I.

LEGAL PROFESSION

A. SUPERVISION AND CONTROL

> Constitution Art VIII, Sec 5 (5)

> Constitution Art XII, Sec 14 (c)

> In Re Cunanan, 94 Phil. 534

B. POWER TO INTEGRATE THE PHILIPPINE BAR (IN

> In Re IBP, 1973

---

II. PRACTICE OF LAW (RULE 138)

A. CONCEPT

> People v Villanueva, 14 SCRA 109

> Cayetano v Monsod, G.R. No. 110113, 3 September 1991

> Ulep v The Legal Clinic

> Alawi v Alauya, A.M. No. SDC-97-2-P, 24 February 1997

B. QUALIFICATIONS

1. Legal Education

> Pre-Law: RULES OF COURT

> Law Proper: RULES OF COURT, Rule 138, Sec 5;

> RA 7662 – Legal Education Reform Act

2. Citizenship

> Constitution Art XII, Sec. 14 (2)

> RA 9225 – Dual Citizenship Act

> Petition to Re-Acquire The privilege to Practice Law by Epifanio Muneses, B.M. No. 2112, July 24, 2012
3. Bar Examinations

> Rules of Court, Rule 138, Sec 7 – 16

> Bar Matter No. 1153, 09 March 2010 (In Re Letter of Atty. Estelito P. Mendoza Proposing Reforms in
the Bar Examinations Through Amendments to Rule 138, Sec. 5 & 6 of the Rules of the Court

> Reforms in the Bar Examinations, B.M. No. 1161, 08 June 2004 (Reserved Section)

> 2010 Bar Matter No. 2265, 28 January 2001, In Re Reforms in the Bar Examinations

> Bar Matter No. 2502, N20 March 2012

> In Re 2003 Bar Examinations, Atty. Daniel De Guzman, M.M. No. 1722, 24 April 2009

4. Good Moral Character as a Prerequisite to Bar Admission

> In Re Argosino, 246 SCRA 14 (1995)

> In the Matter of the Disqualification of Bar Examinee Haron S. Maling in the 2002 Bar Examination, 431
SCRA 146 (2004)

> Sec. 1, Rule 138, RULES OF COURT

> In Re Ching, 113 SCAD 488

> In Re Petition of Ramon Quisumbing, Bar Matter No. 419

> In Re Application of Adriano M. Hernandez, 225 SCAR

> Tan v Sabandal, Bar Matter No. 44, 24 February 1992

C. ADMISSION TO THE BAR

> In Re Cunanan, 94 Phil. 534

> In Re Lanuevo, 29 August 1975

D. APPEARANCE OF NON-LAWYERS

1. Law student practice (Rule 138-A)

> Cruz v Mina, 522 SCRA 387 (2007)

2. Non-lawyers in courts

> RULES OF COURT: Rule 138, Section 34

> Cantimbuhan v. Hon Cruz, 211 Phil. 373 (1983)

> Cruz v Mina, G.R. No. 154207, 27 April 2007

> In PAFLU v Binalagbagan Isabela Sugar Company, G.R. No. L-23959, 29 November 1971

3. Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals

> 2011 NLRC RULES OF PROCEDURE, Rule III, Section 6(B)

4. Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from appearing

E. PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND PRACTICE OF LAW

> 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. VI, Section 14

> 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. VIII, Section 15

> 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. IX-A, Sec 2;

> 1987 CONSTITUTION, Art. IX, Sec. 8(2)

> R.A. 7160, Section 90-91

> RULES OF COURT, Rule 148, Sec. 35

> People v Villanueva, G.R. No. L-19450, 27 May 1965

> R.A. 910, Sec. 1

F. LAWYERS AUTHORIZED TO REPRESENT THE GOVERNMENT

> Orbos v Civil Service Commission, 189 SCRA 459

> Gonzales v Chavez 205, SCAR 815

G. LAWYER’S OATH

-----
III. THE INTEGRATED BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES

> RULES OF COURT, Rule 139

> In Re Integration of the Philippine Bar, 49 SCRA 22 (1973)

> In re IBP Elections, 178 SCRA 815

____________

IV – SUSPENSION, DISBARMENT AND DISCIPLINE OF LAWYERS (RULE 139-B, RULES OF COURT)

1. Nature and characteristics of disciplinary actions against lawyer

a. Sui generis

b. Prescription

> Valencia v Cabanting, 196 SCRA 302 (1991)

> In re Almacen

> Rayos-Ombac v. Rayos, 90 SCAD 742, 285 SCRA 93 (1998).

2. Grounds

a. Deceit

> Cham v Atty Ediberto D. Pizarro, A.C. No. 5499, August 16, 2005

> Co v Bernardino, 285 SCRA 102 (1998)

> Lao v Medel, 405 SCRA 227 (2003)

b. Malpractice

> Nakpil v Atty. Carlos J. Valdes, March 4, 1998

> Buted v Hernando, 203 SCRA 1

> Maturan v Gonzales, March 12, 1998

Conflict of Interest

> Pormento v Pontevedra, March 31, 2005

> Nakpil v Valdes, 286 SCRA 758

c. Grossly immoral conduct

> Emma Dantes v Atty. Crispin Dantes, A.C. No. 6488, September 22, 2004

> Barrientos v Daarol, 218 SCRA 30

> Joselano Guevarra v Jose Emmanuel Eala, A.C. No. 7136, August 1, 2007

> Toledo v Toledo, 7 SCRA 757

> Obusan v Obusan, 128 SCRA 485

> Terre v Terre, July 3, 1992

> Santos v Tan, 196 SCRA 16

> St. Louis Univc. LaboratoryHigh School Faculty & Staff v Atty. Dela Cruz, A.C. No. 6010, August 28,
2006.

> Cojuangco v Palma, 438 SCRA 306; 462 SCRA 310 (2005)

> Zaguirre v Castillo, 398 SCRA 658 (2003)

d. Conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude

> In the Matter of Disbarment Proceedings v Narciso Jaranillo, 101 Phil 323

> In Re: Dalmacio delos Angeles, G.R. No. L-10969, March 31, 1958

> In Re: Disbarment of Rodolfo Pajo, 203 Phil. 79

> In Re: Atty. Isidro Vinzons, 126 Phil. 96

> Barrios v Atty. Francisco Martinez, A. C. No. 4885, November 12, 2004

e. Violation of the Lawyer’s Oath

> Pormento v Dalusog, 62 SCRA 540

> Judge Ubaldino Larucon v Atty. Ellis Jacoba, A. C. No. 5921, March 10, 2006

> Almendrez v Atty. Minervo Langit, A. C. No. 7057, July 25, 2006

> In Re: Suspension from the Practice of Law in the territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquera, 435 SCRA
417, July 30, 2004.
f. Willful disobedience to any lawful order of a superior court

> People v Dalusog, 62 SCRA 540

> Luzon Mahogany Timber Ind. Inc. v Castro, 69 SCRA 384

> People v Medina, 62 SCRA 253

> Geeslin v Navarro, 185 SCRA 230

g. Willfully appearing as attorney for any party without authority

> Sec. 27, Rule 138, RULES OF COURT

> Atty. Edilberto D. Pizarro, A.C. No. 5499, August 16, 2005

> Porac Trucking Corp. v CA, 202 SCRA 674; Garrido v Quisumbing, 28 SCRA 614

> Mercado v Ulay, 187 SCRA 720

3. PROCEEDINGS

4. Discipline of Filipino lawyers practicing abroad

> In Re: Suspension from the Practice of Law in the territory of Guam of Atty. Leon G. Maquerra, 435
SCRA 417, July 30, 2004

> Velez v De Vera, A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006

_________

V. READMISSION TO THE BAR

5. Lawyers who have been suspended

6. Lawyers who have been disbarred

7. Lawyers who have been repatriated

__________

VI. MANDATORY CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION

8. Bar Matter 2012, Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service

9. Purpose
10. Requirements

11. Compliance

12. Exemptions

13. Sanctions
LEGAL PROFESSION

Atty. Jose Victornino L. Salud

Guidelines

1. The professor will not be taking attendance but if a student is called for recitation and is absent, that
student will automatically get a 50 as a recitation score for that session if present, the minimum grade
that may be obtained is 65.

2. The only absences that will be excused are: 1. Death of a family member to the 4th degree of
consanguinity, 2. Illness – as certified by a board licensed medical doctor, 3. The student’s wedding. 4.
Other analogous causes, upon the discretion of the professor

3. Grading will as follows:

a. Class participation (1/3) – active class participation is expected and everyone is encouraged to
contribute to a lively class discussion; there will also be a debate towards the end of the semester where
all students will get to experience arguing for or against a particular topic.

b. Midterm Requirement (1/3) – each student will be required to submit a 1500 word essay on the topic
“The Greatest Threats to the Legal Profession in the Philippines” a week before the finals.

c. Finals (1/3) – to be administered during the Finals week

4. Reference: Agpalo, Legal Ethics (Rex Bookstore)