Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

BAR EXAMINATIONS 2005

LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES

25 September 2005 2 P.M. — 5 P.M.

INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire consists of sixteen (16) numbers contained in


seven (7) pages. Read each question very carefully. Answer
legibly, clearly and concisely. Start each number on a separate
page; an answer to a sub-question under the same number may be
written continuously on the same and immediately succeeding
pages until completed. Do not repeat the question.

HAND IN YOUR NOTEBOOK WITH THIS QUESTIONNAIRE

GOOD LUCK!!!

____________________________________
CHAIRMAN
2005 BAR EXAMINATION COMMITTEE

PLEASE CHECK THE NUMBER OF PAGES IN THIS SET

WARNING: NOT FOR SALE OR UNAUTHORIZED USE

LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 1of 7


LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 2 of 7

-I-

Multiple choice. Choose the correct answer. Write the letter


corresponding to your answer.

(1.) Which of the following need not be verified?

a) Petition for Certiorari;


b) Interpleader;
c) Petition for Habeas Corpus;
d) Answer with compulsory counterclaim;
e) All pleadings under the Rules on Summary Procedure.

(2%)

(2.) Which of the following statements is false?

a) All administrative cases against Justices of appellate courts


and judges of lower courts fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court.

b) Administrative cases against erring Justices of the Court of


Appeals and Sandiganbayan, judges, and lawyers in the government
service are not automatically treated as disbarment cases.

c) The IBP Board of Governors may, motu proprio, or upon


referral by the Supreme Court or by a Chapter Board of Officers, or at
the instance of any person, initiate and prosecute proper charges
against erring lawyers including those in the government service.

d) The filing of an administrative case against the judge is not a


ground for disqualification/inhibition.

e) Trial courts retain jurisdiction over the criminal aspect of


offenses committed by justices of appellate courts and judges of
lower courts.

(2%)
LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 3 of 7

(3.) On which of the following is a lawyer proscribed from


testifying as a witness in a case he is handling for a client:

a) On the mailing of documents;

b) On the authentication or custody of any instrument;

c) On the theory of the case;

d) On substantial matters in cases where his testimony is


essential to the ends of justice.

(2%)

- II -

Mike Adelantado, an aspiring lawyer, disclosed in his petition to


take the 2003 Bar Examinations that there were two civil cases
pending against him for nullification of contract and damages. He was
thus allowed to conditionally take the bar, and subsequently placed
third in the said exams.

In 2004, after the two civil cases had been resolved, Mike
Adelantado filed his petition to take the Lawyer’s Oath and sign the
Roll of Attorneys before the Supreme Court. The Office of the Bar
Confidant, however, had received two anonymous letters: the first
alleged that at the time Mike Adelantado filed his petition to take the
bar, he had two other civil cases pending against him, as well as a
criminal case for violation of Batas Pambansa (B.P.) Bilang 22; the
other letter alleged that Mike Adelantado, as Sangguniang Kabataan
(SK) Chairperson, had been signing the attendance sheets of (SK)
meetings as “Atty. Mike Adelantado.”

a) Having passed the bar, can Mike Adelantado already use the
appellation “attorney”? Explain your answer. (3%)

b) Should Mike Adelantado be allowed to take his oath as a


lawyer and sign the Roll of Attorneys? Explain your answer. (3%)
LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 4 of 7

- III -

Atty. Kuripot was one of Town Bank’s valued clients. In


recognition of his loyalty to the bank, he was issued a gold credit card
with a credit limit of P250,000.00. After two months, Atty. Kuripot
exceeded his credit limit, and refused to pay the monthly charges as
they fell due. Aside from a collection suit, Town Bank also filed a
disbarment case against Atty. Kuripot.

In his comment on the disbarment case, Atty. Kuripot insisted


that he did not violate the Code of Professional Responsibility, since
his obligation to the bank was personal in nature and had no relation
to his being a lawyer.

a) Is Atty. Kuripot correct? Explain your answer. (3%)

b) Explain whether Atty. Kuripot should be held administratively


liable for his refusal to settle his credit card bill. (3%)

- IV -

You had just taken your oath as a lawyer. The secretary to the
president of a big university offered to get you as the official notary
public of the school. She explained that a lot of students lose their
Identification Cards and are required to secure an affidavit of loss
before they can be issued a new one. She claimed that this would be
very lucrative for you, as more than 30 students lose their
Identification Cards every month. However, the secretary wants you
to give her one-half of your earnings therefrom.

Will you agree to the arrangement? Explain. (5%)

-V-

Judge Horacio would usually go to the cockpits on Saturdays


for relaxation, as the owner of the cockpit is a friend of his. He also
goes to the casino once a week to accompany his wife who loves to
play the slot machines. Because of this, Judge Horacio was
administratively charged. When asked to explain, he said that
although he goes to these places, he only watches and does not
place any bets.

Is his explanation tenable? Explain. (5%)


LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 5 of 7

- VI -

A business man is looking for a new retainer. He approached


you and asked for your schedule of fees or charges. He informed
you of the professional fees he is presently paying his retainer, which
is actually lower than your rates. He said that if your rates are lower,
he would engage your services.

Will you lower your rates in order to get the client? Explain.
(5%)

- VII -

(1.) Judge Segotier is a member of Phi Nu Phi Fraternity. Atty.


Nonato filed a motion to disqualify Judge Segotier on the ground that
the counsel for the opposing party is also a member of the Phi Nu Phi
Fraternity. Judge Segotier denied the motion.

Comment on his ruling. (5%)

(2.) In an intestate proceeding, a petition for the issuance of


letters of administration in favor of a Regional Trial Court Judge was
filed by one of the heirs. Another heir opposed the petition on the
ground that the judge is disqualified to become an administrator of
the estate as he is the brother-in-law of the deceased.

Rule on the petition. (5%)

- VIII -

Due to the number of cases handled by Atty. Cesar, he failed to


file a notice of change of address with the Court of Appeals. Hence,
he was not able to file an appellant’s brief and consequently, the case
was dismissed. Aggrieved, Atty. Cesar filed a motion for
reconsideration of the resolution dismissing the appeal and to set
aside the entry of judgment on the ground that he already indicated in
his “Urgent Motion for Extension of Time to File Appeal Brief” his new
address and that his failure to file a notice of change of address is an
excusable negligence.

Will the motion prosper? Explain. (5%)


LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 6 of 7

- IX -

Darius is charged with the crime of murder. He sought Atty.


Francia’s help and assured the latter that he did not commit the
crime. Atty. Francia agreed to represent him in court. During the
trial, the prosecution presented several witnesses whose testimonies
convinced Atty. Francia that her client is guilty. She confronted his
client who eventually admitted that he indeed committed the crime.
In view of his admission, Atty. Francia decided to withdraw from the
case.

Should Atty. Francia be allowed to do so? Explain. (5%)

-X-

Atty. Yabang was suspended as a member of the Bar for a


period of one (1) year. During the period of suspension, he was
permitted by his law firm to continue working in their office, drafting
and preparing pleadings and other legal documents but was not
allowed to come into direct contact with the firms’ clients. Atty.
Yabang was subsequently sued for illegal practice of law.

Would the case prosper? Explain. (5%)

- XI -

Atty. Japzon, a former partner of XXX law firm, is representing


Kapuso Corporation in a civil case against Kapamilya Corporation
whose legal counsel is XXX law firm. Atty. Japzon claims that she
never handled the case of Kapamilya Corporation when she was still
with XXX law firm.

Is there a conflict of interest? Explain. (5%)


LEGAL ETHICS AND PRACTICAL EXERCISES Page 7 of 7

- XII -

Pending before the sala of Judge Magbag is the case of CDG


versus JQT. The legal counsel of JQT is Atty. Ocsing who happens
to be the brother of Atty. Ferreras, a friend of Judge Magbag. While
the case was still being heard, Atty. Ferreras and his wife celebrated
their wedding anniversary. They invited their friends and family to a
dinner party at their house in Forbes Park. Judge Magbag attended
the party and was seen conversing with Atty. Ocsing while they were
eating at the same table.

Comment on the propriety of Judge Magbag’s act. (5%)

- XIII -

Gerry Cruz is the owner of a 1,000-square meter lot covered by


Transfer Certificate of Title No. 12345 located in Sampaloc, Metro
Manila. Gerry decided to sell the property but did not have the time
to look for a buyer. He then designated his brother, Jon, to look for a
buyer and negotiate the sale. Jon met Angelo Santos who expressed
his interest to buy the lot. Angelo agreed to pay P1 Million for the
property on September 26, 2005.

a) Draft the Special Power of Attorney to be executed by Gerry


Cruz, as principal, in favor of his brother Jon, as agent, authorizing
the latter to sell the property in favor of Angelo Santos. (7%)

b) Draft the Deed of Sale of Real Property. (7%)

- XIV -

Draft a withdrawal of counsel without conformity of client. (6%)

- XV -

Draft a Notice of Appeal. (6%)

- XVI -

Draft a Certification of Non-Forum Shopping. (6%)

NOTHING FOLLOWS.