Lawyers Responsibilities to courts

Lawyer's Oath I, do solemnly swear that I will maintain allegiance to the Republic of the Philippines, I will support the Constitution and obey the laws as well as the legal orders of the duly constituted authorities therein; I will do no falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in court; I will not wittingly or willingly promote or sue any groundless, false or unlawful suit, or give aid nor consent to the same; I will delay no man for money or malice, and will conduct myself as a lawyer according to the best of my knowledge and discretion, with all good fidelity as well to the courts as to my clients; and I impose upon myself these voluntary obligations without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion. So help me God.

Code of Professional Responsibility

y CANON 10 - A LAWYER OWES CANDOR, FAIRNESS AND GOOD FAITH TO THE COURT.

RENATO M. MALIGAYA, complainant, vs. ATTY. ANTONIO G. DORONILLA, JR., respondent. Maligaya filed a complaint against the respondent at the Integrated Bar of the Philippines Commission on Bar Discipline for misleading the court through misinterpretation of the facts resulting in obstruction of justice. y CANON 11 - A LAWYER SHALL OBSERVE AND MAINTAIN THE RESPECT DUE TO THE COURTS AND TO JUDICIAL OFFICERS AND SHOULD INSIST ON SIMILAR CONDUCT BY OTHERS.

ATTY. BONIFACIO T. BARANDON, JR., Complainant, vs. ATTY. EDWIN Z. FERRER, SR., Respondent. The Respondent show improper behaviour and threatens the petitioners during the hearing, he also file a fabricated charge against the petitioner.

CANON 12 - A LAWYER SHALL EXERT EVERY EFFORT AND CONSIDER IT HIS DUTY TO ASSIST IN THE SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE.

REXIE EFREN A. BUGARING AND ROYAL BECHTEL BUILDERS, INC., petitioners, vs. HON. DOLORES S. ESPAOL, in her capacity as Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court Branch 90, Imus, Cavite, respondent. During the hearing of the case, the Petitioner Atty. Bugaring was already perorating while in fact Atty. Barazaga has not yet finished with his manifestation, Atty. Bugaring disregards the orderly procedures of the court and directed him to listen and wait for the rulings of the court for an orderly proceeding but Atty. Bugaring was insisting that he d be allowed to mark his documentary evidences and was urging to argue. At this point the court declared him out of order due to claiming that he was listening, but would still speak up anytime that he wants. At which point Atty. Bugaring was flared up and put insulting words against the court that he knows better than the latter and he d won all his cases of certiorari in the appellate courts, , that he knows better the Rules of Court; that he was going to move for the inhibition of the Presiding Judge for allegedly being antagonistic to his client,' and other invectives were hurled to the discredit of the Court. y CANON 13 - A LAWYER SHALL RELY UPON THE MERITS OF HIS CAUSE AND REFRAIN FROM ANY IMPROPRIETY WHICH TENDS TO INFLUENCE, OR GIVES THE APPEARANCE OF INFLUENCING THE COURT.

FOODSPHERE, INC., Complainant, vs. ATTY. MELANIO L. MAURICIO, JR., Respondent.

the respondent sent the complainant an advertising contract asking the complainant to advertise in his tabloids and in his television program and a sign of good will the complaint offered to buy a three full page in his tabloid and a 30 second spot on his program, acting to the complainant offer the respondent and his executive producers were disappointed with the offer and treated to proceed with the publication of the articles and column