1. A is the owner of a parcel of land. Atty.

X, a friend of A, suggested that A apply

for a loan from YZ Bank so that necessary improvements may be made on her
property. Atty. X offered to work on the processing and release of the loan for
expediency purposes, and A agreed. A would inquire about the loan from Atty. X,
and the latter would keep assuring A that the documents required by the bank for
the loan are still being prepared. Because of the assurances made by Atty. X to
A, A no longer bothered to check on her property. One day, A checked her
property, only to find out that her property has been sold to B. A filed a case
against Atty. X, and it was later discovered that at the time of the sale, Atty. X was
in possession of the TCT of A’s property, and it was Atty. X who prepared the
Deed of Sale and notarized it, but did not submit such necessary documents to
the clerk of court of the RTC with regard to her Notarial Report and Deed of Sale.
Furthermore, it appeared that efforts were exerted to get rid of the copies of the
Deed of Sale to prevent A from verifying her signature as she claims that she did
not sign it. Will the case filed by A against Atty. X prosper?

Basis:
CANON 1 - A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land, and
promote respect for law and for legal processes.
RULE 1.01 - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or
deceitful conduct.
RULE 1.02 - A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at defiance of the
law or at lessening confidence in the legal system.
CANON 7 - A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal
profession, and support the activities of the Integrated Bar.
RULE 7.03 - A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his
fitness to practice law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a
scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession.

2. BB ran for the position of Mayor in the local elections, but lost to BC by 1 vote.
BB filed an election protest and enlisted the services of Atty. X who required A to
pay his acceptance fee of P 50,000.00,and which A duly complied with. Atty. X
had ample time to prepare and file for the case but only acted when the deadline
was drawing near. Atty. X needed the signatures of witnesses Y and Z, but due to
their unavailability, Atty. X asked CC and DD to sign on behalf of the witnesses
and filed the falsified affidavit before the court. Y discovered the falsification and
informed BB. Can Atty. X be held liable for misconduct?

Basis:

Lawyer’s Oath: (Emphasis on) “I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the same in
any court”
CANON 10 Rule 10.01 - A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor shall consent to
the doing of in any Court; nor shall he mislead, or allow the Court to be misled by
any artifice.