Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Legal Ethics Cases
Legal Ethics Cases
11 or advertisements, or by personal
IN RE: LUIS B. TAGORDA communications or interview not
March 23, 1929 warranted by personal relations is
Malcolm, J. UNPROFESSIONAL.
o Canon 28: Stirring up litigation,
FACTS: directly or through agents
Luis B. Tagorda is a practicing attorney unprofessional to volunteer advice to
and a member of the provincial board of bring a lawsuit and indictable at
Isabela common law
He wrote in a card written in Spanish and Common barratry frequently stirring up
Ilocano saying: suits and quarrels between individuals was
As notary public, he can execute a deed of a crime at common law penalty : disbar
sale for the purchase of land as req. by the Solicitation of employment is a ground for
cadastral office he can help you collect loans disbarment or suspension
although long overdue
He also admits that he is the author of a ISSUE : Whether or not Atty. Tagorda violated
letter addressed to a lieutenant of barrio in the Code of Professional Ethics
his home that says:
o Informing him that he will be HELD: Yes, suspended from practice as an
inducted as a member of the attorney-at-law for the period of one month
provincial board and wants to ask for from April 1, 1929
suggestions Law is a profession, not a business
o He also said that despite The lawyer may not seek or obtain
membership in the board, residence employment by himself or through
in Echague others
o Despite being part of the provincial Destructive of the honor of a great
board exercise legal profession as profession
a lawyer and notary public Lowers the standards of the profession
o He clarified that other people would Fiscal of Isabela suggests that Tagorda
think that he would be DQ but thats be reprimanded only
not true. Mitigating circumstance : intimation that
o Hes asking the Lt. to disseminate he was unaware of the impropriety of
the info to the barrio his acts ; his youth and inexperience at
Such acts violate Section 21 of the Code of the bar ; his promise not to commit a
Civil Procedure with respect to disbarments similar mistake in the future
Act No. 2828 amended the section and
provided: The practice of soliciting cases
at law for the purpose of gain, either
personally or through paid agents or
brokers , constitutes malpractice
The Statute conforms to the principle of
Code of Professional Ethics adopted by the
American Bar Assoc. Canons 27 & 28
o Canon 27: Advertising, direct or
indirect most worthy and effective
adv of a lawyer is the
establishment of a well-merited
reputation of professional
capacity and fidelity to trust ;
solicitation of business by circulars
FACTS: FACTS:
Atty. Adriano Dacanay was admitted to Atty. Bayot is an atty-at-law charged for
the bar in 1954 malpractice for publishing an ad in the
He sought to enjoin Juan Collas Jr. and SUNDAY TRIBUNE on June 13, 1943
nine other lawyers from practicing law In the ad:
under Baker & McKenzie, a law firm in Marriage license promptly secured and avoid
Illinois thru a verified complaint in delay ; consultation on any party free for the
1980 poor
Vicente A. Torres wrote a letter in Nov Bayot first DENIED publishing the ad
1979 using the letter head of Baker & Thru his atty, he admitted it and prayed for
McKenzie which contains the names of indulgence & mercy
the 10 lawyers asked Rosie Clurman He promised not to repeat such
for the release of 87 shares of Cathay professional misconduct in the future and to
Products Intl Inc to HE Gabriel, a client. abide by the ethical rules
Atty. Dacanay denied any liability of He also alleged that it was published only
Clurman to Gabriel. once in the tribune and that he never had
He asked if the lawyer of Gabriel is any case at law by reason
Baker & McKenzie , and if not whats Brought to the SC
the purpose of using the letterhead
of another law office no replies ISSUE: Whether or not Bayot violated the ethical
filed AN INSTANT COMPLAINT rules of profession with the said advertisement
ISSUE: Whether or not Baker & McKenzie may
practice law in the Philippines HELD: Yes he did. He should be reprimanded
The SC held that it is undeniable that it was
HELD: No, they cannot. Respondents are a flagrant violation
enjoined from practicing law under the firm Its a brazen solicitation of business from
name Baker & McKenzie the public
They are an alien law firm Sec 25, Rule 127 : provides that th practice
B&M is a professional partnership in 1949 of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of
in Chicago, Ill with members and gain, either personally or thru paid agents
associates in 30 cities around the world or brokers constitutes malpractice
Respondents are part of Guererro & Unethical for an attorney to advertise his
Torres and also members of B&M talents or skills as merchant advises his
Sol-Gen : the usage of B&M by wares
respondents constitutes a representation LAW IS A PROFESSION AND NOT A
that being assoc with the firm they could TRADE
render legal services of the highest quality A Lawyer degrades himself and his
to multinational business enterprises and profession who stoops and adopts
others engaged in foreign trade practices of mercantilism by advertising his
UNETHICAL because B&M is not services or offering them to the public.
authorized to practice law in PH
FACTS: