Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS HIS
PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Rule 8.01 - A lawyer shall not, in his professional dealings, use language which is
abusive, offensive or otherwise improper.
Rule 8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional
employment of another lawyer, however, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or
favor, to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful or
neglectful counsel.
CANON 9 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE
OF LAW.
Rule 9.01 - A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the performance of any
task which by law may only be performed by a member of the bar in good standing.
Rule 9.02 - A lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with
persons not licensed to practice law, except:
(a) Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that, upon the
latter's death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time to his estate or to
persons specified in the agreement; or
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
(b) Where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer;
or
(c) Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement plan even if
the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit sharing agreement.
CASE
DOCTRINE
RULING
Edillon was
disbarred.
Canon 7 was
violated
Request for
exemption
was denied.
He was
ordered to
pay 12,035
as
membership
fee from
1977-2005
within 10
days
Atty. Rolando
S. Bala is
found guilty
of
negligence
and conduct
unbecoming
a lawyer; he
is hereby
SUSPENDE
D from the
practice of
law for six
months,
effective
upon his
receipt of
Administrative proceeding
against Victorio Lanuevo for
disbarment.
1. Admitted having
brought the five
examination notebooks
of Ramon E. Galang
back to the respective
examiners for reevalution or rechecking.
2. The five examiners
admitted having reevaluated or re-checked
the notebook to him by
the Bar Confidant,
stating that he has the
authority to do the
same and that the
examinee concerned
failed only in his
particular subject and
was on the borderline of
passing.
3. Ramon galang was able
to pass the 1971 bar
exam because of
Lanuevos move but the
exam results bears that
he failed in 5 subjects
namely in (Political,
Civil, Mercantile,
Criminal & Remedial).
4. Galang on the
otherhand, denied of
this
Decision. He
was ordered
to pay
damages to
the spouses
Respondents
were
disbarred.
having charged of
Slight Physical Injuries
on Eufrosino de Vera, a
law student of MLQU.
5. Diao v. Martinez
Diao falsely represented in his
application for the Bar
examination, that he had the
requisite academic
qualifications.
6. Tolosa v. Cargo
Diao was
disbarred.
Reprimande
d and
warned the
respondent
7. Lim Se v. Argel
-
Di ko na binasa facts
napepressure ako di ko
magets haha!
Atty. Adaza
guilty of
direct
contempt.
However,
considering
his manifest
inexperience
in appellate
court
practice,
instead of
punishing
him with
imprisonmen
8. Likong v. Lim
Cerina B. Likong filed this
administrative case against
Atty. Alexander H. Lim,
seeking the latter's
disbarment for alleged
malpractice and grave
misconduct.
Respondent failed to notify
complainant's counsel of the
compromise agreement
9. Dallong-Galicinao v.
Atty. Castro
Atty. Dallong-Galicinao
is the Clerk of Court of RTC
and Atty. Castro was a private
practitioner and VP of IBPNueva
Vizcaya. Respondent
went to complainants office
to inquire whether the records
of Civil Case No. 784 had
already been remanded to the
MCTC. Respondent was not
the counsel of either party in
that case.
t or fine, he
is hereby
severely
reprimanded
and warned
that a
repetition of
the said act
would be
more
drastically
dealt with.
Respondent
Atty.
Alexander H.
Lim is
hereby
imposed the
penalty of
SUSPENSION
from the
practice of
law for a
period of
ONE (1)
YEAR
respondent
is hereby
FINED in the
amount of
TEN
THOUSAND
(P10,000.00)
PESOS with
a warning
that any
similar
infraction
with be dealt
with more
severely.