Legal Profession Saburnido v.

Madrono, 366 SCRA 1 (2001)

New Era University Castaneda v. Ago, 65 SCRA 505 (1975)
2018
Canon 2
“The honorable peculiarities of Filipino English” by Lisandro Claudio In the Matter of: Svitlana E. Sangary
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/200340/opinion/blogs/the- http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/ca/SangarySvitlana.pdf
honorable-peculiarities-of-filipino-english http://documents.latimes.com/judges-recommendation-lawyer-svitlana-
sangary/
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/ftips/type.pdf Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974)
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/ax_these_terms_from_you See ROC Rule 141, Sec. 18; Rule 3, Sec. 21
r_legal_writing
History of suits in forma pauperis
Research: Algura v. The City of Naga (G.R. No.150135, October 30, 2006)
Etymology of “attorney”; “to attorn”
Difference between the ff.: (Attorney, Barrister, Solicitor) Canon 3
Origin of the word “abogado” Khan v. Simbillo, 409 SCRA 299 (2003)
Origin of the phrase “take up the cudgels” In re Tagorda, 53 Phil 37 (1929)
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378 (1993)
Game of Thrones Season 01 Episode 06; Season 04 Ep. 06 & 08 Assignment: Submit a photocopy of a page from a law list
Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzie, 136 SCRA 349 (1985)
The Legal Profession See: http://www.bakermckenzie.com/Philippines/
In the matter of the Integration of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Samonte v. Gatdula, 303 SCRA 756 (1999)
January 9, 1973 Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1959)
Cayetano v. Monsod, GR 100113, September 3, 1991
(Note: See also dissenting opinion of Justice Padilla) Canon 4
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Bar Matter (BM) No. 553, June 17, 1993 Re: Request Of National Committee On Legal Aid To Exempt Legal Aid
Rules of Court (ROC), Rule 138, Section 1 Clients From Paying Filing, Docket And Other Fees, August 28, 2009
In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 562, (1970)
In re: Cunanan 94 Phil 534 (1954) Canon 5
BAR MATTER (BM) NO. 702 May 12, 1994 B.M. 850, October 2, 2001 (MCLE)
Alawi v. Alauya, A.M. SDC-97-2-P, February 24, 1997 See also: Who are exempt
Cui v. Cui, 120 Phil. 729 B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008
Research: When may a non-lawyer practice law

Requirements for admission to practice Canon 6

Citizenship Vitriolo v. Dasig, 400 SCRA 172 (2003)
1987 Constitution, Art. XII, Sec. 14 People v. Pineda, 20 SCRA 748 (1967)
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 2 Collantes vs Romeren 200 SCRA 584 (1991)
RA 9225 Huyssen vs Gutierrez 485 SCRA 244 (2006)
B.M. 1678, Dacanay (2007) Misamin v. San Juan, 72 SCRA 491 (1976)
B.M. 2112, In re: Muneses (2012) See also: RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Sec. 3(d);
Research: Difference between Disbar, debar, disrobe RA 6713 7(b)
PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 526 (2005)
Residency
Rule 138, Sec. 2 Canon 7
RA 6397
Age In re 1989 Elections of the IBP, 178 SCRA 398 (1989)
Rule 138, Sec. 2 Santos v. Llamas, 322 SCRA 529 (2000)
Letter of Atty. CecilioArevalo, 458 SCRA 209 (2005)
Good moral character Foodsphere v. Mauricio, A.C. No. 7199 (22 July 2009)
Narag v. Narag, 291 SCRA 451, June 29, 1998 Young v. Batuegas, 403 SCRA 123 [2003]).
Olbes v. Deciembre, 457 SCRA 341 In re Parazo, 82 Phil. 230 [1948])
In re: Argosino, A.M. No. 712 July 13, 1995; B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997 Zaguirre v. Castillo, 398 SCRA 659 [2003]:
Tapucar v. Tapucar, 293 SCRA 331 [1998]:
Education
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 6 Canon 8
Republic Act No. 7662 Legal Education Act Camacho v. Pagulayan et al (A.C. No. 4807, March 22, 2000)
LEB Memorandum Order No. 7 Series of 2016 Reyes vs. Chiong, Jr., 405 SCRA 212 (2003)
Rule 138, Sec. 5 – 16 Laput v. Remotigue A.M. No. 219 (1962)
In re: Telesforo Diao, A.C. No. 244 March 29 (1963)
In re: Application of Adriano M. Hernandez, Sept. 6, 1993 Canon 9
Bar Matter 1153 Aguirre v. Rana, supra
Alawi v. Alauya, supra
Oath Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc, supra
Rule 138, Sec. 17 People v. Villanueva, supra
In re: Argosino, supra Rule 138, Sec. 1, Rules of Court
Olbes v. Deciembre, supra Aguirre v. Rana, supra
Aguirre v. Rana 403 SCRA 342 (2003) OCA v. Ladaga, 350 SCRA 326
Rule 138, Sec. 34, Rules of Court in relation to People v. Sin Ben, 98
Qualifications for practice Phil. 138 (1955)
Rule 138, Sec. 1 Guballa v. Caguioa, 78 SCRA 302
Eco v. Rodriguez, 107 Phil. 612 (1960)
Exceptions: Robinson v. Villafuerte, 18 Phil 121 (1911)
Rule 138, Sec. 34 Amalgamated Laborers Assn. v. CIR. 22 SCRA 1266 (1968)
Rule 115, Sec 1 (c) Tan TekBeng v. David. 128 SCRA 389 (1983)
Halili v. CIR. 136 SCRA 113 (1965))
Prohibition from practice Five J Taxi v. NLRC, 235 SCRA 556
Art VI, Sec. 14; Art.VIII, Sec. 15; Art.IX-A, Sec. 2; Art. IX, Sec. 8 (2) (1987
Constitution) Canon 10
RA 7160, Sec. 90-91 Cobb Perez v. Lantin, 24 SCRA 291 (1968)
Rule 148, Sec. 35 Young v. Batuegas, supra
People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-19450 May 27, 1965 COMELEC v. Noynay, 292 SCRA 254 (1992)
RA 910, Sec 1 Rule 138, Sec. 20 (d) in relation to Garcia v. Francisco 220 SCRA 512
(1993)
Duties of a lawyer Gomez v. Presiding Judge 249 SCRA 432
Rule 138, Sec. 20
Research: What are the “four-fold duties” of a lawyer, Canon 11
counsel de oficio, counsel de parte In re Sotto 82 Phil 595 (1949)
See also: B.M. No. 1132, Nov. 12, 2000; De Gracia v. Warden of Makati, G.R. No. L-42032, January 9, 1976
B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008 Buenaseda v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645 (1993)
In re Almacen, 31 SCRA 562
Sangalang v. IAC, 177 SCRA 87
Code of Professional Responsibility Go v. Abrogar, 485 SCRA 457
1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 6.
Canon 1 Visit http://oca.judiciary.gov.ph/
Maceda v. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464 (1993)
Research: Barratry, Ambulance Chasing Ang v Castro, 136 SCRA 453 (May 15, 1985)
Barrios v. Martinez, A.C. No. 4585. November 12, 2004
Ui v. Bonifacio, A.C. No. 3319. June 8, 2000 Canon 12
Figueroa v. Barranco, SBC Case No. 519. July 31, 1997 1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 6
Cordova v. Cordova, 179 SCRA 680 (1989) Rule 138, Sec 20(g)
Guevarra v. Eala, 529 SCRA 1 (2007) Villasis v. Court of Appeals, 60 SCRA 120
Soriano v. Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006 Supreme Court Circular No. 28-91
Calub v. Suller, A.C. No. 1474, January 28, 2000 RULES OF COURT, RULE 7, SEC. 5:
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 416 SCRA 465 Achacoso v. Court of Appeals, 51 SCRA 424, 1973
Manila Pest Control v. WCC, 25 SCRA 700 (1968) Art. 209 Revised Penal Code.
Art. 184, Revised Penal Code Genato v. Silapan 453 Phil. 910 (2003)
US v. Ballena, 18 Phil. 382 Hilado v. David 83 Phil 569 (1949)
Rule 132, Sec. 3
PD1829-Penalizing Obstruction of Justice Canon 22
PNB v. UyTengPiao, 57 Phil 337 (1932) Montano vs. IBP 358 SCRA 1 (2001)
Obando vs. Figueras, 322 SCRA 148 (2000)
Canon 13
Austria v. Masaquel, 20 SCRA 1247(1967) Liabilities of lawyers
Nestle Phil. v. Sanchez 154 SCRA 542 (1987) Kinds of contempt, supra
In re de Vera 385 SCRA 285 (2003) Power to discipline errant lawyers
Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1951) See ROC Rule 138, S. 27
RE: Request Radio – TV Coverage, A.M. No. 01-4-03-S.C. June 29, 2001 139-B, S. 16
Magsalang v. People, G.R. No. 90083 October 4, 1990 Quingwa v. Puno, Admin. Case No. 398, Feb. 28, 1967
Amaya v. Tecson, 450 SCRA 510
Canon 14 Aquino v. Mangaoang, 425 SCRA 572
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (i) In Re: Ruste, 70 Phil 243
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (h) Reinstatement, basis - 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5).
Rule 138, Sec. 31 Cui v. Cui, 11 SCRA 755
P.D. 543 (1974) In re: Adriatico, 17 Phil 324
RA 6033 Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, 192 SCRA 381
RA 6034 Yap Tan v. Sabandal, 170 SCRA 207
RA 6035 In re: Rusiana, 56 SCRA 240
RA 9999 In re: Rovero, 101 SCRA 803
BM 2012, Feb. 10, 2009
Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974) The Judiciary
Blanza v. Arcangel, 21 SCRA 1 (1967)
Algura v. The City of Naga, supra Code of Judicial Conduct
Also read Rule 2.02
Bangalore Principles
Canon 15 http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round4/Bang
Revised Penal Code, Art. 209. alore_principles_EN.pdf
Rule 130, Section 24 (b) of the RRC)
People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 115439-41. July 16, 1997 Qualifications
Regala v. Sandiganbayan, 262 SCRA 122 (1996) Sec. 7 (1), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution
Dee v. CA 176 SCRA 651(1989) BP 129
Nakpil v. Valdez, 286 SCRA 758 (1998) Canon 1
Revised Penal Code, Art. 8
Canon 16 OCA vs. Floro, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460 March 31, 2006
People v. Veneracion, 249 SCRA 244
Research: Privileged communication Go v. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 165
Ordonio v. Eduarte, 207 SCRA 229 (1992) Tahil v. Eisma, 64 SCRA 378
Rubias v. Batiller, G.R. No. L- 35702, May 29, 1973 Padilla v. Zantua, 237 SCRA 670
Art. 1491, NCC Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. A.M. No. 08-8-
Cadavedo v. Lacaya, G.R. No. 173188, January 15, 2014 11-CA
Tuazon v. Tuazon, 88 Phil. 42 Tan v. Rosete, A.M. No. MTJ-04- 1563, September 8, 2004
Daroy v. Legaspi, A.M. No. 936 July 25, 1975 Dimatulac et al v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679
Research: difference between champertous contract and contingency fee
Rule 138, Sec. 37 Canon 2
Businos v. Ricafort, 283 SCRA 40 (1997) Romero v. Valle, A.M. No. R-192-RTJ January 9, 1987
Vda de Caina v. Victoriano, G.R. No. L-12905, February 26, 1959 Castillo v. Calanog, A.M. No. RTJ-90-447 December 16, 1994
Research: Macalintal v. Teh, 280 SCRA 623
Difference between Retaining and Charging lien
Barnachea v. Quicho, 399 SCRA 1 (2003) Canon 3
Parayno v. Meneses, 231 SCRA 807
Canon 17 Rule 137, ROC
Cantiller v. Potenciano, 180 SCRA 246 (1989) Lorenzo v. Marquez, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-87-123 June 27, 1988
Santiago v. Fojas, 248 SCRA 68 (1995) Mane v. Belen, A.M. No. RTJ-08-2119 June 30, 2008
Stemmerik v. Mas AC No. 8010 (2009)
Canon 4
Canon 18 Arban v. Borja, A.M. No R-281-RTJ August 26, 1986
Islas v.Platon, 47 Phil. 162 Saburnido v. Madrono, Sept. 26, 2001
Legarda v. CA, G. R. No. 94457, March 18, 1991 Sison v. Caoibes, Jr. A.M. No. RTJ-03-1771, May 27 2004
Uy v Tansinin [AC No. 8252 (July 21, 2009) Ompoc vs. Judge Torres, A.M. No. MTJ-86-11, 17 Sept. 1989
Garcia V. Bala [A.C. No. 5039(2005)].
Canon 5
Negligence of counsel In Re Judge Rojas, A.M. No. 98-6-185-RTC. October 30, 1998
Mapuav.Mendoza, 45 Phil. 424(1993) In Re: Aguas, G.R. No. 12, August 8, 1901
Filinvest Land v.CA, 182 SCRA 664(1990)
Joven-De Jesus v. PNB, 12 SCRA 447 Canon 6
People v. Cawili, 34 SCRA 728(1970) Longboan v. Polig, A.M. No. 704-RTJ June 14, 1990
Agravante v. Patriarca, 183 SCRA 113(1990)) Abad v. Bleza A.M. No. 227-RTJ October 13, 1986
Ventura v.Santos, 59 Phil. 123(1993) Maquiran v. Grageda, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1888. February 11, 2005
Alcoriza v. Lumakang, Adm. Case No. 249, November 21, 1978) De la Cruz v. Pascua, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1461. June 26, 2001
Capulong v. Alino, 22 SCRA 491(1968)
Liabilities of Judges
Instances where the client is not bound by counsel’s negligence: Basis, 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Section 11
Republic v. Arro, 150 SCRA630(1987) Raquiza vs. Castaneda, 82 SCRA 235
Legarda v. Court of Appeals, supra Galangi v. Macli-ing, Adm. Matter No. 75-DJ, Jan. 17, 1978
PHHC v. Tiongco, 12 SCRA 471(1964) Lapena v. Collado, 76 SCRA 82
Escudero v. Dulay, 158 SCRA 69, 78(1988) Secretary of Justice v. Marcos, 76 SCRA 301
Republic vs. Arro, et al., Supra In re: Impeachment of Horilleno, 43 Phil. 212
Blanza v. Arcangel, A.C. No. 492 September 5, 1967 In re: Climaco, 55 SCRA 107

Canon 19 Grounds for Discipline

Rule 138, Sec. 20(d) Montemayor v. Collado, 107 SCRA 258
Rural Bank of Calape Inc. vs. Florido, A.C. No. 5736 June 18, 2010 Barja v. Beracio, 74 SCRA 355
Pena vs. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298 Haw Tay v. Singayao, 154 SCRA 107
Rule 138, Sec. 23 Lecaroz v. Garcia, A.M. No. 2271-MJ September 18, 1981
Millare vs. Montero, A.C. No. 3283 July 13, 1995 Balagot v. Opinion, 195 SCRA 429
Araza v. Reyes, 64 SCRA 347
Canon 20 In re: Paulin, 101 SCRA 605
Rule 138, Sec. 23 Soriano v. Mabbayad, 67 SCRA 385
Corpuz v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424, June 30, 1980 Monsanto v. Palarca, 126 SCRA 45
Albano v. Coloma, 21 SCRA 411 (1967) Anguluan v. Taguba, 93 SCRA 179
Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v. NLRC, G.R. No. Espayos v. Lee, 89 SCRA 478
120592, March 14, 1997
Rule 138, Sec, 24
Definition of amicus curiae, counsel de parte, counsel de oficio A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC
Rule 138, Sec. 32 See notarial rules as amended
Nocom vs. Camerino, et al., G.R. No. 182984 (February 10, 2009) http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_02_8_13_sc_2008.html
Research: Difference between “acknowledgement” and “jurat”
Canon 21 See also: RA 9406
Rule 138, 20(e). Lapena vs. Marcos Adm. Matter No. 1969-MJ
Rule 130, sec. 21(b). Abadilla vs. Tabiliran, Jr., Adm. Matter MTC-92-716