Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 4

17. Baraco v.

Pinatacan
AffairImpregnated then
abandoned C
Married another

C: acts of R made him unfit Moral delinquency.failed to live up


to become a lawyer
to the high moral standard. Had been
denied for practicing 8 years already
R: Denied relationship; R and recognized the child. Allowed to
promised marriage
take the lawyer's oath.

18.
Diao
v.
Martinez
passed the bar but
failed in acquiring
required academic
qualifications

Did not finish HS; Never


obtained AA diploma
Diao: admits; entered US
army

Not qualified to take bar. False


representations. Passing Bar is
immaterial.
Not
the
only
qualification. Taking prescribed
courses is equally essential. Stricken
off the roll, return lawyer's diploma

19. In re: Argosino


Passed Bar
convicted of RI
resulting
in
Homicide (Hazing)

Court deferred oath-taking


but granted probation. Filed
case to take oath. Prove GM;
Victim's father comment

Allowed but with admonitions. Not


inherently of bad moral fiber. Sc
persuaded he has exerted all efforts
to atone for death. Oath not a mere
ceremony, at ALL TIMES

20. Collantes v.
Renomeron
irregular actuations
in the application of
registration Deeds
of Absolute Sale

R suspended the registration


of documents with special
conditions(round trip ticket
Tacloban-Manila plus 2K
pocket money or sale of R's
house and lot by V&G/GSIS

Lawyer's misconduct as a public


official also constitutes a violation of
his oath as a lawyer. CPR applies to
gov't services (Canon 6). Rule 1.01 and
Rule 1.03
DISBARRED

1. Montecillo v.
Gica
C accused by R of
slander
Atty.
Del
Mar
(lawyer of C) was
able to win the case.
R appealed to CA

Atty filed MR and that CA


judges knowingly rendered
unjust decision; still made
threats. Demanded clerk of SC
names of judges who voted
against him. Filed cases
against SC judges

Contemptuous acts: violation of his


duties to courts. Scant respect on flimsy
ground of alleged error in deciding
case. Challenged the integrity of CA
and SC.
SUSPENDED INDIFINETLY

2. In re: Gutierrez
Lawyer; convicted
of
murder
and
sentenced
with
death
penaltychanged to RP; then
pardoned

Widow of victim filed for


disbarment (moral turpitude)
of Atty. which was answered
and facts were admitted but
used pardon as defense

Pardon was conditional not absolute


(remitted sentence). Crime was
committed with treachery, taking
advantage of his position (mayor)& use
of motor vehicle. Degree of MT justify
disbarment.

3. Oronce v. CA
Flaminiano illegally took
dispute over a land possession of the property
aided by husband-lawyer
while case was pending
Atty: peacefully

Atty's acts show disrespect for the law


and the Court- unbecoming of a
member of the bar. Cannot justify
defiance. CPR: prohibited from
counseling or abetting activities aimed
at defiance of the law or at lessening
confidence in the legal system: FINED
25K

4. De Ysasi v.
NLRC
Father and Son
Labor dispute; son
suffered ailments;

F med expenses and S


compensated during illness.
Without due notice, ceased
to pay S. S demanded
explanation from F's lawyerauditor-inaction.

Conducts of counsels disappointing.


Duties
goes
beyond
merely
representing client's causes, but also
exert all effort to smooth over legal
conflicts especially among family
members. Mediator and councilor
Rule1.04

5. Pajares v. Abad
Santos
buy
and
sell
business.
Company sued C
for recovery of
money

C asked for bill of


particulars : Denied, then
MR:Denied -clogged court
for 7 years

No faithful adherence to RoC Rule 7


sec 5. Counsel should have advised his
client to confess judgment and ask
from her creditor the reasonable time
she needed, expenses of litigation
would have been sufficient to pay the
debt.

1. In re: Lanuevo
Bar Confidant
Ramon
Galang:
passed because of
reevaluation

2. First Lepanto
Ceramic v. CA
BOI
affirmed
changes to registered
name of product

Lanuevo: facilitated reevaluation of Galang's


booklets(unauthorized)
Galang: concealed pending
criminal case on his bar
applications

P: questions jurisdiction of
CA (should be SC EO 226)
Private R: Circular 1-9
resolved conflicts between
B.P.129 and Art of E.O. 226

3. In re: Cunanan
For those with inadequate
RA 972: passed and preparation;
the law is
admitted grade of 72 contrary to public interest
by increasing to 75

Bar Confidant: no authority to reevaluate grades; not an over-all


examiner; only a custodian of
booklets
Galang: highly irregular manner of
passing; fraudulently concealment
of criminal case
BOTH DISBARRED

4. Choa v. Chiongson
Atty Quiroz assisted
in filing a groundless,
false suit against
Judge

P: R failed to divulge
that
they
were
neighbors
R: not acquainted;
complainant not of
good moral character

Canon 15: against groundless suit; nextdoor relationship not a ground for a
mandatory disqualification; should have
raised in an appropriate pleading not
filing an administrative case; FINED
(Quiroz) 5,000

5. Cosmos v. Lo Bu
Atty.
Busmante's
labor dispute; writ of answer to petition:
Private R was correct; conflicts execution
deny allegations,
resolved as C 1-9 effectively
Errand boy
repealed...; BOI appeals can now
be filed in CA
6. Gamalinda vs. C was held in
Alcantara
contempt for entering
J. Fernando & Atty. the disputed land
Lim
pending case. Atty
Unconstitutional:
1.Congress Case regarding loss Lim
moved
for
exceeded power; 2. establish of C land
execution- denied then
arbitrary method; 3. effects violate previous admin case filed urgent surrender
the Constitution;
was dismissed
of TCT-granted
WON acts of Atty.
correct

defend his client's cause with zeal but


not to disregard the truth in defiance of
clear purpose of the labor statues.
Officer of court.

4.
Kuroda
v.
Jalandoni
Atty. Hussey and
Port in behalf of USA

P: American attys not


qualified to practice law in
Phil. Under our ROC
: Violative of nation
sovereignty

SC: under special military tribunal


not
ROC;
no
requirement
regarding qualifications to practice
in Phil.
: vindication of crimes ; have legal
interest; aggrieved by the crimes P

7. JP Sons v. Lianga
Inc.
Collection
case:
judgment in favor of
P and D appealed

5. Omico Mining v.
Vallejos
Catolico: judge of
CFT:
return
10
certificates; payment
of his services

Judge:
GADALEJ
defendants default
R: notice of hearing
addressed to clerk of court

Yes. Has sufficient notice of 8. Azor v. Beltran


hearing. Not in default.
Contract: void (contrary to law...)
Judge should be impartial, his right
to practice law as an atty was
suspended as judge

6.
People
v.
Villanueva
Malicious Mischief
Atty. Fule made an
appearance
during
trial

Fule as City Attorney


entered his appearance
(asked permission from
DOJ) violates Rule 138 of
RRC

No. Isolated appearance not private 9


practice of law (as such is
presenting himself in active and
continued practice of legal
profession); appeared as friend and
was not paid

7. Dia-Anonuevo v.
Judge Bercasio
Municipal Judge
verify deed of sale,
advised C, interceded
in their behalf for
3500

R did not return deposit.


Contended that C did not
want to get the money back.
R engaged in practice of
law

Guilty of violating Sec 77 of


Judiciary Act of 1948: no Judge
may engage in private practice.
Practice
of
law
includes
preparation of pleadings in
anticipation of litigation, giving
legal advice, SUSPENDED 6 mos

8. De Guzman v.
Visayan
Rapid
Transit
P: hired to reduce
certain toll rates

Reasonable Compensation
R: P only administrative and
did not require high degree
of prof skills
R: services of P are
unsolicited
and
unauthorized

Measured not alone by his work


taken separately, but by his work
taken as a whole.
Promise to pay evident.
Reasonable Compensation: 7,000

1. Santiago v. Fojas
C: R failed to answer
-FEUFA lost suit
complaint
-Fojas: counsel to
FEUFA (Santiago)
R: cured by filing motion
for reconsideration; futile c

Inexcusable negligence
Rule 15.05, Canon 15 (candid &
honest opinion on merits of case)
Rule 18.03, Canon 18 (not neglect)
REPRIMANDED

2.
Cantiller
v. C: gave money to R for the
Potenciano
case only for atty to
- ejectment case
withdrew services
withdrew
as
counsel, asked for R: done in good faith, little
time, hemorrhoids
more money

Failure to exercise due diligence


Should protect client's interest
Lack of good faith; His duty was
not only to prepare pleadings but to
represent complainant until the
end. SUSPENDED INDIFINETLY

3. Millare v. Montero C: R filed numerous suits to


C
obtained prevent
execution
of
favorable judgment
judgment
- writ of execution
R: MTC and RTC decisions
were null and void, mistake
in filing appeal

Guilty of forum shopping


Canon 19(Rule 19.01)- within the
bounds of law (Rule 19.03) a
lawyer is not a gun for hire
Canon 12- exert effort; undue
delay, not file multiple actions
SUSPENDED 1 year

Case dismissed
Atty. Lim acted diligently for the cause
of his client in an honorable way. He
should be commended and not
condemned.
Lack of merit.

D filed a notice of D's appeal was frivolous. D has no


appeal resulting to cause to complain. Such cases
further delay in the contribute to the needless clogging of
resolution of case.
court dockets and cause delay.

D accused of taking
rollo
of
Special
Proceedings, financial
report of C and court
order;
WON
guilty
of
malpractice and gross
misconduct

No. C assumed, R submitted evidence


that all are intact and altered. R
explanation is reasonable.
No
justification to induce forcible entry. R
should be absolved. R as a lawyer,
should be more meticulous in examining
records.