1990 BAR EXAMINATION

Mrs. Amy Dizon’s husband was killed in a traffic accident. She wants
to sue the bus company for damages but she cannot afford a lawyer.
She approached Atty. Larry Rio who agreed to handle the case
without any retainer’s fee or expenses on her part, on the condition
that in case of recovery of damages, he shall get 33% of the award
by the court.

Is this arrangement valid and permissible? Decide with reasons.

Answer:

In the recent case of Angel L. Bautista vs. Atty. Ramon A. Gonzales,

Adm. Matter No. 1625, February 12, 1990, the Supreme Court held
that the lawyer shall defray all the expenses of the suit, “it is contrary
to Canon 42 of the Canons of Professional Ethics which provides that
a lawyer may not properly agree with a client to pay or bear the
expenses of litigations (See also Tule 16.04, Code of Professional
Responsibility). The Court added that “although a lawyer may in good
faith, advance the expenses of litigation, the same should be subject
to reimbursement.” And, “an agreement whereby an attorney agrees
to pay expenses of proceedings to enforce the client’s rights is
champertous” and “against public policy especially where, as in this
case, the attorney has agreed to carry on the action at his own
expenses in consideration of some bargain to have part of the thing
in dispute.”

The arrangement between Amy Dizon and Atty. Larry Rio, which
provides that the latter will handle the case without any retainer’s fee
or expenses on her part, can be taken to mean that the lawyer will
carry out the case at his own expenses without reimbursement. On
the basis of the foregoing decision of the Supreme Court, such an
arrangement is invalid.

However, the contingent fee contract is not prohibited by the law and
is impliedly sanctioned. A contingent fee is however closely
supervised by the court to safeguard the client from unjust charges,
and its validity depends, in large measure, upon the reasonableness
of the amount fixed under the circumstances of the case. A
contingent fee of 33% of the amount of recovery may be reasonable
if the bus company fights the case until the Supreme Court and the
litigations are hard-fought and long drawn: it may be unreasonable if
the bus company agrees to compromise. But the fact that a
contingent fee is unreasonable does not preclude the lawyer from
being paid his fees on quantum merit basis.

Question No. 2:

Your services as a lawyer are engaged by John Dizon to defend him

from the charges of malversation of public funds before the Sandigan
Bayan. John confessed to you that he actually misappropriated the
amount charged but she said it was out of extreme necessity to pay
for the emergency operation of his wife.

Will you agree to defend him? State your reason.

Answer:

I will agree to defend him, notwithstanding his confession to me that

he actually misappropriated the amount. Rule 14.01 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not decline to
represent a person because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of
the person. One of the duties of an attorney is that he should, in the
defence of a person accused of a crime, by all fair and honourable
means regardless of his personal opinion as to guilt of the accused,
present every defence that the law permits, to the end that no
person may be deprived of life liberty but by due process of law. The
burden of proof lies with the prosecution and if the prosecution fails
to discharge such burden, the lawyers can always invoke the
presumption of innocence for the acquittal of his client. If the
prosecution proves the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt,
the lawyer can strive to lower the penalty by presenting mitigating
circumstances, for he is not necessarily expected to sustain the
client’s innocence. A lawyer is an advocate, not a judge, and if he has
rendered effective legal assistance to his client as allowed by law, he
can rightfully say that he has faithfully discharged his duties as a
lawyer, even if the accused is found guilty by the court.

Question No. 3:
1. A judge had been seen having a lunch with a litigant with a
case pending before him in a court. He was also seen at the
race track placing bet on certain horses. How would you
evaluate the behaviour of the judge? Explain.


2. Discuss the propriety of a judge standing as sponsor at the

wedding of the son of the litigant his court?


Answer:

1. The judge behaviour is highly improper. Canon 2 of the Code of

Judicial Conduct requires that a judge should avoid impropriety and
the appearance of impropriety in all activities. Rule 2.01 of the same
code provides that the

judge should so behave at all times as to promote public confidence

in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. His having lunch with
a litigant with a case pending before him in court violated such rule
and gives the adverse party cause to complain against his
impartiality.

His going to race track to a place a bet on certain horse puts the
judiciary personified by him in a bad light. For the personal behaviour
of a judge, not only upon the bench but also in everyday life, should
be above reproach and free from the appearance of impropriety. His
judicial office circumscribes his personal conduct and imposes a
number of restrictions, which he must observe faithfully as the price
he has to pay for accepting and occupying an exalted position in the
administration of justice.

2. For the reason stated above stated, a judge’s standing as sponsor

at the wedding of the son of a litigant in his court is highly improper
for it gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that he is disposed to
resolve the case in favour of such litigant. Public confidence in the
impartiality of the judge is eroded, and the due administration of
justice suffers thereby. It is also a violation of the letter and spirit of
rule 2.03 of the Code of Judicial Conduct which states that the
prestige if judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the
private interest of others; nor convey or permit others to convey the
impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.

Question No. 4:

. 1) Would it be proper for the judge to accept a donation of a

lawyer’s table and chairs for his sala from the local chapter of
the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)? Explain your
answer.


. 2) May a judge properly solicit for his promotion the endorsement

of the local chapter of the IBP to the Judicial and Bar Council?
Explain your answer.


Answer:

1) It would be proper for a judge to accept the donations of a

lawyer’s table and chairs for his sala from the local chapter of the IBP
because the donation comes from an organization of lawyers whose
duty, among others, is to help in the proper administration of justice.
Accepting the donation is not for the personal benefit of the judge
but for providing physical facilities for the administration of justice,
which is the concern by both the judge and the IBP local chapter.
What is prohibited is accepting presents or donations from litigants or
from particular lawyers practicing before him.

2) A judge may not properly solicit for his promotion the

endorsement of a local chapter of the IBP to the Judicial and Bar
Council because it will give the impression that his promotion is not
purely on merit, and the judge may feel beholden to the particular
officers of the local chapter which may, in the future, influence him in
the dispositions of cases handled by such officers as counsels for
litigants. Moreover, considering his position, the local chapter officers
may not be able to refuse such solicitation even if they believe that
he is not qualified for promotions. The judge should stand by his own
ability, qualifications and fitness, without exerting extra efforts on his
part to influence the local chapter to endorse his promotion. The local
chapter should, on its own and without solicitations from the judge,
make its own assessment and appraisal of the judge’s qualifications
and fitness for promotion, and if it is convinced that the judge
possesses the required qualifications, it is the duty of the local
chapter to make known such assessment to the Judicial and Bar
Council.

Question No. 5:

. 1) What would you comment be about a judge who, whenever he

promulgates a decision, invites representatives of the print and
broadcast media to his sala for the purpose of having the
promulgation televised, and that in the process, he gives
interviews although he does not discuss his personal views on
the merits of the case? Explain your answer.


. 2) How far should a judge allow publicity of the proceedings and

decisions of his court? Explain your answer.


Answer:

. 1) The judge’s conduct is improper; Canon II Rule 2.02 of the

Code of Judicial Conduct provides that a judge should not seek
publicity for personal vainglory. A judge should conduct
proceedings in court with fitting dignity and decorum and in
such a manner as to reflect the importance and seriousness of
the inquiry to ascertain the truth. Allowing television coverage
of the promulgation of the decision would detract the dignity of
the court proceedings, degrade the court and create
misconception in the public mind. His giving interviews, even if
he does not discuss his personal views on the merits of the
case, have no other purpose than to seek publicity for personal
vainglory, which is prohibited.


. 2) A judge may allow publicity by letting his actuations as a judge

and his decisions speaks for themselves, without any comment
on his part. What makes publicity improper is the employment
of traditional dignity of the court proceedings and of the judge
himself. Good, efficient, speedy and correct administration of
justice on his part has a way of publicizing itself


and catching public attention, and the publicity thereby generated is

a normal by-product of efficient discharge of his duties, which is
proper.
Question No. 6:

A lawyer charged his clients P10,000.00 for filing fees pertaining to

the complaint he filled in court. He actually spent only P1,000.00. He
did not account for the balance.

1) May his client charge him for misconduct as a member of the

Philippine Bar? Explain your answer.

2) Suppose that the lawyer should be charge, how and where should
the complaint be filled? Explain your answer.

Answer:

. 1) The client may charged hid lawyer with misconduct for not
accounting for the balance of P9,000.00. It is well settled that
where the client gives his lawyer money for a specific purpose,
such as to pay the docket fees for the filling of an action in
court, so much of the money not used for the purpose belongs
to the client and the lawyer holds it in trust for him. And it is
the lawyer’s duty to promptly account for all the money
received from his client. For this reason, the lawyer’s failure to
account for the balance of the money not spent for filling fees
will render him liable for misappropriation, which is a ground
for disbarment.


. 2) The client may file a verified complain for disbarment against

his lawyer. His verified complain shall state clearly and
concisely the facts complained of and shall be supported by
affidavits of person or persons having personal knowledge of
the facts therein alleged and /or by such documents as may
substantiate said facts. The client may file complaint directly
with the Supreme Court, in which case at least 18 copies
thereof shall be filled, and the Supreme Court may refer the
complaint to the IBP Boards of Governors for appropriate
action, such as assigning the complaint to an investigator, or to
the Solicitor General or court officer or judge for investigation
when the interest of justice requires. The client may, however,
file his complaint, in six copies, with the IBP Board of
Governors, which will then assign the case to an investigator
 for investigation, or with the Secretary of a local chapter of the
IBP, which will in turn transmit the same to the IBP Board of
Governors from assignment to an investigator. (Rule139-B of
the rules of Court).


Question No. 7:

Atty. Chito Subretodo was retained by Buddy Capilla to handle his

case in the Securities and Exchange Commission. There is a tax angle
so Sobretodo consulted Atty. Romy Collado, a tax expert, and for his
assistance shared 50% of the retainer fees with Collado?

Is this proper? Explain your answer.

Answer:

There is no impropriety in the sharing of attorney’s fees with tax

expert Atty. Romy Collado. This delegation of work and not
delegation of a case. As long as Atty. Sobretodo is responsible to his
client, Buddy Capilla, even if he delegated the research work to atty.
Collado, there is no impropriety in said arrangement. What is
prohibited by the Code of Professional Responsibility is splitting of
Attorney’s fees with a non lawyer.

Alternative Answer:

a) The propriety of Atty. Chito Sobretodo consulting Atty. Romy

Collado on the tax aspect of the case depends on the circumstances
obtaining.

The attorney-client relationship existed between Atty. Chito

Sobretodo and Buddy Capilla only, and not with Atty. Romy Collado.
If Atty. Romy Collado is an assistant, associate or law partner of Atty.
Chito Sobretodo and if the client, Budy Capilla, has not prohibited
Atty. Chito Sobretodo from consulting his assistant or law partner,
then Atty. Romy Collado on the tax angle of the case. As a general
rule the employment of Atty. Chito Sobretodo as a lawyer for Buddy
Capilla is deemed a retainer of any member of Atty. Sobretodo’s law
firm. However, Atty. Romy Collado is an independent lawyer; Atty.
Chito Sobretodo cannot properly consult Attorney Romy Collado on
the tax angle of the case without the consent of his client, Buddy
Capilla, because the consultation will involve revelation of the client’s
secrets, privilege communications or affairs, secret or undisclosed.
Moreover, Rule 18.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provides that a lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which he
knows or should know that is not qualified to render, but he may
render such service if, with the consent of his clients, he can obtain
as collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent on the matter.

Since Atty. Collado has rendered services, Atty. Sobretodo can very
well share 50% of his fees with Atty. Collado, the matter of fee

division being between the two lawyers only because the client is not
asked to pay additional amount for Collado’s services as tax expert.

b) Division of fees among lawyers is allowed provided there is

division of labor and the client consents (Rule 20.02, Canon 20).
Hence the sharing between Sobretodo and Collado is proper provided
the client’s consent is obtained.

Question No. 8:

In a civil case before the Regional Trial Court between Mercy

Sanchez and Cora Delano, Sanchez engaged the services of the
Reyes Cruz and Santos Law Offices. Delano moved for the
disqualification of the Reyes Cruz and Santos Law Offices on the
ground that Atty. Cruz is an incumbent senator.

Answer:

As judge, I will require that the name of Atty. Cruz, an incumbent

Senator, be dropped. From any pending filed in court or from any
oral appearance for the law firm by any other member of the law
firm, and should the law firm refuse, I will disqualify the law firm. My
reasons are as follows:

Article VI, Sec.14 of the 1877 Constitution provides that “no Senator
or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as
counsel before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals,
or quasi judicial and other administrative bodies.” What is prohibited
is personal appearance of the Senator, Atty. Cruz, and for as long as
the Senator does not personally appear in court of Mercy Sanchez,
the prohibition does not apply. Personal appearance includes not only
arguing or attending a hearing of a case in court but also the signing
of pleading and filing it in court. Hence, the Senator should not allow
his name to appear in pleadings filed in court by itself or as part of a
law firm name, such as Reyes Cruz and Santos Law Offices, under
the signature of another lawyer in the law firm, nor should allow the
firm name with his name therein to appear as counsel through
another lawyer, without indirectly violating the constitutional
restriction, because the signature of an agents amounts to a signing
by the Senator through another lawyer is in effects his appearance,
the office of attorney being originally one of agency, and because the
Senator cannot do directly what the Constitution prohibits directly.
The lawyer actually appearing for Mercy Sanchez should drop the
name of Atty. Cruz from any pleading or from any oral appearance in
the court; otherwise the law firm could be disqualified. Moreover,
Rule 6.02 of the Code of Professional Responsibility prohibits a lawyer
in government from using his public position to promote or advance
his private interests, and the Senator’s name appearing in pleadings
or in appearances by other lawyers in the law firm’s client, which can
only be avoided by dropping the name of the Senator from the firm
name whenever it appears in court.

Question No. 1:

1992 BAR EXAMINATION

Atty. V. Suarez represented Altamarino in an ejectment case against

Orbido. Judgement was rendered in favor of Altamarino and Orbido
vacated the property forthwith. Subsequently, a case for annulment
of Altamarino’s title over the property subject of the ejectment case
was filed by Orbido who is now represented by Atty. Suarez.
Altamarino filed a motion for disqualification of Atty. Suarez for
representing conflicting interest as the latter was his lawyer in the
ejectment case against attorney and client relationship between her
and Altamarino had already terminated and that she did not obtain
any confidential information regarding Altamarino’s title in handling
the ejectment case, which is different from the present case for
annulment of title.

Rule on the motion for disqualification of Atty. Suarez should be

granted.

Answer:

The motion for disqualification of Atty. Suarez should be granted.

Atty. Suarez violated Canon 14, rule 14.02 prohibiting lawyers from
appearing for conflicting interest. Atty. Suarez is opposing his former
client in a related suit. Although the ejectment case had already
terminated in favor of Altamarino who was his client, he had already
required information concerning the ownership of property. An
attorney who appears for opposing clients in the same or related
actions put himself in that awkward position where he will have to
oppose on behalf of the other client. He cannot in all situations give
disinterested advice to both clients.

Alternative Answer:

Atty. Suarez is not disqualified on the ground of conflicting interest. It

is true that the employment of a lawyer in a subsequent case
involving former client would result in a conflicting interest if the two
cases are related. In the present case however, the two cases are
not related. An ejectment case involves issue of physical possession
(Possession de facto): whereas the second case involves a question
on the issue of ownership or title.

Question No. 2:

Prosecutor Daniel Marquinez was assigned to handle a case for

homicide. After interviewing the witnesses for the prosecution and
asking them to narrate to him the incident that caused the death of
the victim, he came to the conclusions that the accused was really
guilty. However, the version of one eyewitness showed that the
accused acted in self defence.

If you were the prosecutor, would you place said eyewitness on the
witness stand? Why?
Answer:

Under the ordinary rules on trial technique, the prosecutor should not
place the eyewitness stand.

However, based on the real mission of a lawyer who is to assist the

court in the administration of justice, the prosecutor is bound to
present the eyewitness in order that the court can properly
appreciate the evidence and to decide on the real merit of the case.

A public prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer. He is the representative

not of an ordinary party to controversy, but of a sovereignty whose
obligation to govern at all and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal
prosecution is not that it shall win the case but justice shall be done.
A prosecutor complies with his missions as a lawyer even if the man
he is prosecuting is acquitted in accordance with the law and justice.

Canon 6, Rule 6.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility

provides that the primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public
prosecution is not to convict but to see that justice is done. The
suppressions of facts or the concealment of witnesses capable of
establishing the innocence of the accused is highly reprehensible and
is caused for disciplinary action.

Alternative Answer:

If I were the prosecutor, I would not present this eyewitness. This

does not involve suppression of evidence. It is true that a public
prosecutor’s primary duty is not to convict but to do justice and it is
unethical for a prosecutor to convict but to do justice and its
unethical for a prosecutor to conceal evidence that is favourable to
the accused. In the present case, however, the prosecutor
considered the testimony of several witnesses and came to the
conclusion that the accused was really guilty. Clearly the prosecutor
did not find need of the testimony of the eyewitness who said that
the accused acted in self defence. A lawyer or a prosecutor is not
duty-bound to present a witness whose credibility is in doubt.

Question No. 3:
Atty. Herminio de Pano is a former Prosecutor of the City of Manila
who established his own law office after taking advantage of the
Early Retirement Law. He was approached by Estrella Cabigao to act
as private prosecutor in an estafa case in which she is the
complainant. It appears that the said estafa case was investigated by
Atty. De Pano when he was still a Prosecutor.

Should Atty. Pano accept employment as private prosecutor is said

estafa case? Explain.

Answer:

Atty. De Pano should not accept the employment as private

prosecutor as he will be violating Canon 6, Rule 6.03 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility which provides that a lawyer shall not,
after leaving government service, accept employment in connection
with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.

The restriction against a public official from using his public position
as a vehicle to promote or advance his private interests extends
beyond his tenure on certain matters which intervened as a public
official.

Question No. 4:

Atty. Belle Montes is a former partner in the Rosales Law Office

which is representing Corporation X before the Securities and
Exchange Commission. Atty. Montes who is now practicing on her
own, entered her appearance as counsel for Corporation Y in a suit
between said corporation and Corporation X. Atty. Montes claims that
since she did not personally handle the case of Corporation X when
she was still with the Rosales Law Office she will not be representing
conflicting interests.

Is such argument valid? Explain.

Answer:

Atty. Belle Montes will be deemed to be appearing for conflicting

interests if she appears for Corporation Y against Corporation X.
This question is similar to the case of Philippine Blooming Mills vs.
Court of Appeals, November 1989. In the said case, the Philippine
Blooming Mills was retainer of the ACCRA Law Office. Three lawyers
of ACCRA Law Office separated from said law firm and established
their own law office. The three

lawyers were disqualified from appearing for a corporation against

the Philippine Blooming Mills.

The rule prohibiting appearing for conflicting interests applies to law

firms. The employment of one member of a law firms considered as
an employment of the law firm and that the employment of the law
firm is equivalent to a retainer of the members thereof.

Question No. 5:

Judge Dino was transferred to regional trial Court of Pasig after

serving as Judge of the Regional Trial Court in Sorsogon. Delighted
with her transfer, she immediately assumed her new post. However,
she brought with her the records of five cases which are completely
heard by her in her former assignment and already submitted for
decisions. Thereupon, she prepared the decision in said five cases, by
registered mail to her former Clerk of Court. One of the losing parties
questioned the authority of the Judge Dino in deciding the cases after
she transfer to Pasig.

Are the decisions rendered by Judge Dino in the five cases valid?
Why?

Answer:

The decisions are valid considering that the Regional Trial Court in
Sorsogon is co-equal with that of the regional trial Court in Manila. It
is assumed of course that the five cases were already submitted for
decisions at the time Judge Dino transferred to Manila (Valentine v.
Sta. Maria, 55 SCRA 40).

Question No. 6:

Gliceria Magat who works as clerk typist in the Dimakali Law Offices
wrote a letter to the Supreme Court accusing her employer Atty.
Dimakali of violating her honor several times. He would invite her to
go out on official business only to bring her Regina Court, a motel in
Ermita. There he would force his desires on her. Whenever she
remonstrated and fought him, he would threaten to dismiss her. She
asked the Supreme Court to disbar that “monster lawyer who thinks
nothing of violating the honor and purity of virgins like me.”

. 1) Is there any ground for disciplining Atty. Dimakali? Explain.


. 2) Suppose Atty. Dimakali is the Head of the Legal Division of the

Department of Agrarian reform. Under the foregoing set of
facts, would you advise Ms. Magat to take the same action, that
is, ask the Supreme Court to disbar her
lawyer boss? Explain
your answer.


Answer:

. 1) Yes, there is a ground for disciplining Atty. Dimakali for his

immoral behaviour and abuse of his authority on his lady clerk-
typist. This is a plain sexual harassment.


. 2) Yes, I would advise Ms. Magat to take the same action with the
Supreme Court. It has been ruled in Collantes vs. Renomeron,
2000 SCRA 584.


Canon 6 of the Code of Professional Responsibility also applies to

lawyers in the government service.

Question No. 7:

Atty. Cecilio Hilado, a member of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan og

Bohol was engaged by Irene Gemora as counsel in a case for
malversation of public funds which she filed against City Treasurer
Paulino Alvarez. When Hilado accepted the case, City Treasurer
Alvarez filed an administrative case against Hidlado for practicing law
in violation of Sec 7 of republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct and
Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees) which inter alia
states that:”(b) Public Officials, during their incumbency shall not
....(2) engaged in the private practice of their profession unless
authorized by the Constitution of law....”

Hilado then filed a Motion to dismiss on the Ground that 1) he is very

selective in accepting cases and appears in court only outside of
sessions, hours of Sangguniang Panlalawigan; and 2) in any event it
is the Supreme Court alone, under Art. VIII, Sec 5 of the Constitution
that has the power to “promulgate rules concerning pleading,
practice and procedure in all courts....”

How valid are the arguments of Hilado? Resolve the case.

Answer:

The arguments of Atty. Hilado are not valid.

1) Atty. Hilado should not appear in said case which involves a

criminal prosecution of city treasurer.

Section 90 (b) (2) of the Local Government Code provides:

Sec. 90 Practice of Profession. Xxxx

b) Sanggunian members may practice their professions, engaged in

any occupation, or teach in school except during session hours;
provided, that the Sanggunian members who are also members of
the bar shall not:

xxxxx
 (2)Appear as counsel in any criminal case wherein an officer or

employee of the national or local government is accused of an

offense committed in relation to his office.

In fairness to the examinee, this question is not proper in legal ethic

as it is governed by Local Government Code.

2) While it is true that it is the Supreme Court that promulgated rules

concerning pleading, practice and procedure, the matter in questions
involves administrative law governing public officials prohibiting
practicing law while holding a public office in criminal cases as
provided in the aforesaid Section 90 of the Local government Code.

Question No. 8:
A complaint was filed with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP)
by Mrs. Remy Rozon against Atty. Matapobre asking that the latter be
suspended from the practice of law indefinitely for being a notorious
usurer and for filing groundless suits for various sums of money
against his victims.

Mrs. Razon described the modus operandi of respondent thus:

Matapobre would require a prospective borrower to secure a
promissory note in bank, if he has none at the moment. Then
Matapobre would fill up the notes showing the principal, as well as
the interest rate at 20% a month or 120% per annum, plus other
charges and attorneys fees. Before maturity of the checks,
Matapobre would inquire from the debtor whether his deposit is
already funded. If he answers in the negative, which was more often
than not, Matapobre would magnanimously assure the debtor that he
would forgo presentment of the checks as long as the debt is paid.
However, the moment the debt falls due, regardless of whether the
checking account is funded, Matapobre would insist on payment. If
none is forth coming, Matapobre would file a criminal case against
the delinquent debtor for issuance of a bouncing check in violation of
Batas Pambansa Blg. 22. Mr. Rozon declared that Matapobre, having
victimized several persons and pushed them to brink of penury, has
acquired the reputation of being a loan shark, it was only she who
had he courage to file charges against the lawyer/usurer.

During the investigation before the IBP, Matapobre interposed the

following defences: 1) he cannot possibly be charged with usury
since the Usury Law has been virtually repealed and the Central Bank
allows the imposition of any rate of interest; 2) even assuming that
he charges “usurious” rates of interest, the debtor freely assumes the
obligation; 3) the charges being preferred against him concern his
personal conduct and has nothing to do with the practice of his
profession; and 4) the IBP has no jurisdiction over his acts, personal
or professional. If at all, it is only the Supreme Court that can
discipline him.

How do you dispose of Matapobre’s arguments? Rebut each one in

sequence.
Answer:

. 1) What is in issue in this question is not the violation of the Usury

law but the action of Attorney Matapobre in taking undue
advantage of borrowers to make it appear that the Bouncing
Check Law was violated by his victims. Certainly it is grossly
immoral for the lawyer to manipulate the transactions which
resulted in charging excessive rates of interests o loans an later
threatening them with violation of the Bouncing check law.

Canon Rule 1, Rule 1.01 provides that a lawyer shall not
engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.


. 2) It is not altogether true that the borrowers freely assumed the

obligation as it was the lawyer himself who drafted and
manipulated the documents and made the borrowers sign them
which they did not fully comprehend.


. 3) The lawyer is liable even for acts not connected in his legal
profession.


. 4) The IBP has jurisdiction to investigate the case through the

Grievance
 Committee under Rule 139 (b) of the Rules of Court.


Question No. 9:

In connection with a sensational criminal case, the Public Relation

Officer of All Judges Association, Inc. Issued two press releases, one
stating that the trial judge should not have granted bail to the
accused since evidence of guilt was strong and the other, calling
upon said judge to inhibit himself from trying the case since he did
not exhibit the cold neutrality of an impartial judge in ruling upon
certain motions.

Comment on the actuations of the Public Relations Officer who is

presumably authorized by the Associations.

Answer:

The actuation of the Public Relation Officer of All Judges Association

is improper. What the All Judges Association should do is to report
the matter to the Supreme Court and file proper damages. The
Supreme Court may refer the matter for investigation to a justice of
the Court of Appeals.

The issuance of the press release is in violation of the rule that

charges and investigations against Judges should be confidential in
character and should not be published.

The Public Relation Officers can even be held in contempt of court.

Furthermore, Rule 2.04 of the Code of Judicial Conduct states that “a

judge shall refrain from influencing in any manner the outcome of
litigation or dispute pending before another court or administrative
agency.”

Rule 3.07 of the same Code states that “a judge should abstain from
making public comments on any pending case and should require
similar restrain on the part of court personnel.”

Question No. 10:

The Court Appeals affirmed the judgement of conviction of Atty.

Gncho for violation of B.P. Blg. 2 and likewise suspended him
indefinitely from the practice of law. There upon Atty. Gancho filed a
Motion for Reconsideration assailing the validity of his suspension
from the practice of law contending that the Court of Appeals acted
as offended party, prosecutor and judge all at the same time.

. 1) Resolve this motion.


. 2) Despite the order suspending him from the practice of law, Atty.
Gancho
 still continued, to prosecute the ejectment cases which
he himself filed against his tenants. The tenants then
questioned the authority of Atty. Gancho to prosecute the cases
when he is under suspension.
 May Atty. Gancho be allowed to
continue appearing in the ejectment cases?


Answer:

. 1) The motion for reconsideration should be denied. It is now: a

settled rule that a lawyer found guilty of violation of B.P. Blg.
 22 otherwise known as the Bouncing Check Law is a crime
involving moral turpitude which is a ground for disbursement.


. 2) Atty. Gancho may still continue prosecuting the case not as a

lawyer but as a party litigant.


Question No. 11:

Atty. Nicasio handled a case for Lydia Domondon wherein judgement

was rendered in the latter’s favour in the amount of P10,000.00.
Upon finality of the judgement, the judgement debtor paid the full
amount of P110,000.00 to Atty. Nicasio. However, Atty. Nicasio
turned over only P80,000.00 to Lydia Domondon, explaining that he
has already deducted the amount of P20,000.00 for his professional
services in accordance with their written agreement, and the amount

of P10,000.00 awarded by the court by way of attorney’s fees from

the total sum of P110,000.00 received by him from the judgement
debtor.

Comment on the proprietary of the action of Atty. Nicasio.

Answer:

The action of Atty. Nicasio in retaining the amount of P10,000.00 as

attorney’s fees said amount belongs to his client.

The award of attorney’s fees and damages under article 2208,

paragraph 10 of the Civil Code refers to damages suffered by the
client.

1994 BAR EXAMINATIONS

Question No. 1:

On the day of his arraignment, your client confided in you that he in

fact killed the victim for which he was being charged with murder.
You had been led to believe

Initially that he was just being framed and that another person had
committed the crime.
1. How will you advise your client to plead?

2.If he should refuse to heed your advise, what course of action will
you pursue?

Answer:

1. I would first inquire fully into the circumstances under which he

killed the victim. If I find out that he is guilty as charged. I would
advise him to plead guilty. After explaining his constitutional rights
and the importance of the plead guilty.

2.If he would refuse to follow my advice, I would still render effective

legal assistance to him. I will spare no effort to save him from an
unrighteous conviction and to present, by all fair and reasonable
means, every defense or mitigating circumstances that the law
permits to the end that he may not be deprived of life or liberty but
by due process of law legally applied.

Question No. 2:

Atty. Aguirre as counsel de officio for boy Batong Bakal, was able to
win an acquittal for Boy who was charged with robbery in band. A
year later, Atty. Aguirre discovered that Boy in fact had a lot of
money which he had been bragging as part of the loot in the crime
which he is acquitted. Knowing that Boy can no longer be prosecuted
on the grounds of double jeopardy, Atty. Aguirre sent him a bill for
his services as counsel de officio.

Please give your reasoned comments on the ethical

CONSIDERATIONS if any is involved in the above case.

Answer:

A counsel de officio is a lawyer appointed by the court to defend an

indigent defendant in a criminal case. The lawyer designated as
counsel de officio cannot charge the indigent litigant for his
professional services. In a sense, there is no contract for legal
services between him and the defendant. In the absence of an
express or an implied contract there is no obligation to compensate.
Suing his client for attorney’s fees might also involve a violation of
the confidential nature of a lawyer client relationship.

Question No. 3:

The law firm of Rodriguez, Delfin and Zafra had been in existence for
almost 25 years and had built up an excellent reputation and a well
heeled clientele. Sometimes last year

Partner Zafra died of coronary disease but Rodriguez and Delfin

refused to drop his name from the firm name.

May Rodriguez and Delfin insist on keeping the name of Zafra as part
of the firm name?

Answer:

Yes, they may continue to use the name of Zafra in the firm name,
provided that they indicate in all communications that he is deceased.
Rule 3.02 of the code of professional responsibility that the continued
name of a deceased partner is permissible provided that

The firm indicates in all communication that the said partner passed
away.

Alternative Answer:

They may keep the name of Zafra provided that the consent of the
heirs is obtained.

Question No. 4:

During the course of his cross examination, your client had testified
to events and circumstances which you personally know to be untrue.
If his testimony was given credence and accepted as fact by the
court, you are sure to win your clients case.

Under the code of professional responsibility, what is your obligation

to: a) The Court
 b) Your client
 c)The public?

Answer:
a) A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of
any in court; nor shall he mislead or allow the court to be misled by
any artifice (Rule 10.01, Canon 10, and Code of Professional
Responsibility). A lawyer shall not knowingly assist a witness to
misrepresent himself or to impersonate other ( Rule 12.06 canon 12
Code of Professional Responsibility)

b) A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the
course of representation, perpetuated a fraud upon a person or
tribunal, shall promptly call upon his client to rectify the same, and
failing to follow will allow to terminate the

client attorney relationship in accordance with (Rule 19.02 Canon 19

Code of Professional Responsibility).

c) A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or

deceitful conduct (Rule 1.01 Canon 1 of the code of professional
responsibility). A lawyer shall not counsel or abet activities aimed at
the defiance of law or at lessening confidence on the legal system
(Rule 1.02 Canon 1 Code of Professional Responsibility)

Question No. 5:

The client with whom you have a retainer agreement had not been
paying you contrary to your stipulations on legal fees as you continue
to appear at hearings in his case. A judgment was finally rendered in
your clients favor awarding him the real property in litigation as well
as a substantial amount in damages.

As a counsel who had not been paid what steps can you take to
protect your interest?

Answer:

I will cause charging lien for my fees to be recorded and attached to

the judgment in so far as it is for the payment of money in damages.
Then I will have the right to collect my fees out of such judgments
and execution in issuance pursuance thereof.

Question No. 6:
A verified complaint for disbarment was filed against Atty. Cruz who
was accused of misappropriating funds belonging to the complainant.
The matter was referred to the IBP which forthwith conducted an
investigation through its local chapter. During the pendency of the
investigation, the complainant filed an Affidavit of Desistance
claiming that Atty. Cruz has already reimbursed him for the funds
which he had accused him of unlawfully spending for his own use.
Atty. Cruz moved for the dismissal of the complaint. As the hearing
officer, how will you react to the motion of Atty. Cruz?

Answer:

The desistance of a complaint in a disbarment proceedings or his

withdrawal of the charges against a lawyer does not deprive the
court of the authority to proceed and determine the matter. Nor does
it necessary result in the dismissal of the complaint, except when, as
a consequence of withdrawal or desistance, no evidence is adduced
to prove the charges, Since a disbarment proceeding is neither a civil
or criminal action but one presented solely for public interest; the
fact that the complainant and the respondent have considered the
case close, is unimportant.

As, a hearing officer, I will deny the motion of Atty. Cruz and
continue the hearing.

Question No. 7:

JG, a known vagrant was defended by Atty. Go in his trial for robbery
with homicide.

After he had been convicted, he appealed to reverse the decision of

the court claiming he was deprived the constitutional right to counsel
when the court appointed Atty. Go as counsel de officio in spite of his
request to the court that he preferred Atty. Concepcion whom he
knew to be an excellent criminal lawyer. Is JG correct?

Answer:

The accused is entitled to a counsel of his choice and a counsel de

officio may be appointed for him if he has no counsel de parte. In
the case of(People vs Malunsing, 63 SCRA 793), the Supreme Court
set aside the judgment of conviction because the court appointed a
counsel de officio and the accused insisted that he gets his own
lawyer.

Alternative Answer:

JG is not correct. An accused is entitled to be assisted by counsel. To

constitute a violation of an accused’s right to counsel of his choice;
the accused must inform the trial court of his desire to be defended
by a counsel de parte and if a counsel de officio is appointed, he
must protest such appointment and the actuation of the

counsel de officio, otherwise he cannot rightly claim that his right

was violated. Thus, where a counsel de officio has been assigned to
an accused on trial and such counsel has acted without objection
from the accused. The latter’s conviction cannot be set aside on the
sole ground that his counsel was not of his own choice (People vs
Solis, 128 SCRA 217) the said ruling is applicable to this question.
While JG expressed his preference to be defended by Atty.
Concepcion, he really did not object to the appointment of Atty. Go
until after his conviction. Beside if Atty. Concepcion was his counsel
of choice, he should have retained him as counsel de parte.

Question No. 8:

Atty. Queliza was convicted of qualified seduction. He was

subsequently disbarred at the initiative of the IBP. Before he could
complete the service of his sentence, he was given an absolute
pardon of the president. He thereupon petitioned the Supreme Court
for reinstatement to the practice of law as a legal and logical
consequence of the absolute pardon. Is he entitled to reinstatement?

Answer:

An absolute pardon granted to a lawyer who has been previously

disbarred for conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude does not
automatically entitle him to reinstatement. The matter of his
reinstatement is still subject to the discretion of the Supreme Court.
He should still show by evidence aside from absolute pardon that he
is now a person of good moral character, a fit and proper person to
practice law.

(In Re: Rovero)

Question No. 9:

Deciding a case for malicious prosecution, Judge Sales awarded

attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation, in addition to exemplary
damage to the plaintiff.

1. Did the judge act within his discretion in awarding attorney’s

fees?
 2. As counsel for the plaintiff, are you entitled to receive the
attorney’s fee thus

awarded in addition to your stipulated attorney’s fees? Answer:

1. A party may recover attorney’s fees by cases of malicious

prosecution against him in action for damages against the party
responsible therefore( Art 2208(8) civil code) But he must prove not
only that he was acquitted in the criminal action, but the person who
charged him, knowingly made a false statement of facts to induce
the prosecutor to prosecute or that the institution of the criminal
action was prompted by a sinister design to vex or humiliate him and
to cast upon him dishonor and disgrace.

2. No, attorney’s fees in the concept or as an item of damages are an

indemnity sustained by the client, and belong to him.

Question No. 10:

The law firm of Sale, Santiago and Aldeguer has an existing and
current retainership agreement with XYZ corporation and ABC
company, both of which were pharmaceutical firms, XYZ corporation
discovered that a number of its patented drugs had been duplicated
and sold in the market under ABC company’s brand names, XYZ
corporation turned to the law firm and asked it to bring suit against
ABC company for patent infringement on several counts.

What are the ethical considerations in this case and how are you
going to resolve them?
Answer:

A lawyer may refuse to accept representation of a client if he labors

under conflict of interest between him and the prospective client or
between a present client or prospective client ( Rule 14.03 Canon 14
Code of Professional Responsibility). It is unprofessional for a lawyer
to represent conflicting facts (Canon 6, Code of Professional
Responsibility). A lawyer cannot accept a case against a present
client either in the same case or a totally unrelated case.

Question No. 11:

1. May a client dismiss his lawyer at any time?
 2. May a lawyer

withdraw as counsel at any time?

Answer:

1. A client may dismiss his lawyer at any time with or without

cause because the relationship is one of trust and confidence,


2. A lawyer may withdraw as counsel only with the consent of the

client and with leave of court and only for good cause
enumerated in (Rule 22.01 Canon 22 Code of Professional
Responsibility).


Question No. 12:

Mindful that the law is a profession and not a trade or business; what
are the factors must you, as a lawyer consider in charging reasonable
compensation for your services?

Answer:

1. a) The time spent and the extent of the services rendered or

required; b) The novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
 c)
The importance of the subject matter;
 d) The skill demanded;

e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of

acceptance of the proffered case;
 f) The customary charges for similar
services and the schedule of fees of the IBP chapter to which he
belongs;

g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting

to the client form the service;
 h) The contingency or certainty of
compensation;
 i) The character of the employment, whether
occasional or established; and j) The professional standing of the
lawyer.( Rule 20.01 Canon 20 Code of Professional Responsibility).

Question No. 13:

In a civil case, the defendant discovered that the counsel for plaintiff
was used to be a member of the Judicial and Bar Council during
whose time the Judge presiding over the case was appointed and
confirmed by him. He filed a motion to inhibit the Judge on the
ground that latter’s ability to act independently and

judiciously had been compromised and seriously impaired because of

his “utang na loob” to the plaintiff’s counsel.

If you were the Judge, how will your rule the motion?

Answer:

I will deny the Motion for Inhibition because every Judge is sworn to
upheld the decision of cases in accordance with the law. The fact that
the judge was recommended by the JBC which has seven members
and deliberated even confidentially does not make the judge even
morally indebted to the JBC member who may not even vote for him.

Alternative Answer:

Section 1 Rule 137 of the Rules of Court provides specific grounds

where it is mandatory for a Judge to be legally disqualified from
sitting in a case. None of those grounds is applicable to the facts
given in this case. However, the same rule allows that the Judge may
exercise of his sound discretion to disqualify himself from sitting in
the case for a just and valid reason. The Supreme Court has held
that when a suggestion is made that a judge might be induced to act
in favor of one party and against another arising out of circumstances
capable of inciting such a state of mind; he should exercise his
discretion in a way the people’s faith in the court of justice is not
impaired (Masadao and Elizaga Re: Crim Case No, 4954-M 155 SCRA
72).

The fact that the counsel of one of the parties was a member of the
Judicial and Bar Council during the time that the Judge was
appointed would not by in itself constitute sufficient ground to inhibit
himself. However there is a probability that the losing party on the
back of his mind that the judge had unmeritoriously tilted the scales
of justice against him; It maybe more prudent that the Judge inhibit
himself.

Question No. 14:

After a study of the records of the case and deciding that the plaintiff
was entitled to a favorable judgment, Judge Reyes requested Atty.
Sta. Ana for the plaintiff, to prepare a draft decision. Judge Reyes
then reviewed the draft decision prepared by Atty. Sta. Ana and
adopted its decision for the plaintiff. Judge Reyes saw nothing

unethical in the procedure he would asked the other party to do the

same if it were the prevailing party.

Please Comment if Judge Reyes decision was ethical and proper?

Answer:

The procedure of Judge Reyes was unethical because the judge is

duty bound to review the case himself; he must personally and
directly prepare his decisions and not delegate it to other person
especially a lawyer in the case. (Section 1 Rule 36 Rules of Court)

Question No. 15:

While Atty. Lancia was on his way to the office in Makati, he chanced
upon a vehicular accident involving a wayward bus and a small Kia
whose driver, a Mr. Malas, suffered serious physical injuries. Coming
to the succor of the injured Mr. Malas; Atty. Lancia drove him to the
nearest hospital. On the wqay to the Hospital Mr. Malas found out
that Atty. Lancia was a practicing lawyer In gratitude of his help , Mr
Malas retained Atty. Lancia to file a suit against the bus company and
its driver.

If you were Atty. Lancia would you accept the case?

Answer:

I will not accept the case if I were Atty. Lancia because it is difficult
to dismiss the suspicion that Atty. Lancia had assisted Mr. Alas for
the purpose of soliciting legal business. It is not clear from the facts
how Mr. Alas learned Atty. Lancia was a practicing lawyer. This could
have been only if Atty. Lancia introduced himself as a lawyer.
Moreover Atty. Lancia can be utilized as a witness to the case.

Question No. 1:

1996 BAR EXAMINATION

1) Define legal ethics.
 2) What is the significance of lawyer’s oath?

Answer:

. 1) Legal ethics is that branch of moral science which treats of the

duties which an attorney owes to the court, his client, to his
colleagues in the profession, and to the public.


. 2) “The significance of the oath is that it not only impress upon the
attorney his responsibilities but it also stamps him as an officer
of the court with rights, powers and oath of a lawyer is a
condensed code of legal ethics. It is a source of his obligation
and its violation is a ground for his suspension, disbarment or
th
other disciplinary action.” (Agpalo, Legal Ethics, 5 . Edition,
p.59)


Question No. 2

. 1) The Code of Professional Responsibility is to lawyers, as the

Code of Judicial Conduct is to members of the bench.
 How
would you characterize the relationship between the judge and
the lawyer? Explain.

. 2) Generally, only those who are members of the bar can appear
in court. Are the exclusions to this rule? Explain.


. 3) Should a lawyer accept a losing case: (a) in a criminal case; (b)

in a civil case. Explain.


Answer:

1) The Code of Professional Responsibility requires lawyers to

observe and maintained respect for judicial officers (Canon 11). On
the other hand, the Code of Judicial Conducts requires judges to be
patient, attentive and courteous to lawyers (Rule 3.03). In a word, a
lawyer and judge owe each other mutual respect and courtesy.

Alternative Answer:

. a) The relationship between a judge and a lawyer must be based

on independence and self-respect. He must neither be a
mindless fawning slave of the judge, nor must he take an
attitude of hostility towards the judge. The lawyer must
maintain toward the court a respectful attitude and to uphold
and protect the dignity of the court.


. b) Being an officer of the court, the first and foremost duty of a

lawyer is to the court. He is bound to obey lawful orders and
decisions of the court. Like the court itself, the lawyer is an
instrument to advance the ends of justice. Should there be a
conflict between the duty to his client and that of the court, he
should resolve conflict against his client and obey the lawful
orders of the court. On the other hand, judges should be
courteous and impartial to counsel. To maintain impartiality,
the judge should not associate too much with lawyers.


2) The exceptions to the rule that the only those who are members
of the bar can appear in court are the following:

. a) In the municipal trial court, a party may conduct his litigation in

person
 or with the aid of an agent or friend (Sec. 34, Rule
138).

. b) In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation
personally.(id)


. c) In criminal proceedings before a municipal trial court in a

locality where
 a duly licensed member of the bar is not
available, the court may in its discretion admit or assign a
person, resident of the province and of good repute for probity
and ability, to aid the defendant in his defence, although the
person so assigned is not a duly authorized members of the bar
(Sec. 4, Rule 116).


. d) Any official or other person appointed or designated in

accordance with the law to appear for the government of the
Philippines shall have all the rights of a duly authored member
of the bar to appear in any case in which said government has
an interest direct of indirect (Section 33, Rule 138).


. e) A senior law student who is enrolled in a recognized law

school’s clinical education program approved by the Supreme
court may appear before any court without compensation, to
represent indigent clients accepted by the legal clinic of the law
school (Rule 138-A).


. f) Non-lawyers may appear before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter if

they represent themselves or their labor organization or
members thereof (Art.222, Labor Code).


. g) Under the Cadastral Act, a non-lawyer can represent a claimant

before the Cadastral Court Sec. 9, Act. 2259).


(Note: We suggest that any four instances will be sufficient.)

3) a) A lawyer may accept a “losing” criminal case. An accused is

presumed to be innocent until his guilt is proven beyond reasonable
doubt by procedure recognized by the law. Rule 14.01 of Code of
Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall not decline to
represent a person solely on account of the latter’s race, sex, creed
or status of life, or because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of
said persons. Otherwise innocent persons might be denied proper
defence.
b) A lawyer may not accept a “loosing” civil case. Firstly, his
signature in every pleading constitutes a certification that there is a
good cause to support it and that it is not interposed for delay (Sec.
5, Rule 7, Rules of Court). Secondly, it is the lawyer’s duty to counsel
or maintain such actions or proceedings only as appear to him to be
just and such defences only as he believes to be honestly debatable
under the law (Sec. 20 (a), Rule 138, Rules of Court). Thirdly, h is
not to encourage either the commencement or continuance of an
action or proceeding or delay in any man’s cause for any corrupt
motive or interest (Sec.20 (g), rule 138). Fourthly, he must decline to
conduct a civil cause or to make a defence when convinced that it is
intended merely to harass or injure the opposite party to work
oppression or wrong (Canon 130, Canons of Professional Ethics). If a
lawyer were to accept a bad civil case, it will wither be exert his best
efforts towards a compromise or it unsuccessful, to advice his client
to confess judgement.

Alternative Answer:

A lawyer may also accept a losing civil case provided that in so doing,
he must not engaged in dilatory tactics and must advise his client
about the prospects and the advantage of settling a compromise in a
case.

Question No. 3

1) Why is a lawyer an “officer of the court?” Explain.
 2) Is a lawyer

(a) always a notary public; or (b) is a notary public always a

lawyer? Explain.

Answer:

. 1) Lawyers are “officers of the court” because they form part of

the machinery of the law for the administration of justice
(Hilado v. David, 84 Phil. 569). Under Canon 12 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility, the lawyer shall exert every effort
and consider it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient
administration of justice.

. 2) a) A lawyer is not always a notary public. In order to be a
notary public, he has to be issued a commission by the
Executive Judge of the Court of First Instance (now Regional
Trial Court) where he has applied for such commission (Adm.
Order No. 6, June 30, 1975).


c) On the other hand, a notary public need not be a lawyer, Sec. 233
of the Revised Administrative Code provides that persons who have
completed and passed the study of law in a reputable school or
university, or who have passed the examinations for office of justice
of the peace or clerk or deputy clerk of court for a period of not less
than two years, may also be appointed notaries public. In
municipalities and municipal districts where there are no lawyers or
persons having the qualifications above specified, or having them,
refused to hols such office, the judges may appoint other persons
temporarily to exercise the office of notary public who have the
qualifications of fitness and morality.

Question No. 4

. 1) Atty. Z, a Notary public commissioned in Quezon City, attended

a wedding at Makati, B requested Z to notarized a deed of sale
executed between X and Y who were both in Baguio City. Atty.
Z who has a portable notarial seal, notarized the document.
Subsequently, X assailed the document alleging that his
signature thereon was falsified. X files a case for disbarment
against Atty. Z.
 a) What is the liability of Atty. Z, if any?
Explain.
 b) Where the complaint for disbarment should be filed?


. 2) Congress woman C is a senior partner in a law firm. Although C

is no longer appear in court, she advises clients and corrects
the pleadings of her assistants. A political opponent lodged a
complaint with the House Committee on ethics contending that
Congresswoman C is prohibited by the Constitution to practice
law.
 Will the complaint prosper? Explain.


Answer:

. 1) a) Atty. Z may be held criminally liable for violating Article 171

(Falsification by Public Officer) of the Revised Penal Code, by
 making it appear that X and Y appeared and acknowledged
having executed the deed of sale before him, when in fact they
did so appear or acknowledge. He may also administratively
liable for not obeying the laws of the land (Canon 1, Code of
Professional Responsibility). Moreover, his jurisdiction as notary
is only in Quezon City.
 b) The complaint for disbarment may be
filed with the Supreme Court or with the Board of governors of
the Integrated bar of the Philippines, or with the IBP chapter of
which Atty. Z is member (Rule 139-B, Rules of Court).


. 2) b) The complaint will not prosper, Sec. 14, Article IV of the

Constitution provides that “No senator or member of the House
of the Representatives may personally appears as counsel
before any court of justice or before the electoral tribunals, or
quasi-judicial and other administrative bodies.” What is
prohibited is “personal appearance.” Since the practice of law
covers a wide range of activities senators and congressmen are
allowed to engaged in the aspects of legal practice such as the
giving of legal advice to clients (Pineda, Legal and Judicial
Ethics, 1995 ed.,p.20). However, he should not sign any
pleading.


Question No. 5

. 1) Talbog, a small town, has only two practicing lawyers. Jose, a

good friend of Judge M, requested the latter to notarize a deed
of sale for his farm lot, because the two lawyers of their town
charged exorbitant fees. Judge M notarized the document and
charged P10.00 as fee. The two lawyers complained to the
Supreme Court.
 a) Will their complaint prosper? Explain b) Can
Judge M charge a fee?


. 2) Atty. X retained by E in case for violation of BP 22 filed by B

before the scheduled hearing, Atty. X assured B that E would
pay the value of the dishonored check. Elated at the prospect
of being paid, B wined and dined Atty. X several times. Atty. X
convinced B not to appear at the scheduled hearing. Due to
non-appearance of B , the estafa case was dismissed for failure
to prosecute. B, however, was never paid. Thus, she filed a
 case for disbarment against Atty. X.
Does the conduct of Atty. X
constitute malpractice? Explain.


Answer:

. 1) a) The complaint will prosper, Circular No 1-90 of the Supreme

Court provides that Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judges may act
as notaries public ex officio only in the notarization of
documents connected with the exercise of their official
functions and duties. They may not, as notaries public officio,
undertake the preparation and acknowledgement of private
documents, contracts and other acts of conveyances which
bear no direct relation to the performance of their functions as
judges. As an exception, MTC and MCTC judges assigned to
municipalities or circuits with no lawyers or notaries public may,
in their capacity as notaries public exofficio, perform any act
within the competency of a regular notary public, provided that
(1) all notarial fees charged shall be for the amount of the
government and turned over to the municipal treasurer, and (2)
certification be made in the notarized documents attesting to
the lack of any lawyer or notary public in such municipality or
circuit. In this case there were two lawyers available in the
municipality, only that they were charging exorbitant fees,
which is not an exemption to the general rule.
 b) As can be
seen from Circular No. 1-90 above, the judge, if allowed to
perform the functions of a regular notary, may charge a fee,
but such fee shall be for the account of the government and
turned over to the municipal treasurer.


. 2) Yes, the conduct of Atty. S constitutes malpractice. A lawyer

owes candor, fairness and good faith to the court. He shall not
do any falsehood or shall be mislead or allow the court to be
misled by any artifice. He owes loyalty to his client. In a case
involving similar facts, the Supreme Court found that the lawyer
concerned obstructed the administration of justice and
suspended him for two years (Cantorne v. Ducusin, 57, Phil.
20).


Question No. 6
1) May a law firm use the name of a deceased partner? Qualify.
2) Y
hires the services of Atty. Z in a case where Y is accused of rape.
Atty. Z,

firmly believes that Y is guilty of the crime of rape.
 If you were Atty.
Z, would you still accept the case? Explain.

Answer:

. 1) Rule 3.02 of the Code of Professional responsibility provides in

part that “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.” However,
several justices of the Supreme Court dissented from this rule.


. 2) I would still accept the case. It is not for me to judge that Y is

guilty of the crime. The law presumes him to be innocent, and
is entitled to an acquittal unless his guilt is proven beyond
reasonable doubt with due process of law. The lawyer’s work is
to see to it that due process of law is observed. Otherwise, may
accused will be defenceless.


Question No. 7

. 1) In a hearing before the Court of Tax Appeals, Atty. G was

invited to appear as amicus curiae. One of the Judges hearing
the tax case is the father of Atty. G. The counsel for the
respondent moved for the inhibition of the judge in view of the
father-son relationship.
 Is there merit to the motion? Decide.


. 2) A group of businessmen formed a corporation, the primary

purpose of which is furnish legal advised and service to the
subscribers as a collection agency. To accomplish this purpose,
the group planned to employ a staff of lawyers to initiate and
prosecute collection suits entrusted to it by its clients. The SEC
denied registration of the corporation on the ground that it was
disqualified to practice law.
 Is the SEC correct? Discuss briefly.


Answer:
1)

There is no merit to the motion. Rule 3.12 of the Code of Judicial

Responsibility provides that “A judge should take no part where the
judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Among the
instances for the disqualification of a judge is that he is related to a
party litigant within the sixth degree or to counsel within the fourth
degree of consanguinity or affinity. But this refers to counsel of the
parties. An amicus curiae is supposed to be an experienced and
impartial attorney invited by the court to appear and help in the
disposition of issues submitted to it. He represents no

party to the case. There is, therefore, no ground to fear the loss of
the judge’s impartiality in this case if his son is appointed amicus
curiae.

Alternative Answer:

Yes, there is merit in the motion. Although Atty. G. was appearing

only as amicus curiae, his opinion may influence the decision of one
of the judges who is his father. Rule 137, par. 1 of the rules of Court
does not distinguish whether the lawyer who is related to the judge
within fourth degree is appearing as amicus curiae or hired counsel.

2) The SEC is correct. It is well settled that a corporation cannot

engaged in the practice of law. Only a natural person may be
admitted to the practice of law. (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court). A
corporation cannot perform the conditions required for membership
in the bar, such as possession of good moral character. A corporation
cannot practice law directly or indirectly by employing a lawyer to
practice for it or to appear for others for its benefit.

Question No. 8

. 1) May a judge be disciplined by the Supreme Court based solely

on a complaint filed by the complainant and the answer of
respondent Judge? If so, under what circumstances? What is
the rationale behind this power of the Supreme Court?


. 2) A Judge of the regional Trial Court, notwithstanding the fact

 that he was facing criminal charges at the time he obtained his
appointment, did not disclosed the pendency of the cases
either to the President or to the Supreme Court. He claims that:
(a) he enjoys presumption of innocence in the pending criminal
cases; (b) that the said cases even if sustained after trial do not
involve moral turpitude; and (3) before an administrative
complaint based on a criminal prosecution can be given due
course there must be a conviction by final judgement.
 May the
Judge be considered as an undeserving appointee and
therefore be removed from his office?


Answer:

1) A judge may be disciplined by the Supreme Court based solely on

the basis of the complaint filed by the complainant and answer of the
respondent judge, under the principles of res ipsa loquitur. The
Supreme Court has held that when the facts alleged in the complaint
are admitted or are ready how negate the strong inference of evil
intent is forthcoming, no further hearing to establish such facts to
support a judgement as to culpability of the

respondent is necessary (In Re: Petition for dismissal of Judge Dizon,

173 SCRA 719).

2) He may be considered as undeserving and removed from office.

This problem falls quarterly under the decision of the Supreme Court
in the case of Court Administrator v. Estacion, 181 SCRA 33, wherein
a complaint was filed concerning the appointment of a Regional Trial
Court judge notwithstanding the fact that he was then facing criminal
charges for homicide and attempted homicide. The judge also
claimed that (a) he enjoys the presumption of innocence, (b) the said
cases, even if sustained, do not involved moral turpitude, and (c)
before an administrative complained based on a criminal prosecution
is given due course, there must be a conviction by final judgement.
The Supreme Court held:

“The argument that he had not yet been convicted and should be
presumed innocent is beside the point, and so is the contention that
the crimes of homicide and attempted homicide do not involve moral
turpitude. The important consideration is that he had a duty to
inform appointing authority and this Court of the pending criminal
charges against him to enable them to determine on the basis of his
record, eligibility for the position he was seeking. He did not
discharge that duty. His record did not contain the important
information in question because he deliberately withheld and thus
effectively hid it. His lack of candor is as obvious as his reason for
suppression of such vial fact, which he knew would have been taken
into account against him if it had been disclosed.

As stressed in the report, it behoves every prospective appointee to

the judiciary to appraise the appointing authority of every matter
bearing on his fitness for judicial office, including such circumstances
as may reflect on his integrity and probity. These are qualifications
specifically required of appointees to the judiciary under Article VIII
Sec. 7(3) of the Constitution. The fact alone of his concealment of
the two criminal cases against him is clear proof of his lack of the
said qualifications and renders him unworthy to sit as a judge.”

The respondent judge was accordingly removed from office.

Question No. 9

1) In a homicide case, Atty. M was appointed by the Court as counsel

de officio for F, the accused. After trial F was acquitted. Atty. M sent
F a bill for attorney’s fees.
 a) Can F be compelled to pay? Explain.

b) Can F employ a counsel de parte to collaborate with Atty. M, his

counsel de officio? Explain.

2) In a murder trial, Judge to asked searching questions of all the

witnesses for the accused prompting Atty. O counsel of the accused,
to request Judge T to desist from acting as counsel for the
prosecution. The Judge, however, reminded Atty. O that she wanted
to determine whether the accused was guilty of the crime charged.

Is it proper for Judge T to take an active part on the examination of

the accused witnesses?

Answer:
. 1) a) No, F may not be compelled to pay attorney’s fees. A counsel
de officio is a lawyer appointed to render professional services
in favour of an indigent to render professional services in
favour of an indigent client. In the absence of a law allowing
compensation, he cannot charge the indigent litigant for his
professional services. One of the obligation which the lawyer
assumed when he took his oath as a lawyer is to render free
legal services when required b the law to do so. The Rules of
Court provides a token compensation for an attorney de officio
to be paid by the state.
 He may do so, but if he can afford to
employ a counsel de parte, then he is no longer indigent and
will not need a counsel de officio. The latter can withdraw as
his counsel if he chooses to.


. 2) No, it is not proper. Rule 3.06 of the Code of Judicial conduct

provides that “While a judge may, to promote justice, prevent
waste of time or clear up some obscurity, properly intervene in
the presentation of evidence during the trial, it should always
be borne in mind that undue interference may prevent the
proper presentation of the cause or the ascertainment of truth.”
The intervention of the judge in a case must be done with
considerable circumspection. It must be done sparingly and not
throughout trial, which will have the effect of or will tend to
build or bolster the case for one of the parties. The reason for
the rule is that the judge should not only be impartial but also
appear to be impartial.


Question No. 10

1) Judge P decide an annulment of title suit in favour of A. After the

decision had become final and executor. A sold property to a realty
firm. Judge P, a

good friend of the owner of the realty firm, purchased two lots in the
property at a substantial discount.

. a) Did Judge P violate any provision of the Civil Code with respect
to the
 purchase of a litigated property?


. b) Did Judge P go against any provision of the Civil Code with

 respect to the purchase of a litigated property? 


. 2) Justice C recently retired. The parents of the victims of the

OZONE Disco tragedy retained him in the case for damages
which they filed against the owners of the Disco, Quezon City
officials and Quezon City.
 Can he appear as counsel for the
victims’ parents? Explain.


. 3) Upon being replaced by Justice C, Atty. B, the former counsel of

the victims of the Ozone Disco tragedy, was directed toward all
the documents in his possessions to Justice c. Atty. B refused,
demanding full compensation pursuant to their written contract.
Sensing that a favourable judgement was forthcoming, Atty. B
filed a motion in court relative to his attorney’s fees, furnishing
his former clients with copies thereof.
 Is Atty. B legally and
ethically correct in refusing to turn over the documents and in
filing the motion? Explain.


Answer:

1) A) Article 1941 of the Civil Code provides as follows:

“Art. 1941. The following persons cannot acquire by purchase, even

at a public or judicial auction, either in person or through the
mediation of another.

XXXXXXXXXX

(5) Justices, judges, prosecuting attorneys, clerks of superior and

inferior courts, and other officers and employees connected with the
administration of justice, the property and rights in litigation or levied
upon an execution before the court within whose jurisdiction or
territory they exercise their respective function; this prohibition
includes the act of acquiring by assignment and shall apply to lawyer
with respect to the property and rights which may be the object of
any litigation to which they may take part by virtue of the
profession.”

In the case of Macariola v. Asuncion, 14 SCRA 77, the Supreme Court

held the Article 1491 does not apply where the property was not
acquired from any of the parties to the case, or when the litigation is
already terminated. In this realty firm was not a party to the case.
Moreover, his judgement had already become final and executor;
hence the property was no longer in litigation. There is no violation of
Article 1941.

b) However, in the same case, the Supreme Court held that while the
respondent judge may not have violated Art. 1941 of the Civil Code,
still, it was improper for him to have acquired the property
concerned. He has violated Canon 3 of the Canons of Judicial Ethics
which requires that judge’s official conduct should be free from the
appearance of improperly, and his personal behaviour, not only upon
the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his
everyday life, should be beyond reproach. It was unwise and
indiscreet of him to have acquired the subject property, because it
gives cause for doubt or mistrust in the uprightness of the
administration of justice.

. 2) Section 1 of Republic Act No. 910, as amended provides hat “it

is a condition of the pension provided for herein that no retiring
justice or judge of a court of record or city or municipal judge
during the time that he is receiving the said pension shall
appear before any court in any civil case wherein the
government or any of its legally instituted officers.” In as much
as the case being offered to Justice C is a civil case against not
only the disco itself, but also against Quezon City and its
officials, he will be violating the aforesaid condition if he
appears as counsel for the victim’s parents in the said case.


. 3) Atty. B is legally and ethically correct in refusing to turn over the

documents. He is entitled to a retaining lien which gives him
the right to retain the funds, documents and papers of his
clients which have lawfully come to his possession until his
lawful fees and disbursement have been paid (Sec. 37, Rule
138, Rules of Court, Rule 16.03, Code of Professional
Responsibility). Likewise, he is legally and ethically correct in
filing a motion in court relative to his fees. He is entitled to a
charging lien upon all judgements for the payment of money,
and executions issued in pursuance of such judgements, which
 he has secured in a litigation of his client, from and after the
time when the records of the court rendering such judgement
or issuing such execution (ibid.)


Question No. 1

1998 BAR EXAMINATION

Judge C was appointed MTC Judge in 1993. Subsequently, the

Judicial and Bar Council received information that previously he had
been dismissed as Assistant City Prosecutor of Manila. It appeared
that when he applied for appointment to the Judiciary, his answer to
the question in the personal data sheet- “Have you ever been retired,
dismissed or forced to resign from any employment?” was- “Optional
under Republic Act No. 1145.” The truth is, he was dismissed for
gross misconduct as Assistant City prosecutor.

May he be dismissed as Judge? (5%)

Answer:

Yes. “By his concealment of his previous dismissal from the public
serice, which the Judicial and Bar Council would have taken into
consideration in acting on his application for appointment as a judge,
he (the judge) committed an act of dishonesty that rendered him
unfit to be appointed, and to remain, in the Judiciary he has
tarnished with his falsehood.” (Re: Inquiry on the Appointment of
Judge Enrique A. Cube, 227 SCRA 193: Jose Estacion, 181 SCRA 33,
Estanislao Belan, August 6, 1998).

Question No. 2

What is your understanding of forum-shopping? What are the

possible consequences? (5%)

Answer:

Forum-shopping is the improper practice of filling several actions or

petitions in the same or different tribunals arising from the same
cause and seeking substantially identical reliefs in the hope of
winning in one of them.
The possible consequences of forum-shopping are:

. 1) Summary dismissal of the multiple petition or complaint.


. 2) Penalty for direct contempt of court on the party and his lawyer.



. 3) Criminal action for a false certification of non forum shopping.


. 4) Disciplinary proceeding for the lawyer concerned. (Sec. 5, Rule

7, 1997
 Rules of Civil Procedure)


Question No. 3

When Atty. Aldrin received copy of the decision of the court of

Appeals, he files a motion for reconsideration using intemperate and
disrespectful language with a subtle threat that “knowingly rendering
an unjust judgement is punishable under the Revised Penal Code.”

The Court of Appeals ordered him to explain why he should not be

cited in contempt of court. Instead of complying, he submitted to the
Court of Appeals his Petition to Retire from the practice of law which
he immediately filed with the Supreme Court after receiving the
citation for contempt. May he be allowed to retire from the practice
of law? (5%).

Answer:

No. “A practicing lawyer and officer of the court facing contempt

proceedings cannot just be allowed to voluntarily retire from the
practice of law which would negate the inherent power of the court
to punish him for contempt.” (Montecillo v. Gica, 60SCRA 234).

Question No. 4

Nene approached Atty. Nilo and asked him if it was alright to buy a
piece of land which Maneng was selling. What was shown by Maneng
to Nene was an Original Certificate of title with many annotations and
old patches, to which Nene expressed suspicion. However, Atty. Nilo,
desirous of pushing through with the transaction because of the high
notarial fee promised to him, told Nene that the title was alright and
that the title was alright and that she should not worry since he is an
attorney and that he knew Maneng well. He notarized the Deed of
Sale and Nene paid Maneng P108,000.00. It turned out that Maneng
had previously sold the same property to another person.

For the injustice done to Nene, may Atty. Nilo be disciplined? (5%).

Answer:

Yes. Atty. Nilo is guilty of gross negligence in protecting the interest

of his client. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to
him and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable
(Rule 18.03, Code of Professional responsibility). Worse, he was
negligent because he placed his own interest in receiving a high
notarial fee over and above the interest of his client. In the case of

Nadayag v. Grageda, 237 SCRA 202, which involves similar facts, the
Supreme Court held that lawyer “should have been conscientious in
seeing to it that justice permeated every aspect of a transaction for
which his services had been engaged, in conformity with the avowed
duties of a worthy member of the Bar.”

Question No. 5

A lawyer advertised in the newspaper the following:

“Can secure annulment of your marriage promptly. Expert in legal

separation cases. Consult anytime.”

Is the advertisement proper? (5%)

Answer:

No. A lawyer in making known his legal services should not use any
false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified or self-laudatory
statements regarding Professional Responsibility, In re Tagorda, 53
Phil. 37). The claim that he can secure annulment of marriage
promptly is false and misleading and his claim that he is an expert in
legal separation is self-laudatory. The advertisement constitutes
improper solicitation and violates the sanctity of the institution of
marriage which the States should protect (Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc.
221 SCRA 378).

Question No. 6

State the rule on (a) the right of the client to dismiss his lawyer and
(b) the prerogative of a lawyer to withdraw as counsel. (5%).

Answer:

. (a) A client has the right to dismiss his lawyer at any time, with or
without just cause. The existence or non-existence of just
cause. The existence or non- existence of just cause is material
only for determining the right of the lawyer to compensation for
the services rendered. The client’s right to terminate the
lawyer’s services springs from the strictly personal and highly
confidential nature of the client loses confidence in his lawyer,
he has the right to dismiss him.


. (b) On the other hand, the lawyer does not have an unqualified
right to withdraw as counsel. As an officer of the court, he may
not withdraw or to be permitted to withdraw as counsel if such
withdrawal will work injustice to a


client of frustrate the ends of justice. A lawyer may withdraw at

anytime with his client’s written consent. Without such consent, he
may withdraw his services only for good because and upon notice
appropriate in the circumstances (Canon 22, Code of Professional
Responsibility).

Question No. 7

A mayor charged with Homicide engaged your services as his lawyer.

Since there is only one witness to the incident, the mayor disclosed
to you his plan to kill the lone witness through a contrived vehicular
accident.

. 1) What are the moral and legal obligations to the mayor, and to
the authorities? (3%)


. 2) Should the killing push through and are you certain that the
mayor is one responsible, are you under obligation to disclose
 to the authorities what was confided to you? Is this not a
privilege communication between client and attorney? (2%).


Answer:

. 1) It is the duty of an attorney to divulge the communication of his

client as to his announced intention to commit a crime to the
proper authorities to prevent the act or to protect the person
against whom it is threatened.


. 2) Public policy and the lawyer’s duty to counsel obedience to the

law forbid that an attorney should assist in the commission of a
crime or permit the relation of attorney and client to conceal a
wrong doing. He owes it to himself and to the public to use his
best efforts to restraint his client from doing any unlawful act
and if, notwithstanding his advice, his client proceeds to
execute the illegal deed, he may disclose it or be examined as
to any communication relating thereto. There is privileged
communication only as to crimes already committed before its
communication to the lawyer.


Question No. 8

A judge, in order to ease his clogged docket, would exert efforts to

compel the accused in criminal cases to plead guilty to a lesser
offense and advise party litigants in civil cases, whose positions
appear weak, to accept the compromise offered by the opposing
party.

Is the practice legally acceptable? (5%)

Answer:

The practice is legally acceptable as long as the judge does not

pressure on the parties and takes care that he does not appear to
have prejudged the case. Where a judge has told a party that his
case is weak before the latter was fully heard, such was considered
ground for his disqualification (Castillo v. Juan 62 SCRA 124).

Question No. 9
Atty. Asilo, a lawyer and a notary public, notarized a document
already prepared by spouses Roger and Luisa when they approached
him. It stated in the document that Roger and and Luisa formally
agreed to live separately from each other and either one can have a
live-in partner with full consent of the other.

What is the liability of Atty. Asilo if any? (5%).

Answer:

Atty. Asilo maybe held administratively liable for violating Rule 1.02
of Code of Professional responsibility. A lawyer shall not counsel of
abet activities aimed at defiance of the law or at lessening confidence
in the legal system. An agreement between two spouses to live
separately from each other and either one could have a live-in
partner with full consent of the other, is contrary to law and morals.
The ratification by a notary public who is a layer of such illegal or
immoral contract or document constitutes malpractice or gross
misconduct in office. He should at least refrain from its consumption.
(In re Santiago, 70 Phil.661; Panganiban v. Borromeo, 58 Phil. 38
Phil. 367, In re Bucana, 72 SCra 14).

Question No. 10

What is your understanding of quantum merit as attorney’s fee?

(5%)

Answer:

Quantum merit literally means “as much as he deserves.” It is a

measure for the lawyer’s fee in the absence of a contract, or when
the fees stipulated in a contract are found unconscionable, or when
the lawyer’s services are terminated for cause. The lawyer is entitled
to receive what merits for his services, as much as

he has earned. The factors to be taken into consideration are

enumerated in Rule 22 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Question No. 11

For his failure to appear for trial despite notice Atty. Umali was
summarily pronounced guilty of direct contempt and was fined
P10,000.00 by judge.

Is the Judge correct? (5%).

Answer:

The judge is not correct. A lawyer who fails to appear for trials is only
liable for indirect contempt, which cannot be punished summarily.
(People v. Torio, 118 SCRA 14; Atty. Himiniano D. Silva v. Judge
German G. Lee, 169 SCRA 512).

Question No. 12

Ben filed proceedings for disbarment against his lawyer, Atty. Co,
following the latter’s conviction for estafa for misappropriating funds
belonging to his client (Ben). While the proceedings for disbarment
was pending, the President granted absolute pardon in favour of
Atty. Co, then moved for the dismissal of the disbarment case.

Should the motion be granted? (5%).

Answer:

An absolute pardon by the President is one that operates to wipe out

the conviction as was as the offense itself. The grant thereof to a
lawyer is a bar to a proceeding for disbarment against him, if such
proceeding is based solely on the fact of such conviction ( In re
Parcasion, 69 SCRA 336). But where the proceeding to disbar is
founded on the professional misconduct involved in the transaction
which culminated in his conviction, the effect of the pardon is only to
relieve him of the penal consequences of his act and does not
operate as a bar to the disbarment proceeding, inasmuch as the
criminal acts may nevertheless constitute proof that the attorney
does not possess good moral character (In re Lontoc, 43 Phil.293).

Question No. 13

Discuss the propriety of a lawyer filing a suit against his client

concerning his fees. (5%).
Answer:

Rule 20.04 of Code of Professional Responsibility provides that “a

lawyer shall avoid controversies with his clients concerning his
compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent
imposition, injustice of fraud.” The legal profession is not a money-
making trade but a form of public service. Lawyers should avoid
giving the impression that they are mercenary (Perez v. Scottish
Union and National Insurance Co.,76 Phil.325). It might even turn
out to be unproductive for him for potential clients are likely to avoid
a lawyer with a reputation of suing his clients.

Question No. 14

Judge Silva upon seeing a reckless tricycle driver almost hitting a boy
by the side of the road gave chase and stopped the tricycle. Judge
Silva then confiscated the driver’s license and told him to get it from
his office. Was the conduct of Judge Salva proper?” (5%).

Answer:

The facts are akin to those in Paguirigan v. Clavano (61 SCRA 411
(1074), where the Supreme Court held:

While respondent might have been motivated by a spirit of civicism in

cooperating with the city authorities in the enforcement of traffic
rules and regulations, the arrest of errant motor vehicle drivers and
the confiscation of their licenses are essentially police functions which
are specifically vested by law upon law enforcement officers of the
government. Respondent as Judge of the City Court will necessarily
hear and decide all cases filed in his court regarding such violations
and infractions of the Motor Vehicle Law or traffic regulations by the
law enforcement officers. It is patent, therefore, that respondent
should not have taken upon himself the responsibility of confiscating
the license of the motor cab driver but he should have referred the
matter to the police. We deemed it relevant to emphasize that the
official conduct of a judge should be free from impropriety or any
appearance thereof. His personal behaviour in the performance of his
official duties and in his everyday life should be beyond approach. By
confiscating the driver’s license without issuing any traffic Violation
Report (TVR) and losing the same while in his possession,
respondent Judge has acted in ), a barangay captain manner
unbefitting his high judicial office.