Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Canon 17 fidelity
DR GAMILLO VS MARINO
Ground for disbarment failure to account an amount of money received in a compromise agreement between
UST and its employees union
SC. Arty Marino was guilty of conflict of interest for serving two adverse parties
VIRAY VS SANICAS
Money judgment was appropriated by Atty Sanicas w/o accounting the proceeds out of the labor case
The lawyer defrauded the client and making it appear to Sps Lopez that Viray authorize the lawyer to
collect the money judgment. Concept of extraordinary attorney’s fees
Ground of disbarment : violation of the trust and confidence of the client Atty Go did not sell the property to be used
to settle monetary obligations of the client. By his act, the client lost the property and all other assets used to secure
the outstanding obligations of the client
SC: Lawyer defrauded the client when he made it appear that he filed Petition for Annulment
SC: Lawyer violated Canon 16. He was ordered to return 50k + 2 years suspension
SC: Lawyer is guilty of violating Canon 16. Disbarment requires only preponderance of evidence Canon 7 was also
violated
Ricaforts arrogance in not responding to the SCs order to comment on the complaint showed UTTER DISRESPECT
towards the judiciary. Such act diminishes the respect of the public in the judiciary system.
BELATED PAYMENT OF ANY AMOUNT OR REIMBURSEMENT WILL NOT EXONERATE THE LAWYER
SISON VS CAMACHO
Charged Atty. Camacho of entering into a compromise agreement without the consent of the client
There has been failure to account the full amount of the docket fees.
GR: A foreign judgment involving the violation of his duties as a lawyer can be a basis of a disbarment case in the
Philippines
SC: this rule cannot apply to Atty Maquerra information was lacking
SANCHEZ VS AGUILOS
1. Fees based on quantum meruit bases of legal fees of lawyer is based on the extent of the lawyer’s services
2. COMPETENCE knowledge of the law
3. Respect towards a fellow lawyer
4. Reprimand + fine 10k + return of 70k
Lawyers were suspended for 3 years and ordered return of the full amount of 350K
DIONA VS BALAGUE
SC: Annulment of judgment may be availed if where the acts of a lawyer would impair the substantive rights of the
client
Filed a labor case of agreement to pay his fees based on contingency fees
The NLRC reversed the ruling of the Labor Arbiter
She lost the case due to failure of the counsel to file a Motion for Reconsideration
FABLE VS REAL
Engaged the services of respondent for the transfer of title donated to him by Pacia sisters
He turned over the respondent the Deed of Donation, TCT covering the donated property
Counsel received 40K to undertake the referral
REAL alleged that the engagement was for the settlement of the estate of the father of Fable
SC: violated Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility for negligence in handling a case referred by his
client
He also violated his fiduciary duty for failure to return documents he received 40k from his client
He lost the case but respondent never informed of the status of the case
FUDELIN’S DEFENSE : he suffers from several health issues ( high blood, stroke, diabetes )
SC: Atty Fudelin is guilty of negligence His failure to file the appropriate pleadings resulted to disbarment of the case
POST-MIDTERMS ETHICS CASES UNDER ASSOC DEAN LOANZON 4|Page
PENALTY: increased from 6 months to 2 years
LAZARETE VS ACCORDA
Engaged on the services of respondent for extrajudicial settlement of his father’s estate
To the dismay of the complainant, he found that despite the payment of professional fees, the lawyer defrauded
him.
Filed MR
MR was denied
THE COURT WILL NOT TOLERATE THE RESORT OF CLIENTS TO DELAY EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT
Sps filed a complaint against Atty Dublin for failure to file the FORMAL OFFER OF EVIDENCE to file his comment to
the Formal offer of evidence of the opposing party
He said that the delay was caused by his extensive research on matters regarding the cases
SC: Suspended for 6 months. Atty Dublin was found guilty of violating Canon 18 for negligence
Filed a disbarment against the counsel for gross negligence for failure to file pleadings on behalf of his client
SC: Atty Venida was suspended for one year for violating Canon 18
Saulog alleged that the structure was defective and she refused to pay any billing presented by FAJ
SC: The Court sustained the decision of the RTC and put the blame on the counsel of FAJ for resorting to delay the
execution of judgment
RUIZ VS SANTOS
Subject matter: client’s case was dismissed for failure of counsel to pay docket fees
Engagement was based on a contingency fee (1/5 of the proceeds of the sale )
ROBOSA instructed Navarro to appeal the decision BUT the failed to file the appeal
SC: MENDOZA absolved : Contract based on contingency fee was approved by court
Resort to dilatory tactics of Villaruel in order to delay the execution of judgment in favor of Salabao.
Filed several actions involving he same property and identical party
RTC, CA and SC = IN FAVOR OF SALABAO
IBP recommended the dismissal of the case and directed Mauricio to reimburse the amounts he received from
Dalisay
Counsel was directed to file a position paper despite receipt of money to pay for docket fee/ engagement of
services
Case was ruled in favor of the opposing party
DEFENSE : Olivida refused to heed his legal advice
DISBARMENT PROCEEDINGS
IBP, HOWEVER, DID NOT accept the defense of Gonzales and recommended his suspension
SC: The Court increased the penalty to 3 years suspension for failure to perform the agreed engagement
MASMUD VS NLRC
ISSUE: WON Atty Go may get more than was agreed upon under a contingency fee?
SC: A party may go to the Court to review the terms of the contract. If the terms are ONEROUS, the Court may
reduce the amount awarded. May reduce the amount under the engagement
Admin case
Engaged the services of counsel
Claimed that acceptance will be reduced provided the complainants will give him 1000 square meters of the
property
S.C.: application of Art. 1491 (5) of the Civil Code
SC: A lawyer-client relationship begins when a lawyer renders a legal opinion to a client
DISBARMENT: disqualification based on prior disclosure make upon counsel ( CONFLICT OF INTEREST)
BUN SIONG YAO filed a complaint against Atty Aurelio for instituting actions against him and other corporate
officer where Aurelio is also a stockholder charged Atty Aurelio for CONFLICT OF INTEREST
SC: Atty Aurelio is guilty of utilizing his relationship to gain information to institute an action against his client. He
was suspended for 6 months
UY VS ATTY GONZALES
SUBJECT MATTER: sale of land by Gonzales in favor of Uy’s children. It appeard that Uy’s children were minors
SC: Atty Gonzales was NOT guilty of any violation of a disbarment case
Engaged the services of Dealca for P15K; he paid P7500 as initial fee; thereafter, Atty Dealca asked for
another P3500
DESPITE PAYMENT OF FEES, Atty Dealca DID NOT PERFORM the legal services required of him
IBP reduced the penalty from suspension to only a reprimand
At the end of the case, the parties agreed to enter into a compromise agreement
The complaint alleged that Atty Yuseco ceased to be the counsel of the opposing party
Requisites:
SEC GONZALES enjoined Private respondents Buffe form discharging her duties as prosecution
SC: Sec of Justice has no jurisdiction over Buffe. As a public officer, Ombudsman has jurisdiction over him. IBP has its
jurisdiction over government lawyers.
After 8 years, Atty Macarrubo PETITION FOR EXTRAORDINARY MERCY OF REINSTATEMENT IN THE ROLL OF ATTYS.
REQUISITES:
1. Proof of remorse submitted 18 certification for different offices pictures and letter of apology to all
children
2. Sufficient time has lapse
3. Considering the age of the person
4. Showing of promise of intellectual capacity to help
REINSTATED!!!!
MANIAGO VS DE DIOS
Complaint was anchored on the fact that the respondent lawyer continued to represent clients despite her 6
month suspension
REQUISITES FOR RESUMPTION TO THE PRACTICE OF LAW
1. SUSPENSION
2. Of service of suspension under oath before the office of the bar confidant
3. Server the copy of the oath before
a) IBP chapter
b) Executive judge; RTC
c) Executive judge; MTC
4. Order of lifting the order
SC: A lawyer suspended CANNOT PRACTICE LAW and he CANNOT APPLY FOR A POSITION WHICH REQUIRES the
practice of law
Rodica alam mabigat kalaban nya.. engaged the services of Atty. Lazaro
RODICA AGREEMENT ATTY. LAZARO: will dismiss the case against the client of Atty Tan as long as my husband will
not get deported
SC: It was legal to deport MR. STRONG (Rodica’s husband). There was basis for his disbarment. No basis for
disbarment of lawyers.
OSG’s postion: Incumbent COMELEC Commissioners can ONLY BE REMOVED THROUGH IMPEACHMENT
REPUBLIC VS SERENO
ESPINO VS TABAQUERO
SUBJECT MATTER: Execution of a Waiver of Rights allegedly executed while affiant was abroad
IBP dismissed the case in view of affidavit of desistance a mutual agreement of parties
SC: A DISBARMENT CASE IS IMBUED WITH PUBLIC INTERET AND NOT SUBJECT TO DISMISSAL
CORONEL VS CUNANAN
SC: Atty Cunanan’s act constitutes gross misconduct. He was suspended for one year
Alleged that lawyer continues to refuse to follow the court’s repeated orders
SC: Atty Intongs acts of continued refusal to obey the orders of the court constitute disrespect to the court
LEGAL BASIS FOR THE COURT’S JURISDICTION: Sec 5 (5), Art VIII, Constitution
DOCTRINAL RULING: The election of the officers of the IBP is based on rotation basis
Atty Umana prepared a notarial deed which effectively annulled the marriage of Espinosas
SC: Atty Umana is guilty of violating her notarial commission. Only a family court can annul a marriage of individuals.
Her commission was revoked and she CANNOT renew the same for two years.
--Revised Administrtive Code is applied, because the new notarial rules took effect only in August 2004
- He was reprimanded.
Not necessary in admin. Code but is necessary in the new notarial rules
Rule: First level court judges may act s notary public when there are NO LAWYERS in the area
METROBANK VS ARGUELLES
Arguelles entered into a contract with the Trinidads for the sale of a property in Cavite.
Trinidads using the alleged fraudulent Deed of Sale were able to obtain a loan from Metrobank
Wanted the Notary Public to testify on the valid execution of the Deed of Sale
SC: The notary public CANNOT BE CALLED UPON TO SATISFY 12 years after the execution if the document to attest as
to the identities of the affiants
SC motu proprio
Investigating Commissioners
MR is allowed
RESOLUTION
SC: Atty Mejia was disbarred for gross misconduct. He violated his fiduciary duty and neglect his duties to his clients
POST-MIDTERMS ETHICS CASES UNDER ASSOC DEAN LOANZON 12 | P a g e
At 71 years old, Atty Mejia prayed for reinstatement.
*leakage case
JUDICIAL ETHICS
JBC 7 members
Secretary of judges
VILLANUEVA VS JBC
SC: The equal protection clause DOES NOT PRECLUDE classification of individuals who may be accorded different
treatment under the law as long as it is REASONABLE AND NOT ARBITRARY
In determining competence, JBC considers, among the classifications, experience and performance.
Five years is considered as sufficient span of time f or one to acquire professional skills for the next level court and
gain extensive experience in the judicial process.
A five year stint in the Judiciary can also provide evidence of integrity probity and independence of judges.
DUE PROCESS was however violated when the assailed policy was not published. It was part of the internal rules.
JARDELEZA VS JBC
1. Competence
2. Integrity
POST-MIDTERMS ETHICS CASES UNDER ASSOC DEAN LOANZON 13 | P a g e
3. Probity
4. Independence
ACCUSATIONS:
1. Extra-marital affair
2. Engaged in insider trading
3. You did not do your job as solicitor general of the west Philippine Sea
SC: ASSOC JUSTICE RUBEN REYES P 500K premature releasing of decision principle of res ipsa loquitor (Ikaw
ang ponente, you had the control) + indefinite suspension
ESTES VS TEXAS
SC: He must be acquitted BECAUSE THE RULING was influenced by the jury
TEJANO VS PEOPLA
REPUBLIC VS SERENO
The only case where the SC confer the disbarment case to the IBP
OCA VS MUSNI
SC: DISMISSED FOR GROSS DISHONESTY foe not being able to account 45K which she received and supposedly used
to renovate the court premises
DISMISS PERPETUAL BAN FROM SERVICE FROM ANY BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT Forfeiture of benefits
OCA VS DE LEMOS
DE LEMOS (clerk of court – assist trial judge to assure compliance) and 5 other respondents were charged with
dishonesty by tampering with bandicard
SC: has suspension in one count
OCA VS PERADILLA
Peradilla was not able to account 630K which she received in the course of her duties as Clerk of Court
She offered to pay to fill the amount of 630K out of her benefit for 16 years of service
*SY vs DINOPOL
charged the judge for:
1. gross ignorance of the law
2. conduct unbecoming of a judge
Hon. Dinopol voluntarily inhibited himself in the case between Spouses Sy and Metrobank. After inhibiting himself,
he issued the Writ of Execution in favor of Metrobank
SC: Issuance of write of execution is ministerial
*CHAN VS MAJADUCON
filed an admin case against the judge for :
a. not wearing his robe during trial
b. hears cases at 10 AM and at 2/3PM
c. confers with counsels without the presence of the opposing counsels
d. impartiality
SC: The Court agreed with the OCA’s recommendation that the judge violated the rule on the use of robe. He was
fined 10K for this violation and also for communicating with counsels while the court is NOT in session
HERNANDO VS BENGZON
Sought reconsideration of the one month and one day suspension of the Bengzon without pay for simple
misconduct
BENGZON Legal researcher 76K to facilitate the transfer of the property of Hernando
ISSUE: WON Bengzon be made to suffer a mere severe penalty
SC: YES. SC increased the penalty to 6 months without pay and to return the 76K she received from Hernandez
TABAO VS ASIS
TABAO sister of Judge Asis
Accused the judge for notarizing a document while serving the judiciary
A JUDGE IS NOT ALLOWED TO PRACTICE HIS PROFESSION DURING HIS TURN OF OFFICE
POST-MIDTERMS ETHICS CASES UNDER ASSOC DEAN LOANZON 16 | P a g e
OCA VS CASTANEDA
An administrative investigation was conducted on Judge Castaneda
Based on the audit of cases, Judge Castaneda failed to act on the cases within the prescribed period under
the Constitution
SC: Hon Castaneda was dismissed with forfeiture of benefits