.
1he case lnvolves an acLlon for [udlclal parLlLlon of properLy wlLh accounLlng and damages (Clvll
Case no. 1464-v-81), whlch was flled by 8elen Cruz-8egoso agalnsL her husband, Maxlmo
8egoso, ln Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal CourL, 8ranch xv of Malolos, 8ulacan.

8egoso dled on !anuary 17, 1983 afLer Lhe case had been submlLLed for declslon, buL he was
noL subsLlLuLed as defendanL by hls helrs because, apparenLly, Lhe Lrlal courL was noL lnformed
of hls deaLh unLll Lhe declslon had been promulgaLed on november 14, 1988.
Cn november 29, 1988, 8egoso's counsel, ALLorney Adrlano !avler, Sr., flled a noLlce of appeal
whlch Lhe Lrlal courL approved. 1he appeal was dockeLed ln Lhe CourL of Appeals as CA-C.8. no.
20183.
1he plalnLlff, 8elen Cruz-8egoso, Lhrough counsel, moved Lo dlsmlss Lhe appeal on Lhe ground
LhaL Lhe deceased defendanL ceased Lo have legal personallLy and LhaL ALLorney !avler's
auLhorlLy Lo represenL hlm was LermlnaLed or explred upon hls demlse, hence, Lhe noLlce of
appeal flled by sald counsel was lnvalld, a worLhless plece of paper.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL Lhe eLlLloner's Counsel (ALLy. !avler) ls sLlll auLhorlzed Lo represenL Lhe
lalnLlff for Lhls Supreme CourL case, conslderlng LhaL Lhe eLlLloner has already dled prlor Lo
Lhe submlsslon of Lhe noLlce of appeal.

nCLDINGS: no. under Lhe rules, lL ls Lhe duLy of Lhe "##$%&'( )$% #*' +','"-'+ +')'&+"&# Lo
lnform Lhe courL of hls cllenL's deaLh and Lo furnlsh Lhe courL wlLh Lhe names and resldences of
Lhe execuLor, admlnlsLraLor, or legal represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased. SecLlons 16 and 17, 8ule 3
of Lhe 8ules of CourL provlde:
Sec. 16. ./#( $) "##$%&'( /0$& +'"#*1 2&,"0",2#(1 $% 2&,$30'#'&,( $) 0"%#(.- Whenever
a parLy Lo a pendlng case dles, becomes lncapaclLaLed or lncompeLenL, lL shall be Lhe
duLy of hls aLLorney Lo lnform Lhe courL prompLly of such deaLh, lncapaclLy or
lncompeLency, and Lo glve Lhe name and resldence of hls execuLor, admlnlsLraLor,
guardlan or oLher legal represenLaLlve.
Sec. 17. .'"#* $) 0"%#(.- AfLer a parLy dles and Lhe clalm ls noL Lhereby exLlngulshed,
Lhe courL shall order, upon proper noLlce, Lhe legal represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased Lo
appear and Lo be subsLlLuLed for Lhe deceased, wlLhln a perlod of LhlrLy (30) days, or
wlLhln such Llme as may be granLed. lf Lhe legal represenLaLlve falls Lo appear wlLhln
sald Llme, Lhe courL may order Lhe opposlng parLy Lo procure Lhe appolnLmenL of a legal
represenLaLlve of Lhe deceased wlLhln a Llme Lo be speclfled by Lhe courL, and Lhe
represenLaLlve shall lmmedlaLely appear for and on behalf of Lhe lnLeresL of Lhe
deceased. 1he courL charges lnvolved ln procurlng such appolnLmenL, lf defrayed by Lhe
opposlng parLy, may be recovered as cosLs. 1he helrs of Lhe deceased may be allowed Lo
be subsLlLuLed for Lhe deceased, wlLhouL requlrlng Lhe appolnLmenL of an execuLor or
admlnlsLraLor and Lhe courL may appolnL guardlan "+ 42#'3 for Lhe mlnor helrs.

ALLorney !avler's appeal from Lhe declslon of Lhe Lrlal courL was correcLly dlsmlssed by Lhe
appellaLe courL for upon Lhe deaLh of Maxlmo 8egoso, ALLorney !avler's auLhorlLy Lo represenL
hlm also explred. 1hen noLlce of appeal, whlch ALLorney !avler flled on behalf of Lhe decedenL
was an unauLhorlzed pleadlng, hence, lnvalld (8arrameda, eL al. vs. 8arbara, eL al., 90 hll. 718,
Casenas vs. 8osales, 19 SC8A 462).
Powever, Lhe valldlLy of Lhe [udgmenL of Lhe Lrlal courL was noL affecLed by Lhe defendanL's
demlse for Lhe acLlon survlved. 1he declslon ls blndlng and enforceable agalnsL Lhe successors-
ln-lnLeresL of Lhe deceased llLlganL by LlLle subsequenL Lo Lhe commencemenL of Lhe acLlon
[SecLlon 49(b) 8ule 39, 8ules of CourL, llorendo, eL al. vs. Coloma, eL al., 129 SC8A 304].


6. VILLAILCkLS v. LIMCS (AC 7S04 [2007])

IAC1S: ComplalnL

for ulsbarmenL flled by complalnanL vlrglnla vlllaflores agalnsL respondenL
ALLy. Slnamar Llmos, charglng Lhe laLLer wlLh Cross negllgence and uerellcLlon of uuLy.

8ecelvlng an unfavorable [udgmenL wlLh counsel - ALLy. Slnamar, complalnanL soughL Lhe help
of Lhe ubllc ALLorney's Cfflce (AC) Lo appeal her case Lo Lhe CourL of Appeals. 1he AC flled
for her a noLlce of Appeal wlLh Lhe 81C.
Cn 1 SepLember 2004, complalnanL recelved a copy of a noLlce from Lhe CourL of Appeals
requlrlng her Lo flle her appellanL's brlef wlLhln 43 days from recelpL Lhereof.

lmmedlaLely afLer, complalnanL approached respondenL who had prevlously handled her son's
case, Lo flle, on her behalf, Lhe appellanL's brlef. 1he respondenL recelved Lhe accepLance fee of
hp 10,000.00 as parLlal paymenL for respondenL's accepLance fee of hp20,000.00, LogeLher
wlLh Lhe enLlre records of Lhe case. Cn SepLember 9, a day afLer Lhe respondenL accepLed Lhe
downpaymenL of hp10,000.00, Lhe remalnlng hp10,000.00 from Lhe balance was pald by Lhe
complalnanL.


Cn 21 SepLember 2004, an LmploymenL ConLracL

was execuLed beLween complalnanL and
respondenL whereby Lhe former formally engaged Lhe laLLer's professlonal servlces. upon Lhe
execuLlon of sald conLracL, complalnanL agaln pald Lhe respondenL Lhe amounL of 2,000.00 for
mlscellaneous expenses.
Cn 14 !anuary 2003, complalnanL recelved a copy of a 8esoluLlon
6
daLed 6 !anuary 2003 lssued
by Lhe CourL of Appeals dlsmlsslng her appeal for fallure Lo flle her appellanL's brlef wlLhln Lhe
reglemenLary perlod. 1hus, on 17 !anuary 2003, complalnanL wenL Lo respondenL's offlce buL
falled Lo see respondenL.
AfLer several unsuccessful aLLempLs Lo Lalk Lo Lhe respondenL, complalnanL wenL Lo Manlla on
18 !anuary 2003 Lo seek help from anoLher lawyer who agreed Lo handle Lhe case for her. Cn
19 !anuary 2003, complalnanL wenL back Lo Lhe respondenL's offlce Lo reLrleve Lhe records of
her case. 8espondenL allegedly refused Lo Lalk Lo her.
Aggrleved by respondenL's acLuaLlons, complalnanL flled Lhe lnsLanL admlnlsLraLlve complalnL
agalnsL respondenL.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL Lhe respondenL commlLLed culpable negllgence ln handllng
complalnanL's case as would warranL dlsclpllnary acLlon.

nCLDINGS: ?es. 8espondenL's conducL ln falllng Lo flle Lhe appellanL's brlef for complalnanL
before Lhe CourL of Appeals falls below Lhe sLandards exacLed upon lawyers on dedlcaLlon and
commlLmenL Lo Lhelr cllenL's cause.

1he relaLlon of aLLorney and cllenL beglns from Lhe Llme an aLLorney ls reLalned. 1o esLabllsh
Lhe professlonal relaLlon, lL ls sufflclenL LhaL Lhe advlce and asslsLance of an aLLorney are soughL
and recelved ln any manner perLlnenL Lo hls professlon.

lL musL be noLed LhaL as early as 8 SepLember 2004, respondenL already agreed Lo Lake on
complalnanL's case, recelvlng from Lhe laLLer parLlal paymenL of her accepLance fee and Lhe
enLlre records of complalnanL's case. 1he very nexL day, 9 SepLember 2004, complalnanL pald
Lhe balance of respondenL's accepLance fee. 8espondenL admlLLed her recelpL of 20,000.00 as
accepLance fee for Lhe legal servlces she ls Lo render Lo complalnanL and 2,000.00 for Lhe
mlscellaneous expenses she ls Lo lncur ln handllng Lhe case, and Lhe subsequenL execuLlon
of Lhe employmenL conLracL beLween her and complalnanL. Pence, lL can be sald LhaL as early
as 8 SepLember 2004, respondenL's rendlLlon of legal servlces Lo complalnanL had commenced,
and from Lhen on, she should sLarL proLecLlng Lhe complalnanL's lnLeresLs.

no lawyer ls obllged Lo advocaLe for every person who may wlsh Lo become hls cllenL, buL once
he agrees Lo Lake up Lhe cause of a cllenL, Lhe lawyer owes fldellLy Lo such cause and musL be
mlndful of Lhe LrusL and confldence reposed ln hlm. Among Lhe fundamenLal rules of eLhlcs ls
Lhe prlnclple LhaL an aLLorney who underLakes an acLlon lmplledly sLlpulaLes Lo carry lL Lo lLs
LermlnaLlon, LhaL ls, unLll Lhe case becomes flnal and execuLory.

A lawyer should serve hls cllenL ln a consclenLlous, dlllgenL and efflclenL manner, and he should
provlde a quallLy of servlce aL leasL equal Lo LhaL whlch lawyers generally would expecL of a
compeLenL lawyer ln a llke slLuaLlon. 8y agreelng Lo be hls cllenL's counsel, he represenLs LhaL
he wlll exerclse ordlnary dlllgence or LhaL reasonable degree of care and sklll havlng reference
Lo Lhe characLer of Lhe buslness he underLakes Lo do, Lo proLecL Lhe cllenL's lnLeresLs and Lake
all sLeps or do all acLs necessary Lherefor, and hls cllenL may reasonably expecL hlm Lo dlscharge
hls obllgaLlons dlllgenLly.

8espondenL has obvlously falled Lo measure up Lo Lhe foregolng sLandards. 8espondenL A11?.
SlnAMA8 L. LlMCS was SuSLnuLu from Lhe pracLlce of law for a perlod of 1P8LL (3)
MCn1PS, wlLh a sLern warnlng LhaL a repeLlLlon of Lhe same or slmllar wrongdolng wlll be dealL
wlLh more severely and was C8uL8Lu Lo reLurn Lhe amounL of 1wenLy-1wo 1housand esos
(22,000.00), whlch she recelved from complalnanL vlrglnla vlllaflores


7. DCNNA MAkIL AGUIkkL v. LDWIN L. kANA 8.M. No. 1036 Iune 10, 2000

IAC1S: 8espondenL ls a successful bar passer who was allowed only Lo Lake oaLh buL noL Lo slgn
Lhe roll of aLLorneys pendlng Lhe resoluLlon of Lhe complalnL of Lhe peLlLloner who charges
respondenL wlLh unauLhorlzed pracLlce of law, grave mlsconducL, vlolaLlon of law, and grave
mlsrepresenLaLlon. ApparenLly, Lhe respondenL appeared as counsel Lo an elecLlon candldaLe
before Lhe Munlclpal 8oard of LlecLlon Canvassers (M8LC") of MasbaLe before he Look hls
oaLh and slgned Lhe rolls of aLLorneys. ln hls commenL, respondenL alleges he only provlde
speclflc asslsLance and advlce noL as a lawyer buL as a person who knows Lhe law. Pe conLends
LhaL he dld noL slgn Lhe pleadlngs as a lawyer. 1he Cfflce of Lhe 8ar ConfldanL was Lasked Lo
lnvesLlgaLe and lLs flndlngs dlsclosed LhaL accordlng Lo Lhe mlnuLes of Lhe meeLlng of Lhe M8LC,
Lhe respondenL acLlvely parLlclpaLed ln Lhe proceedlng and slgned ln Lhe pleadlng as counsel for
Lhe candldaLe.

ISSUL: WheLher or noL Lhe respondenL ls flL for admlsslon Lo Lhe 8ar.

nCLDINGS: 1he courL held LhaL respondenL dld engage ln unauLhorlzed pracLlce of law. lL held
LhaL all Lhe acLlvlLles he parLlclpaLed durlng LhaL Llme lnvolves Lhe pracLlce of law desplLe Lhe
facL LhaL he ls noL yeL a member of Lhe 8ar.

racLlclng law ls noL a rlghL buL a prlvllege exLended Lo Lhose morally uprlghL and wlLh Lhe
proper knowledge and skllls. lL lnvolves sLrlcL regulaLlon, one of whlch ls on Lhe moral characLer
of lLs members. asslng Lhe bar ls noL Lhe only quallflcaLlon Lo become an aLLorney-aL-law.

8espondenL should know LhaL Lwo essenLlal requlslLes for becomlng a lawyer sLlll had Lo be
performed, namely: hls lawyer's oaLh Lo be admlnlsLered by Lhls CourL and hls slgnaLure ln Lhe
8oll of ALLorneys. 8ecause Lhe courL flnds respondenL noL morally flL Lo be admlLLed ln Lhe 8ar,
noLwlLhsLandlng Lhe facL LhaL he already Look hls oaLh, he was denled admlsslon Lo Lhe 8ar.