SAN BEDA COLLEGE MENDIOLA

COLLEGE OF LAW

Syllabus in Legal Ethics

I. PRELIMINARY MATTERS

A. Legal Ethics - definition

B. Legal Profession- definition

C. Sources of Principles and Rules on Legal and Judicial Ethics

Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution
Rules 135 to 142, Revised Rules of Court
Lawyer's Oath (MEMORIZE!)
The Notarial Law (Title IV, Chapter 11, Revised Administrative Code)
2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, April 27, 2004

D. Practice of Law
1. Definition

Renato L. Cayetano vs. Christian Monsod, G.R. No. 100113, September 3, 1991
Paguia v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 176278, June 25, 2010
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Ladaga, A.M. No. P-99-1287, January 26, 2001

2. Admission
a. A judicial function
Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5), 1987 Constitution
In re Cunanan, Resolution, March 18, 1954
In re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, February 18, 1970

b. Requirements
Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court
Re: Letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza xxx, B.M. No. 1153, March 09, 2010
Re: 1999 Bar Examinations, B.M. No. 879 & 986, December 10, 2002

c. Attorneys roll defined

Pangan vs. Ramos, Adm. Case No. 1053, September 7, 1979

3. Characteristics of the Law Profession

a.
B.M. No. 712 July 13, 1995,
B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997
In re: Edillon, Adm. Case No. 1928, August 3, 1978

b.
Docena v. Atty. Limon, A.C. No. 2387, September 10, 1998

c.
Philippine Lawyers' Association vs. Agrava, G.R. No. L-12426, February 16, 1959
Marcos vs. Chief of Staff, G.R. No. L-4663, May 30, 1951

d.
Mauricio C. Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., B.M. No. 553, June 17, 1993

Exceptions to the Practice of Law

1)

i.
Rule 138, Sec. 34, Revised Rules of Court
Cantimbuhan vs. Cruz, Jr., G.R. Nos. L-51813-14, November 29, 1983

ii.
Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court

iii.
Rule 138-A, Sec. 1, Revised Rules of Court
Cruz v. Judge Mijares, G.R. No. 154464, September 11, 2008.

iv.
Maderada v. Judge Mediodea, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1459, October 14, 2003

2) Limitations of Lawyers to Practice Law

i.
Rule 138, Sec. 35, Revised Rules of Court
Art. VII, Sec. 13, 1987 Constitution
R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90
R.A. No. 910, Section 1

Query of Atty. Buffee, A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC, August 19, 2009

II. LAWYER AND SOCIETY

A. Canon 1, Code of Professional Responsibility

Cases:
Gonzales v. Alcaraz, A.C. No. 5321, 27 September 2006
Saquing v. Mora, A.C. No. 6678, 09 October 2006
Atty. Dizon v. Atty. Lambino, A.C. No. 6968, August 9, 2006

B. Canon 2, Code of Professional Responsibility

CASES:
Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 2009.
Khan v. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003

C. Canon 3, Code of Professional Responsibility

Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378 [1993]

D. Canon 4, Code of Professional Responsibility

RE: Letter of the UP Law Faculty xxx , A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC, March 8, 2011

E. Canon 5, Code of Professional Responsibility

Bar Matter No. 850, 22 August 2000

Sps. Williams v. Enriquez, A.C. No.6353, 27 February 2006.
Dulalia v. Cruz, A.C. No. 6854, 27 April 2007.

F. Canon 6, Code of Professional Responsibility

 Pimentel v. Fabros, et. al. A.C. No. 4517, 11 September 2006
Igoy v. Soriano, A.M. No. 2001-9-SC, October 11, 2001
Section 7(b)(2) of R.A. No. 6713
Olazo v. Justice Tinga, A.M No. 10-5-7-SC, December 7, 2010.

III. THE LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION

A. Canon 7, Code of Professional Responsibility

_ Royong v. Atty. Oblena, G.R. No. 376, April 30, 1963

Sps. Franklin and Lourdes Olbes vs. Victor V. Deciembre, A.C. No. 5365,
April 27, 2005
Joseph Samala vs. Antonuitti K. Palaa, A.C. No. 6595, April 15, 2005
Gacias v. Bulauitan, A.C. No. 7280, 16 November 2006
Guevarra v. Atty. Eala, A.C. No. 7136,August 1, 2007

B. Canon 8, Code of Professional Responsibility

Ng v. Alar, A.C. No. 7252, 22 November 2006.

Dallong-Galicinao v. Castro, A.C. No. 6396, October 25, 2005
Reyes v. Chiong, Jr., A.C. No. 5148, July 1, 2003

C. Canon 9, Code of Professional Responsibility

Rule 138, Secs. 6 and 9, Revised Rules of Court

Rule 71, Sec. 3 (e), Revised Rules of Court
Cambaliza v. Cristal-Tenorio, A.C. No. 6290, 14 July 2004.
Republic v. Kenrick Development Corp., G.R. No. 149576 , August 8, 2006

IV. LAWYER AND THE COURTS

A. Canon 10, Code of Professional Responsibility

A lawyer owes CANDOR, FAIRNESS and GOOD FAITH to the Court

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (b), Revised Rules of Court

Rule 71, Sec. 3 (a), Revised Rules of Court
Afurong v. Aquino, Administrative Case No. 1571 September 23, 1999
Villaflor v. Sarita, A.C. CBD No. 471 June 10, 1999
Re: Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated January 11, 2010 xxx, A.M. No. 10-1-13-
SC March 2, 2010

B. Canon 11, Code of Professional Responsibility

Art. XI, Secs. 2-8, 1987 Constitution

Rule 139-B, Sec. 1, par. 2, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (b), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 71, Sec. 3 (a), Revised Rules of Court
Balaoing v. Judge Calderon, A.M. No. RTJ-90-580, April 27, 1993
Boquiren v. Del Rosario-Cruz, A.C. No. MTJ-94-894 June 2, 1995
Re: Suspension of Atty. Bagabuyo, Adm. Case No. 7006, October 9, 2007.

C. Canon 12, Code of Professional Responsibility

Agustin v. Atty. Empleo, A.C. No. 6986, March 6, 2006

1. Rule 130, Sec. 3, Revised Rules of Court

Javellana v. Lutero, G.R. No. L-23956, July 21, 1967
2. Olivares v. Atty. Villalon,Jr. A.C. No. 6323, April 13, 2007

3. Edrial vs. Quilat-quilat, GR No. 133625, September 6, 2000

4. Millare v. Atty. Montero, A.C. No. 3283

5.

Articles 181-184 Revised Penal Code

6.

Canon 18, Canons of Professional Ethics

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (f), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 132, Section 3, Revised Rules of Court

7. Santiago v. Atty. Rafanan, A.C. No. 6252, October 5, 2004

D. Canon 13, Code of Professional Responsibility

Art. 19, New Civil Code

Rule 2.03, Code of Judicial Conduct
Bildner v. Ilusorio, G.R. No. 157384, June 5, 2009

1. Cruz vs. Salva, G.R. No. L-12871, July 25, 1959

In the Matter of the Alleged Improper Conduct of Sandiganbayan Associate
Justice Badoy, A.M. No. 01-12-01-SC, 16 January 2003.

2. de Bumanglag vs. Bumanglag, Adm. Case No. 188, November 29, 1976

V. LAWYER AND CLIENT

A. A lawyer shall not refuse services to the needy (Canon 14, Code of Professional
Responsibility)
1. A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on account of the latters race, sex,
creed or status of life, or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person. (Rule 14.01)

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (i), Revised Rules of Court

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (c), Revised Rules of Court
Canon 5, Canons of Professional Ethics
Canon 31, Canons of Professional Ethics
Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155, March 14, 2006

2. A lawyer shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient cause, an appointment as counsel
de oficio or as amicus curiae or a request from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its
chapters for rendition of free legal aid. (Rule 14.02)

Sec. 4, R.A. No. 6033

Rule 116, Sec. 6, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 116, Sec. 8, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 124, Sec. 2, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 31, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 36, Revised Rules of Court
People vs. Rio, G.R. No. 90294, September 24, 1991
3. A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent client unless:
a) he is not in a position to carry out the work effectively or competently;
b) he labors under a conflict of interest between him and the prospective client or between a
present client and the prospective client. (Rule 14.03)

_ Sps. Algura v. The Local Gov't Unit of the City of Naga, G.R. No. 150135,
October 30, 2006
Ledesma vs. Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28, 1974

4. A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay his professional fees shall observe
the same standard of conduct governing his relations with paying clients. (Rule 14.04)

In re: Filart, September 27, 1919

B. A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and loyalty in dealings and transactions with client
(Canon 15, Code of Professional Responsibility)

1. A lawyer, in conferring with a prospective client, shall ascertain as soon as practicable whether
the matter would involve a conflict with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith
inform the prospective client. (Rule 15.01)

Art. 209, Revised Penal Code

PNB vs. Cedo, Adm. Case No. 3701, March 28, 1995

2. A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication in respect of matters disclosed
to him by a prospective client. (Rule 15.02)

Canon 21, Code of Professional Responsibility

Rule 130, Sec. 24 (b), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (e), Revised Rules of Court
Rosa F. Mercado vs. Julito D. Vitriolo, A.C. No. 5108, May 26, 2005

3. A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned
given after a full disclosure of the facts. (Rule 15.03)

_ Hilado v. David, G.R. No. L-961, September 21, 1949

Paz v. Sanchez, A.C. No. 6125, 19 September 2006
Pacana, Jr. v. Atty. Pascual-Lopez, A.C. No. 8243, July 24, 2009

4. A lawyer may, with the written consent of all concerned, act as mediator, conciliator or
arbitrator in settling disputes. (Rule 15.04)

5. A lawyer, when advising his client, shall give a candid and honest opinion on the merits and
probable results of the client's case, neither overstating nor understating the prospects on the case.
(Rule 15.05)

_ Bergonia v. Merrera, A.C. No. 5024, February 20, 2003

6. A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body. (Rule 15.06)

7. A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws and the principles of fairness.
(Rule 15.07)

Rural Bank of Calape v. Atty. Florido, A.C. No. 5736, June 18, 2010

8. A lawyer who is engaged in another profession or occupation concurrently with the practice of
law shall make clear to his client whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity. (Rule 15.08)

C. A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client in his possession (Canon 16,
Code of Professional Responsibility)

Barcenas v. Atty. Alvero, A.C. No. 8159, April 23, 2010

1. A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the client.
(Rule 16.01)

Tarog v. Atty. Ricafort, A.C. No. 8253, March 15, 2011

2. A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client separate and apart from his own and those of
others kept by him. (Rule 16.02)

Villanueva v. Atty. Ishiwata, A.C. No. 5041, November 23, 2004

3. A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when due or upon demand. However,
he shall have a lien over the funds and may apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy
his lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also have a
lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he has secured for his client as provided for
in the Rules of Court.(Rule 16.03)

Rule 138, Sec. 37, Revised Rules of Court

Vda de Caia v. Hon. Victoriano, G.R. No. L-12905, February 26, 1959

4. A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the client's interests are fully protected
by the nature of the case or by independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client
except, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is
handling for the client. (Rule 16.04)

Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009

D. A lawyer owes fidelity to his clients cause (Canon 17, Code of Professional Responsibility)

Hernandez v. Go, A.C. No. 1526, January 31, 2005

Marcial L. Abiero v. Bernardo G. Juanino, A.C. No. 5302, February 18,
2005

E. A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence (Canon 18, Code of Professional
Responsibility)

Dimarucot v. People, G.R. No. 183975, September 20, 2010.

Apex Mining, Inc. v CA, G.R. No. 133750, November 29, 1999
Rasmus G. Anderson vs. Reynaldo A. Cardeo, A.C. No. 3523, January 17,
2005

1. A lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which he knows or should know that he is not
qualified to render. However, he may render such service if, with the consent of his client, he can
obtain as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent on the matter. (Rule 18.01)

Juan v. Atty. Baria, A.C. No. 5817, May 27, 2004.

2. A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter without adequate preparation. (Rule 18.02)

De Roy vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80718, January 29, 1988
Legarda vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 94457, March 18, 1991

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

Sambajon, et. al. v. Suing, A.C. No. 7062, 26 September 2006

Adrimisin v. Javier, A.C. No. 2591, 08 September 2006
Valeriana U. Dalisay vs. Melanio Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, April 22, 2005
4. 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. (Rule 18.04)

Peter D. Garrucho vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 143791, January 14, 2005
Anastacio-Briones v. Zapanta, A.C. No. 6266, 16 November 2006

F. A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal (Canon 19, Code of Professional Responsibility)

1. A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client
and shall not present, participate in presenting or threatening to present unfounded criminal charges
to obtain an improper advantage in any case or proceeding. (Rule 19.01)

Pena v. Atty. Aparicio,A.C. No. 7258 June 25, 2007

2. A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the representation,
perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same,
and failing which, he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the Rules of
Court. (Rule 19.02)

Dalisay v. Atty. Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, January 23, 2006

3. A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the procedure in handling the case. (Rule 19.03)

Fernandez v. Atty. Novero, Jr., A.C. No. 5394, December 2, 2002

G. A lawyer shall charge only fair and reasonable fees (Canon 20, Code of Professional
Responsibility)

Shirley Loria Toledo, et al.. vs. Alfredo E. Kallos, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1900, January 28, 2005
Dalisay v. Atty. Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, January 23, 2006
Lijauco v. Atty. Terrado, A.C. No. 6317 August 31, 2006
Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court

1. A lawyer shall be guided by the following factors in determining his fees:

(a) the time spent and the extent of the service rendered or required;
(b) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
(c) The importance of the subject matter;
(d) The skill demanded;
(e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of acceptance of the proffered case;
(f) The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he
belongs;
(g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting to the client from the service;
(h) The contingency or certainty of compensation;
(i) The character of the employment, whether occasional or established; and
(j) The professional standing of the lawyer.(Rule 20.01)

Doy Mercantile, Inc. v. AMA Computer College, G.R. No. 155311, March 31, 2004

2. A lawyer shall, in case of referral, with the consent of the client, be entitled to a division of fees
in proportion to the work performed and responsibility assumed. (Rule 20.02)

3. A lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and consent of the client, accept any fee, reward,
costs, commission, interest, rebate or forwarding allowance or other compensation whatsoever
related to his professional employment from anyone other than the client. (Rule 20.03)

4. A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to
judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice or fraud. (Rule 20.04)

Pineda v. Atty. De Jesus, G.R. No. 155224 August 23, 2006

H. A lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of his client even after the attorney-client
relation is terminated (Canon 21, Code of Professional Responsibility)

Sec. 20 (e), Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court

Atty. Alcantara v. Atty. De Vera, A.C. No. 5859, November 23, 2010
Palm v. Atty. Iledan, Jr. A.C. No. 8242, October 2, 2009

1. A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client except;
(a) When authorized by the client after acquainting him of the consequences of the disclosure;
(b) When required by law;
(c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his employees or associates or by judicial
action (Rule 21.01)

2. A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use information acquired in the course of
employment, nor shall he use the same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the
client with full knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto. (Rule 21.02)
3. A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give information from his files to an
outside agency seeking such information for auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data
processing, or any similar purpose. (Rule 21.03)
4. A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to partners or associates thereof unless
prohibited by the client. (Rule 21.04)
5. A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be required to prevent those whose services are
utilized by him, from disclosing or using confidences or secrets of the clients. (Rule 21.05)
6. A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client's affairs even with members of his
family. (Rule 21.06)
7. A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a particular case except to avoid
possible conflict of interest.(Rule 21.07)

I. A lawyer shall withdraw his services only for good cause and upon notice (Canon 22, Code of
Professional Responsibility)

Montano vs. IBP, AM No. 4215, May 21, 2001

1. A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the following case:

(a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in connection with the matter he
is handling;
(b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons and rules;
(c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the best interest of the client;
(d) When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
(e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services or fails to comply with the retainer
agreement;
(f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public office; and
(g) Other similar cases.(Rule 22.01 )

2. A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, subject to a retainer lien, immediately turn over
all papers and property to which the client is entitled, and shall cooperative with his successor in the
orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for the proper handling of the matter.
(Rule 22.02)

VI. Discipline of Lawyers

1. Power to Discipline
Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 139-B, Sec. 16, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 71, Revised Rules of Court
Gatmaytan vs. Ilao, A.C. No. 6086, January 26, 2005
2. Disbarment and Suspension
Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court
Yap-Paras vs. Paras, A.C. No. 4947, February 14, 2005

a. Objectives
Sps. Rafols, Jr. v. Atty. Barrios, Jr. A.C. No. 4973, March 15, 2010

b. Grounds
Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court
Mendoza v. Mercado, A.M. No. 1484, June 19, 1980
In Re: Suspension of Pelaez, March 3, 1923.

c. Procedure
Rule 139-B, Revised Rules of Court
Tabang v. Atty. Gacott, A.C. No. 6490, September 29, 2004
Cojuangco, Jr. v. Atty. Palma, A.C. No. 2474, June 30, 2005

3. Liabilities and Disabilities of Lawyers

a. Purchase of Clients Properties
Art. 1491, Civil Code
In Re: Suspension xxx, B.M. No. 793, July 30, 2004

b. Civil Liability for Damages

Art. 1170, Civil Code
Arts. 1171 and 2201 par. 2, Civil Code
Art. 1173, Civil Code
Soriano v. Atty. Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006

4. Res Ipsa Loquitor

Guiang vs. Antonio, Adm Case No. 2473, February 3, 1993

5. Reinstatement
Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution
Re: 2003 Bar Examinations, B.M. No. 1222, April 24, 2009
Overgaard v. Atty. Valdez, A.C. No. 7902, March 31, 2009

6. Executive Pardon
In re: Avancea, Adm. Case No. 407, August 15, 1967
Gutierrez vs. Villegas, G.R. No. L-11848, May 31, 1962

VII. Judicial Ethics

Preliminary Matters
A. Sources of Judicial Ethics
1987 Constitution (Arts. VIII, Art. XI and Art. III)
Civil Code (Arts. 9, 20, 27, 32, 35, 739, 1491, 2005, 2029 to 2035 & 2046)
Rules of Court (Rules 71, 135, 137, 139-B and 140)
Revised Penal Code (Arts. 204, 205, 206 & 207)
Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)
Canons of Judicial Ethics, August 1, 1946
Code of Judicial Conduct, September 5, 1989
Code of Judicial Conduct, October 20, 1989
Code of Professional Responsibility
New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, April 27, 2004

B. Qualifications of Judges
Sec. 7, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution
Art. 140, P.D. No. 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal Laws)
B.P. Blg. 129, Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980
 Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council, October 18, 2000
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Filomeno Pascual, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-783, July 29,
1996

VIII. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary

A. Canon 1. Independence

1. Section 1
Ramirez v. Corpus-Macandog, Adm. Matter Nos. R-351-RTJ, R-359-RJT, R-621-RTJ, R-684-
RTJ, R-687-RTJ & 86-4-9987-RTC, September 26, 1986
Ajeno v. Inserto, Adm. Matter No. 1098-CFI, May 31, 1976
Office of the Court Administrator v. Judge Floro, Jr., A.M. No. RTC-99-146

2. Section 2

3. Section 3
Sec. 12, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution
Melencio P. Manansala III vs. Fatima G. Asdala, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1916, May 10, 2005
In Re: Demetrio G. Demetria, A.M. No. 00-7-09-CA, March 27, 2001
Martinez v. Gironella, G.R. No. L-37635, July 22, 1975

4. Section 4
Sulu Islamic Asso. v. Malik, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-92-691, September 10, 1993

5. Section 5
Muez v. Judge Ario, MTJ-94-985, February 21, 1995

6. Section 6
Lecaroz v. Garcia, Adm. Matter No. 2271-MJ, September 18, 1981

7. Section 7

8. Section 8
Uy v. Capulong, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-91-766, April 7, 1993
Calilung v. Suriaga, A.M. Nos. MTJ-99-1191 & RTJ-99-1437, August 31, 2000

B. Canon 2. Integrity

1. Section 1
Re: Procedure Adopted by Judge Daniel Liangco, Adm. Matter No. 99-11-158-MTC, August 1,
2000
Editha O. Catbagan vs. Felixberto P. Barte, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1452, April 6, 2005

2. Section 2
Inciong v. De Guia, Adm. Matter No. R-249-RTJ, September 17, 1987
In Re: Report on the Judicial and Financial Audit Conducted in the MTCC, Koronadal City, A.M.
No. 02-9-233-MTCC, April 27, 2005

3. Section 3
In re: Jesus Cuenco, August 6, 1920
Thelma Canlas Trinidad-Pe Aguirre vs. Eduardo T. Baltazar, A.M. No. P-05-1957, February 7,
2005

C. Canon 3. Impartiality
1. Section 1
Dimacuha v. Concepcion, G.R. No. L-60842, September 30, 1982
Julius Neri vs. Jesus S. de la Pea, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1896, April 29, 2005
2. Section 2
Dela Cruz v. Bersamira, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1567, July 24, 2000
Spouses Nazareno v. Judge Almario, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-1195, February 26, 1997

3. Section 3
4. Section 4
Jugueta v. Boncaros, Adm. Matter No. 440-CFI, September 30, 1974

5. Section 5
People v. Judge Gako, GR No. 135045, December 15, 2000
People v. Kho, GR No. 139381, April 20, 2001
Gutierrez v. Santos, G.R. No. L-15824, May 30, 1961
6. Section 6

D. Canon 4. Propriety

1. Section 1
Re: immorality: Atienza v. Brilliantes, MTJ-92-706, March 29, 1995
Alday v. Cruz, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1530, March 14, 2001
Jaime Lim Co vs. Ruben R. Plata, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1501, March 14, 2005

2. Section 2
Martinez v. Pahimulin, Adm. Matter No. 78-MJ, August 30, 1982

3. Section 3

4. Section 4

5. Section 5

6. Section 6
Luzuriaga v. Bromo, Adm. Matter No. 2385-MJ, August 19, 1982
Barrera v. Barrera, G.R. No. L-31589, July 31, 1970
7. Section 7
Sec. 7, RA 3019
Sec. 17, Art. XI, 1987

8. Section 8
Mamba v. Garcia, A.M. No. MTJ-96-1110, June 25, 2001
Jordan P. Oktubre vs. Ramon P. Velasco, A.M. No. MTJ 02-1444, July 22, 2004

9. Section 9

10. Section 10

11. Section 11
Horst Franz Ellert v. Judge Galapon, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1294, July 31, 2000
Villareal v. Diongson, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1520, November 22, 2000

12. Section 12

13. Section 13
Arts. 210-211, Revised Penal Code
RA 3019
Art. 739, Civil Code
Capuno v. Jaramillo, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-944, July 20, 1994

14. Section 14

15. Section 15

E. Canon 5. Equality

1. Section 1

2. Section 2
3. Section 3
Aquino v. Valenciano, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-746, December 27, 1994

4. Section 4

5. Section 5
Parayno v. Meneses, G.R. No. 112684, April 26, 1994
Hurtado v. Judalena, G.R. No. L-40603, July 13, 1978
F. Canon 6 Competence and Diligence

1. Section 1
Libarios v. Dabalos, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-89-286, July 11, 1991
Albos v. Alaba, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-91517, March 11, 1994

2. Section 2
Lapena v. Marcos, Adm. Matter No. 1969-MJ, June 29, 1982
Barbarona v. Canda, A.M. No. MTJ-01-1355, April 20, 2000

3. Section 3
Seares v. Salazar, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1160, November 22, 2000
Hold Departure Order issued by Acting Judge Aniceto Madronio, A.M. No. 99-12-192-MTC
January 26, 2000
Lucia Layola vs. Judge Basilio Gabo, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-00-1524, January 26, 2000
Purita Lim vs. Cesar M. Dumlao, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1556, March 31, 2005

4. Section 4

5. Section 5
Bentulan v. Dumatol, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-999, June 15, 1994
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Aniceto L. Madronio, Sr., A.M. No. MTJ-04-1571, February
14, 2005
Ma. Teresa D. Columbres vs. Aniceto L. Madronio, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1461, March 31, 2005

6. Section 6
Santos v. Silva, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1579, January 18, 2001
Impao v. Makilala, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-88-184, MTJ-88-217 & MTJ-88-221, October 13,
1989
7. Section 7
In re: Flordeliza, March 12, 1923
Re: Report of Acting Presiding Judge Wilfredo F. Herico on Missing Cash Bonds, A.M. Nos. 00-
3-108-RTC and 00-11-260-MCTC, January 28, 2005

IX.Liabilities of Judges
A. Administrative Liability

Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted at the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (BR. 1), Surigao
City, A.M. No. P-04-1835, January 11, 2005
In re: Climaco, Adm. Case No. 134-J, January 21, 1974
In re: Echiverri, Adm. Matter No. 697-CFI, October 30, 1975
Re: Judge Silverio Tayao, RTC Br. 141, Mkt., Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-978, February 7, 1994

B. Civil Liability
State Prosecutors vs. Manuel T. Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92-876, September 19, 1994

C. Criminal Liability
Dela Cruz v. Concepcion, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-1062, August 25, 1994
Maceda v. Conrado Vasquez, G.R. No. 102781, April 22, 1993
In re: Climaco, Adm. Case No. 134-J, i 21, 1974