Professional Documents
Culture Documents
W - Solicitation of Legal Services - Student - Pale 2
W - Solicitation of Legal Services - Student - Pale 2
Rule 2.01 - A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the
oppressed.
Rule 2.02 - In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he shall not refuse to render legal
advice to the person concerned if only to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter's rights.
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal
business.
Rule 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those customarily prescribed unless the
circumstances so warrant.
Rule 138
Sec. 27. Attorneys removed or suspended by Supreme Court on what grounds. - A member of the bar
may be removed or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any deceit,
malpractice, or other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his
conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to
take before admission to practice, or for a wilfull disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court, or
for corruptly or wilfully appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority so to do. The
practice of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or
brokers, constitutes malpractice.
Rule 2.03 should be read in connection with Rule 1.03 of the CPR
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.
RULE 1.03. A LAWYER SHALL NOT, FOR ANY CORRUPT MOTIVE OR INTEREST, ENCOURAGE ANY SUIT OR
PROCEEDING OR DELAY ANY MAN’S CAUSE.
1
This rule proscribes “ambulance chasing” (the solicitation of almost any kind of legal business by an
attorney, personally or through an agent in order to gain employment) as a measure to protect the
community from barratry and champerty. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4,
2009
Rule 8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional employment
of another lawyer, however, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper
advice and assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.
The following elements distinguish the legal profession from a business:
1. A duty of public service, of which the emolument is a by-product, and in which one may attain the
highest eminence without making much money;
2. A relation as an “officer of the court” to the administration of justice involving thorough sincerity,
integrity and reliability;
3. A relation to clients in the highest degree of fiduciary;
4. A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized by candor, fairness, and unwillingness to resort to
current business methods of advertising and encroachment on their practice, or dealing directly
with their clients. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
General rule
Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain, either personally or through
paid agents or brokers. Such actuation constitutes malpractice, a ground for disbarment. - Linsangan v.
Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
Thru all means of communication
¡°Solicitation or obtaining of professional employment by any means of communication." - Geffen v.
Moss, 53 Cal.App.3d 215, 125 Cal.Rptr. 687 [1975]
………
The term "solicit" includes contact in person, by telephone or telegraph, by letter or other writing, or by
other communication directed to a specific recipient, but does not include letters addressed or
advertising circulars distributed generally to persons not known to need legal services of the kind
provided by the lawyer in a particular matter, but who are so situated that they might in general find
such services useful.- Shapero v. KBA, 726 S.W.2d 299 (1986)
2
We need not labor the point that solicitation or ambulance chasing, so-called, either directly or
indirectly through the services of runners or others, is conduct which is reprehensible and inimicable to
the traditions and best interests of the legal profession. Not only does it provoke derision and
disrespect in the eyes of the public, but it is an overreaching of the other members of the profession
who adhere to the standards fixed by canons of ethics and the dictates of good conscience. To permit
such conduct to continue undeterred could only result in unsavory competitions and consequences
materially detrimental to the dignity and honor of the legal profession as a whole. - In re Krasner 204
N.E.2d 10 (1965)
Ambulance chasing
This rule proscribes “ambulance chasing” (the solicitation of almost any kind of legal business by an
attorney, personally or through an agent in order to gain employment) as a measure to protect the
community from barratry and champerty. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4,
2009
……
Solicitation of prospective litigants by nonprofit organizations that engage in litigation as "a form of
political expression" and "political association" constitutes expressive and associational conduct
entitled to First Amendment protection, as to which government may regulate only "with narrow
specificity.”
The "collective activity undertaken to obtain meaningful access to the courts is a fundamental right
within the protection of the First Amendment." - In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978)
3
right to prevent, and thus the application of the Disciplinary Rules in question to appellant does not
offend the Constitution.
(a) A lawyer's solicitation of business through direct, in-person communication with the prospective
clients has long been viewed as inconsistent with the profession's ideal of the attorney-client
relationship and as posing a significant potential for harm to the prospective client.
(b) The State does not lose its power to regulate commercial activity deemed harmful to the public
simply because speech is a component of that activity.
(c) A lawyer's procurement of remunerative employment is only marginally affected with First
Amendment concerns. While entitled to some constitutional protection, [respondent's] conduct is
subject to regulation in furtherance of important state interests. - Ohralik v. Ohio State Bar Assn., 436
U.S. 447 (1978)
……
(d) In addition to its general interest in protecting consumers and regulating commercial transactions,
the State bears a special responsibility for maintaining standards among members of the licensed
professions, especially members of the Bar. Protection of the public from those aspects of solicitation
that involve fraud, undue influence, intimidation, overreaching, and other forms of "vexatious conduct"
is a legitimate and important state interest.
(e) Because the State's interest is in averting harm by prohibiting solicitation in circumstances where it is
likely to occur, the absence of explicit proof or findings of harm or injury to the person solicited is
immaterial. The application of the Disciplinary Rules to appellant, who solicited employment for
pecuniary gain under circumstances likely to result in the adverse consequences the State seeks to avert,
does not offend the Constitution.
Champertous contract
Champerty n. an agreement between the party suing in a lawsuit (plaintiff) and another person, usually
an attorney, who agrees to finance and carry the lawsuit in return for a percentage of the recovery
(money won and paid.) In Common Law this was illegal on the theory that it encouraged lawsuits.
Acceptance fee
An acceptance fee is not a contingent fee, but is an absolute fee arrangement which entitles a lawyer to
get paid for his efforts regardless of the outcome of the litigation. - Yu v. Bondal, A.C. No. 5534, January
17, 2005
On the other hand, acceptance fee refers to the charge imposed by the lawyer for merely accepting the
case. This is because once the lawyer agrees to represent a client, he is precluded from handling cases of
the opposing party based on the prohibition on conflict of interest. Thus, the incurs an opportunity cost
by merely accepting the case of the client which is therefore indemnified by the payment of acceptance
4
fee. Since the acceptance fee only seeks to compensate the lawyer for the lost opportunity, it is not
measured by the nature and extent of the legal services rendered. – Dalupan v. Gacott, A.C. No. 5067,
June 29, 2015
……..
Thus, the use of simple signs stating the name or names of the lawyers, the office and residence
address and fields of practice, as well as advertisement in legal periodicals bearing the same brief data,
are permissible. Even the use of calling cards is now acceptable. Publication in reputable law lists, in a
manner consistent with the standards of conduct imposed by the canon, of brief biographical and
informative data is likewise allowable. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
Uninformative fact
Somewhat more troubling is appellant's listing, in large capital letters, that he was a member of the Bar
of the Supreme Court of the United States. The emphasis of this relatively uninformative fact is at least
bad taste. - In re: R.M.J. 455 U.S. 191 [1982]
Laudatory terms
Several of the releases describe Bushman in laudatory terms, stating that he is a "well known
aviation lawyer," or a "recognized ... specialist in International and Aviation and Tax Law," a
"noted authority on legal economics," and a specialist in "international tax law and an authority
on treaties.“ - Bushman v. The State Bar of California, 522 P.2d 312 (1974)
Acceptable publication
The use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted. The card may contain only a
statement of his name, the name of the law firm which he is connected with, address, telephone
number and special branch of law practiced. The publication of a simple announcement of the opening
5
of a law firm or of changes in the partnership, associates, firm name or office address, being for the
convenience of the profession, is not objectionable. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299,
August 19, 2003
Telephone directory
He may likewise have his name listed in a telephone directory but not under a designation of special
branch of law. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
……
7. posts of honor;
8. legal authorships;
9. legal teaching positions;
10. membership and offices in bar associations and committees thereof, in legal and scientific
societies and legal fraternities;
11. the fact of listings in other reputable law lists;
12. the names and addresses of references; and,
13. with their written consent, the names of clients regularly represented.
- Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
Limits of solicitation
Nonetheless, the solicitation of legal business is not altogether proscribed. However, for solicitation to
be proper, it must be compatible with the dignity of the legal profession. If it is made in a modest and
decorous manner, it would bring no injury to the lawyer and to the bar. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo,
A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. The
continued use of the name of a deceased partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased.
6
………
A partnership for the practice of law cannot be likened to partnerships formed by other professionals or
for business. For one thing, the law on accountancy specifically allows the use of a trade name in
connection with the practice of accountancy.
A partnership for the practice of law is not a legal entity. It is a mere relationship or association for a
particular purpose. ... It is not a partnership formed for the purpose of carrying on trade or business or
of holding property." Thus, it has been stated that "the use of a nom de plume, assumed or trade name
in law practice is improper.
Whether or not the firm of Velasquez, Rodriguez, Respicio, Ramos, Nidea, and Prado may call
itself “A law Firm Of St. Thomas More and Associate Members”
We agree with the OBC. Rule 3.02 is clear. No name not belonging to any of the partners or associates
may be used in the firm name for any purpose. In one case, we have ruled that the use of the firm
name of a foreign law firm is unethical because that firm is not authorized to practice law in this
jurisdiction. In this case, “The Law Firm of St. Thomas More and Associate Members” is not a law firm in
this jurisdiction or even in any other jurisdiction. A “St. Thomas More and Associates” or STMA is in fact
the socio-political ministry or the couples for Christ, a Christian family-renewal community. - PP v.
Gonzalez, Jr., G.R. No. 139542 June 10, 2003
…..
To appellate to the name of the lawyers “The Law Firm of St. Thomas More and Associate Members”
indeed appears misleading. It implies that St. Thomas More is a Law Firm when in fact it is not it would
also convey to the public the impression that the lawyers are members of the law firm which does not
exist. To the public, it would seem that the purpose or intention of adding “The Law Firm of St. Thomas
More and Associates Members” is to bask in the name of a Saint, although that may not really, be the
purpose or intention of the lawyers. The appellation only tends to confuse the public and in a way
demean both the saints and the legal profession whose members must depend on their own name and
record and merit and not on the name/glory of other persons living or dead. – PP v. Gonzalez, Jr., G.R.
No. 139542 June 10, 2003
Unacceptable advertisement
LUIS B. TAGORDA
Attorney
Notary Public
CANDIDATE FOR THIRD MEMBER
Province of Isabela
(NOTE. — As notary public, he can execute for you a deed of sale for the purchase of land as required by
the cadastral office; can renew lost documents of your animals; can make your application and final
requisites for your homestead; and can execute any kind of affidavit. As a lawyer, he can help you collect
your loans although long overdue, as well as any complaint for or against you. Come or write to him in
his town, Echague, Isabela. He offers free consultation, and is willing to help and serve the poor.)
7
But solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements, or by personal communications or interview
not warranted by personal relations, is unprofessional.
It is equally unprofessional to procure business by indirection through toutersof any kind, whether allied
real estate firms or trust companies advertising to secure the drawing of deeds or wills or offering
retainers in exchange for executorships or trusteeships to be influenced by the lawyer.
Indirect advertisement for business by furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments concerning the
manner of their conduct, the magnitude of the interest involved, the importance of the lawyer's
position, and all other like self-laudation, defy the traditions and lower the tone of our high calling, and
are intolerable.
- Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
…..
The rule is that a lawyer shall not lend money to his client. The only exception is, when in the interest of
justice, he has to advance necessary expenses (such as filing fees, stenographer’s fees for transcript of
stenographic notes, cash bond or premium for surety bond, etc.) for a matter that he is handling for the
client.
The rule is intended to safeguard the lawyer’s independence of mind so that the free exercise of his
judgment may not be adversely affected. It seeks to ensure his undivided attention to the case he is
handling as well as his entire devotion and fidelity to the client’s cause. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino,
A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
8
accept a settlement which may take care of his interest in the verdict to the prejudice of the client in
violation of his duty of undivided fidelity to the client’s cause. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No.
6672, September 4, 2009
A verified complaint, sought to enjoin Juan G. Collas, Jr. and nine other lawyers from practicing
law under the name of Baker & McKenzie, a law firm organized in Illinois
We hold that Baker & McKenzie, being an alien law firm, cannot practice law in the Philippines (Sec. 1,
Rule 138, Rules of Court). As admitted by the respondents in their memorandum, Baker & McKenzie is a
professional partnership organized in 1949 in Chicago, Illinois with members and associates in 30 cities
around the world. Respondents, aside from being members of the Philippine bar, practicing under the
firm name of Guerrero & Torres, are members or associates of Baker &Mckenzie. - Dacanay v. Baker &
McKenzie, et. al. Adm. Case No. 2131 [1985]
…..
As pointed out by the Solicitor General, respondents' use of the firm name Baker & McKenzie
constitutes a representation that being associated with the firm they could "render legal services of the
highest quality to multinational business enterprises and others engaged in foreign trade and
investment“. This is unethical because Baker & McKenzie is not authorized to practice law here. -
Dacanay v. Baker & McKenzie, et. al. Adm. Case No. 2131 [1985]
Marriage license promptly secured thru our assistance & the annoyance of delay or publicity avoided if
desired, and marriage arranged to wishes of parties. Consultation on any matter free for the poor.
Everything confidential.
9
American Bar Association in 1908 and by the Philippine Bar Association in 1917. Canons 27 and 28 of the
Code of Ethics - In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37 (1929)
………
While it is true that the client chooses which lawyer to engage, he or she usually does so on the basis of
reputation. – Ramirez v. Atty. Mercedes Buhayang-Margallo, A.C. No. 10537 February 3, 2015
…..
Moreover the firm circular in setting forth the establishment of an office for the general practice of law
in all the courts of the Islands, amounted to an assertion of his right and purpose, not effectively
qualified by the addition that he would devote himself to consultation and office work relating to
Spanish law.
Rule 3.01 - A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive,
undignified, self-laudatory or unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed name shall be used. Xxx.
10
“Informal partnership”
vis-a-vis
“acting together as a law firm”
……..
In their defense, respondents admitted that they indeed operated under the name Valencia
CioconDabao Valencia De La Paz DionelaPandanRubica Law Office, but explained that their association
is not a formal partnership, but one that is subject to certain "arrangements."
According to them, each lawyer contributes a fixed amount every month for the maintenance of the
entire office; and expenses for cases, such as transportation, copying, printing, mailing, and the like are
shouldered by each lawyer separately, allowing each lawyer to fix and receive his own professional fees
exclusively.
…….
As such, the lawyers do not discuss their clientele with the other lawyers and associates, unless they
agree that a case be handled collaboratively. Respondents claim that this has been the practice of the
law firm since its inception.
They averred that complainant's labor cases were solely and exclusively handled by Atty. Dionela and not
by the entire law firm. Moreover, respondents asserted that the qualified theft case filed by FEVE Farms
was handled by Atty. Penalosa, a new associate who had no knowledge of complainant's labor cases, as
he started working for the firm after the termination thereof.
Held
As the Court observes, the law firm's unethical acceptance of the criminal case arose from its failure to
organize and implement a system by which it would have been able to keep track of all cases assigned
to its handling lawyers to the end of, among others, ensuring that every engagement it accepts stands
clear of any potential conflict of interest.
As an organization of individual lawyers which, albeit engaged as a collective, assigns legal work to a
corresponding handling lawyer, it behooves the law firm to value coordination in deference to the
conflict of interest rule. This lack of coordination, as respondents' law firm exhibited in this case,
intolerably renders its clients' secrets vulnerable to undue and even adverse exposure, eroding in the
balance the lawyer-client relationship's primordial ideal of unimpaired trust and confidence. – Anglo v.
Attys. Valencia, et. Al., A.C. No. 10567, February 25, 2015
By including self-laudatory details in his professional card, did the Judge violate Canon 2, Rule
2.02 of the Code of Judicial Conduct?
Judge [] was circulating calling cards bearing his name as the Presiding Judge of RTC, Branch 73, Malabon
City, and indicating therein that he is a "bar exams topnotcher (87.55%)" and with "full second honors"
from the Ateneo de Manila University, A.B. and LL.B.
…….
Judge [] argues that, per commentary of Justice Ruperto G. Martin, "the use of professional cards
containing the name of the lawyer, his title, his office and residence is not improper" and that the word
"title" should be broad enough to include a Judge¡¯s legal standing in the bar, his honors duly earned
or even his Law School.
Moreover, other lawyers do include in their calling cards their former/present titles/positions like
President of the Jaycees, Rotary Club, etc., so where then does one draw the line?
……..
In Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., we explained that the use of an ordinary and simple professional card by
lawyers is permitted and that the card "may contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law
11
firm which he is connected with, address, telephone number and special branch of law practiced." In
herein case, Judge¡¯s calling cards cannot be considered as simple and ordinary. By including therein the
honors he received from his law school with a claim of being a bar topnotcher, Judge [] breached the
norms of simplicity and modesty required of judges.
If you speak at a conference and get new clients out of it, is that in-person solicitation?
A person’s decision to attend a seminar at which attorneys make presentations is the triggering event
that initiates the personal contact between that person and participating attorneys. Thus, any personal
contact that ensues from the seminar would be at the prospective client’s initiation and election.
The problem is not in-person solicitation; neither the lawyer’s presentation to a live audience nor the
lawyer’s agreement to speak to attendees violates the code.
Is it OK to give a discount to a client after that client sends new clients to you?
A communication contains a recommendation if it endorses or vouches for a lawyer's credentials,
abilities, competence, character, or other professional qualities.
Thus, it is impermissible to give a discount on a bill to a client who sends other clients to the lawyer.
12