Ethics Digests Compiled

(1)

LEGAL ETHICS 2nd_{Sem 2005-2006}

1 LEDESMA V CLIMACO 1 LEDESMA V CLIMACO FACTS:

▪ Ledesma is counsel de parte of one accused. Thereafter, he was appointed as Election Registrar of Cadiz, Negros Occidental by COMELEC

▪ Ledesma withdrew as counsel on the basis that his appointment as Election Registrar would require full time service as well as on the volume or pressure of work will prevent him from handling adequately the defense. ▪ Judge Climaco denied his motion, and even appointed him as counsel de

officio of the accused.

ISSUE: WoN the withdrawal of Ledesma should be allowed HELD: No.

RATIO:

1. There is obvious reluctance of Ledesma to comply with his responsibilities as counsel de oficio. Then, even assuming that he continues his position, his volume of work is likely to be very much less than present. There is no excuse for him to shirk from his obligation as member of the bar, who expects to remain in good standing, should fulfill.

2. Ledesma was not mindful of his obligation as counsel de oficio. He ought to know that membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions. Being appointed as counsel de oficio requires a high degree of fidelity (law is a profession and not a mere trade). Requires counsel of repute and eminence.

3. In criminal cases, right to counsel is absolute. No fair hearing unless the accused be given an opportunity to be heard by counsel.

4. The denial by Judge Climaco was due to the principal effect to delay the case (case has already been postponed for 8 times)

2 IN RE SYCIP 2 IN RE SYCIP FACTS:

 This is a consolidated petition. The first one filed by the surviving partners

of atty. Alexander Sycip and the other filed by the surviving partners of Atty. Herminio Ovaepa. They pray that they be allowed to continue using the names of partners who had passed away.

 Petitioners based their petitions on the following arguments: o Art. 1840 of the Civil Code,

o

in regulating other professions, the legislature has authorized the adoption of firm names without any restriction as to the use of the name of a deceased partner,

(2)

o the Canons of Professional Ethics allows the continued use of a

deceased partner when permissible by local custom. ISSUE:

 W/N law firms may continue to use the names o deceased partners in their

firm names HELD:

 NO!

 Art. 1840 primarily deals with the exception of liability on cases of a

dissolved partnership, of the individual property of the deceased partner for debts contracted by the person who continues the business using the partnership name. what the law contemplates is a hold over situation preparatory to formal reorganization. Art. 1840 treats more of a commercial partnership with a good will to protect rather than a professional partnership whose reputation depends on the personal qualifications of its individual members.

 A partnership for the practice of law cannot be likened to partnerships

formed by other professionals or for business. a partnership for the practice of law is not a legal entity. It is not a partnership formed for then purpose of carrying on trade or business or of holding property. Thus, assumed or trade name in law practice is improper. The right to practice law is not a natural or constitutional right but is in the nature of a privilege or franchise.

 It must be considered that in the Philippines, no local custom permits or

allows the continued use of a deceased partner’s name. Therefore, the cited provision on Canons of Professional Ethics is not applicable. DISSENTING OPINION:

 Petition may be granted with the condition that it be indicated in the

letterheads of the 2 firms that Sycip and Ovaepa are dead or the period when they served as partners sould be stated therein.

3 CAYETANO V MONSOD 3 CAYETANO V MONSOD Facts:

 Pres. Aquino nominated Christian Monsod to the position of COMELEC

chairman.

 The Commission on Appointments affirmed the nomination and appointed

Monsod to the position.

 Renato Cayetano now assails the appointment. He says that Monsod is not

qualified to the position because he has not been “engaged in the practice of law for ten years” (requirement is provided by Consti Art. 9-C Sec. 1(1)). Issue:

(3)

Held:

 SC says yes. Monsod passed the bar in 1960 and had been consistently

paying his professional fees. He worked in a law firm for several years after graduating but after that, had been more engaged in business and politics (for a list of his jobs, see p.238). Still, the SC said that he can still be considered as practicing law, if we consider the modern concept of the practice of law. This modern concept pertains to any act, whether in or out of court, which requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training and experience.

 SC now says that since most of Monsod’s jobs involved the law, even if he

has not been engaged in traditional lawyering (i.e. making pleadings or appearing in court), he can still be considered as to have been engaged in the practice of law.

Dissents:

 Most of the dissents focused on the issue that the Consti requirement

pertains to habitual practice of law. The dissenters pointed out that for the past ten years, Monsod really seldom practiced law. This group believed that the Consti required that the practice of law be on a regular basis. Justice Padilla even came up with qualifications – habituality; compensation;

application of law, legal principle, practice or procedure; and atty.-client relationship – to determine w/n a person has been engaged in the practice of law..

4 CUI V CUI 4 CUI V CUI Facts:

 _{The main concern in this case is the respective qualifications of Jesus Cui}

and Antonio Cui to the position of administrator of Hospicio de San Jose de Barii, a charitable institution established by Don Pedro Cui and Dona Benigna Cui.

 Jesus and Antonio are the sons of Mariano Cui, a nephew of the founders of

the institution. Antonio’s claim to the position is based on a “convenio” where then administrator Teodoro resigned in favor of him. Jesus, however, had no prior notice of this.

 Jesus’s claim is that he should be preferred pursuant to the deed of

donation (which recognized their father Mariano as a legitimate descendant to the position) as he is the older of the two.

 The deed, however, gives preference to a descendant who has a “titulo de

abogado” or a doctor, or a civil engineer, or a pharmacist (in order). Or to the one who pays the highest taxes. Jesus holds the degree of Bachelor of Laws but is not a member of the Bar, while Antonio is a member of the Bar (he was formerly disbarred, though, by the SC and was just reinstated weeks before assuming the position)

(4)

Who has a better right to the position of administrator between Jose and Antonio? What does the term “titulo de abogado” mean?

Held:

Antonio. The term “titulo de abogado” is not just mere possession of the academic degree of Bachelor of Laws but membership in the bar after due admission thereto, qualifying one to the practice of law. Possession of the degree is not indispensable to qualify as a lawyer since completion of the prescribed courses may be shown in some other way.

It was also argued that Antonio is disqualified for having been previously

disbarred since the deed also provided that an administrator may be removed if found to lack a sound moral character. However, Antonio was reinstated. This reinstatement is a recognition of his moral rehabilitation after proving what was required by the Bar. Antonio’s restoration to the roll of lawyers wiped out restrictions and disabilities resulting from the previous disbarment. 5 ALAWI V ALAUYA

5 ALAWI V ALAUYA PARTIES

 ALAWI, sales rep of E.B. Villarosa

 ALAUYA, incumbent executive clerk of court

FACTS

 Through ALAWI’S agency, a contract was executed for the purchase on

installments by ALAUYA of a housing unit

 _{A housing loan was also granted to ALAUYA by the National Home Mortgage}

Finance Corporation (NHMFC)

 Subsequently, ALAUYA wrote a letter to the President of Villarosa advising

termination of his contract on the grounds that his consent was vitiated by gross misrepresentation, deceit, fraud, dishonesty and abuse of confidence by ALAWI and proceeded to expound using acerbic language

 A copy of the letter, which bore no stamps, was sent to the VP of Villarosa  ALAUYA also wrote the NHMFC repudiating as void his contract with

Villarosa and asking for cancellation of his loan

 Finally, ALAUYA wrote 3 other letters to officers of the SC to stop deductions

from his salary regarding the loan from NHMFC

 NHMFC also wrote the SC requesting it to stop said deductions  Learning of the letters, ALAWI filed a complaint alleging that ALAUYA

o Committed malicious and libelous charges o Usurped the title of attorney

ISSUE W/N ALAUYA VIOLATED THE CODE OF CONDUCT AND ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES

(5)

HELD YES, PARTICULARLY SECTION 4 RATIO

 Section 4 “public officials and employees at all times respect the rights of

others, and refrain from doing acts contrary to law, public order, public safety and public interest”

 ALAUYA, being a member of the Shari’a Bar and an officer of the Court, may

not use language which is abusive, offensive, scandalous, menacing or otherwise improper

 His radical deviation from these norms cannot be excused

ISSUE W/N ALAUYA BEING A MEMBER OF THE SHARI’A BAR CAN USE THE TITLE “ATTORNEY”

HELD NO, RESERVED ONLY FOR THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN ADMITTED AS MEMBERS OF THE INTEGRATED BAR

RATIO

 Court has already had an occasion to declare that persons who pass the

Shari’a Bar are not full-fledged members of the Philippine Bar and may practice law only before Shari’a courts

 ALAUYA’S wish of not using “counsellor” because of confusion with

“councilor” is immaterial because disinclination to use said title does not warrant his use of the title “attorney”

6 IN RE CUNANAN 6 IN RE CUNANAN Facts:

This is the “Bar Flunkers Act of 1953” case.

As per the Rules of Court. A bar candidate must have a general average of 75% in all subjects without failing below 50% in any subject.

In spite of this, the court passed and admitted to the bar those candidates who had obtained an average of only:

• 72% in 1946 • 69% in 1947 • 70% in 1948 • 74% in 1949

• In 1950 to 53, the 74% was raised to 75%

A few candidates who missed the above marks set by the courts approached Congress. Congress made a bill, which was allowed by the president to become a law without his signature. This is RA 972.

Pursuant to the law in question, those who, without a grade below 50 per cent in any subject, have obtained a general average of 69.5 per cent in the bar

(6)

examinations in 1946 to 1951, 70.5 per cent in 1952, 71.5 per cent in 1953, and those will obtain 72.5 per cent in 1954, and 73.5 per cent in 1955, will be permitted to take and subscribe the corresponding oath of office as members of the Bar, notwithstanding that the rules require a minimum general average of 75 per cent, which has been invariably followed since 1950.

A breakdown of the numbers is on page 538.

The additional candidates who want to be admitted claim that they suffered from insufficiency of reading materials and of inadequacy of preparation.

Issue:

W/N RA 972 is valid. Held:

RA 972 is contrary to public interest because it qualifies 1,094 law graduates who confessedly had inadequate preparation for the practice of the profession. The public interest demands of the legal profession, adequate preparation and efficiency, precisely more so as legal problems evolved by the times become more difficult.

In decreeing that bar candidates who obtained in the bar examinations of 1946 to 1952, a general average of 70 per cent without falling below 50 per cent in any subject, be admitted in mass to the practice of law, the disputed law is not a legislation; it is a judgment — a judgment revoking those promulgated by this Court during the years affecting the bar candidates concerned

Although the SC certainly can revoke these judgments even now, for justifiable reasons, it is no less certain that only the SC, and not the legislative nor executive department, that may be so. Any attempt on the part of any of these

departments would be a clear usurpation of its functions, as in this case.

Congress may repeal, alter and supplement the rules promulgated by this court, but the authority and responsibility over the admission, suspension, disbarment and reinstatement of attorneys-at-law and their supervision remain vested in the Supreme Court.

Section 13, article VIII of the Constitution provides:

"Section 13. The Supreme Court shall have the power to promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure in all courts, and the

(7)

admission to the practice of law. Said rules shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish increase or modify substantive rights. The existing laws on pleading, practice, and procedure are hereby repealed as statutes, and are declared Rules of Courts, subject to the power of the Supreme Court to alter and modify the same. The Congress shall have the power to repeal, alter, or supplement the rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure, and the admission to the practice of law

in the Philippines."

The Constitution has not conferred on Congress and the SC equal responsibilities concerning the admission to the practice of law. The primary power and

responsibility which the Constitution recognizes continue to reside in the SC. Had Congress found that this Court has not promulgated any rule on the matter, it would have nothing over which to exercise the power granted to it.

The Constitution does not say nor mean that Congress may admit, suspend, disbar or reinstate directly attorneys at law, or a determinate group of individuals to the practice of law. Its power is limited to repeal, modify or supplement the existing rules on the matter, if according to its judgment the need for a better service of the legal profession requires it. But this power does not relieve this Court of its responsibility to admit, suspend, disbar and reinstate attorneys at law and supervise the practice of the legal profession.

There is no motive stated by the authorities for the qualification in RA 972 because of this, the classification is fatally defective.

1. That (a) the portion of article 1 of Republic Act No. 972 referring to the examinations of 1946 to 1952, and (b) all of article 2 of said law are

unconstitutional and, therefore, void and without force and effect.

2. That, for lack of unanimity in the eight Justices, that part of article 1 which refers to the examinations subsequent to the approval of the law, that is from 1953 to 1955 inclusive, is valid and shall continue to be in force, in conformity with section 10, article VII of the Constitution.

Consequently, (1) all the above-mentioned petitions of the candidates who failed in the examinations of 1946 to 1952 inclusive are denied, and (2) all candidates who in the examinations of 1953 obtained a general average of 71.5 per cent or more, without having a grade below 50 per cent in any subject, are considered as having passed, whether they have filed petitions for admission or not. After this decision has become final, they shall be permitted to take and subscribe the corresponding oath of office as members of the Bar on the date or dates that the Chief Justice may set.

7 ECHEGARAY V SECRETARY OF

7 ECHEGARAY V SECRETARY OF JUSTICEJUSTICE pp. 111-112

(8)

The 1973 Constitution Article X, Sec5 (5):

The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

xxx xxx xxx

(5) Promulgate rules concerning pleading, practice and procedure in all courts, the admission in the practice of law, and the integration of the Bar, which, however, mamay y bebe rreeppeeaalleedd, , aalltteerreedd, , oorr sup

suppleplemenmented ted by by the the BatBatasaasangng Pambensa.

Pambensa. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform in all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive

rights.

The 1987 Constitution Article VIII, Sec5 (5):

The Supreme Court shall have the following powers:

xxx xxx xxx

(5) PromPromulgatulgate e rules rules concconcerninerningg the

the protprotectioection n and and enfoenforcemrcementent of constitutional rights

of constitutional rights , pleading, practice and procedure in all courts, the admission in the practice of law, the Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform in all courts of the same grade and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

The 1987 molded an even stronger and more independent judiciary. It expanded the rule-making power of the Supreme Court. For the first time, the court was given the power to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. It also granted for the first time the power to disapprove rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies. BuBut t momostst importantly, the 1987 Constitution took away the power of Congress to importantly, the 1987 Constitution took away the power of Congress to repeal, alter, or supplement rules concerning pleading, practice, and repeal, alter, or supplement rules concerning pleading, practice, and procedure. procedure. 8 IN RE GUTIERREZ 8 IN RE GUTIERREZ In re Gutierrez Facts:

Gutierrez is a member of the Philippine Bar. While he was the municipal mayor of Calapan, he and other co-conspirators murdered the former municipal mayor of Calapan, for which they were held guilty and sentenced to the penalty of death. Upon review by the Supreme court the penalty was changed to

reclusion perpetua. After serving a portion of the sentence, Gutierrez was granted conditional pardon by the President. The unexecuted portion of the prison term

(9)

was remitted on condition that the shall not again violate any of the penal laws of the Philippines.

The widow of the murdered victim then filed a complaint with the Supreme Court asking that Gutierrez

be removed from the rule of lawyers pursuant to Rule 127, section 5.

Issue: W/N the conditional pardon to Gutierrez places him beyond the rule of disbarment

Held: NO.



Under section 5 of Rule 127, a member of the bar may be removed or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court by reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude. Murder is, without doubt, such a crime. “Moral turpitude” includes everything contrary to justice, honesty, modesty, or good morals.

 In the Lontok case, on which Gutierrez relies, the respondent, Lontok, was

granted absolute or unconditional pardon after conviction for the crime of crime of bigamy. It was held that such pardon releases the punishment and blots out existence of guilt, so that in the eye of the law the offender is as innocent as if he had never committed the offense.

 In the case at bar, the pardon granted was conditional, and merely remitted

the unexecuted portion of his term. It was not a full pardon which could have blotted out the offense committed.

 The crime was qualified by treachery and aggravated by its having been

committed in band, by taking advantage of his official position, and with the use of a motor vehicle. The degree of moral turpitude warrants disbarment. Admission of a candidate to the bar requires academic preparation and satisfactorytestimonials of good moral character. These standards are neither dispensed with nor lowered after admission: the lawyer must adhere to them or incur the risk of suspension or removal.

9 ROYONG v OBLENA 9 ROYONG v OBLENA FACTS:

 Royong, the niece it the common-law wife of Oblena, filed a rape case

against the latter.

 In her complaint, Royong alleged that in 1958 Oblena forced her to have

intercourse with her and that she refrained to report the incident because Oblena threatened to kill her family.

 As a result if the sexual intercourse, Royong gave birth to a child  Oblena denied all the allegations and argued that he and Royong had a

relationship and Royong consented to have intercourse with him.

 The Solicitor General recommended that Oblena be permanently removed

from the roll of attorney eventhough the acts of the Royong before and after the rape incident showed that she is more of a sweetheart than a

(10)

victim because of the circumstances behind the incident

 The Solicitor General also charged Oblena of falsifying and deliberately

alleging in his application in the bar in1958 that he is a person of good moral character while having an illicit and adulterous relationship with Angeles who is not only the aunt of Royong but also has a legal husband in the province

 Oblena moved to dismiss the case because the offenses charged are

different from those srcinally charged in the complaint but the court overruled his petition

 After the hearing, the investigators concluded that A.) Oblena used his

knowledge in law to commit immoral acts without incurring any criminal liability; B.) he committed gross immorality by continuously cohabiting with Angeles, his common-law wife, even after he became a lawyer and C.) Oblena falsified the truth as to his good moral character in his application to take the bar.

ISSUE:

 W/N the illicit relationship with Royong and the open cohabitation with

Angeles, a married woman, are sufficient grounds to cause Oblena’s disbarment

HELD:

 YES!

 Although Oblena is not yet convicted of the crime of rape, seduction or

adultery and he is not guilty of any of the grounds for disbarment

enumerated in Sec 25, Rule 127 of the Rules of Court, the enumeration is not exclusive and the power of the court to exclude unworthy members of the bar is inherent and is a necessary incident to the proper administration of justice and can be exercised even without any statutory authority, in all cases unless properly prohibited by statutes.

 American jurisprudence provides that the continued possession of a good

moral character is a requisite condition for the rightful continuance in the practice of law. The loss requires suspension or disbarment eventhough the statues do not explicitly specify that as a ground of disbarment.

 Oblena’s argument that he believed himself to be a person with good moral

character when he filed his application to take the bar examination is wrong. One’s own approximation of himself is not a gauge of his moral character. Moral character is not a subjective term but one which

corresponds to objective reality. Moral character is what the person really is and not what he other people thinks he is.

 His pretension to wait for the 18thbirthday of Royong before having carnal

knowledge with her shows the scheming mind of Oblena and his taking advantage of his knowledge of the law.

 Also, Royong is the niece of his common-law wife and he enjoyed moral

(11)

 Oblena’s contention that the Solicitor General exceeded his authority in

filing the present complain which is entirely different from the srcinal complaint filed is untenable. There is nothing in the law requiring the Solicitor General to charge in his complaint the same offence charged in the srcinal complaint. What the law provides is that if the Solicitor General finds sufficient grounds to proceed against the respondent, he shall file the corresponding complaint accompanied by the evidence introduced in his investigation.

10 CORDON v BALICANTA 10 CORDON v BALICANTA

(complaint for disbarment against Balicanta) Facts:

 Cordon and her daughter inherited 21 parcels of land in Zamboanga City

when Cordon’s husband died.

 Sometime after, Balicanta enticed Cordon to organize a corporation to

develop the properties. 19 parcels of land was transferred in the name of the newly formed corporation. Balicanta became the Chairman of the Board, President, General Manager and Treasurer of the corporation (kupal talaga)

 Balicanta was able to transfer some of the land to a certain Tion Suy Ong

through an SPA signed by Cordon. Balicanta was also able to obtain a loan from Land Bank using as collateral 9 parcels of land.

 Balicanta did not even try to redeem the properties and even sold the right

to redeem to another person.

 _{Gago talaga to si Balicanta. Cordon’s ancestral home was demolished and}

Cordon was detained in a nipa shack. Buti na lang at nadiscover ni daughter kung ano nangyari. Sabi kasi ni Balicanta na he’s just going to have the house remodeled and repainted, tapos dinemolish na niya. Gago talaga.

 Cordon and daughter demanded that Balicanta return all the properties

given by them to the corporation but Balicanta is unable to do so (napunta na sa ibang tao eh)

 IBP investigation recommended that Balicanta be disbarred. Balicanta

fought back and said that the investigation is prejudiced against him and filed a complaint for disbarment against the people who investigated his case and the lawyers of Cordon. Balicanta’s complaint was dismissed. Issue:

• W/N Balicanta should be disbarred

Held:• Hello?! Siyempre he should be disbarred.

• Balicanta cannot invoke the separate personality of the corporation (wow, piercing the corporate veil)

(12)

• Balicanta has perpetuated massive fraud against his client.

• Lahat ng ginawa niya against The Code of Professional Responsibility.

11 TING-DUMALI v TORRES 11 TING-DUMALI v TORRES FACTS:

 Isidra Ting-Dumali charges Rolando Torres with violating his oath as a

lawyer and canons of legal and judicial ethics.



Isidra’s parents died intestate and left many parcels of land to their 6 children (Isidra, Marcelina, Miriam, Eliseo and Vicente and Felicisima (married to Rolando Torres))

 Torres consented to the forgery of Isidra’s signature for an Extrajudicial

settlement making it appear that his wife and Miriam were the only sole heirs.

 Torres, on a reconstitution hearing, presented false testimony that Miriam

and Felicisima were the only sole heirs

 Torres presented the reconstituted deed to the RD to enable them to profit

by selling the land

 Torres contends that his acts were done in good faith believing for himself

that his and the siblings had already agreed on how to dispose of the said lot. That the false testimony was a clear oversight. And that his conformity through his signature was pro forma because the property was a

paraphernal property of Marcelina and his wife.

 Investigating Commissioner of IBP suggested disbarment

ISSUE: WoN Torres should be disbarred? HELD: YES

RATIO:

1. The lawyer’s oath, to which all lawyers have subscribed in solemn agreement to dedicate themselves to the pursuit of justice, is not a mere ceremony or formality for practicing law to be forgotten afterwards, nor is it mere words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that lawyers must uphold and keep inviolable at all times.

2. A lawyer is the servant of the law and belongs to a profession to which society has entrusted the administration of law and the dispensation of justice, he should make himself more an exemplar for others to emulate

and he should make himself more an exemplar for others to emulate and he should not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. 3. The supreme penalty of disbarment is meted out only in clear cases of

misconduct that seriously affect the standing and character of the lawyer as an officer of the court and member of the bar.

(13)

12 MACARRUBO v MACARRUBO 12 MACARRUBO v MACARRUBO Facts:

Florence Macarrubo by herself and on behalf of her 2 children files a complaint for disbarment against Edmundo Macarrubo alleging that Edmundo deceived her into marrying him despite his prior subsisting marriage with a certain Helen Esparza.

Florence further averred that Edmundo entered into a 3rd marriage with Josephine Constantino; and that he abandoned Florence without providing them

w/ regular support.

Edmundo denied the allegations, insisting instead that complainant Florence was fully aware of his prior subsisting marriage, but that Florence dragged Edmundo against his will to a 'sham wedding'.

Edmundo submitted the decision of RTC declaring his marriage to complainant void ab initio. Edmundo claimed that he left complainant and their 2 children w/ her consent.

Issue:

W/n Edmundo should be disbarred... Held:

Yes.

Facts show that while Edmundo has a subsisting marriage w/ Helen Esparza s/ whom he had 2 children, he entered into a 2nd marriage with complainant. While the

marriage between complainant Florence and Edmundo has been annulled by final judgment, this does not cleanse his conduct of impropriety.

Even assuming arguendo that Edmunod was coerced by complainant to marry her, the duress has ceased after wedding day. Edmundo having freely cohabited with her

and even begot a 2nd child.

The decision of RTC annulling their marriage is not res judicata on the final resolution of this case. A disbarment case is sui generis for it is neither purely civil nor criminal but is rather an investigation by the court on the conduct of its officers.

13 SICAT v ARIOLA 13 SICAT v ARIOLA

(14)

Facts:

Arturo Sicat, Board Member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of Rizal

charged Atty. Gregorio E. Ariola of committing fraud, deceit, and falsehood in notarizing a Special Power of Attorney (SPA).

Said SPA was purportedly executed by Juanito Benitez, of the JC Benitez

Architect and Technical Management. Said company had a contract with the Municipality of Cainta for the construction of low cost houses.

What is fraudulent about it is the fact that the SPA was notarized more than

2 months after the death of Benitez, the person who supposedly executed it.

P3,700T was paid to JC Benitez Architect and Technical Management for

services not rendered (as consultants).

Ariola claims that the document he notarized was superfluous and

unnecessary, and prejudiced no one, and therefore he should be exonerated – the document was cancelled the same day he notarized it, hence legally there was no public document that existed.

Issue:

W/N Ariola can be held liable.

Held:

 Yes.

Notaries public should not authenticate documents unless the persons who

signed them are the very same persons who executed them an personally appeared before the, to attest to the contents and truth of what are stated therein.

His assertion of falsehood in a public document contravened one of the

most cherished tenets of the legal profession and potentially cast suspicion on the truthfulness of every notarial act.

Ariola is disbarred, and not merely suspended for a year.

14 CHUA v MESINA, Jr 14 CHUA v MESINA, Jr Facts:

Atty Simeon Mesina is the legal counsel of spouses Anna Chua and Chua

An. The spouses leased a building owned by Mesina’s family. The property, however, was actually mortgaged in favor of a bank for a loan obtained by Mesina’s mother—Felicisima Melencio (who was the registered owner as well).



When Felicisima failed to meet her obligations to the bank, the spouses were convinced by Mesina to help his mother in consideration for the purchase of the same lot at a certain price. A deed of sale was made conveying the property to the spouses.

(15)

But when the spouses were appraised for capital gains tax, Atty Mesina

suggested to execute another deed of sale—this time, the date of the transaction is 1979, which is before the effectivity of the law imposing capital gains tax.

Not long after the title was handed over to the spouses, another lessee of

the building—Tecson—questioned the transaction as he was, himself, interested in buying the property. Tecson filed charges for falsification of documents.

 To avoid the falsification charge, Mesina proposed to simulate a deed of

sale wherein the spouses would appear to resell the property to Felicisima. A new title was issued to Felicisima by virtue of said deed but this was entrusted in the hands of the spouses.

Later on, Tecson desisted from pursuing the charges. Meanwhile, Mesina

borrowed the title of the property from the spouses and promised to transfer, yet again, title in the name of the spouses.

But Mesina failed to effect such transfer and the spouses learned that the

property is being offered to a public sale. Hence the action. The case was investigated by the IBP and recommended that Mesina be suspended for gross misconduct.

Issue:

Was Atty. Mesina guilty of gross misconduct? Held:

Blimey! Of course! When Atty Mesina advised Chua to execute a deed of sale antedated to 1979 to evade payment of capital gains tax, he violated his duty to promote respect for law and legal processes. When he convinced Chua to execute another deed to make it appear that the property was conveyed back to

Felicisima, Mesina committed dishonesty. And when he obtained the title upon the misrepresentation that he will return the same after 4 months, he committed dishonesty again. There were also badges of fraud that can be attributed to Mesina as there were marked differences in the signatures of Felicisima.

Clearly, Mesina violated his oath of office and Canons 1, 7, 15, and 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. His disbarment is warranted.

15 DE YSASI III v NLRC 15 DE YSASI III v NLRC FACTS

FACTS

 This is a case filed by a son against his father

‘Father’ employed ‘Son’ as farm administrator of Hacienda Manucao

‘Son’ suffered various ailments and was hospitalized on 2 separate occasions,

June and August 1982

‘Father’ took care of medical expenses while son continued to receive

(16)

However, in April 1984, ‘Father’ ceased to pay ‘Son’s’ salary ‘Son’ filed an action in NLRC for illegal dismissal with prayer for

reinstatement without loss of seniority rights and payment of full back wages

NLRC dismissed case stating that ‘Son’ has abandoned his work and

termination is for a valid cause though ordered ‘Father’ to pay P5,000 as penalty for failure to serve notice of said termination to son

IISSSSUUEE WW//N N SSOON N WWAAS S IILLLLEEGGAALLLLY Y DDIISSMMIISSSSEEDD H

HEELLDD YYEESS RATIO

RATIO

Article 282 of Labor Code enumerates causes for which an employer may

valid terminate an employment

‘Father’ banks on the fact that ‘Son’ has abandoned his work

However, to constitute abandonment there must be a clear, deliberate and

justified refusal to resume employment and not mere absence

In the case at bar, the reason for the ‘Son’s’ absence was due to his illness of

which Father was aware of since he paid hospital and medical bills

‘Father’ is ordered to pay ‘Son’ backwages in lieu of reinstatement and

separation pay equivalent to 1 month for every year of service IS

ISSUSUEE W/W/N CN COOUNUNSESELLS OS OF EF EAACH CH PPARARTTY AY ACTCTEED ID IN AN ACCCCOORRDADANNCE CE WWITITHH THE CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY

THE CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY H

HEELLDD NNOO RATIO

RATIO

Rule 1.04 of the Code of Responsibility explicitly provides “a lawyer shall

encourage his client to avoid, end or settle the controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement”

In the case at bar, records do not show that counsel of both parties took

pains to initiate steps geared toward a rapprochment between their clients

In the same manner, the labor arbiter has been less than faithful to the spirit

of the Labor Code as he did not exert all efforts towards the amicable settlement of the labor dispute

16 PEOPLE v ROSQUETA 16 PEOPLE v ROSQUETA Facts:

 There was a criminal case against Antonio Rosqueta, Jr., Eugenio Rosqueta

(17)

Gregorio Estacio (counsel de parte of the accused) to explain why disciplinary actions should not be taken against him for his failure to file the brief for appellants during the required period.

Estacio failed to explain, so he was suspended from the practice of law. He then filed a motion for reconsideration saying that he did file the briefs

but he sent it to Rosqueta Sr., whose house was burned down along with the briefs. He also said that the reason why he did not file the briefs was because the accused declared that they intended t withdraw their appeal for lack of money.

 The SC did subsequently receive affidavits from the accused withdrawing

their appeal. Issue:

W/n Estacio’s acts should be punished.

Held:

SC says yes. His acts were not consistent with the idea that the law is not a

business but a profession. Lawyers do their job not for the sole consideration of money. Estacio should have continued with his duties despite knowing that the accused did not have money anymore.

SC commended what some lawyers would have done in that situation which

was to be declared as counsel de officio so that the client remains properly represented by a lawyer who is already familiar with the case.

SC said that Estacio’s suspension for 5 mos. is already sufficient punishment

for his acts. Thus, the suspension is lifted and Estacio is not anymore required to file the briefs but he is censured for negligence and inattention to duty.

17 CANOY v ORTIZ 17 CANOY v ORTIZ

Facts: A Complaint was filed Canoy accusing Atty. Ortiz of misconduct and malpractice. It was alleged that Canoy filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against Coca Cola Philippines. Atty. Ortiz appeared as counsel for Canoy in this proceeding. Canoy submitted all the documents and records to Atty. Ortiz for the preparation of the position paper. Thereafter, he made several unfruitful visits to the office of Atty. Ortiz to follow-up the progress of the case. He was shocked to learn that his complaint was actually dismissed way back in 1998, for failure to prosecute, the parties not having submitted their position papers. Canoy alleged that Ortiz had never communicated to him about the status of the case.

Atty. Ortiz informs the Court that he has mostly catered to indigent and low-income clients, at considerable financial sacrifice to himself. Atty. Ortiz admits that the period within which to file the position paper had already lapsed. He attributes this failure to timely file the position paper to the fact that after his election as Councilor of Bacolod City, “he was frankly

(18)

preoccupied with both his functions as a local government official and as a practicing lawyer.”

Issue: W/N Atty. is liable to be sanctioned.

Held: Atty. Ortiz is to be sanctioned. Suspension from the practice of law for one (1) month.

Several of the canons and rules in the Code of Professional Responsibility guard against the sort of conduct.

CANON 18–A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.

Rule 18.03–A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.

Rule 18.04–A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client’s request for information.

His failure to do so constitutes a violation of Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. A lawyer owes fidelity to such cause and must always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. He owes entire devotion to the interest of the client. The relationship of lawyer-client being one of confidence, there is ever present the need for the client to be adequately and fully informed of the developments of the case and should not be left in the dark.

Neither is the Court mollified by the circumstance of Atty. Ortiz’s election as a City Councilor of Bacolod City, as his adoption of these additional duties does not exonerate him of his negligent behavior.

18 PEOPLE v STA TERESA 18 PEOPLE v STA TERESA Facts:

Angeles Sta. Teresa was found by the trial court to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt of raping his 12-year old daughter, and was given the penalty of death. The case is now on automatic review.

When accused was arraigned, he pleaded not guilty. After 9 days, his counsel de oficio made a manifestation that the accused wanted to change his plea to “guilty.” The prosecution no longer presented testimonial evidence and merely presented exhibits to which counsel de oficio did not comment nor object. During the promulgation of RTC’s decision, counsel failed to appear and the trial judge

(19)

had to appoint

another counsel de oficio for the purpose of promulgation. Issue: W/N counsel de officio discharged his duties properly Held: NO.

 The abbreviated and aborted presentation of the prosecution evidence and

the improvident plea of guilty was not in accordance with requirements of due process

Considering the gravity of the offense charged and the finality of the penalty,

the counsel de oficio’s performance was utterly wanting. As a lawyer sworn to uphold justice and the law, he had the duty to exert utmost efforts to defend his client and protect his rights, no matter how guilty or evil he appears to be. This duty becomes more compelling is his client is accused of a grave crime and is in danger of forfeiting his life

 The right to counsel means more that just the presence of a lawyer in the

courtroom or the mere propounding of standard questions and objections. Counsel must provide effective legal assistance and commit himself to the cause for the defense. There must be active involvement by the lawyer and he must be well-versed on the case, the procedures, law, and jurisprudence. 19 KHAN V SIMBILLO

19 KHAN V SIMBILLO FACTS:

 An advertisement in Philippine Daily Inquirer came out which reads:

“ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE SPECIALIST 532-4333/521-2667.”

 SC ordered its staff to call the number and ask some information.

 Espeleta called the number and the wife of Atty. Rizalino Simbillo answered

who said that his husband was an expert in handling annulment cases and guarantees a court decree within 4-6 month. The services of Atty. Simbillo is for P48,000. half of which is payable at the filing of the case and the balance after the decision has been rendered.

 Similar advertisement also appeared in The Philippine Star and Manila

Bulletin.

 Khan, Assist. Court Administrator, filed a case against Simbillo for violating

the Code of Professional Responsibility, Rule 2.03 and 3.01.

 Simbillo admitted that he caused the advertisement but he argued that

solicitation and advertisement is not prohibited per se and that it is about time to change our views about the prohibition on advertising and

solicitation. He also said that the interest of the public is not served by the prohibition and suggested that the ban be lifted.

 IBP recommended that Simbillo be suspended for 1 year and that repetition

of similar act will be dealt with more severely.

(20)

advertised his legal services, for 2 times, in the Buy & Sell Free Ads Magazine.

ISSUE:

 W/N Simbillo violated the Code of Professional Responsibility

HELD:

 YES!

 Rule 2.03 provides a lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act

designed primarily to solicit legal business while Rule 3.01 states that a lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.

 It has been repeatedly stressed that the practice of law is not a business.

It is a profession in which the duty to public service, not money, is the primary consideration. The gaining of livelihood should be a secondary consideration.

 Aside from advertising himself as an “Annulment of Marriage Specialist,” his

assurance of his clients that an annulment may be obtained in 4-6 months from the filing of the case encourages people, who might other have 2nd thought, to dissolve their marriage.

 Solicitation of legal business is not proscribed. However, solicitation must

be compatible with the dignity of the legal profession. The use of simple signs stating the name/s of the lawyers, the office and residence address and the fields of expertise, as well as advertisement in legal periodicals bearing the same brief data, are permissible.

 The use of calling cards is now acceptable.

20 IN RE TAGORDA 20 IN RE TAGORDA Facts:

 Luis Tagorda is a member of the provincial board of Isabela

 Previous to the last election, he used placards which in a way was

advertising his services as a lawyer and notary public

 He also wrote a letter to a lieutenant of a barrio in Echague,Isabela. In

essence he was informing the lieutenant that he will be in Echague during the weekends and the lieutenant should convey this information to the other people in his town.

Issue: W/N the acts of Tagorda is advertising

(21)

 Yes, Tagorda is in a way advertising his services and this is contrary to the

Canons of Professional Ethics (wala pa yung code of professional responsibility, 1929 case to)

 The most worthy and effective advertising for a lawyer is a well-merited

reputation for professional capacity.

 Solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements, or by personal

communications or interviews not warranted by personal relations, is unprofessional.

 It is unprofessional for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring lawsuit.  Solicitation of cases result in the lowering of the confidence of the

community and integrity of the members of the bar. It results in needless litigations and in incenting to strife.

 Tagorda suspended for a month.

21 DIR OF LEGAL AFFAIRS V BAYOT 21 DIR OF LEGAL AFFAIRS V BAYOT FACTS:

 Bayot was charged with malpractice by publishing “Marriagelicense

promptly secured thru our assistance & the annoyance of delay or publicity avoided if desired, and marriage arranged to wishes of parties. Consultation on any matter free for the poor. Everything confidential.” In the Sunday Tribune

 Bayot first denied the publication but later on admitted, and asked for

mitigation saying:

o I only did it once. I won’t repeat it again!

o I never had any case by reason of the publication

ISSUE: WoN Bayot can be charged with malpractice? HELD: YES.

1. The publication is tantamount to a solic itation of business from the public. Section 25 of Rule 127 expressly provides among other things that "the practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or thru paid agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice." It is highly unethical for an attorney to advertise his talents or skill as a merchant advertises his wares. Law is a profession and not a trade.

2. In_{practice of law for the period of one month for advertising his services and}In re Tagorda_{, 53 Phil., the respondent attorney was suspended from the} soliciting work from the public by writing circular letters. That case, however, was more serious than this because there the solicitations were

(22)

repeatedly made and were more elaborate and insistent..Considering his plea for leniency and his promise not to repeat the misconduct, the Court is of the opinion and so decided that the respondent should be, as he hereby is, reprimanded.

3. "The most worth and effective advertisement possible, even for a young lawyer is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced but must be the outcome of character and conduct." (Canon 27, Code of Ethics.) 22 ULEP V LEGAL CLINIC

22 ULEP V LEGAL CLINIC FACTS:

 Ulep prays the Supreme Court to order the Legal Clinic to cease, issuing

advertisement similar to or of the same tenor as that of annexes A and B (p381). Legal Clinic admits the facts of publication of said advertisement that claims that it is not engage in the practice of law but in the rendering of legal support services through paralegals with the use of modern computers and electronic machine.

ISSUE:

 W/N the services offered by Legal Clinic as advertised by it constitutes

practice of law

 Whether the same can properly be the subject of the advertisement

complained of HELD:

 According to the IBP, notwithstanding the manner by which respondent

endeavored to distinguish the 2 terms, legal support services and legal services, common sense would readily dictate that the same are essentially without substantial distinction. The use of the name the Legal Clinic gives the impression that the respondent corporation is being managed by lawyers and that it renders legal services. The advertisement in question is meant to induce the performance of acts contrary to law, morals, public order and public policy. This is in violation of Canon 1 Rule 1.02 that is counseling illegal activities.

 Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court which requires that

application of law, legal procedures, knowledge, training and experience. Applying the case Cayetano vs. Monsod, the court agrees that the activities of the respondent Legal Clinic constitute the practice of law. Such a conclusion will not be altered by the fact that respondent does not represent clients in court since law practice is not limited merely to court appearances.

(23)

 Regarding the issue on the validity of the questioned advertisements, the

Code of Profession Responsibility provides that a lawyer, in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, and objective information or statement of facts. The proscription against advertising of legal services rests on the fundamental postulate that the practice of law is a profession.

 Exceptions:

o Publication in reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the

standards of conduct imposed by the canon

o Ordinary, simple professional card. The card may contain only the

statement of his name, the law firm, address and branch of law practiced.

 Considering that Atty. Nogales who is the prime incorporator, major

stockholder and proprietor of the legal clinic is a member of the Philippine Bar, he is hereby reprimanded with a warning that the repetition of the same or similar acts which are involved in this proceeding will be dealt with more severely.

23 SAN JOSE HOMEOWNERS V ROMANILLOS 23 SAN JOSE HOMEOWNERS V ROMANILLOS Facts:

Facts:

 This is a disbarment case against Atty. Roberto Romanillos, for representing

conflicting interests and for using the title “Judge” despite having been found guilty of grave and serious misconduct (in Zarate v Romanillos).

 Apparently, Romanillos was previously an active board member as

corporate secretary of Durano Corp. Inc. (DCI). But it allowed itself to represent San Jose Homeowners Association, Inc (SJHAI) before the human Settlements Regulation Commission in a case against the same DCI.

 Irrelevant info: the case above was an alleged violation of DCI of the

Subdivision and Condominium Buyer’s Protection Act. DCI sold a land designated as a school site, without disclosing it as such. (page 106)

 When SJHAI’s petition over the land was denied, the SJHAI’s Board

terminated Romanillos’ services.

 Also, Romanillos acted as counsel for Lydia Durano-Rodriguez who

substituted for DCI.

 Thus, a disbarment case was filed for conflicting interests.  The IBP handled the case, but he was merely reprimanded.

 In spite of this, he still continued to serve as counsel for Durano-Rodriguez.

Thus, a second disbarment case was filed. It also included his use of “judge” although he was found guilty of grave and serious misconduct. Issue:

Issue:

(24)

Held: Held:

 Yes.

 It is inconsequential that SJHAI never questioned the propriety of

respondent’s continued representation of Durano-Rodriguez. The lack of opposition does not mean consent. As long as the lawyer represents 2 or more opposing clients, he is guilty of violating his oath.

 His continued use of “judge” violated Rules 1.01 and 3.01. The penalty

imposed on him in the Zarate case forfeiture of all leave and retirement benefits and privileges: including the title judge. (he was a judge before, but he resigned instead of being booted out)

 The title “judge” should be reserved only to judges, incumbent and retired,

an not to those who were dishonorably discharged from the service. 24 DIMATULAC v VILLON

24 DIMATULAC v VILLON Facts:

 In the prosecution of the Yabuts for the murder of Dimatulac, the Office of

the Public Prosecutor (particularly the Asst Prosecutor) and two Judges (who handled the case) committed serious procedural flaws resulting in the impairment of due process (prejudicial to both the offended party and the accused).

 Procedural irregularities in the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor: o Warrants of arrest were issued by the MCTC, with no bail

recommended, but the Yabuts were not arrested or were never brought unto the custody of the law. Yet, Asst Fiscal Alfonso-Reyes conducted a reinvestigation. Though a prosecutor may disagree with the findings of the judge who conducted the preliminary investigation (and conduct his own), the circumstance that the accused waived the filing of their counter-affidavits left Alfonso-Reyes no other choice but to sustain the MCTC findings—which she did not do. And later on, Alfonso-Reyes allowed the Yabuts to file their counter-affidavits without first demanding that they surrender by virtue of the standing warrants of arrest.

o Alfonso-Reyes recommended a bond of 20k for the Yabuts despite the

fact that they were charged of homicide and that they were fugitives from justice (having avoided service of warrant of arrest).

o Alfonso-Reyes was aware of the private prosecution’s appeal to the

DOJ from her resolution. (The subsequent resolution of the DOJ Secretary exposed her blatant errors.) And despite the pending appeal, she filed the Information. It would be more prudent to wait for the DOJ resolution.

o

Office of the Prosecutor did not even inform the trial court of the pending appeal to the DOJ Secretary.

(25)

o Deferred resolution on the motion for a hold departure order until

“such time that all the accused who are out on bail are arraigned”

o Denied the motion to defer proceedings for the reason that “private

prosecution has not shown any indication that the appeal was given due course by DOJ”

 Judge Villon’s procedural lapses:

o Ordered arraignment despite: a motion to defer proceedings; a

ten-day period with which the complainants can file petition with the CA; resolution of the CA ordering the Yabuts to comment on the

complainants’ action; pending appeal with the DOJ. Issue:

Can the orders of Judge Roura and Judge Villon be sustained despite procedural defects?

Held:

No. The orders of Judge Roura denying Motion to Defer proceedings are void and set aside. The order of Judge Villon on the arraignment, and the subsequent arraignment of the Yabuts are void and set aside. Office of the Provincial Prosecutor is ordered to comply with the DOJ Secretary’s resolution.

Prosecutors are the representatives not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win every case but that justice be done. They are servants of the law whose two-fold aim is that guilt shall not escape and innocence shall not suffer. The judge “should always be imbued with a high sense of duty and responsibility

in the discharge of his obligation to promptly and properly administer justice”. The judge’s action must not impair the substantial rights of the accused, nor the

right of the State and offended party.

When the State is deprived of due process in a criminal case by reason of grave abuse of discretion on the part of the trial court, the acquittal of the accused or dismissal of the case is void.

25 TRIESTE v SANDIGANBAYAN 25 TRIESTE v SANDIGANBAYAN FACTS

FACTS

 TRIESTE was charged with 23 separate violations of the Anti Graft and

Corrupt Practices Act* because while being the Municipal Mayor and member of the Committee on Award of the Municipality of Numancia in Aklan and having financial or pecuniary interest in TRIGEN Agro-Industrial

(26)

Development Corporation, he awarded purchases of construction materials by the said municipality from the said corporation and signing the vouchers as evidence of said purchase

 The Sandiganbayan found TRIESTE guilty and sentenced him to suffer

indeterminate penalty of imprisonment and perpetual disqualification

 TRIESTE, in his defense, alleges that he signed the vouchers only after all

the purchases had already been made, delivered and paid for by the Municipal Treasurer hence he cannot be guilty under the provisions of the Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act

ISSUE

ISSUE W/N TRIESTE IS GUILTY UNDER THE ANTI GRAFT ANDW/N TRIESTE IS GUILTY UNDER THE ANTI GRAFT ANDCORRUPT PRACTICES ACTCORRUPT PRACTICES ACT H

HEELLDD NNOO RATIO

RATIO

 TRIESTE already sold his shares to a certain MRS TUASON before he

assumed office and despite the absence of it in the SEC records, the court finds this fact immaterial as there is no law requiring submission of reports regarding sales and disposal of stocks (what is required is only submission of annual financial reports)

 The Municipal Treasurer testified that there was never a public bidding

hence if there is no bidding then there could be no awarding by TRIESTE

 Testimonial and documentary evidence both confirm that TRIESTE signed

vouchers after payment and since what is contemplated in the Anti-Graft Law is the actual intervention in the transaction which one has financial or pecuniary interest in, TRIESTE cannot be held liable under such Law

 TRIGEN did not gain any undue advantage in the transaction such that

there is no complaint for non-delivery, underdelivery or overpricing in the transactions

 Hence, TRIESTE should be acquitted

NOTE NOTE

**Section 3. Corrupt Practices of Public Officers

(h) Directly or indirectly having financial or pecuniary interest in any business, contract or transaction in connection with which he intervenes or takes part in his official capacity, or in which he is prohibited by the Constitution or by any law from having any interest

26 TATAD v SANDIGANBAYAN 26 TATAD v SANDIGANBAYAN Facts:

 Oct. 1974 – Antonio de los Reyes, former Head Executive Assistant of the

(27)

the Presidential Security Command (PSC) containing charges of violations of RA30191_{(Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Acts) against Sec. of DPI}

Francisco Tatad.

 1979 – Tatad had a falling out with then Pres. Marcos and the charges

became widely known.

 Dec. 12, 1979 – a formal complaint was filed with the Tanodbayan  Apr. 1, 1980 – Tanodbayan referred the complaint to the PSC for

investigation and report.



June 16, 1980 – report by PSC was submitted recommending the filing of _{charges for graft and corruption.}

 Oct. 25, 1982 – all affidavits and counter-affidavits were in and the case

was ready for disposition.

 July 5, 1985 – Tanodbayan issued a resolution calling for the filing of

charges against Tatad in the Sandiganbayan. 5 informations were filed against Tatad in 1985.

 Tatad now questions the propriety of the filing of charges. He alleges that

his rights to due process and speedy disposition of cases have been violated.

Issue:

 W/n Tatad’s rights to due process and speedy disposition of cases have

been violated. Held:

 SC says yes they were violated by the long delay in the termination of the

preliminary investigation by the Tanodbayan. Substantial adherence to the requirements of the law and substantial compliance with the time limitation prescribed by law is part of procedural due process.

 The case was ready for disposition as early as 1982 but the informations

were only filed in 1985. A delay of close to 3 years can not be deemed reasonable or justifiable in the light of the circumstance obtaining in the case at bar. The charges in the complaint, specially his failure to file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities, are not that complicated to require 3 years before formal complaints are filed.

27 PNB v ATTY CEDO 27 PNB v ATTY CEDO

1_{(a) Giving D’Group, a private corporation owned by his brother –in-law unwarranted benefits; (b) receiving a check from Roberto Vallar, Gen. Manager}

of Amity Trading Corp., as consideration for the release of a check to the said corp. for printing services rendered during the Constitutional Convention Referendum; and (c) failure to file his Statement of Assets and Liabilities.

(28)

Facts: PNB filed a complaint against Atty. Cedo for violation of Rule 6.02 that states: A lawyer shall not, after leaving gov’t. service, accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter which he had intervened with in said service. Cedo was the former Asst. Vice-President of the Asset management Group of PNB.

During Cedo’s stint with PNB, he became involved in 2 transactions: 1.) sale of steel sheets to Ms. Ong and 2.) intervened in the handling of a loan of spouses Almeda. When a civil action arose because of #1, Cedo, after leaving the bank appeared as one of the counsel of Ms. Ong. Also, when #2 was involved in a civil action, the Almedas were represented by the law firm Cedo, Ferrer, Maynigo & Associates of which Cedo was a Senior Partner.

Cedo claims that he did not participate in the litigation of Ms. Ong’s case. He also claims that even if it was his law firm handling the Almeda case, the case was being handled by Atty. Ferrer.

Issue: W/N violated Rule 6.02. Held: Cedo violated Rule 6.02.

In the complexity of what is said in the course of dealings between the atty. and the client, inquiry of the nature suggested would lead to the revelation, in advance of the trial, of other matters that might only further prejudice the complainant cause. Whatever may be said as to w/n the atty. utilized against his former client information given to him in a professional capacity, the mere fact that their previous relationship should have precluded him from appearing as counsel for the other side.

It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests, except It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests, except by express consent of all the parties concerned after the disclosure by express consent of all the parties concerned after the disclosure of facts. A lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in behalf of of facts. A lawyer represents conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client, it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another one client, it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires him to

client requires him to oppose.oppose. 28 DINSAY v CIOCO

28 DINSAY v CIOCO Facts:

 Planters Machinery Corporation (PLAMACO) mortgaged to Traders Royal

Bank (the Bank) certain properties as security for the payment of its loan. PLAMACO defaulted in the payment of the loan so the Bank extrajudicially foreclosed the mortgage. At a foreclosure sale conducted by the sheriff, the property was sold to the bank, who was the sole bidder. A certificate of Sheriff’s sale was executed by Atty. Cioco, then clerk of Court and Ex-officio Sheriff.

 Records disclose that page four of the said Certificate was surreptitiously

(29)

of P3, 263, 182.67 to only P730,000. Cioco and the sheriff who conducted the sale had previously been administratively charged and dismissed from service.

 Now, Atty.Cioco is sought to be disbarred. He argues that there was res

adjudicata due to the administrative case, and that disbarment was deemed adjudicated therein, thus he may now longer be charged.

Issue: W/N Cioco may be charged with disbarment (W/N res adjudicata appplies) Held:



Cioco’s contention has no merit. Res adjudicata applies only to judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings and not to the exercise of the Court’s

administrative powers, as in this case.

 Disbarment has not been adjudicated in the previous case. Therein, Cioco

was administratively proceeded against as an erring Court personnel under the supervisory authority of the court. Herein, Cioco is sought to be

disciplined as a lawyer under the court’s plenary authority over members of the legal profession.

 While Cioco is in effect being indicted twice for the same misconduct, there

is no double jeopardy as both proceedings are administrative in nature.

 The general rule is that a lawyer who holds a government office may not be

disciplined as a member of the bar for misconduct in the discharge of his duties as a government official. The exception is , if that misconduct affects his qualification as a lawyer or shows moral delinquency.

 Cioco’s participation in changing the bid price in the Certificate of Sheriff’s

Sale affects his fitness as a member of the bar. He knows it is patently illegal to alter its contents after notarization, since it is already a public document.

 Cioco is disbarred.

29 IGOY v SORIANO 29 IGOY v SORIANO FACTS:

 Igoy is one of the petitioners in the case of Heirs of Gavino Igoy, et al. vs.

Mactan Shangrila Hotel.

 Eng. William Redoblado introduced Atty. Soriano to Igoy as a Justice of the

CA.

 According to Igoy’s friend, Atty. Soriano will be able to help him in his case

which is pending in the CA

 Atty. Soriano demanded from Igoy P20,000 but the former reminded the

latter the he will only be able to help in the case as soon as the case was lifted to the SC

 Igoy’s case received an unfavorable decision in the CA and Atty. Soriano

(30)

 Atty. Soriano asked for an additional P20,000

 Igoy send the amount by courier to the address of Atty. Soriano which was

received by his son.

 SC denied the petition for review of Igoy with finality

 Igoy later found out that Atty. Soriano is not a CA Justice and filed this

complaint against Igoy in the SC

 Arguments of Atty. Soriano:

o It is unnatural for a person to give money to someone whom he does

not know well and whom he met only for the first time

o The money was offered gratuitously by Igoy

o _{it is impossible the Igoy handed the money to him on the SC parking}

lot for many employees were passing in that place

o it is not Eng. Redoblado who introduced him to Igoy but Mr. Taneo o if the SC finds that he is guilty, he will retire from the service  Atty. Soriano filed his letter of resignation/retirement under RA 1616

ISSUE:

 W/N Atty. Soriano violated Canon 6, Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional

Responsibility HELD:

 Yes! Atty. Soriano was dismissed from the service with forfeiture of all

retirement benefits and is suspended from the practice of law.

 Atty. Soriano’s offer to resign was obviously an attempt to evade whatever

penalty may be imposed on him. However, resignation will not extricate him form the consequences of his acts

 Resignation should not be used either as an escape or an easy way out to

evade administrative liability by court personnel facing administrative sanctions

 To accept the claim of Soriano that the money was offered gratuitously will

open the floodgates to fraud or graft and corruption.

 Government lawyers who are public servants owe utmost fidelity to the

public service for public service is a public trust. Government lawyers should be more sensitive to their professional obligations as their reputable conduct is more likely to be magnified in the public eye.

 The nature and responsibilities of public officers enshrined in the

Constitution are not mere rhetorical words to be taken lightly as idealistic sentiments but as working standards and attainable goals that should e matched with actual deeds.

30 PCGG v SANDIGANBAYAN 30 PCGG v SANDIGANBAYAN

*kalokohan na kaso to, 140++ pages (disclaimer) main decision – 28 pages lang ** merong history of Rule 6.03 and other historical stuff sa case