FACTS: On Sept.

4, 1959, the Chief of Police of Alaminos, Laguna, charged SImplicio Villanueva

with crime of Malicious Mischiedf, before the Justice of the Peace Court of said Municipality. Said
accused was represented by counsel de oficio, but later on replaced by counsel de parte. The
complainant in the same case was representry by City Attorney Ariston Fule of San Pablo City,
having entered his appearance as private-prosecutor, having secuting the permission of the the
Secretary of Justice.
Counsel for the accused presented a Motion in inhibit Fiscal Fule from Acting as Private prosecutor
in this case, this time invoking sec. 32, Rule 127, now sec. 35, Rule 138, Revised Rules, which bars
certain attorneys from practicing.

ISSUE: Whether of not Atty. Fule violate sec. 32 of Rule 127 now Sec. 35, Rule 138, revised Rules
of Court, which bars certain attorneys from practicing.

RULING: The Court holds that the appearance of Attorney Fule did not constitute private practice,
within the meaning and contemplation of the Rules. Practice is more than isolated appearance, for it
consists in frequent or customary action, a succession of acts of the same kind. The word private
practice of law implies that one must have presented himself to be in the active and continued
practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public for
compensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. It has never been
refuted that City Attorney Fule had been given permission by his immediate supervisor, the Secretary
of Justice, to represent the complainant in the case at bar, who is a relative.

In 1991, Christian Monsod was appointed as the Chairman of the Commission on Elections. His
appointment was affirmed by the Commission on Appointments. Monsods appointment was opposed
by Renato Cayetano on the ground that he does not qualify for he failed to meet the Constitutional
requirement which provides that the chairman of the COMELEC should have been engaged in the
practice law for at least ten years.
Monsods track record as a lawyer:
1. Passed the bar in 1960 with a rating of 86.55%.
2. Immediately after passing, worked in his fathers law firm for one year.
3. Thereafter, until 1970, he went abroad where he had a degree in economics and held various
positions in various foreign corporations.
4. In 1970, he returned to the Philippines and held executive jobs for various local corporations
until 1986.
5. In 1986, he became a member of the Constitutional Commission.
ISSUE: Whether or not Monsod qualifies as chairman of the COMELEC. What constitutes practice of
law?
HELD: Yes. Atty. Monsods past work experiences as a lawyer-economist, a lawyer-manager, a
lawyer-entrepreneur of industry, a lawyer-negotiator of contracts, and a lawyer-legislator of both the

rich and the poor verily more than satisfy the constitutional requirement that he has been
engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
As noted by various authorities, the practice of law is not limited to court appearances. The members
of the bench and bar and the informed laymen such as businessmen, know that in most developed
societies today, substantially more legal work is transacted in law offices than in the courtrooms.
General practitioners of law who do both litigation and non-litigation work also know that in most
cases they find themselves spending more time doing what is loosely described as business
counseling than in trying cases. In the course of a working day the average general practitioner wig
engage in a number of legal tasks, each involving different legal doctrines, legal skills, legal
processes, legal institutions, clients, and other interested parties. Even the increasing numbers of
lawyers in specialized practice wig usually perform at least some legal services outside their
specialty. By no means will most of this work involve litigation, unless the lawyer is one of the
relatively rare types a litigator who specializes in this work to the exclusion of much else. Instead,
the work will require the lawyer to have mastered the full range of traditional lawyer skills of client
counseling, advice-giving, document drafting, and negotiation.

ADEZ REALTY, INCORPORATED, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS

FACTS:
1. In a SC resolution, it directed Atty. Benjamin Dacanay counsel for petitioner Adez Realty, Inc., to
SHOW CAUSE within 5 days from notice why he should not be disciplinary dealt with for intercalating
a material fact in the judgment of the court a quo thereby altering and modifying its factual findings
with the apparent purpose of misleading the SC in order to obtain a favorable judgment, and thus
failing to live up to the standards expected of a member of the Bar.
2. In his defense, he humbly submitted to the court and threw himself at its mercy. He explained that
whenever he prepares pleadings, he dictates to his secretary and if portions of the decision or order
to be appealed from have to be quoted, he simply instructs his said secretary to copy the particular
pages of the said decision or order. In the case at bar, he did instruct his secretary to copy
the corresponding pages in the decision of the CA. Somehow, however, some words were
intercalated on a particular paragraph. He reasoned that it was his secretary who was at fault.
3. His secretary attached an Affidavit supporting the explanation made by Dacanay and admitted that
it was her who committed the error.
ISSUE:
WON Atty. Dacanay should be disbarred for intercalating a material fact in a judicial decision.
HELD:
4. YES. It is the bounden duty of lawyers to check, review and rechecks the allegations in their
pleadings, more particularly the quoted portions, and ensure that the statements therein are accurate
and the reproductions faithful, down to the last word and even punctuation mark.

The legal profession demands that lawyers thoroughly go over pleadings, motions and other
documents dictated or prepared by them, typed or transcribed by their secretaries or clerks,
before filing them with the court.
If a client is bound by the acts of his counsel, with more reason should counsel be bound by the acts
of his secretary who merely follows his orders.
5. The distortion of facts committed by counsel, with the willing assistance of his secretary, is a grave
offense and should not be treated lightly, not only because it may set a dangerous precedent but,
rather, because it is a clear and serious violation of ones oath as a member of the Bar. Rule 10.02,
Canon 10, Chapter III, of the Code of Professional Responsibility directs that [a] lawyer shall not
knowingly misquote or misrepresent the contents of a paper, the language or the argument
of opposing counsel, or the text of a decision or authority, or knowingly cite as a law a provision
already rendered inoperative by repeal or amendment, or assert as a fact that which has not been
proved.
6. Misquoting or intercalating phrases in the text of a court decision constitutes wilful disregard of the
lawyers solemn duty to act at all times in a manner consistent with the truth. A lawyer should never
venture to mislead the court by false statements or quotations of facts or laws. Thus, in Bautista v.
Gonzales, We suspended respondent for six (6) months for, among others, submitting to the lower
court falsified documents, representing them to be true copies. In Chavez v. Viola, We suspended
respondent counsel for five (5) months after he filed an Amended Application for Original Registration
of Title which contained false statements.
WHEREFORE, We find ATTY. BENJAMIN M. DACANAY, counsel for petitioner, guilty of intercalating
a material fact in a judicial Decision elevated to Us on certiorari, thereby altering its factual findings
with the apparent purpose, and no other, of misleading the Court in order to obtain a
favorable judgment, and thus miserably failing to live up to the standards expected of him as a
member of the Philippine Bar. Consequently, ATTY. BENJAMIN M.DACANAY is hereby DISBARRED
effective immediately from the practice of law.