Atty. Tolentino was accused of soliciting clients from another lawyer, Atty. Linsangan. Specifically, Tolentino convinced some of Linsangan's clients to transfer representation by promising financial assistance and fast collection of claims. He also sent persistent text messages. Additionally, Tolentino engaged in unethical money lending with clients. The Commission on Bar Discipline found Tolentino violated various ethical rules regarding solicitation of clients, encroaching on another lawyer's practice, and lending to clients. While the IBP only recommended reprimand, the Supreme Court determined reprimand was too lenient and suspended Tolentino from practice for 1 year, finding his actions constituted distinct violations of ethical rules.
Atty. Tolentino was accused of soliciting clients from another lawyer, Atty. Linsangan. Specifically, Tolentino convinced some of Linsangan's clients to transfer representation by promising financial assistance and fast collection of claims. He also sent persistent text messages. Additionally, Tolentino engaged in unethical money lending with clients. The Commission on Bar Discipline found Tolentino violated various ethical rules regarding solicitation of clients, encroaching on another lawyer's practice, and lending to clients. While the IBP only recommended reprimand, the Supreme Court determined reprimand was too lenient and suspended Tolentino from practice for 1 year, finding his actions constituted distinct violations of ethical rules.
Atty. Tolentino was accused of soliciting clients from another lawyer, Atty. Linsangan. Specifically, Tolentino convinced some of Linsangan's clients to transfer representation by promising financial assistance and fast collection of claims. He also sent persistent text messages. Additionally, Tolentino engaged in unethical money lending with clients. The Commission on Bar Discipline found Tolentino violated various ethical rules regarding solicitation of clients, encroaching on another lawyer's practice, and lending to clients. While the IBP only recommended reprimand, the Supreme Court determined reprimand was too lenient and suspended Tolentino from practice for 1 year, finding his actions constituted distinct violations of ethical rules.
TOLENTINO – A lawyer in making known his legal services shall
LINSANGAN v. TOLENTINO use only true, honest, fair, dignified and objective A.C. No. 6672 information or statement of facts. September 4, 2009 – The practice of law is a profession and not a business. To allow a lawyer to advertise his talent or FACTS: skill is to commercialize the practice of law, degrade the profession in the publics estimation and impair its • There was a complaint for disbarment filed by ability to efficiently render that high character of LINSANGAN against Atty. TOLENTINO for solicitation service to which every member of the bar is called. of clients and encroachment of professional services. • • Rule 2.03, CPR provides: – LINSANGAN alleged that TOLENTINO, with the help – A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act of a paralegal, LABIANO, convinced his clients to designed primarily to solicit legal business. transfer legal representation. TOLENTINO promised – Lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the them financial assistance and expeditious collection purpose of gain, either personally or through paid on their claims. To induce them to hire his services, agents or brokers. Such actuation constitutes he persistently called them and sent them text malpractice, a ground for disbarment. messages. • • Rule 1.03, CPR which provides: • LINSANGAN presented an affidavit attesting that – A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or LABIANO tried to prevail upon a client to sever his interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay lawyer-client relations with LINSANGAN and utilize any man’s cause. TOLENTINO's services instead, in exchange for a loan – This rule proscribes ambulance chasing (the of ₱50,000. solicitation of almost any kind of legal business by an • LINSANGAN also attached TOLENTINO's calling card. attorney, personally or through an agent in order to • TOLENTINO denied knowing LABIANO and gain employment as a measure to protect the authorizing the printing and circulation of the said community from barratry and champerty. calling card. • TOLENTINO clearly solicited employment violating • The complaint was referred to the Commission on Rule 2.03, and Rule 1.03 and Canon 3 of the CPR and Bar Discipline (CBD) of the IBP. Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. • The CBD recommended that TOLENTINO be • TOLENTINO also committed an unethical, predatory reprimanded as it found that he: overstep into another’s legal practice, in violation of – had encroached on the professional practice of • • Rule 8.02, CPR LINSANGAN, violating Rule 8.02 and other canons of – A lawyer should not steal another lawyers client nor the Code of Professional Responsibility induce the latter to retain him by a promise of better – contravened the rule against soliciting cases for service, good result or reduced fees for his services. gain, personally or through paid agents or brokers as • Moreover, by engaging in a money-lending venture stated in Section 27, Rule 138, Rules of Court with his clients as borrowers, TOLENTINO violated: • • Rule 16.04, CPR ISSUE/S: – A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the clients interests are fully protected by the • W.O.N. Tolentino's actions warrant disbarment nature of the case or by independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client except, when in RULING: the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the • SC adopts the findings of the IBP on the unethical client. conduct of TOLENTINO but modifies the • • The rule is intended to safeguard the lawyers recommended penalty. independence of mind so that the free exercise of his • The means employed by TOLENTINO in furtherance judgment may not be adversely affected. It seeks to of the said misconduct constituted distinct violations ensure his undivided attention to the case he is of ethical rules. handling as well as his entire devotion and fidelity to • • Canon 3, CPR provides: the clients cause. • Any act of solicitation constitutes malpractice which calls for the exercise of the Courts disciplinary powers. • Considering the myriad infractions of respondent (including violation of the prohibition on lending money to clients), the sanction recommended by the IBP, a mere reprimand, is a wimpy slap on the wrist. The proposed penalty is grossly incommensurate to its findings. • • Atty. TOLENTINO for violating Rules 1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and 16.04 and Canon 3 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of 1 year . • Lawyers are only allowed to announce their services by publication in reputable law lists or use of simple professional cards. Professional calling cards may only contain the following details: lawyers name; name of the law firm with which he is connected; address; telephone number and special branch of law practiced.
The 5 Elements of the Highly Effective Debt Collector: How to Become a Top Performing Debt Collector in Less Than 30 Days!!! the Powerful Training System for Developing Efficient, Effective & Top Performing Debt Collectors