Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

A. Requisites for Admissions to the Bar Sec. 2. Requirements for all applicants for admission to the bar. - Every applicant for admission as a member of the bar must be a citizen of the Philippines, at least twenty-one years of a e, of ood moral character, and a resident of the Philippines! and must produce before the Supreme "ourt satisfactory evidence of ood moral character, and that no char es a ainst him, involvin moral turpitude, have been filed or are pendin in any court in the Philippines.#Rule $%&, RR"' B. Lawyers Oath Importance of the Lawyers Oath (, do solemnly swear that ( will maintain alle iance to the Republic of the Philippines, ( will support the "onstitution and obey the laws as well as the le al orders of the duly constituted authorities therein! ( will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doin of any in court! ( will not wittin ly or willin ly promote or sue any roundless, false or unlawful suit, or ive aid nor consent to the same! ( will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer accordin to the best of my )nowled e and discretion, with all ood fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients! and ( impose upon myself these voluntary obli ations without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me *od. 1. In Re: Al C. Ar osino !acts: Petitioner +l "aparros +r osino passed the bar e,aminations held in $--%. .he "ourt however deferred his oathta)in due to his previous conviction for Rec)less (mprudence Resultin (n /omicide. .he criminal case which resulted in petitioner0s conviction arose from the death of a neophyte durin fraternity initiation rites sometime in September $--$. +fter applyin for probation, havin it approved, and bein dischar ed from it upon the Probation 1fficer2s recommendation, petitioner filed before the Supreme "ourt a petition to be allowed to ta)e the lawyer0s oath. .he "ourt throu h then Senior +ssociate 3ustice 4lorentino P. 4eliciano issued a resolution requirin petitioner +l ". +r osino to submit to the "ourt evidence that he may now be re arded as complyin with the requirement of ood moral character imposed upon those see)in admission to the bar. (n compliance with the above resolution, petitioner submitted no less than fifteen #$5' certifications6letters e,ecuted by amon others two #2' senators, five #5' trial court 7ud es, and si, #8' members of reli ious orders. Petitioner li)ewise submitted evidence that a scholarship foundation had been established in honor of Raul "amali an, the hazin victim, throu h 7oint efforts of the latter0s family and the ei ht #&' accused in the criminal case. .he "ourt also required +tty. *ilbert "amali an, father of Raul, to comment on petitioner0s prayer to be allowed to ta)e the lawyer0s oath. (n his comment, he stated that he has for iven petitioner but left the "ourt to decide on whether petitioner is now morally fit for admission to the bar. Issue: 9hether +l +r osino should be allowed to ta)e the lawyer2s oath and practice law. "eld: :ES. .he "ourt is persuaded that ;r. +r osino has e,erted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul "amali an. .he "ourt stresses to ;r. +r osino that the lawyer0s oath is <1. a mere ceremony or formality for practicin law. Every lawyer should at +== .(;ES wei h his actions accordin to the sworn promises he ma)es when ta)in the lawyer0s oath. .he practice of law is a privile e ranted only to those who possess the strict intellectual and moral qualifications required of lawyers who are instruments in the effective and efficient administration of 7ustice. (t is the sworn duty of this "ourt not only to >weed out? lawyers who have become a dis race to the noble profession of the law but, also of equal importance, to prevent >misfits? from ta)in the lawyer0s oath, thereby further tarnishin the public ima e of lawyers which in recent years has undoubtedly become less than irreproachable. #. Or$es %. &eciem$re AC'()*(. April #+, #--( !acts:

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

+tty. @ictor @. Aeciembre was iven five blan) chec)s by Spouses 1lbes for security of a loan. +fter the loan was paid and a receipt issued, +tty. Aeciembre filled up four of the five chec)s for P5B, BBB with different maturity date. +ll chec)s were dishonored. .hus, +tty. Aeciembre fled a case for estafa a ainst the spouses 1lbes. .his prompted the spouses 1lbes to file a disbarment case a ainst +tty. Aeciembre with the 1ffice of the Car "onfidant of this "ourt. (n the report, "ommissioner Aulay recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for two years for violatin Rule $.B$ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. Issue: 9hether or not the suspension of +tty. Aeciembre was in accord with his fault. "eld: ;embership in the le al profession is a special privile e burdened with conditions. (t is bestowed upon individuals who are not only learned in the law, but also )nown to possess ood moral character. >+ lawyer is an oath-bound servant of society whose conduct is clearly circumscribed by infle,ible norms of law and ethics, and whose primary duty is the advancement of the quest for truth and 7ustice, for which he has sworn to be a fearless crusader.? Cy ta)in the lawyer0s oath, an attorney becomes a uardian of truth and the rule of law, and an indispensable instrument in the fair and impartial administration of 7ustice. =awyers should act and comport themselves with honesty and inte rity in a manner beyond reproach, in order to promote the public0s faith in the le al profession. (t is also larin ly clear that the "ode of Professional Responsibility was seriously trans ressed by his malevolent act of fillin up the blan) chec)s by indicatin amounts that had not been a reed upon at all and despite respondent0s full )nowled e that the loan supposed to be secured by the chec)s had already been paid. /is was a brazen act of falsification of a commercial document, resorted to for his material ain. Aeception and other fraudulent acts are not merely unacceptable practices that are dis raceful and dishonorable! they reveal a basic moral flaw. .he standards of the le al profession are not satisfied by conduct that merely enables one to escape the penalties of criminal laws. "onsiderin the depravity of the offense committed by respondent, we find the penalty recommended by the (CP of suspension for two years from the practice of law to be too mild. /is propensity for employin deceit and misrepresentation is reprehensible. /is misuse of the filled-up chec)s that led to the detention of one petitioner is loathsome. .hus, he is sentenced suspended indefinitely from the practice of law effective immediately. ). &e .u/man %. &e &ios Adm. Case 0o. 121). 3anuary #*, #--1 4AR&O, 3.: !acts: 1n $--5 she hired by Ae *uzman as counsel to form a Suzu)i Ceach /otel, (nc.#SC/(' in 1lon apo. (t was re istered with SE" and paid Ae Aios a monthly retainer fee of P5,BBB 1n Aecember $5,$--D, the corporation required Ae *uzman to pay unpaid subscribed share of stoc) of P2,2%5,BBB.BB on or before Aec. %B, $--D. =ater on 3anuary 2-, $--&, Ae *uzman received a notice of auction sale of her delinquent shares and a copy of board resolution authorizin the sale. She later learned that Ael Rosario, one of the incorporators of SC/( will acquire her shares. Such sale ousted her from the corporation while Ae Aios rose to be the president and Ae *uzman lost all her life savin s "omplainant alle ed she relied on the advice of Ae Aios and believed that he would help her with mana ement of the corporation. Respondent appeared as her counsel and si ned pleadin s. 9hile respondent contend that she only appeared because the property belon ed to SC/( and further said that complainant misunderstood the role of respondent as le al counsel of SC/(. .hat only her appearance was to protect the ri ht of SC/( .he said land of SC/( was owned by 3apanese incorporators and not the complainant and her relationship towards the investors turned sour because she misappropriated the funds and property of the corporation. .o save from ban)ruptcy, respondent advised all concerned stoc)holders to call for payment of unpaid subscriptions and sale of delinquent shares.

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

Ael Rosario transferred $BB shares to respondent in payment of le al services evidence by Aeed of 9aiver and transfer of corporate shares of stoc) 1n 1ct. 22, $---, (CP issued a resolution that the acts of respondent were not motivated by ill will as she acted in the best interest of her client. Issue: 96< there is conflict of interestE "eld: :es. .here is attorney-client relationship between the complainant and respondent since she was retained to form a corporation and appeared as counsel in behalf of complainant. .here was evidence of collusion between the board and respondent. .he respondent was now president of the SC/( which shows a clear case of conflict of interest. =awyers must conduct themselves, especially in their dealin with their clients and the public with honesty and inte rity in a manner beyond reproach. Respondent violated the prohibition a ainst conflictin of interests and en a in in unlawful, dishonest and immoral deceitful conduct. .he lawyer0s oath is a source of obli ations and violation thereof is a round for suspension, disbarment, or other disciplinary action. .he acts of respondent +tty. de Aios are clearly in violation of her solemn oath as a lawyer that this "ourt will not tolerate. AecisionF Suspension of 8 months with warnin . C. Code of 4rofessional Responsi$ility 54romul ated 3une #1, 12667 "/+P.ER (. ./E =+9:ER +<A S1"(E.: "+<1< $ - + =+9:ER S/+== GP/1=A ./E "1<S.(.G.(1<, 1CE: ./E =+9S 14 ./E =+<A +<A PR1;1.E RESPE". 41R =+9 14 +<A =E*+= PR1"ESSES. Rule $.B$ - + lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. Rule $.B2 - + lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessenin confidence in the le al system. Rule $.B% - + lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encoura e any suit or proceedin or delay any man2s cause. Rule $.BH - + lawyer shall encoura e his clients to avoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fair settlement. 1. &onton %s 8ansin co !AC89: .his is a disbarment complaint a ainst respondent +tty. Emmanuel 1. .ansin co #>respondent?' for serious misconduct. (n his "omplaint dated 2B ;ay 2BB%, Peter .. Aonton #>complainant?' stated that he filed a criminal complaint for estafa thru falsification of a public document a ainst Auane 1. Stier, Emelyn +. ;a ay and respondent, as the notary public who notarized the 1ccupancy + reement. Sometime in September $--5, ;r. StierIa G.S. citizen and thereby disqualified to own real property in his nameIa reed that the property be transferred in the name of ;r. Aonton, a 4ilipino. ;r. Stier, in the presence of ;r. Aonton, requested +tty. .ansin co to prepare several documents that would uarantee reco nition of him bein the actual owner of the property despite the transfer of title in the name of ;r. Aonton. +tty. .ansin co e,ecuted the 1""GP+<": +*REE;E<., reco nizin ;r. Stier0s free and undisturbed use of the property for his residence and business operations. .he 1""GP+<": +*REE;E<. was tied up with a loan which ;r. Stier had e,tended to ;r. Aonton.

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

"omplainant averred that respondent0s act of preparin the 1ccupancy + reement, despite )nowled e that Stier, bein a forei n national, is disqualified to own real property in his name, constitutes serious misconduct and is a deliberate violation of the "ode. "omplainant prayed that respondent be disbarred for advisin Stier to do somethin in violation of law and assistin Stier in carryin out a dishonest scheme. .he (CP Coard of *overnors recommended respondent0s suspension from the practice of law for si, months. 1n 2& 3uly 2BBH, respondent filed a motion for reconsideration before the (CP. Respondent stated that he was already D8 years old and would already retire by 2BB5 after the termination of his pendin cases. /e also said that his practice of law is his only means of support for his family and his si, minor children. I99:;: 9hether or not +tty. .ansin co should be suspended or disbarred. R:LI0.: .he "ourt finds respondent liable for violation of "anon $ and Rule $.B2 of the "ode. /e is suspended from the practice of law for S(J ;1<./S effective upon finality of this Aecision. + lawyer should not render any service or ive advice to any client which will involve defiance of the laws which he is bound to uphold and obey. + lawyer who assists a client in a dishonest scheme or who connives in violatin the law commits an act which 7ustifies disciplinary action a ainst the lawyer. Respondent had sworn to uphold the "onstitution. .hus, he violated his oath and the "ode when he prepared and notarized the 1ccupancy + reement to evade the law a ainst forei n ownership of lands. Respondent used his )nowled e of the law to achieve an unlawful end. Such an act amounts to malpractice in his office, for which he may be suspended. #. &ayan 9ta. Ana Christian 0ei h$orhood Association, Inc. %s. ;spiritu

!AC89: 1fficers and members of the Aayan Sta. +na "hristian <ei hborhood +ssociation (nc. sou ht the services of respondent re ardin a consolidated e7ectment case where they were bein sued as officers and members of the association. "omplainants lost, however, and respondent advised them to file a supersedeas bond to stay their eviction and so they entrusted payment therfore to respondent. /e receipted erroneously in the amount of P&8,888.D2 instead of the more than P2BB,BBB but was corrected afterwards. +ssociation President ;inerva *enato then made a verbal demand for respondent to return the remainin balance, upon which respondent delivered a personal chec) for P$H$,-BH.BB in the name of +tty. =eonardo 1campo. "hec) bounced for insufficency of funds so 1campo sent a demand letter to *enato to ma)e ood the payment of the chec). + number of demand letters were a ain sent to respondent. +n (nformation char in respondent with estafa was lii)ewise filed. 4or his part, respondent ar ued that the amount if P$H$, -BH.BB and not P2B8, H-D.BB was meant as paymen of the sub7ect porperty, he insisted that the instant administrative complaint must be dismissed. Issue: Aid respondent violate the "ode of Professional ResponsiibilityE "eld: :es. (t is clear that respondent misappropriated the money which his clients, herein complainants, had entrusted to him for a specific purpose, and such act cannot be countenanced. Rule $8.B$ of "anon $8 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from his client. + lawyer should be scrupulously careful in handlin money entrusted to him in his professional capacity, because a hi h de ree of fidelity and ood faith on his part is e,acted. (n PariKas v. Pa uinto, the "ourt had the occasion to state that >money entrusted to a lawyer

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

for a specific purpose, such as for filin fee, but not used for failure to file the case must immediately be returned to the client on demand.? (ndeed, a lawyer has no ri ht to unilaterally appropriate his or her client0s money. ). Ro$erto 9oriano %s Atty. <anuel &i/on A.C 0o. *+2#3anuary #(, #--*

!acts: + c o m p l a i n t - a f f i d a v i t f o r t h e d i s b a r m e n t o f + t t y . ; a n u e l A i z o n , f i l e d b y Roberto Soriano with the "ommission on CarAiscipline #"CA' of the (nter rated Car of thePhilippines. "omplainant Soriano alle ed thatrespondent had violated "anon $, Rule $.B$o f t h e " o d e o f P r o f e s s i o n a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y a n d t h a t t h e c o n v i c t i o n o f t h e l a t t e r f o r frustrated homicide, which involved moralturpitude, should result in his disbarment.+ c c o r d i n t o t h e u n r e f u t e d s t a t e m e n t s o f c o m p l a i n a n t , + t t y . A i z o n , w h o h a s y e t t o comply with this particular underta)in , evena p p e a l e d t h e c i v i l l i a b i l i t y t o t h e " o u r t o f +ppeals Issue: 9hether or not the atty. Aizon violates"anon $ of rule $.B$ of the "ode of Professional Responsibilities "eld: :es. (t is also larin ly clear thatrespondent seriously trans ressed "anon $ o f t h e " o d e o f P r o f e s s i o n a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y throu h his ille al possession of anunlicensed firearm his un7ust refusal tosatisfy his civil liabilities. /e has thusbrazenly violated the law and disobeyed thelawful orders of the courts. 9 e remind himthat, both in his attorney0s oath and in the "ode of Professional Responsibility, he boundhimself to >obey the laws of the land.?+ll told, +tty. Aizon has shown throu h this i n c i d e n t t h a t h e i s w a n t i n i n e v e n a b a s i c sense of 7ustice. /e obtained thebenevolence of the trial court when its u s p e n d e d h i s s e n t e n c e a n d r a n t e d h i m probation. +nd yet, it has been four years since he was ordered to settle his civill i a b i l i t i e s t o c o m p l a i n a n t . . o d a t e , respondent remains adamant in refusin to fulfill that obli ation. Cy his e,tremeimpetuosity and intolerance, as shown by hisviolent reaction to a simple trafficaltercation, he has ta)en away the earnin capacity, ood health, and youthful vi or of his victim. Still, +tty. Aizon be rud escomplainant the measly amount that could never even fully restore what the latter has lost. 1. Baustista %s.Berna$e A.C. 0o. *2*). !e$ruary 2, #--* !acts: +tty. Ser io Cernabe prepared and notarized a ;a )asanib na Salaysay purportedly e,ecuted by Aonato Salon a and complainant0s mother, Casilia de la "ruz. /erein complainant, @ictorina Caustista filed before the "ommission on Car Aiscipline of the (nte rated Car of the Philippines #(CP' on <ovember $8, 2BBH, prayin for the suspension or disbarment of respondent for malpractice and unethical conduct in the performance of his duties as a notary public and a lawyer. .he complainant claimed that her mother could not have e,ecuted the 7oint affidavit on 3anuary %, $--& because she has been dead since 3anuary 2&, $-8$. (n his answer, defendant, alle ed that the document was not falsified as he disclaimed any )nowled e about Casilia0s death. .hat he requested for Casilia0s presence and in her absence, he allowed a certain Pronebo, alle edly a son-in-law of Casilia, to si n above the name of the latter as shown by the word >by? on top of the name of Casilia. Respondent maintained that there was no for ery since the si nature appearin on top of Casilia0s name was the si nature of Pronebo. 1n +pril, 2BB5, complainant filed an +ffidavit of Aesistance a ainst the lawyer. Issue:

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

91< the respondent lawyer committed a violation of the "ode of Professional Responsibility and the <otarial =aw to warrant suspension or disbarment. 91< the +ffidavit of Aesistance of the petitioner e,onerates him from disciplinary proceedin s already initiated a ainst him. "eld: Respondent0s act of notarizin the ;a )asanib na Salaysay in the absence of one of the affiants is in violation of Rule $.B$ "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility and the <otarial =aw. Respondent was also remiss in his duty when he allowed Pronebo to si n in behalf of Casilia. .he acts of the affiants cannot be dele ated to anyone for what are stated therein are facts of which they have personal )nowled e. .hey should swear to the document personally and not throu h any representative. 1therwise, their representative0s name should appear in the said documents as the one who e,ecuted the same. + case of suspension or disbarment may proceed re ardless of interest or lac) of interest of the complainant. 9hat matters is whether, on the basis of the facts borne out by the record, the char e of deceit and rossly immoral conduct has been proven. + proceedin for suspension or disbarment is not a civil action where the complainant is a plaintiff and the respondent lawyer is a defendant. /eretofore, defendant0s notarial commission was revo)ed and he was disqualified from reappointment for a period of two years. (. =illanue%a %. Beradio A.C. 0o. *#+3anuary ##, #--+ !acts: L.his is a disbarment case a ainst +tty. Salud P. Ceradio #respondent', filed by the heirs of the late spouses =ucas and 4rancisca @illanueva #spouses @illanueva', namelyF +rdenio ;. 4onacier, +raceli ;. 4onacier, +lano ;. 4onacier, Eusebio ;. 4onacier, 3r., Rolando @. <azarro, +le7andro @. <azarro, ;ar arita @. "ollado, 4elisa "ollado, and /ermini ildo :lhi #complainants'. Lthe spouses @illanueva acquired several parcels of land in Pan asinan, one of which was covered by 1ri inal "ertificate of .itle #1".' <o. 2522. 4rancisca died in $-8&, and =ucas in $-DH. .heir five children, namely, Simeona, Susana, ;aria, +lfonso, and 4lorencia, survived them. L+lfonso e,ecuted an +ffidavit of +d7udication $ #affidavit of ad7udication' statin that as Mthe only survivin son and sole heirs #sic'M of the spouses @illanueva, he was ad7udicatin to himself the parcel of land under 1". <o. 2522. +lfonso then e,ecuted a Aeed of +bsolute Sale conveyin the property to +driano @illanueva. Respondent appeared as notary public on both the affidavit of ad7udication and the deed of sale. L"ontrary to the misrepresentations of +lfonso, his sister 4lorencia was still alive at the time he e,ecuted the affidavit of ad7udication and the deed of sale, as were descendants of the other children of the spouses @illanueva. L"omplainants accused respondent of )nowin the Mtrue facts and surroundin circumstancesM re ardin the properties of the spouses @illanueva, yet conspirin with +lfonso to deprive his co-heirs of their ri htful shares in the property. Lrespondent admitted that she notarized the affidavit of ad7udication and the deed of sale e,ecuted by +lfonso in $-&H. /owever, respondent denied that she conspired with +lfonso to dispose of fraudulently the property L+ccordin to respondent, the fact that none of +lfonso0s co-heirs filed their ob7ections at the time he e,ecuted the affidavit of ad7udication proved that most of the properties of the spouses @illanueva had earlier been distributed to the other heirs. (t also proved that the heirs had a reed to abide by the intention of the spouses @illanueva to leave the property to +lfonso. Respondent asserted that Mthe personal appearances and ac)nowled ment by the party to the document are the core of the ritual that effectively convert a private document into a public document M (bp0s findin sF

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

L(CP "ommissioner @illadolid found that respondent violated the provisions of the "ode of Professional Responsibility and the spirit and intent of the notarial law when she notarized the affidavit )nowin that +lfonso was not the sole compulsory heir of the spouses @illanueva (CP "ommissioner @illadolid held that respondent Men a ed in conduct that lessened confidence in the le al system.M +lthou h he found no evidence of fraudulent intent on respondent0s part,he recommended suspension of respondent0s notarial commission for one year. /e also recommended that respondent be reprimanded or suspended from the practice of law for up to si, months. Issue: whether or not the recommendation of ibp is correct in suspendin beradio "eld: L+ notary public is empowered to perform a variety of notarial acts, most common of which are the ac)nowled ment and affirmation of a document or instrument. (n the performance of such notarial acts, the notary public must be mindful of the si nificance of the notarial seal as affi,ed on a document. .he notarial seal converts the document from private to public, after which it may be presented as evidence without need for proof of its enuineness and due e,ecution. 5 .hus, notarization should not be treated as an empty, meanin less, or routinary act. .hey must uard a ainst any ille al or immoral arran ements. L9here admittedly the notary public has personal )nowled e of a false statement or information contained in the instrument to be notarized, yet proceeds to affi, his or her notarial seal on it, the "ourt must not hesitate to discipline the notary public accordin ly as the circumstances of the case may dictate. 1therwise, the inte rity and sanctity of the notarization process may be undermined and public confidence on notarial documents diminished. Lrespondent0s conduct amounted to a breach of "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility, which requires lawyers to obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the law and le al processes. Respondent also violated Rule $.B$ of the "ode which proscribes lawyers from en a in in unlawful, dishonest, immoral, or deceitful conduct. L.he court revo)ed the commission of respondent +tty. Salud P. Ceradio as <otary Public, if still e,istin , and disqualify her from bein commissioned a notary public for one #$' year. .he court further suspend respondent from the practice of law for si, #8' months *. 9amala %. =alencia A.C. 0o. (1)2. 3anuary ##, #--+. A:98RIA'<AR8I0;>, 3.: !AC89: Cefore us is a complaint dated ;ay 2, 2BB$ filed by "larita 3. Samala #complainant' a ainst +tty. =uciano A. @alencia #respondent' for Aisbarment (t was shown on record that Records show that durin the trial for non-payment of rentals, herein respondent, while bein the counsel for defendant @aldez, also acted as counsel for the tenants =a may, @alencia, Custamante and Cayu a by filin an E,planation and "ompliance before the R.". Respondent also represented @aldez in a civil case for e7ectment Gpon the promul ation of the decision, Presidin 3ud e Reuben P. dela "ruz warned respondent to refrain from repeatin the act of bein counsel of record of both parties in a civil case. /owever, in another "ivil "ase respondent, as counsel for @aldez, filed a "omplaint for Rescission of "ontract with Aama es and "ancellation of .ransfer "ertificate of .itle a ainst +lba, who is the respondent0s former client in previous cases. (n the "ivil "ase <o. BB-D$%D for e7ectment, respondent submitted .". <o. 2D%B2B as evidence of @aldez0s ownership despite the fact that a new .". <o. 2D55BB was already issued in the name of +lba on 4ebruary 2, $--5. "ivil "ase <o. 2BBB-85D-;N for rescission of contract and cancellation of .". <o. 2D55BB was also filed on <ovember 2D, 2BBB, before R.", Cranch 2D%, ;ari)ina "ity. (t was revealed durin the hearin that "ivil "ase <os. BB-D$%D and 2BBB-85D-;N were filed on the same date, althou h in different courts and at different times.

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

"ulled from the records, @aldez entered into a retainer a reement with respondent. +s payment for his services, he was allowed to occupy the property for free and utilize the same as his office pursuant to their retainer a reement. Respondent filed (.S. <os. BB-HH%-H% and B$-B%8$82HH both entitled >@alencia v. Samala? for estafa and rave coercion, respectively, to protect his client0s ri hts a ainst complainant who filed (.S. <o. BB-H%B8H5 for estafa a ainst =a may, and (.S. <o. BB-H%$&H8 a ainst +lvin @alenciaHD for trespass to dwellin . Aurin the hearin , respondent admitted that he sired three children by .eresita =a may who are all over 2B years of a e, H& while his first wife was still alive. /e also admitted that he has ei ht children by his first wife, the youn est of whom is over 2B years of a e, and after his wife died in $--D, he married =a may in $--&.H- Respondent further admitted that =a may was stayin in one of the apartments bein claimed by complainant. /owever, he does not consider his affair with =a may as a relationship5B and does not consider the latter as his second family. /e reasoned that he was not stayin with =a may because he has two houses, one in ;untinlupa and another in ;ari)ina. I99:;: 96< +tty. @alencia committed rave professional misconduct on the followin F $.' Cy servin as counsel for contendin parties. 2.' Cy )nowin ly misleadin the court by submittin false documentary evidence. %.' Cy initiatin numerous cases in e,chan e for non-payment of rental fees. H.' for bein immoral by sirin ille itimate children.

";L&: $.' :es, he committed rave misconduct. Rule $5.B%, "anon $5 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not represent conflictin interests e,cept by written consent of all concerned iven after a full disclosure of the facts. + lawyer may not, without bein uilty of professional misconduct, act as counsel for a person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former client. /e may not also underta)e to dischar e conflictin duties any more than he may represent anta onistic interests. .his stern rule is founded on the principles of pu$lic policy and ood taste. (t sprin s from the relation of attorney and client which is one of trust and confidence. =awyers are e,pected not only to )eep inviolate the client0s confidence, but also to avoid the appearance of treachery and double-dealin . 1ne of the tests of inconsistency of interests is whether the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the full dischar e of the lawyer0s duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealin in the performance of that duty. +n attorney owes loyalty to his client not only in the case in which he has represented him but also after the relation of attorney and client has terminated. .he bare attorney-client relationship with a client precludes an attorney from acceptin professional employment from the client0s adversary either in the same case or in a different but related action. + lawyer is forbidden from representin a subsequent client a ainst a former client when the sub7ect matter of the present controversy is related, directly or indirectly, to the sub7ect matter of the previous liti ation in which he appeared for the former client.2% (n the case of <ombrado v. /ernandez, that the termination of the relation of attorney and client provides no 7ustification for a lawyer to represent an interest adverse to or in conflict with that of the former client. .he reason for the rule is that the client0s confidence once reposed cannot be divested by the e,piration of the professional employment.25 "onsequently, a lawyer should not, even after the severance of the relation with his client, do anythin which will in7uriously affect his former client in any matter in which he previously represented him nor should he disclose or use any of the client0s confidences acquired in the previous relation.28

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

(n this case, respondent0s averment that his relationship with +lba has lon been severed by the act of the latter of not turnin over the proceeds collected in connivance with the complainant, is unavailin . +lba may not be his ori inal client but the fact that he filed a case entitled >@aldez and +lba v. Custamante and her husband,? is a clear indication that respondent is protectin the interests of both @aldez and +lba in the said case. Respondent cannot 7ust claim that the lawyer-client relationship between him and +lba has lon been severed without observin Section 28, Rule $%& of the Rules of "ourt wherein the written consent of his client is required. (n another case, *onzales v. "abucana, 3r., citin the case of Ouiambao v. Camba, it was held thatF >.he proscription a ainst representation of conflictin interests applies to a situation where the opposin parties are present clients in the same action or in an unrelated action. (t is of no moment that the lawyer would not be called upon to contend for one client that which the lawyer has to oppose for the other client, or that there would be no occasion to use the confidential information acquired from one to the disadvanta e of the other as the two actions are wholly unrelated. (t is enou h that the opposin parties in one case, one of whom would lose the suit, are present clients and the nature or conditions of the lawyer0s respective retainers with each of them would affect the performance of the duty of undivided fidelity to both clients.? Respondent is bound to comply with "anon 2$ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility which states that >a lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of his client even after the attorney-client relation is terminated.? Reason for the prohibition is found in the relation of attorney and client, which is one of trust and confidence of the hi hest de ree. + lawyer becomes familiar with all the facts connected with his client0s case. /e learns from his client the wea) points of the action as well as the stron ones. Such )nowled e must be considered sacred and uarded with care. (t was clear at the case at hand that respondent0s representation of @aldez and +lba a ainst Custamante and her husband, in one case, and @aldez a ainst +lba, in another case, is a case of conflict of interests which merits a correspondin sanction from this "ourt. Respondent may have withdrawn his representation in "ivil "ase <o. -5-$B5-;N upon bein warned by the court, but the same will not e,culpate him from the char e of representin conflictin interests in his representation in other related cases. 2.' :es, he is uilty of )nowin ly misleadin the court by submittin false documentary evidence. Respondent failed to comply with "anon $B of the "ode of Professional Responsibility which provides that a lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doin of any in court! nor shall he mislead, or allow the "ourt to be mislead by any artifice. Gpon e,amination of the record, it was noted that "ivil "ase <o. 2BBB-85D-;N for rescission of contract and cancellation of .". <o. 2D55BB was also filed on <ovember 2D, 2BBB,%5 before R.", Cranch 2D%, ;ari)ina "ity, thus belyin the averment of respondent that he came to )now of +lba0s title only in 2BB2 when the case for rescission was filed. (t was revealed durin the hearin that "ivil "ase <os. BB-D$%D and 2BBB-85D-;N were filed on the same date, althou h in different courts and at different times. /ence, respondent cannot fei n i norance of the fact that the title he submitted was already cancelled in lieu of a new title issued in the name of +lba in $--5 yet, as proof of the latter0s ownership. (t matters not that the trial court was not misled by respondent0s submission of .". <o. 2D%B2B in the name of @aldez, dismissin the complaint for e7ectment. 9hat is decisive in this case is respondent0s intent in tryin to mislead the court by presentin .". <o. 2D%B2B despite the fact that said title was already cancelled and a new one, .". <o. 2D55BB, was already issued in the name of +lba. (n the case of :oun v. Catue as, S" held that a lawyer must be a disciple of truth. /e should bear in mind that as an officer of the court his hi h vocation is to correctly inform the court upon the law and the facts of the case and to aid it in doin 7ustice and arrivin at correct conclusion. .he courts, on the other hand, are entitled to e,pect only complete honesty from lawyers

"

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

appearin and pleadin before them. 9hile a lawyer has the solemn duty to defend his client0s ri hts and is e,pected to display the utmost zeal in defense of his client0s cause, his conduct must never be at the e,pense of truth. %.' 1n initiatin numerous cases in e,chan e for nonpayment of rental fees. <o. 9e find the char e to be without sufficient basis. .he act of respondent of filin the aforecited cases to protect the interest of his client, on one hand, and his own interest, on the other, cannot be made the basis of an administrative char e unless it can be clearly shown that the same was bein done to abuse 7udicial processes to commit in7ustice. .he filin of an administrative case a ainst respondent for protectin the interest of his client and his own ri ht would be puttin a burden on a practicin lawyer who is obli ated to defend and prosecute the ri ht of his client. H.' :es, S" find respondent liable for bein immoral by sirin ille itimate children. Gnder "anon $, Rule $.B$ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. (t may be difficult to specify the de ree of moral delinquency that may qualify an act as immoral, yet, for purposes of disciplinin a lawyer, immoral conduct has been defined as that >conduct which is willful, fla rant, or shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of respectable members of the community.? (n several cases, the "ourt did not hesitate to discipline a lawyer for )eepin a mistress in defiance of the mores and sense of morality of the community. .hat respondent subsequently married =a may in $--& after the death of his wife and that this is his first infraction as re ards immorality serve to miti ate his liability. (n this case, the admissions made by respondent are more than enou h to hold him liable on the char e of immorality. Aurin the hearin , respondent did not show any remorse. (t is noted that durin the hearin , respondent boasts in tellin the commissioner that he has two housesIin ;untinlupa, where his first wife lived, and in ;ari)ina, where =a may lives. (t is of no moment that respondent eventually married =a may after the death of his first wife. .he fact still remains that respondent did not live up to the e,actin standard of morality and decorum required of the le al profession. +""1RA(<*=:, the "ourt finds respondent +tty. =uciano A. @alencia *G(=.: of misconduct and violation of "anons 2$, $B and $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. /e is SGSPE<AEA from the practice of law for three #%' years, effective immediately upon receipt of herein Resolution. D. 98. LO:I9 :0I=;R9I8? LABORA8OR? "I." 9C"OOL 59L:'L"97 !AC:L8? and 98A!! vs. A88?. ROLA0&O C. &;LA CR:> CO<4LAI08: .his is a disbarment case filed by the 4aculty members and Staff of the Saint =ouis Gniversity-=aboratory /i h School #S=G=/S' a ainst +tty. Rolando ". Aela "ruz, principal of S=G-=/S, forF #a' pendin criminal case for child abuse and a labor case a ainst him in the <=R" #b' contractin a second marria e despite the e,istence of his first marria e #c' notarizin documents despite the e,piration of his commission. !AC89: Respondent was le ally married to .eresita Rivera in $-&2 at .uba, Cen uet. /e thereafter contracted a subsequent marria e with ;ary 3ane Pascua in $--H, said second marria e was subsequently annulled for bein bi amous. 1n the char e of malpractice, complainant alle ed that respondent deliberately subscribed and notarized certain le al documents on different dates from $-&& to $--D, despite e,piration of respondent0s notarial commission on %$ Aecember $-&D. Respondent, in his comment, denied the char es of child abuse, ille al deduction of salary and others which are still pendin before the St. =ouis Gniversity #S=G', <ational =abor Relations "ommission #<=R"' and the Prosecutor0s 1ffice. /e e,pressly admitted his second marria e despite the e,istence of his first marria e, and the subsequent nullification of the former. /e also admitted havin notarized certain documents durin the period when his notarial commission had already e,pired. /owever, he offered some e,tenuatin defenses such as ood faith, lac) of malice and noble intentions in doin the complained acts.

10

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

I99:;: 91< +tty. Aela "ruz must be disbarredE ";L&: .he "ourt has laid down with a common definition of what constitutes immoral conduct, vis-P-vis, rossly immoral conduct. (mmoral conduct is Mthat conduct which is willful, fla rant, or shameless, and which shows a moral indifference to the opinion of the ood and respectable members of the communityM and what is M rossly immoral,M that is, it must be so corrupt and false as to constitute a criminal act or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a hi h de ree.M Gndoubtedly, respondent0s act constitutes immoral conduct. But it is 0O8 so ross as to warrant his dis$arment. /owever, measured a ainst the definition, the court is not prepared to consider respondent0s act as rossly immoral. +s to the char e of misconduct for havin notarized several documents durin the years $-&&-$--D after his commission as notary public had e,pired, respondent humbly admitted havin notarized certain documents despite his )nowled e that he no lon er had authority to do so. /e, however, alle ed that he received no payment in notarizin said documents, but the requirements for the issuance of a commission as notary public must not be treated as a mere casual formality. 1ther char es constitutin respondent0s misconduct filed before the Prosecutor0s 1ffice of Ca uio "ity, the (nvesti atin Coard created by S=G and the pendin labor case before the <=R", need not be discussed, as they are still pendin before the proper forums. +t such sta es, the presumption of innocence still prevails in favor of the respondent. +tty. Rolando Aela "ruz (S uilty of immoral conduct, in disre ard of the "ode of Professional Responsibility, and SGSPE<AEA from the practice of law for a period of two #2' years, and another two #2' years for notarizin documents despite the e,piration of his commission or a total of four #H' years of suspension. @(1=+.EA RG=E PR1@(S(1< /19 (. 9+S @(1=+.EA C: +..:. AE=+ "RGQ /is act of contractin a second marria e while the first marria e was still in place, is contrary to honesty, 7ustice, decency and morality. Cy ma)in it appear that he is duly commissioned when he is not, he is, for all le al intents and purposes, indul in in deliberate falsehood, which the lawyer0s oath similarly proscribes. Cy actin as a notary public without the proper commission to do so.

$.$

+ lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. + lawyer shall at all times uphold the inte rity and di nity of the le al profession and support the activities of the inte rated bar.

6. Ad%incula %.<aca$ata !acts: "omplainant "ynthia +dvincula sou ht the le al services of +tty. ;acabata, respondent herein re ardin her collectibles from Oueensway .ravel and .ours. .hey met to discuss the possibility of filin a complaint because accounts remained unsettled. +fter their dinner, respondent sent complainant home and while she was about to step out of the car, respondent held her arm and )issed her on the chee) and embraced her very ti htly. .hey met a ain to finalize the draft of the complaint to be filed. +fter their meetin , respondent offered a ain a ride. +lon the way, complainant felt so sleepy and when she was almost restless, respondent stopped the car and forcefully held her face and )issed her lips while the other hand held her breast. "omplainant even in a state of shoc), succeeded in resistin his criminal attempt and immediately mana ed to et out of the car. She filed a disbarment case a ainst respondent for ross immorality. Issue: 9hether respondent is uilty of ross immoralityE "eld:

11

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

<o. (n Qa uirre v. "astillo, we reiterated the definition of immoral conduct, as such conduct which is so willful, fla rant, or shameless as to show indifference to the opinion of ood and respectable members of the community. 4urthermore, for such conduct to warrant disciplinary action, the same must not simply be immoral, but rossly immoral. (t must be so corrupt as to constitute a criminal act, or so unprincipled as to be reprehensible to a hi h de ree or committed under such scandalous or revoltin circumstances as to shoc) the common sense of decency. "omplainant0s bare alle ation that respondent made use and too) advanta e of his position as a lawyer to lure her to a ree to have se,ual relations with him, deserves no credit. .he burden of proof rests on the complainant which in the case at bar, she miserably failed to comply with. ;oreover, while respondent admitted havin )issed complainant on the lips, the same was not motivated by malice. Ce it noted also that the incident happened in a place where there were several people in the vicinity

2. Ronquilio, et. al %. Cha%e/ !AC89: "omplainants see) the disbarment or suspension of respondent from the practice of law for unlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful conduct. .hey alle e that respondent sold them a piece of property over which he has no ri ht nor interest, and that he refuses to return to them the amount they have paid him for it. "omplainant ;arili ". Ronquillo is a 4ilipino citizen currently residin in "annes, 4rance, to ether with her minor children, +le,ander and 3on +le,ander. (n ;ay $---, complainant ;arili Ronquillo and respondent entered into a Aeed of +ssi nment for the price of P$.5;. Respondent transferred, in favor of the complainants, his ri hts and interests over a townhouse unit and lot, located at D5 *ranwood @illas Subd., C4 /omes, Ouezon "ity. Respondent also obli ated himself to deliver to complainants a copy of the "ontract to Sell he e,ecuted with "rown +sia, the townhouse developer, dated +pril $-, $--8. Gpon full payment of the purchase price, respondent further undertoo) to have "rown +sia e,ecute a Aeed of +bsolute Sale over the property in favor of the complainants. Respondent received from complainants PD5B,BBB.BB upon e,ecution of the Aeed of +ssi nment. .he balance was to be paid by complainants in four equal quarterly installments of P$&D,5BB.BB each. .hus, complainants issued in favor of respondent four postdated chec)s in the amount of P$&D,5BB.BB each. "omplainants subsequently received information from "rown +sia that respondent has not paid in full the price of the townhouse at the time he e,ecuted the Aeed of +ssi nment. Respondent also failed to deliver to complainants a copy of the "ontract to Sell he alle edly e,ecuted with "rown +sia. 4or these reasons, complainant ;arili Ronquillo ordered the ban) to stop payment on the second chec) she issued to respondent in the amount of P$&D,5BB.BB. 1n ;arch 8, 2BBB, complainants, throu h their counsel, wrote respondent, informin him that they were still willin to pay the balance of the purchase price of the townhouse on the condition that respondent wor) on "rown +sia0s e,ecution of the Aeed of +bsolute Sale in their favor. (n the alternative, complainants demanded the return of the amount of P-%D,5BB.BB, plus le al interest, within ten days. .he amount of P-%D,5BB.BB represents the PD5B,BBB.BB down payment and the first quarterly installment of P$&D,5BB.BB which complainants paid respondent. (n a letter dated ;ay 2, 2BBB, addressed to complainants, respondent requested for an e,tension of 2B days from ;ay $5, 2BBB within which to either completely pay "rown +sia or return the money at your #complainants0' option. .he period lapsed but respondent did not ma)e ood his promise to pay "rown +sia in full, or return the amount paid by complainants. 1n 4ebruary 2$, 2BB2, complainants0 counsel sent respondent a second letter demandin the return of the amount of P-%D,5BB.BB, includin le al interest, for failin to comply with his promise. .he demand was unheeded.

12

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

/ence, this administrative complaint. I99:;: 96< respondent is uilty of dishonest and deceitful conduct. ";L&: :es, respondent is uilty of dishonest and deceitful conduct. S" a reed with the findin s of (nte rated Car of the Philippines #(CP' (nvesti atin "ommissioner ;ila ros @. San 3uan, to whom the instant disciplinary case was assi ned for investi ation, report and recommendation, found respondent uilty of dishonest and deceitful conduct proscribed under Rule $.B$, "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. She recommended that respondent be suspended from the practice of law for a period of three #%' years. +s provided by Rule $.B$, "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility provides that >+ lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.? >"onduct,? as used in this rule, does not refer e,clusively to the performance of a lawyer0s professional duties. .his "ourt has made clear in a lon line of casesD that a lawyer may be disbarred or suspended for misconduct, whether in his professional or private capacity, which shows him to be wantin in moral character, honesty, probity and ood demeanor, or unworthy to continue as an officer of the court. 4urthermore, Gnder Section 2D, Rule $%& of the Revised Rules of "ourt, a member of the Car may be disbarred or suspended on any of the followin roundsF #$' deceit! #2' malpractice or other ross misconduct in office! #%' rossly immoral conduct! #H' conviction of a crime involvin moral turpitude! #5' violation of the lawyer0s oath! #8' willful disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court! and #D' willfully appearin as an attorney for a party without authority. (n the instant case, respondent may have acted in his private capacity when he entered into a contract with complainant ;arili representin to have the ri hts to transfer title over the townhouse unit and lot in question. 9hen he failed in his underta)in , respondent fell short of his duty under Rule $.B$, "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. (t cannot be ainsaid that it was unlawful for respondent to transfer property over which one has no le al ri ht of ownership. Respondent was li)ewise uilty of dishonest and deceitful conduct when he concealed this lac) of ri ht from complainants. /e did not inform the complainants that he has not yet paid in full the price of the sub7ect townhouse unit and lot, and, therefore, he had no ri ht to sell, transfer or assi n said property at the time of the e,ecution of the Aeed of +ssi nment. /is acceptance of the bul) of the purchase price amountin to <ine /undred .hirty-Seven .housand 4ive /undred Pesos #P-%D,5BB.BB', despite )nowin he was not entitled to it, made matters worse for him. 9ith the Respondent0s adamant refusal to return to complainant ;arili Ronquillo the money she paid him respondent failed to live up to the strict standard of morality required by the "ode of Professional Responsibility and violated the trust and respect reposed in him as a member of the Car, and an officer of the court. Respondent0s culpability is therefore clear. /e received a letter from complainants0 counsel demandin the e,ecution of the Aeed of +bsolute Sale in favor of the complainants, or, in the alternative, the return of the money paid by complainants. (n reply to said letter, respondent ac)nowled ed his obli ation, and promised to settle the same if iven sufficient time. (n no uncertain terms, respondent admitted not havin full ownership over the sub7ect townhouse unit and lot, as he has yet to completely pay "rown +sia. .o be sure, complainants ave respondent sufficient time to fulfill his obli ation. /owever, it was only after almost two years had passed, after respondent promised to pay "rown +sia or return to complainants the amount they paid him, that complainants sent respondent a second letter& demandin solely the return of the amount of P-%D,5BB.BB, includin le al interest. Cy this time, it was indubitable that respondent would not be able to perform his end of their a reement. .he practice of law is not a ri ht but a privile e. (t is ranted only to those of ood moral character. .he Car must maintain a hi h standard of honesty and fair dealin . =awyers must conduct themselves beyond reproach at all times, whether they are dealin with their clients or the public at lar e, and a violation of the hi h moral standards of the le al profession 7ustifies the imposition of the appropriate penalty, includin suspension and disbarment.

13

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

Respondent +tty. /omobono .. "ezar is SGSPE<AEA from the practice of law for a period of ./REE #%' :E+RS, effective immediately. 1-. 8in '&umali %s 8orres !AC89: (n a "omplaint filed on 22 1ctober $---, complainant (sidra .in -Aumali char es respondent +tty. Rolando S. .orres #her Crother-in-law' with presentation of false testimony! participation in, consent to, and failure to advise a ainst, the for ery of complainant0s si nature in a purported Aeed of E,tra7udicial Settlement! and ross misrepresentation in court for the purpose of profitin from such for ery, thereby violatin his oath as a lawyer and the canons of le al and 7udicial ethics. (sidra0s parents died intestate, leavin several properties. +tty. .orres participated in the per7ury done by his wife 4elicisima and his sister-in-law ;iriam when they made it appear in the e,tra-7udicial settlement that they are the sole heirs. /e presented that document to the Re ister of Aeeds of "avite so that the property would be transferred to 4elicisima and ;iriam. .he lot was sold to +ntel /oldin s (nc. for P$,$-5,HBB and 4elicisima and ;iriam accepted the payment. +tty. .orres0 defenseF +ll the while he believed in ood faith that the .in sisters had already a reed on how to dispose of the said lot. (f ever complainant0s si nature was affi,ed on that document, it was done in ood faith. 1n $H 3une 2BBB, the "ourt referred the case to the (nte rated Car of the Philippines #(CP' for investi ation, report, and recommendation or decision. 1n - 3anuary 2BB%, after due hearin and consideration of the issues presented by both parties, (nvesti atin "ommissioner ;ila ros @. San 3uan of the "ommission on Car Aiscipline of the (CP found the actuations of the respondent to be violative of Rules $.B$ and $.B2 of "anon $ and Rule $B.B$ of "anon $B of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. .hus she recommended that the respondent be disbarred from the practice of law. (n its Resolution, of 2$ 3une 2BB%, the Coard of *overnors of the (CP approved and adopted "ommissioner San 3uan0s report, but reduced the penalty to suspension from the practice of law for si, years.

I99:;: 9hether or not +tty. .orres should be disbarred. R:LI0.: :es, he is uilty of ross misconduct. .he respondent has sufficiently demonstrated that he is morally and le ally unfit to remain in the e,clusive and honorable fraternity of the le al profession. (n his lon years as a lawyer, he must have for otten his sworn pled e as a lawyer. =+9:ER0S 1+./ (, .......................... , do solemnly swear that ( will maintain alle iance to the Republic of the Philippines! ( will support its "onstitution and obey the laws as well as the le al orders of the duly constituted authorities therein! ( will do no falsehood, nor consent to its commission! ( will not wittin ly or willin ly promote or sue any roundless, false or unlawful suit nor ive aid nor consent to the same! ( will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer accordin to the best of my )nowled e and discretion with all ood fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients! and ( impose upon myself this voluntary obli ation without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. S1 /E=P ;E *1A. .his oath to which all lawyers have subscribed in solemn a reement to dedicate themselves to the pursuit of 7ustice is not a mere ceremony or formality for practicin law to be for otten afterwards! nor is it mere words, drift and hollow, but a sacred trust that lawyers must uphold and )eep inviolable at all times. Cy swearin the lawyer0s oath, they become uardians of truth and the rule of law, as well as instruments in the fair and impartial dispensation of 7ustice. .he supreme penalty of disbarment is meted out only in clear cases of misconduct that seriously affect the standin and character of the lawyer as an officer of the court and member of the bar. 11. =ista :ni%esity %. 3ones

14

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

1#. &i/on %s. Lam$ino A.C. 0o. *2*6. Au ust 2, #--*. !acts: .wo students of GP were suspects for the )illin of Aennis @enturina. .he GP "hancellor see) the assistance of the <ational Cureau of (nvesti ation #<C('. +tty. Aizon requested to ta)e the suspects into his custody. +tty. ;arichu =ambino, =e al "ounsel of GP Ailiman, advised a ainst +tty. Aizon0s move as the latter was without a warrant. =ater, the "hancellor and @ice "hancellor also 7oined in opposin the turn-over of the students. +tty. Aizon is claimin that under its "harter the <C( was authorized to ma)e warrantless arrests. .he two student-suspects were eventually indicted in court. +tty. Aizon filed a complaint a ainst +tty. =ambino before the (nte rated Car of the Philippines #(CP', for violation of "anon $, Rules $.B$ to $.B% of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. +tty. Aizon had earlier filed a criminal complaint also a ainst +tty. =ambino, to ether with GP "hancellor and @ice "hancellor before the 1mbudsman, for violation of P.A. $&2- which ma)es it unlawful for anyone to obstruct the apprehension and prosecution of criminal offenses. +tty. =ambino in turn char ed +tty. Aizon before the (CP with violation of the "ode of Professional Responsibility, specifically "anon $, Rule $.B$, $.B2, and $.B%! "anon 8, Rules 8.B$ and 8.B2! and "anon &, Rule &.B$ Cy Report and Recommendation submitted to the Coard of *overnors of the (CP, the investi atin commissioner dismissed the case a ainst +tty. =ambino and recommended reprimand to +tty. Aizon. Issues: 91< the attempted arrest of the student suspects by the <C( could be validly made without a warrant. 91< there was probable cause for prosecutin petitioner for violation of P.A. <o. $&2-. "eld: .he <C( "harter clearly qualifies the power to ma)e arrests to be >in accordance with e,istin laws and rules.? Cy persistin in his attempt to arrest the suspected students without a warrant, +tty. Aizon violated Rule $.B2 of "anon $ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility which providesF Rule $.B2I+ lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessenin confidence in the le al system. .he ob7ection of the GP officials to the arrest of the students cannot be construed as a violation of P.A. <o. $&2-, Sec. $ #c' without renderin it unconstitutional, >they havin ? a ri ht to prevent the arrest at the time because their attempted arrest was ille al.? (ndeed, +tty. =ambino was le ally 7ustified in advisin a ainst the turn over of the suspects to +tty. Aizon, there bein no basis for him to effect a warrantless arrest +tty. Aizon was reprimanded and warned that a repetition of the same or similar infraction shall be dealt with more severely. 1). Li@auco %. 8errado A.C. 0o. *)1+ Au ust )1, #--* 4onente: ?0AR;9'9A08IA.O, J.: CO<4LAI08: *ross misconduct, malpractice and conduct unbecomin of an officer of the court when he ne lected a le al matter entrusted to him despite receipt of payment representin attorney0s fees. !AC89: =i7auco en a ed the services of +tty .errado in 3anuary 2BB$ for PDB,BBB.BB to assist in recoverin her deposit with Planters Aevelopment Can), Cuendia, ;a)ati branch in the amount of P$&B,BBB.BB and the release of her foreclosed house and lot located in "alamba, =a una. .he property identified as =ot <o. HB&-"-2 and re istered as .". <o. .-HB2$$- in the name of said ban) is the sub7ect of a petition for the issuance of a writ of possession then pendin before the Re ional .rial "ourt of Cinan, =a una. "omplainant alle ed that respondent failed to appear before the trial court in the hearin for the issuance of the 9rit of Possession and did not protect her interests in the "ompromise + reement which she subsequently entered into to end it.

15

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

Respondent averred that the PDB,BBB.BB he received from complainant was payment for le al services for the recovery of the deposit with Planters Aevelopment Can) and did not include the case pendin before the Re ional .rial "ourt of CiKan, =a una. /e admitted that he divided the le al fees with two other people as a referral fee. I99:;: 91< +tty. .errado uilty of violatin Rules $.B$ and -.B2 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. ";L&: +tty. Ro elio P. .errado is found *G(=.: of violatin Rules $.B$, -.B2, $&.B2 and 2B.B$ of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. /e is SGSPE<AEA from the practice of law for six (6) months effective from notice, and 98;R0L? 9+R<EA that any similar infraction will be dealt with more severely. /e is further ordered to R;8:R0, within thirty #%B' days from notice, the sum of PDB,BBB.BB to complainant =uzviminda ". =i7auco. RG=E $.B$ PR1@(S(1< + lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. + lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for le al services with persons not licensed to practice law, e,cept in certain cases. + lawyer shall handle any le al matter without adequate prepartion RE+S1< 41R CE(<* *G(=.: Cy lurin complainant to participate in a compromise a reement with a false and misleadin assurance that complainant can still recover after .hree #%' years her foreclosed property. Cy openly admittin he divided the PhpDB,BBB.BB to other individuals as commission6referral fees. Respondent0s disre ard for his client0s interests is evident in the iniquitous stipulations in the compromise a reement where the complainant conceded the validity of the foreclosure of her property! that the redemption period has already e,pired thus consolidatin ownership in the ban), and that she releases her claims a ainst it. .he (nvesti atin "ommissioner #(CP' observed that the fee of PDB,BBB.BB for le al assistance in the recovery of the deposit amountin to P$&B,BBB.BB is unreasonable.

-.B2

$&.B2

2B.B$

+ lawyer shall char e only fair and reasonable fees. 2B.$ states the determinin factors.

11. 4A.COR %s. CARA0&A0. !acts: P+*"1R and Cin o Royale e,ecuted a >*rant of +uthority to 1perate Cin o *ames.? (n the course of its operations, Cin o Royale incurred arrears amountin to P8,B8H,&%%.$H as of <ovember $5, 2BB$. (nstead of demandin the payment therefor, P+*"1R allowed Cin o Royale and respondent +tty. "arandan to pay the said amount in monthly installment of P%BB,BBB.BB from 3uly 2BB$ to 3une 2BB%. Cin o Royale then issued to P+*"1R 2H Can) of "ommerce chec)s in the sum of PD,2BB,BBB.BB si ned by respondent. /owever, they were all dishonored by reason of Cin o Royale0s >"losed +ccount.?Aespite demands, respondent failed to pay the amount of the chec)s. .his prompted P+*"1R to file a case a ainst respondent for violation of C.P. 22. P+*"1R contends that in issuin those bouncin chec)s, respondent is liable for serious misconduct, violation of the +ttorney0s 1ath and violation of the "ode of Professional Responsibility! and prays that his name be stric)en from the Roll of +ttorneys. (n his >1pposition? to the complaint, respondent averred that he is not liable for issuin bouncin chec)s because they were drawn by Cin o Royale. /is act of doin so >is not related to the office of a lawyer.? 1n <ovember 2B, 2BB$, P+*"1R closed the operations of Cin o Royale. Respondent filed a claim for dama es. Subsequently, Cin o Royale became ban)rupt. Respondent now maintains that the dishonor of the chec)s was caused by circumstances beyond his control and pleads that our power to disbar him must be e,ercised with reat caution. Issue: 9hether +tty. "arandan is uilty of serious misconduct! hence he should be disbarred. "eld: :ES, he was uilty of serious misconduct, but he was only suspended from the practice of law for 8 months. +s a lawyer, respondent is deemed to )now the law, especially C.P. Cl . 22. Cy issuin chec)s in violation of the provisions of this law, respondent is uilty of serious misconduct. >;isconduct has been defined as >wron or improper conduct!? and

16

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

> ross? has been held to mean >fla rant! shameful? #9ebster'. .his "ourt once held that the word misconduct implies a wron ful intention and not a mere error of 7ud ment.? Respondent li)ewise violated the +ttorney0s 1ath that he will, amon others, obey the laws! and the "ode of Professional Responsibility, specifically the followin provisionsF "anon $I+ lawyer shall uphold the "onstitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the law and le al processes. Rule $.B$I+ lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. "anon DI+ lawyer shall at all times uphold the inte rity and di nity of the le al profession and support the activities of the (nte rated Car. Rule D.B%I+ lawyer shall not en a e in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the le al profession.

1(. R;: R;4OR8 O0 8"; !I0A0CIAL A:&I8 CO0&:C8;& O0 8"; BOOA9 O! ACCO:089 O! A88?. RAB:;L .. A"O, CL;RA O! CO:R8 I=, R8C, ORA9, ;A98;R0 9A<AR !acts: (n a resolution dated 3une 2D, 2BB8, the Supreme "ourt found +tty. Raquel *. Nho, former cler) of court of the Re ional .rial "ourt, Cranch 5, 1ras, Eastern Samar, uilty of ross misconduct for his failure to ma)e a timely remittance of 7udiciary funds in his custody as required by 1"+ "ircular <o. &+-%. /e was ordered to pay a fine of P$B,BBB for his trans ression. .he matter did not end there, however. Cecause his malfeasance prima facie contravened "anon $, Rule $.B$2 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility, the "ourt ordered him to show cause why he should not be disciplined as a lawyer and as an officer of the court. (n his e,planation, +tty. Nho admitted that his failure to ma)e a timely remittance of the cash deposited with him was ine,cusable. /e maintained, however, that he )ept the money in the court0s safety vault and never once used it for his own benefit. +tty. Nho0s apparent ood faith and his ready admission of the infraction, althou h certainly miti atin , cannot ne ate the fact that his failure to remit P85,BBB in 7udiciary funds for over a year was contrary to the mandatory provisions of 1"+ "ircular &+--%. .hat omission was a breach of his oath to obey the laws as well as the le al orders of the duly constituted authorities% and of his duties under "anon $, Rule $.B$ of the "ode of Professional ResponsibilityF "+<1< $I+ lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and for le al processes. RG=E $.B$. + lawyer shall not en a e in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct. Issue: 9hether +tty. Nho is uilty of unlawful conduct in violation of the +ttorney2s 1ath. "eld: :ES. (t is no accident that these are the first edicts laid down in the "ode of Professional Responsibility for these are a lawyer0s foremost duties. =awyers should always )eep in mind that, althou h upholdin the "onstitution and obeyin the law is an obli ation imposed on every citizen, a lawyer0s responsibilities under "anon $ mean more than 7ust stayin out of trouble with the law. .he least a lawyer can do in compliance with "anon $ is to refrain from en a in in unlawful conduct. Cy definition, any act or omission contrary to law is unlawful. (t does not necessarily imply the element of criminality althou h it is broad enou h to include it. .hus, the presence of evil intent on the part of the lawyer is not essential in order to brin his act or omission within the terms of Rule $.B$ which specifically prohibits lawyers from en a in in unlawful conduct.

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

+tty. Nho0s conduct was not only far from e,emplary, it was unlawful as well. /owever, his candid and repentant admission of his error, his lac) of intent to ain and the fact that this is his first offense should temper his culpability considerably. Gnder the circumstances, a fine of P5,BBB should suffice.

1*. .ue%arra %. ;ala A.C. 0o. +1)* Au ust 1, #--+ !acts: L 1n ;arch H, 2BB2 a complaint of disbarment was filed before the (nte rated Car of the Philippines "ommittee on Car Aiscipline a ainst +tty. 3ose Emmanuel ;. Eala a.).a. <oli Eala for rossly immoral conduct and unmiti ated violation of the lawyer0s oath. (n the "omplaint, *uevarra first met the respondent in 3anuary 2BBB when his then fiancRe (rene ;o7e introduced respondent to him as her friend who was married to ;arianne .antoco with whom he had three children. L +fter his marria e to (rene on 1ctober D, 2BBB, "omplainant noticed that from 3anuary to ;arch 2BB$, (rene had been receivin from respondent "ellphone calls, as well as messa es some which read >( love you,? >( miss you,? or >;eet you at ;e amall.? /e also noticed that (rene habitually went home very late at ni ht or early in the mornin of the followin day, and sometimes did not o home from wor). 9hen he as)ed her whereabouts, she replied that she slept at her parent0s house inCinan onan, Rizal or she was busy with her wor). L (n 4ebruary or ;arch 2BB$, complainant saw (rene and Respondent to ether on two occasions. 1n the second occasion, he confronted them followin which (rene abandoned the con7u al house. L 1n +pril 22, 2BB$ complainant went uninvited to (rene0s birthday celebration at which he saw her and the respondent celebratin with her family and friends. 1ut of embarrassment, an er and humiliation, he left the venue immediately. 4ollowin that incident, (rene went to the con7u al house and hauled off all her personal belon in s. L "omplainant later found a handwritten letter dated 1ctober D, 2BBD, the day of his weddin to (rene, "omplainant soon saw respondent0s car and that of (rene constantly par)ed at <o. D$-C$$ Street, <ew ;anila where as he was later learn sometime in +pril 2BB$, (rene was already residin . /e also learned still later that when his friends saw (rene on about 3anuary $&, 2BB2 to ether with respondent durin a concert, she was pre nant. Issue: 9hether "oncubina e or +dulterous relationship, be the reason for the disbarment of +tty. 3ose Emmanuel Eala. "eld: =awyer0s oath stated that a lawyer should support the "onstitution and obey the laws, ;eanin he shall not ma)e use of deceit, malpractice, or other ross misconduct, rossly immoral conduct, or be convicted in any crime involvin moral turpitude. (n the case at bar +tty. Eala was accused of "oncubina e, under +R.. %%H of the Revised Penal "ode, > +ny husband who shall )eep a mistress in a con7u al dwellin , or, shall have se,ual intercourse, under scandalouscircumstances, with a woman who is not his wife, or shall cohabit with her in any other place, shall be punished by prision correccional in its minimum and medium period. Section 2 of +R.. J@ states that >;arria e, as an inviolable social institution, is the foundation of the family and shall be protected by the state. Respondent0s rossly immoral conduct runs afoul of the constitution and the laws, that he as a lawyer has sworn to uphold. /ence the court declared +tty. 3ose Emmanul ;. Eala A(SC+RREA for rossly immoral conduct, violation of his oath of office, and violation of canon $, Rule $.B$ and "anon D, Rule D.B% of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. A. "anon 2 "+<1< 2 - + =+9:ER S/+== ;+NE /(S =E*+= SER@("ES +@+(=+C=E (< +< E44("(E<. +<A "1<@E<(E<. ;+<<ER "1;P+.(C=E 9(./ ./E (<AEPE<AE<"E, (<.E*R(.: +<A E44E".(@E<ESS 14 ./E PR14ESS(1<. Rule 2.B$ - + lawyer shall not re7ect, e,cept for valid reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.

1!

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

Rule 2.B2 - (n such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he shall not refuse to render le al advice to the person concerned if only to the e,tent necessary to safe uard the latter2s ri hts. Rule 2.B% - + lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act desi ned primarily to solicit le al business. Rule 2.BH - + lawyer shall not char e rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant.

E. "anon 5 "+<1< 5 - + =+9:ER S/+== NEEP +CRE+S. 14 =E*+= AE@E=1P;E<.S, P+R.("(P+.E (< "1<.(<G(<* =E*+= EAG"+.(1< PR1*R+;S, SGPP1R. E441R.S .1 +"/(E@E /(*/ S.+<A+RAS (< =+9 S"/11=S +S 9E== +S (< ./E PR+".("+= .R+(<(<* 14 =+9 S.GAE<.S +<A +SS(S. (< A(SSE;(<+.(<* ./E =+9 +<A 3GR(SPRGAE<"E. 1. 9ps. Cilliams %. ;nrique/ A.C. 0o. *)() !e$ruary #+, #--* !actsF +tty. Rudy .. Enriquez stands char ed with Munlawful, dishonest, immoral and deceitful acts in violation of the "ode of Professional Responsibility and the "anons of Professional Ethics, and with conduct unbecomin an attorney.M .he char es are contained in the 3oint "omplaint-+ffidavit for Aisbarment $ filed by the spouses Aavid 9. 9illiams and ;arisa C. 9illiams. (t appears that respondent is the counsel of record of the plaintiffs in "ivil "ase <o. $%HH% 2 pendin before the Re ional .rial "ourt, Cranch %%, Auma uete "ity where complainants are the defendants. +ccordin to the complainant-spouses, ;arisa 9illiams bou ht the lot sub7ect of the controversy. + .ransfer "ertificate of .itle #.".' was then issued in her favor, statin that she is M4ilipino, married to Aavid 9. 9illiams, an +merican citizen.M% 1n 3anuary &, 2BBH, respondent char ed her with falsification of public documents before the 1ffice of the "ity Prosecutor of Auma uete "ity. +ttorney Enriquez, quotes more outdated law, declarin that her Mact of marryin M her husband was equivalent to renouncin her citizenship. /e also do edly attempts to show that the $-&D "onstitution supports his position, not ;arisa0s (n their Position Paper, complainants claimed that respondent had maliciously and )nowin ly filed fabricated cases a ainst them and that his acts were forms of attempted e,tortion. .hey also adopted their 7oint complaintaffidavit by way of incorporation, alon with their other pleadin s. 4or his part, respondent maintained that complainant ;arisa 9illiams was no lon er a citizen of the Republic of the Philippines as a result of her marria e to Aavid 9illiams. .here is no evidence shown by respondent that complainant ;arisa Cacatan-9illiams has renounced her 4ilipino citizenship e,cept her "ertificate of ;arria e, which does not show that she has automatically acquired her husband0s citizenship upon her marria e to him. .he cases cited by respondent are not applicable in this case as it is clear that they refer to aliens acquirin lands in the Philippines. (ssueF 9hether or not +tty. Enriquez0s insufficient )nowled e of the law shall be a round for his disbarment. Rulin F +s pointed out by the (nvesti atin "ommissioner, "anon 5 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility requires that a lawyer be updated in the latest laws and 7urisprudence. $B (ndeed, when the law is so elementary, not to

1"

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

)now it or to act as if one does not )now it constitutes ross i norance of the law. $$ +s a retired 7ud e, respondent should have )nown that it is his duty to )eep himself well-informed of the latest rulin s of the "ourt on the issues and le al problems confrontin a client. $2 (n this case, the law he apparently misconstrued is no less than the "onstitution,$% the most basic law of the land. $H (mplicit in a lawyer0s mandate to protect a client0s interest to the best of his6her ability and with utmost dili ence is the duty to )eep abreast of the law and le al developments, and participate in continuin le al education pro rams. $5 .hus, in championin the interest of clients and defendin cases, a lawyer must not only be uided by the strict standards imposed by the lawyer0s oath, but should li)ewise espouse le ally sound ar uments for clients, lest the latter0s cause be dismissed on a technical round. $8 ( norance encompasses both substantive and procedural laws. $Dlavvph!1.net 9e find too harsh the recommended penalty of the (nvesti atin "ommissioner. (t must be stressed that the power to disbar or suspend must be e,ercised with reat caution. 1nly in a clear case of misconduct that seriously affects the standin and character of a lawyer as an officer of the "ourt and member of the bar will disbarment or suspension be imposed as a penalty. $& Pursuant to the (CP "ommission on Car Aiscipline0s *uidelines for (mposin =awyer Sanctions,$- and considerin further that this is respondent0s first infraction, we find that the penalty of reprimand as recommended by the (CP "ommission on Car Aiscipline, will suffice.

#. &ulalia %. Cru/ 3uan &ulalia, 3r., %s Atty. 4a$lo C. Cru/ 5A.C. 0o, *6(1, April #(, #--+ D!ormerly CB& Case 0o. -1'1)6-E7 !acts: +tty. Pablo ". "ruz, ;unicipal =e al 1fficer of ;eycauayan, Culacan #respondent', is char ed by 3uan Aulalia, 3r. #complainant' of violation of the "ode of Professional Responsibility. "omplainants wife Susan Soriano Aulalia filed an application for buildin permit for the construction of a warehouse. Aespite compliance with all the requirements for the purpose, she failed to secure a permit, she attributin the same to the opposition of respondents who wrote a September $%, 2BBH letter to "arlos 3. +bacan, ;unicipal En ineer and concurrent Cuildin 1fficial of ;eycauayan sayin that unbearable nuisances that the construction creates and its adverse effects particularly the imminent dan er and dama e to their properties, health and safety of the nei hbors ad7oinin the site. Cy complainants claim, respondent opposed the application for buildin permit because of a personal rud e a ainst his wife Susan who ob7ected to respondents marryin her first cousin (melda Soriano on September $D, $-&- while respondents marria e with "arolina + aton which was solemnized on Aecember $D, $-8D, is still subsistin . Respondent married (melda Soriano on September $D, $-&- at the "lar) "ounty, <evada, GS+,2$ when the 4amily "ode of the Philippines had already ta)en effect.22 /e invo)es ood faith, however, he claimin to have had the impression that the applicable provision at the time was +rticle &% of the "ivil "ode.2% 4or while +rticle 258 of the 4amily "ode provides that the "ode shallhave retroactive application, there is a qualification there under that it should not pre7udice or impair vested or acquired ri hts in accordance with the "ivil "ode or other laws. (n respondents case, he bein out of the country since $-&8, he can be iven the benefit of the doubt on his claim that +rticle &% of the "ivil "ode was the applicable provision when he contractedthe second marria e abroad. 4rom $-&5 when alle edly his first wife abandoned him, an alle ation which was not refuted, until his marria e in $-&- with (melda Soriano, there is no showin that the was romantically involved with any woman. +nd, it is undisputed that his first wife has remained an absentee even durin the pendency of this case.Respondents misimpression that it was the "ivil "ode provisions which applied at the time he contracted his second marria e and the seemin ly unmindful attitude of his residential community towards his second marria e notwithstandin , respondent may not o suit free. "eld: Respondent violated "anon 5 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility which providesF "+<1< 5 + lawyer shall )eep abreast of le al developments, participate in continuin le al education pro rams, support efforts to achieve hi h standards in law schools as well as in the practicaltrainin of law students and assist in disseminatin information re ardin the law and 7urisprudence.RespondentSs claim that he was not aware that the 4amily "ode already too) effect on +u ust %, $-&& as he was in the Gnited States from $-&8 and stayed there until he came bac) to thePhilippines to ether with his second wife on 1ctober -, $--B does not lie, as Mi norance of the law e,cuses no one from compliance therewith.M(t must be emphasized that the primary duty of lawyers is to obey the laws of the land and promote respect for the law and le al processes. .hey are e,pected to be in the forefront in theobservance and maintenance of the rule of law. .his duty carries with it the obli ation to be well-informed of the e,istin laws and to )eep abreast with le al developments, recent enactments and 7urisprudence. (t is imperative that they be conversant with basic le al principles. Gnless they faithfully comply with such duty, they may not be able to dischar e competently and dili ently theirobli ations as members of the bar. 9orse, they may become susceptible to committin

20

Problem Area in Legal Ethics Dean Ulan Sarmiento SY 2011-2012

mista)es.9/ERE41RE, respondent +tty. Pablo ". "ruz is uilty of violatin "anon 5 of the "ode of Professional Responsibility and is SGSPE<AEA from the practice of law for one year. /e is 9+R<EA that asimilar infraction will be dealt with more severely

21