Bar Examination Questionnaire for Legal Ethics

Set A
(1) Atty. Mike started teaching Agrarian Reform and Taxation in June 2001 at the Arts and
Sciences Department of the Far Eastern University. In 2005, he moved to San Sebastian Institute
of Law where he taught Political Law. Is Atty. Mike exempt from complying with the MCLE for
the 4th compliance period in April 2013?
(A) No, since he has yet to complete the required teaching experience to be exempt.
(B) No, because he is not yet a bar reviewer.
(C) Yes, since by April 2013, he will have been teaching law for more than 10 years.
(D) Yes, since he updated himself in law by engaging in teaching.
(2) The acknowledgment appearing in a deed of sale reads: "Before me personally appeared this
30 August 2010 Milagros A. Ramirez, who proved her identity to me through witnesses: 1.
Rosauro S. Balana, Passport UU123456; 1-5-2010/ Baguio City; and 2. Elvira N. Buela, Passport
VV200345; 1-17-2009/ Manila. "Both witnesses, of legal ages, under oath declare that: Milagros
A. Ramirez is personally known to them; she is the same seller in the foregoing deed of sale; she
does not have any current identification document nor can she obtain one within a reasonable
time; and they are not privy to or are interested in the deed he signed." What is the status of such
a notarial acknowledgment?
(A) Questionable since the notary public is not shown to personally know the principal
party.
(B) Ineffective since it included parties not privy to the deed.
(C) Invalid since the evidence of identity is non-compliant with the notarial rules.
(D) Valid since it is a manner of establishing the identity of the person executing the
document.
(3) Atty. Franciscos retainer agreement with RXU said that his attorney's fees in its case against
CRP "shall be 15% of the amounts collected." Atty. Francisco asked the trial court to issue a
temporary restraining order against CRP but this was denied, prompting him to file a petition for
certiorari with the Court of Appeals to question the order of denial. At this point, RXU
terminated Atty. Franciscos services. When the parties later settled their dispute amicably, CRP
paid RXU P100 million. Because of this, Atty. Francisco came around and claimed a 15% share
in the amount. What should be his attorneys fees?

(A) Nothing because the compromise came after RXU terminated him.
(B) 15% of what CRP paid RXU or P15 million.
(C) A reasonable amount that the court shall fix upon proof of quantum meruit.
(D) Nothing since he was unable to complete the work stated in the retainer contract.
(4) Lee became a lawyer in 1988 under a claim that he is a Filipino like his parents. Efren sought
Lees disbarment on the ground that he really is a Chinese. To prove he is a Filipino, Lee cited an
Albay regional trial courts final judgment in an action to recover real property which mentioned
his citizenship as Filipino. This final judgment resulted in the correction of his birth records in a
separate special proceeding to show he is a Filipino, not Chinese as there stated. Is Lees claim to
Filipino citizenship valid?
(A) No, since the mention of his citizenship in the land case was just incidental.
(B) No, since those rulings were not appealed to the Supreme Court.
(C) Yes, because the rulings in his favor have become final and executory.
(D) Yes, since his parents are Filipinos based on what he said in his bar exam petition.
(5) Sheryl, Eric's counsel, once asked for postponement and the court granted it since the
opposing counsel, Bernadine, did not object. Eric then asked Sheryl not to allow any further
postponements because his case has been pending for 8 years. When trial resumed, Bernadine
moved to reset the trial because of her infant's ailment. What must Sheryl do?
(A) Remind the Court that it has the duty to promptly decide the case.
(B) Interpose no objection since she too once sought postponement without Bernadine's
objection.
(C) Vehemently oppose Bernadine's motion for being contrary to Eric's wishes.
(D) Submit the motion to the Court's sound discretion.
(6) In a verified complaint, Kathy said that Judge Florante decided a petition for correction of
entry involving the birth record of her grandson, Joshua, who happened to be child of Judge
Florante's daughter, Pilita. Judge Florante insisted that he committed no wrong since the
proceeding was non-adversarial and since it merely sought to correct an erroneous entry in the
childs birth certificate. Is Judge Florante liable?

(A) Yes, because Florante breached the rule on mandatory disqualification.

(B) No, because Judge Florante has no pecuniary interest in the proceeding.
(C) No, because it is true the proceeding was non-adversarial so it prejudiced no one.
(D) Yes, since the correction in the childs record affects the details of birth of the child.
(7) Which of the following statements best describes the distinct traditional dignity that the legal
profession enjoys over other professions?
(A) People are quite dependent on lawyers for their skills in getting them out of trouble
with the law.
(B) Its members strive to maintain honesty even in their private dealings.
(C) Its members earn by charging specified emoluments or fees.
(D) The profession is anchored on a fiduciary relation with the client.
(8) Raul sought Ely's disbarment for notarizing a deed of sale knowing that four of the sellers
were dead. Ely admitted that he notarized the deed of sale but only after his client assured him
that the signatures of the others were authentic. Later, Raul moved to have the complaint against
him dismissed on the ground that it was filed because of a misunderstanding which had already
been clarified. This prompted the IBP to recommend the dismissal of the complaint. Can the
dismissal be allowed?
(A) No, unless the complainant executes an affidavit of desistance.
(B) Yes, since no compelling reason remained to continue with it.
(C) Yes, but recall Ely's notarial commission since the charge against him seems
meritorious.
(D) No, given Elys admission that he notarized the document when some signatories
were absent.
(9) When will Atty. Antonio's notarial commission expire if he applied for and was given such
commission on 12 November 2010?
(A) 31 December 2012

(B) 31 December 2011

(C) 11 November 2011
(D) 11 November 2012
(10) Elaine filed a complaint against Fely before their barangay concerning a contract that they
entered into. During conciliation, Fely came with Sarah, who claimed the right to represent her
minor sister. The barangay captain let Sarah assist her sister. Eventually, the barangay issued a
certificate to file action after the parties failed to settle their differences. When Sarah formally
appeared as lawyer for her sister, Elaine filed an administrative complaint against her for taking
part in the barangay conciliation and preventing the parties from taking meaningful advantage of
the same. Is Sarah liable?
(A) No, because she has to represent her sister who was a minor.
(B) No, because the Court can always dismiss the case without prejudice to a genuine
conciliation.
(C) Yes, because what Sarah did was deceitful and amounts to fraud.
(D) Yes, because as a lawyer, she is absolutely forbidden to appear in barangay
conciliations.
(11) Which of the following will subject Atty. Lyndon, a Manila notary public, to sanctions under
the notarial rules?
(A) Notarizing a verification and certification against forum shopping in Manila Hotel at
the request of his Senator-client.
(B) Refusing to notarize an extra-judicial settlement deed after noting that Ambo, a
friend, was delisted as heir when he was in fact one.
(C) Performing signature witnessing involving his brother-in-law and recording it in his
register.
(D) Notarizing a deed of sale for someone he knew without requiring any proof of
identity.
(12) Justice Frank, a retired Court of Appeals justice, appeared before the Supreme Court on
behalf of Landbank, a government bank, in a case involving the compensable value of the
property taken from a landowner under the agrarian reform law. The landowner questioned

Justice Frank's appearance in the case, pointing out that the same is unethical and smacks of
opportunism since he obviously capitalizes on his judicial experience. Is Justice Frank's
appearance in the case valid?
(A) Yes, because the law allows such appearance as long as the government is not the
adverse party.
(B) No, because he cannot enjoy his retirement pay and at the same time work for a
government institution.
(C) Yes, since Landbank does not perform government function.
(D) No, he should have waited for at least a year to avoid improprieties.
(13) On appeal, RTC Judge Rudy affirmed the MTCs conviction of Lorna for violation of the
bouncing checks law and awarded Agnes, the complainant, Php1.6 million in damages. Two
years later, upon Lornas motion and after ascertaining that her counsel never received the court's
decision, Judge Rudy recalled the entry of judgment in the case, reversed himself, and absolved
Lorna of guilt. Claiming an unjust judgment, Agnes filed an administrative complained against
Judge Rudy, saying that it is plain from the circumstances that he connived with Lorna, her
counsel, and the handling prosecutor. But she offered no further evidence. Rudy denied the
charges and asserted that any error in his judgment is correctible only by an appeal, not by an
administrative suit. Should Judge Rudy be disciplined?
(A) No, because Agnes' complaint is merely based on suspicions and speculations.
(B) No, because Agnes has yet to establish that Rudy's decision is plainly erroneous.
(C) Yes, because he gravely abused his discretion in recalling the entry of judgment.
(D) Yes, because reconsidering the judgment of conviction that the MTC and he earlier
issued shows anomaly in Judge Rudy's action.
(14) After Atty. Benny got a P2 million final judgment in his clients favor, he promptly asked
the court, without informing his client, to allow him a charging lien over the money in the
amount of P500,000, his agreed fees, The Court issued a writ of execution for the whole
judgment in Atty. Benny's name with an order for him to turn over the excess to his client. Is
Atty. Bennys action correct?
(A) No, since his fees are excessive.
(B) Yes, since he was merely asserting his right to collect his fees.

(C) Yes, since he would anyway give the excess to his client after getting his fees.
(D) No, since he did not disclose to his client the matter of getting a charging lien and a
writ of execution in his name.
(15) On 17 April 2006 NWD, a local water district entity, hired Atty. Chito as private counsel for
a year with the consent of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC). Shortly
after, a leadership struggle erupted in NWD between faction A and faction B. Siding with the
first, Atty. Chito filed several actions against the members of faction B. Eventually, the court
upheld Faction B which thus revoked Atty. Chitos retainer on 14 January 2007. With OGCCs
approval, NWD hired Atty. Arthur in his place. When Atty. Arthur sought the dismissal of the
actions that Atty. Chito had instituted, the latter objected on the ground that his term had not yet
expired and Atty. Arthur had no vacancy to fill up. Is Atty. Chito right?
(A) No, because Atty. Chitos continued appearances in the cases was without authority
since 14 January 2007.
(B) No, because Atty. Arthur would have violated the rule on forum shopping.
(C) Yes, because Atty. Chitos retainer and authority remained valid until 17 April 2006.
(D) No, because Atty. Chito has the duty to expose the irregularities committed by the
members of Faction B.
(16)Noel and Emily who were involved in a road accident sued Ferdie, the driver of the other
car, for damages. Atty. Jose represented only Noel but he called Emily to testify for his client.
During direct examination, Emily claimed that her injuries were serious when Atty. Jose knew
that they were not. Still, Atty. Jose did not contest such claim. Ferdie later sued Emily for giving
false testimony since her own doctors report contradicted it. He also sued Atty. Jose for foisting
a false testimony in court. Is Atty. Jose liable?
(A) No, because he did not knowingly arrange for Emily to lie in court.
(B) Yes, because he did not advise his client to settle the case amicably.
(C) No, because Emily did not permit him to reveal the falsity to the court.
(D) Yes, because he knowingly let Emily's false testimony pass for truth.
(17) In settling his client's claims, Atty. Cruz received from the adverse party P200,000 in cash
for his client. Which of the following is an IMPROPER way for Atty. Cruz to handle the money?

(A) Ask his client to prepare a check for his fees for swapping with the cash.
(B) Deposit the cash in his own bank account and later issue his personal check to his
client, less his fees.
(C) Turn over the cash to his client with a request that the latter pay him his fees.
(D) Tell his client about the settlement and the cash and wait for the client's instructions.
(18) Judge Cristina has many law-related activities. She teaches law and delivers lectures on law.
Some in the government consult her on their legal problems. She also serves as director of a
stock corporation devoted to penal reform, where she participates in both fund raising and fund
management. Which of the following statements applies to her case?
(A) She should not engage in fund raising activities.
(B) Her activities are acceptable except the part where she is involved in fund
management.
(C) She can teach law and deliver lectures on law but not do the other things.
(D) All of her activities are legal.
(19) One of the foundation principles of the Bangalore Draft of the Code of Judicial Conduct is
the importance in a modern democratic society of
(A) a judicial system that caters to the needs of the poor and the weak.
(B) public confidence in its judicial system and in the moral authority and integrity of its
judiciary.
(C) the existence of independent and impartial tribunals that have the support of its
government.
(D) judges who are learned in law and jurisprudence.
(20) After representing Lenie in an important lawsuit from 1992 to 1995, Atty. Jennifer lost touch
of her client. Ten years later in 2005, Evelyn asked Atty. Jennifer to represent her in an action
against Lenie. Such action involved certain facts, some confidential, to which Atty. Jennifer was
privy because she handled Lenie's old case. Can Atty. Jennifer act as counsel for Evelyn?
(A) No, but she can assist another lawyer who will handle the case.

(B) Yes, but she must notify Lenie before accepting the case.
(C) No, because her duty to keep the confidences of previous clients remains.
(D) Yes, but she cannot reveal any confidential information she previously got.
(21) Eric, a labor federation president, represented Luisa, a dismissed WXT employee, before the
NLRC. Atty. John represented Luisa's two cocomplainants. In due course, the NLRC reinstated
the three complainants with backwages and awarded 25% of the backwages as attorneys fees,
15% for Atty. John and 10% for Eric, a non-lawyer. When WXT appealed to the Court of
Appeals, Atty. John questioned Erics continued appearance before that court on Luisas behalf,
he not being a lawyer. Is Eric's appearance before the Court of Appeals valid?
(A) Yes, for Eric has a personal stake, the fees awarded to him, in defending the NLRC's
decision in the case.
(B) No, since John can very well represent Luisa, she being in the same situation as his
own clients.
(C) No, because the representation of another in courts can be entrusted only to lawyers.
(D) Yes, since that appeal is a mere continuation of the labor dispute that began at the
NLRC.
(22) In what documented act will a notary publics failure to affix the expiration date of his
commission warrant administrative sanction?
(A) In the jurat of a secretary's certificate.
(B) In the will acknowledged before him.
(C) In the signature witnessing he performed.
(D) In the document copy he certified.
(23) Provincial Governors and Municipal Mayors who are lawyers are MCLE exempt because
(A) they handle cases of their constituents for free.
(B) the Local Government Code prohibits them from practicing their profession.
(C) they are rendering public service.

(D) As experts in local governance, it may be assumed that they are updated on legal
developments.
(24) A difficult client directed his counsel to bring up to the Supreme Court the trial courts
dismissal of their action. Counsel believes that the trial court acted correctly and that an appeal
would be futile. Which of the following options should counsel take?
(A) Withdraw from the case to temper the clients propensity to litigate.
(B) Engage a collaborating counsel who can assist in the case.
(C) Submit a new retainer proposal to the client for a higher fee.
(D) Elevate the case to the Supreme Court as directed by client.
(25) Although not counsel in a particular case, Atty. Anthony asked Lisa, the RTC clerk of court,
if the case records have already been remanded to the MTC as the Court of Appeals directed.
Lisa said no, saying that the RTC had not yet received a certified copy of the Court of Appeals
decision. When Lisa suggested that Atty. Anthony first secure such a copy, the latter scolded her.
Shamed by this, Lisa filed a disciplinary action against him for encroaching on the work of the
lawyers of record. Anthony defends his follow-up action by claiming good faith and the
possibility of entering his appearance later. Is Anthony liable for his record follow up?
(A) Yes, because he did not inform Lisa of the basis of his interest in the case.
(B) Yes, because none of the parties to the case authorized him to do such followup.
(C) No, because he acted in good faith with a view to a possible retainer.
(D) No, because following up the records of any case does not constitute practice of law.
(26) Administrative proceedings against Judges of all courts and Justices of the Court of Appeals
and the Sandiganbayan shall be
(A) private and confidential.
(B) public but subdued.
(C) private but transparent.
(D) public.

(27)When does the initial MCLE compliance period of a newly admitted member of the bar
begin?
(A) On the first day of the month of his admission.
(B) On the tenth day of the month of his admission.
(C) On the third year after his admission as member.
(D) On the first year of the next succeeding compliance period.
(28) Counsel for Philzea Mining appealed a decision of the Bureau of Mines, which was adverse
to his client, to the Environment Secretary. At about the same time, he filed a special civil action
of certiorari with the Court of Appeals for the annulment of the same decision. Did counsel
commit any ethical impropriety in his actions?
(A) Yes, since the action he filed with the Court of Appeals was barred by the pendency
of a similar action before the Environment Secretary.
(B) Yes, since he was evidently shopping for a sympathetic forum, a condemnable
practice.
(C) No, since his appeal to the Environment Secretary was administrative, not judicial.
(D) No, since he has to exhaust all available remedies to serve his clients interest.
(29) Atty. Melissa witnessed the car accident that resulted in injury to Manny, a friend of hers.
While visiting him at the hospital, she advised him about what action he needed to take regarding
the accident. Is Atty. Melissa subject to disciplinary action if she eventually handles the case for
him?
(A) No, because Melissa did not directly volunteer her services.
(B) No, because Manny happened to be a friend.
(C) Yes, she engaged in typical ambulance chasing.
(D) Yes, because she should have offered her services for free.
(30) A Court Administrator's auditing team found that Judge Ruby used business cards which
stated, in addition to her official title as presiding judge of her court, that she is bar topnotcher,
her law schools "class valedictorian," and "one of the most sought after private law

practitioners" before she joined the judiciary, all of which are true. Asked to explain this seeming
impropriety, Ruby pointed out that business cards can include the persons "title" which is broad
enough to include in her case her standing in the bar and all the honors she earned. Did Ruby
commit an impropriety?
(A) Yes, unless the cards were given to her as a gift.
(B) No, because all she stated in her business cards are true.
(C) Yes, because she showed a hunger for publicity and recognition that debases her
judicial post.
(D) No, because she is free to include in her business cards details that say who she is.
(31) Serving as counsel de oficio, Atty. Mamerto advised John of the consequences of his plea of
not guilty to the charge. Before trial could be held, however, the presiding judge died. As it
happened, Atty. Mamerto was appointed judge and Johns case was assigned to him by raffle.
John quickly moved for the judges disqualification. Is Judge Mamerto under obligation to
inhibit himself from the case?
(A) No, because his service to John was just momentary.
(B) Yes, because his knowledge of Johns case affects his judgment.
(C) No, because he was merely a counsel de oficio.
(D) Yes, because he served as John's counsel.
(32) Myra asked Atty. Elma to notarize her deed of sale. When Elma asked for Myra's competent
evidence of identity, she explained that she does not have any current identification document
nor could she get one soon. Instead, she presented her friend, Alex, who showed Atty. Elma his
drivers license and confirmed her Myras identity. Is Alexs identification of Myra valid?
(A) Yes, provided Alex states in the deed of sale that he knew Myra personally.
(B) No, Myra needs to produce a valid identification document of herself.
(C) No, since Alex is not himself a party to the document.
(D) Yes, since Alex had a valid identification document.

(33) Atty. Eliseo represented Allan in a collection suit against the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes
Office (PCSO). After his election as sangguniang bayan member, the court rendered a decision in
PCSOs favor. Still, Atty. Eliseo appeared for Allan in the latters appeal, prompting the PCSO to
question his right to do so. In response, Atty. Eliseo claimed that the local government code
authorizes him to practice law as long it does not conflict with his duties. Is Atty. Eliseo right?
(A) No, because he cannot appear against a government instrumentality in a civil case.
(B) Yes, because his official duties do not conflict with his private practice.
(C) No, because he works on his private case at the sacrifice of public service.
(D) Yes, because he does not appear in the case as a municipal official.
(34) Which of the following instances demonstrates counsels LACK of diligence in serving his
client's interest?
(A) Failing to file his clients appeal brief despite 2 extensions upon the excuse that the
client did not coordinate with him.
(B) Failing to send to client a requested legal opinion until after the latter gave him the
additional documents he requested.
(C) Failing to rehearse his client on his testimony before the trial.
(D) Updating his client about the status of his case by phone and electronic mail.
(35) What is the method of national inquiry into the conduct of Supreme Court magistrates?
(A) Administrative investigation.
(B) Disqualification.
(C) Impeachment.
(D) Disbarment.
(36) What unhealthy attitude of mind should a judge avoid falling into?
(A) Hearing and adjudicating cases is an important job.
(B) Courts are made for litigants.

(C) Litigants are made for the courts.

(D) Courts should dispose of their cases on time.
(37) After hearing in a sensational criminal case, counsel for the accused told television viewers
how the judge unfairly ruled to stop his witness from testifying fully about certain aspects of the
case that would help the accused. Counsel said that the public should know the injustice to which
his client was being subjected. Can counsel be disciplined for his utterances?
(A) Yes, because rather than defend the judicial system as was his duty, he attacked it.
(B) No, since counsel did not use obscene language.
(C) No, so long as counsel did not knowingly make false statements or act in reckless
disregard of truth.
(D) Yes, even if the judge may have actually made unfair rulings in the course of trial.
(38) Which of the following is required of counsel when withdrawing his services to a client in a
case?
(A) Counsel's desire to withdraw, expressed in his motion.
(B) Payment of withdrawal fee.
(C) Opposing counsels conformity to the withdrawal.
(D) Client's written consent filed in court.
(39) Which of the following demonstrates the lawyer's duty to give the court the respect it
deserves?
(A) Counsel consistently appearing in court on time.
(B) Counsel obeying court's orders and processes.
(C) Woman counsel appearing in court dressed in business attire.
(D) Counsel addressing the court as "Your Honor" at all times.
(40) Atty. Arthur agreed to represent Patrick in a personal injury case after the latter signed a
retainer agreement for a 33% fee contingent on their winning the case. In the course of trial,

Patrick dismissed Atty. Arthur after he presented their evidence in chief and engaged Atty.
Winston another lawyer. They lost the case. What fee would Atty. Arthur be entitled to?
(A) Thirty three percent of the fee actually paid to Winston.
(B) The reasonable value of his services.
(C) A flat hourly rate for the time he invested in the case.
(D) Absolutely nothing.
(41) Ronnie, a paralegal in a law firm, helped Beth in a property dispute in which she was
involved by giving her legal advice and preparing a complaint that she eventually filed in court
under her own signature. When the lawyer for the defendant learned of it, he told Ronnie to
desist from practicing law. But he disputed this, claiming that he had not practiced law since he
did not receive compensation from Beth for his help. Is Ronnie correct?
(A) Yes, because he could as a paralegal provide competent legal help to litigants.
(B) Yes, for so long as he did not sign the complaint or appeared as Beth's lawyer.
(C) No, unless Beth was ill-advised in filing her complaint in court.
(D) No, because receipt of compensation is not the sole determinant of legal practice.
(42) Which of the following characteristics pertains to a charging lien?
(A) It cannot attach to judgments for delivery of real estates.
(B) It involves documents placed in the lawyer's possession by reason of the retainer.
(C) It does not need any notice to the client to make it effective.
(D) It may be exercised before judgment or execution.
(43) To whom may the Supreme Court refer complaints against lawyers for investigation?
(A) Integrated Bar of the Philippines.
(B) Office of the Bar Confidant.
(C) Judicial and Bar Council.

(D) Office of the Court Administrator.

(44) After several years as a private practitioner, Ben got appointed as Regional Trial Court
judge. Five years after his appointment, he received summons directing him to answer a
disbarment complaint that pertained to a document he notarized more than 10 years ago from
appointment date. He sought the dismissal of the complaint arguing that the cause of action has
prescribed. Must the complaint be dismissed?
(A) No, because such complaints do not prescribe.
(B) Yes, because the complaint creates a chilling effect on judicial independence.
(C) No, but the complaint should be verified to ensure transparency.
(D) Yes, because actions on contracts prescribe in 10 years.
(45) On November 28 Atty. Patrick wrote in a newspaper column that the Supreme Court already
decided in favor of the validity of the Executive Order that created the Truth Commission upon a
vote of 13-2. But, as it turned out, the Court actually rendered an adverse decision only on
December 7, and upon a vote of 10-5. Asked to explain his misleading article, Patrick said that
his constitutionally protected right to free expression covered what he wrote. Can the Court cite
Patrick for contempt?
(A) Yes, because his article obstructs and degrades the administration of justice.
(B) No, because the right to free expression occupies a high rank in the hierarchy of
cherished rights.
(C) No, because courts must simply ignore public opinion and the media when rendering
decisions.
(D) Yes, because he wrote a lie in his column.
(46) Atty. Ramon borrowed his client's (Menchu) land title. After eight months, Menchu
demanded its return but he failed to comply and changed his residence. After Menchu tracked
him down, she confronted him about the title. He then offered to just buy the property and gave
her five checks for it but these bounced. Charged with malpractice, Atty. Ramon answered that
his license to practice law cannot be in issue. He merely incurred civil liability for a failed
transaction. Will the malpractice action prosper?
(A) No, because his failure to pay his obligation only makes him civilly liable.

(B) No, since Menchu did not transact business with Atty. Ramon as a lawyer.
(C) Yes, because it is professionally reprehensible for a lawyer to be unavailable to a
person in need.
(D) Yes, he having taken advantage of Menchu who was not fully protected and had no
independent advice.
(47) Atty. Alfredo Prado appeared in a case as legal officer of the Land Registration Authority
(LRA). His opponent, Atty. Armando, knew an Atty. Alfredo Prado from his province who had
been dead for years. When Atty. Armando checked with the Supreme Court, only one Alfredo
Prado was in the roll of attorneys. What action can Atty. Armado take against Vicente who had
taken a dead lawyers identity?
(A) File direct contempt action against Vicente for deceiving the court.
(B) Criminally prosecute Vicente for estafa for making money upon false pretense.
(C) Criminally prosecute Vicente for theft of Alfredo's identity and law practice.
(D) Institute a disbarment case against Vicente for misrepresenting himself as lawyer.
(48) After the prosecution cross-examined Shiela, a witness for the accused, Judge Pedro asked
her ten additional questions that were so intense they made her cry. One question forced Sheila to
admit that her mother was living with another man, a fact that weighed on the case of the
accused. This prompted the latters counsel to move to expunge the judges questions for
building on the prosecution's case. Judge Pedro denied the motion, insisting that bolstering a
partys case is incidental to the courts desire to be clarified. Did Pedro commit an impropriety?
(A) No, his ten questions could not be considered an undue intervention.
(B) No, because the judge is free to inquire into any aspect of the case that would clarify
the evidence for him.
(C) Yes, because he effectively deprived the defense of its right to due process when he
acted both as prosecutor and judge.
(D) Yes, because nothing connects his desire to be clarified with the questions he asked.
(49) Administrative penalties imposed on judges are
(A) curative.

(B) punitive.
(C) corrective.
(D) both punitive and corrective.
(50) Which of the following demonstrates a lawyers fidelity to known practices and customs of
the bar regarding a case he is handling?
(A) Treating his clients disclosures as confidential but not the documents he submits for
review.
(B) Meeting with his clients opponent over lunch to discuss settlement without telling
his client.
(C) Accepting a tough case although he is new in practice, trusting that his diligence
would make up for lack of experience.
(D) Inviting the judge hearing the case to dinner with no purpose to discuss the case with
him.

EGAL ETHICS 1. As a result of a vehicular mishap between a Toyota Land Cruiser driven by
Judge Garcia and the motorcycle driven by Francisco Ortega, the latter died and Judge Garcia
was subsequently charged with the crime of Reckless Imprudence Resulting to Homicide. Judge
Ortega filed a Motion to Quash the Information on grounds that the court trying the case has no
jurisdiction over the offense charged and over his person. He argued that the Ombudsman should
refer all cases against judges and court personnel filed before his office to the Supreme Court
since it is only the Supreme Court that can oversee the judges' and court personnel's compliance
with all laws, and take the proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation
thereof by virtue of its constitutional power of supervision over all courts and court personnel.
Resolve the motion to quash. A: The Motion to Quash should be denied. Article VIII, Section 6
of the Constitution exclusively vests in the Supreme Court administrative supervision over all
courts and court personnel, from the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals to the lowest
municipal trial court clerk. Hence, it is the Supreme Court that is tasked to oversee the judges
and court personnel and take the proper administrative action against them if they commit any
violation of the laws of the land. No other branch of government may intrude into this power,
without running afoul of the independence of the judiciary and the doctrine of separation of
powers. However, that prerogative only extends to administrative supervision. As such, the
Ombudsman cannot encroach upon this Courts task to oversee judges and court personnel
and take the proper administrative action against them if they commit any violation of the laws
of the land. Since the criminal case filed against Judge Ortega was in no way related to the

performance of his duties as a judge. As such, the jurisdiction of the MCTC over the case is
beyond contestation. 2. Judge Untalan is a former official of the Mandaluyong city government
entrusted with the duty of settling land disputes. After he was appointed as a judge, he continued
to assist neighbors and friends, without any compensation, in settling their land differences. Is
there an ethical/professional responsibility problem in this situation? If a problem exists, what
are its implications or potential consequences? A: Canon 2 of the Code of Judicial Conduct states
that a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities. By
using his position to help private persons settle a legal dispute, Judge Untalan is administratively
liable under Rule 2.03 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. His intentions may have been noble as he
sought to make complainant realize that he had been occupying by mistake the property subject
of the dispute, but Judge Untalan should be mindful to conduct himself in a manner that gives no
ground for reproach. The Court held in Miranda v. Judge Mangrobang that a judges private
life cannot be dissociated from his public life and it is, thus, important that his behavior both on
and off the bench be free from any appearance of impropriety. While there was no categorical
finding of bad faith or malice on the part of respondent Judge, who was motivated by the noble
intention of settling the property dispute between Lozada and Abando, however, he must bear in
mind that his office demands an exacting standard of decorum to promote public confidence in
the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. Judge Untalan should be more prudent in the
observance of his dealings with the public to obviate the mistaken impression of impropriety in
that he is probably using his position as a judge to impose improper pressure or exert undue
influence so as to obtain the desired result in a given situation. 3. When is inhibition considered
as mandatory and when is it considered as a matter of discretion on the part of a judge? A:
Section 1, Rule 137 of the Revised Rules of Court stated that no judge or judicial officer shall sit
in any case in which he, or his wife or child, is pecuniarily interested as heir, legatee, creditor or
otherwise, or in which he is related to either party within the sixth degree of consanguinity or
affinity, or to counsel within the fourth degree, computed according to the rules of the civil law,
or in which he has been executor, administrator, guardian, trustee or counsel, or in which he has
presided in any inferior court when his ruling or decision is the subject of review, without the
written consent of all parties in interest, signed by them and entered upon the record. A judge
may, in the exercise of his sound discretion, disqualify himself from sitting in a case, for just or
valid reasons other than those mentioned above. 4. A Complaint was filed before the Office of
the Bar Confidant by Mrs. Agbulos against Atty. Viray for allegedly notarizing a document
denominated as Affidavit of Non-Tenancy in violation of the Notarial Law since a competent
evidence of identity was not presented. Atty. Viray argued that the Notarial Rules did not amend
Section 163 of the Local Government Code which only requires the presentation of a
Community Tax Certificate when notarizing a document since the rules promulgated by the
Supreme Court cannot amend the law. Was the affidavit validly notarized? Explain. A: The
Community Tax Certificate and a competent evidence of identity must be presented to the Notary
Public since the Notarial Rules did not amend Section 163 of the Local Government Code. The
law and the rule must be complied with. 5. Ana Salinas filed a case for Violence Against Women
and their Children with a Petition for the Issuance of a Temporary Protection Order against her
husband Roy Salinas before the Regional Trial Court. After a chamber conference with both
parties counsels, Judge Bitas immediately issued an Order appointing Mervyn Aover as
the administrator of the spouses community properties. Ana Salinas avers that she did not
agree to the appointment of an administrator, hence, she filed a Motion for Reconsideration of
the Order appointing Mervyn Aover as the administrator. In response, Roy Salinas

counsel filed his comment on the motion, with motion to cite Ana Salinas for indirect contempt
for her defiance to the order of the court by disallowing Mervyn Aover to take over the
management of the spouses community properties. Judge Bitas summarily held petitioner in
contempt of court for violating the courts order by disallowing the administrator to perform
his duty. Is Judge Bitas correct in issuing an order peremptorily holding Ana Salinas in contempt
of court? A: Judge Bitas should be held administratively liable for summarily holding Ana
Salinas in contempt of court. Charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified
petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved
therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil
actions in the court concerned. If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a principal
action pending in the court, the petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall
be docketed, heard and decided separately, unless the court in its discretion orders the
consolidation of the contempt charge and the principal action for joint hearing and decision.
From the foregoing, it is clear that the following procedural requisites must be complied with
before petitioner may be punished for indirect contempt: First, there must be an order requiring
the petitioner to show cause why she should not be cited for contempt. Second, the petitioner
must be given the opportunity to comment on the charge against her. Third, there must be a
hearing and the court must investigate the charge and consider petitioners answer. Finally,
only if found guilty will petitioner be punished accordingly. What is most essential in indirect
contempt cases, however, is that the alleged contemner be granted an opportunity to meet the
charges against him and to be heard in his defenses. Here, it appears that Roy Salinas did not file
a verified complaint, but instead initiated the indirect contempt through his Comment/Opposition
to the Motion for Reconsideration with Motion to Cite Defendant for Indirect Contempt.
Regardless of this fact, however, respondent Judge still issued an order peremptorily holding
petitioner in contempt of court. Moreover, assuming that the contempt charge was initiated motu
proprio by the Court, respondent Judge still failed to abide by the rules when he did not require
petitioner to show cause why she should not be punished for contempt. Plainly, respondent
Judge's obstinate disregard of established rules of procedure amounts to gross ignorance of the
law or procedure, since he disregarded the basic procedural requirements in instituting an
indirect contempt charge. 6. Johnwell Tiggangay ran for the mayoralty position of Kalinga in the
election but lost to Rhustom L. Dagadag by a slim margin. Following Dagadag's proclamation,
Tiggangay filed an electoral protest which was raffled to the sala of Judge Wacas. Judge Wacas
rendered a Decision finding Dagadag to have won the protested election but at a reduced
winning margin. Tiggangay filed a complaint charging Judge Wacas with Impropriety and
Partiality, alleging that during the course of the proceedings, he learned that Judge Wacas is
Dagadags second cousin by affinity, the formers aunt is married to an uncle of Dagadag.
Should Judge Wacas be held administratively liable for Impropriety and Partiality for not
inhibiting himself from hearing the electoral protest case? A: No. There is no affinity between
the blood relatives of one spouse and the blood relatives of the other. A husband is related by
affinity to his wifes brother, but not to the wife of his wifes brother. There is no affinity
between the husbands brother and the wifes sister; this is called affinitas affinitatis.
There is no relationship by affinity between Judge Wacas and Dagadag as they are not in-laws of
each other. Thus, Judge Wacas is not disqualified under Sec. 1 of Rule 137 to hear the election
case. 7. Atty. Revilla notarized a complaint-affidavit signed by Heneraline L. Brosas, a sister of
Atty. Revillas wife, without requiring the presentation of the latters valid identification
card. Can this be a ground for the disbarment of Atty. Revilla? A: Section 3(c), Rule IV of the

2004 Rules on Notarial Practice clearly disqualifies him from notarizing the complaint-affidavit,
from performing the notarial act, since the affiant or principal is his relative within the fourth
civil degree of affinity. Given the clear provision of the disqualification rule, it behooved upon
Atty. Revilla, Jr. to act with prudence and refuse notarizing the document. The fact that a valid
identification card has not been presented is immaterial. If the notary public knows the affiants
personally, he need not require them to show their valid identification cards. This rule is
supported by the definition of a "jurat" under Section 6, Rule II of the 2004 Rules on Notarial
Practice. Atty. Revilla, Jr.s violation of the disqualification rule under Section 3(c), Rule IV
of the 2004 Rules on Notarial Practice is not a sufficient ground to disbar him. He did not
commit any deceit, malpractice, gross misconduct or gross immoral conduct, or any other serious
ground for disbarment under Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. 8. An administrative
case for gross incompetence, inefficiency, negligence, and dereliction of duty was filed against
Judge Andaya of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 53, Lucena City, Quezon. However, the action
was brought in court only after he retired on March 27, 2009. Did Judges Andayas
retirement bar the Supreme Court from pursuing the administrative proceeding against him? A: A
judges retirement effectively barred the Court from pursuing the instant administrative
proceeding that was instituted after his tenure in office, and divested the Court, much less the
OCA, of any jurisdiction to still subject him to the rules and regulations of the judiciary and/or to
penalize him for the infractions committed while he was still in the service. The Court has lost
jurisdiction to find him liable for the cases and motions left unresolved prior to his retirement. 9.
What are the three tests provided by Jurisprudence in determining whether a lawyer is guilty of
representing conflicting interest? A: Jurisprudence has provided three tests in determining
whether a lawyer is guilty of representing conflicting interest. One test is whether a lawyer is
duty-bound to fight for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, to oppose
that claim for the other client. Thus, if a lawyers argument for one client has to be opposed
by that same lawyer in arguing for the other client, there is a violation of the rule. Another test of
inconsistency of interests is whether the acceptance of a new relation would prevent the full
discharge of the lawyers duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to the client or invite
suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in the performance of that duty. Still another test is
whether the lawyer would be called upon in the new relation to use against a former client any
confidential information acquired through their connection or previous employment. 10. During
the pendency of a litigation case between Czarina Malvar and Kraft Foods Phils, a Compromise
Agreement was executed by the parties. Atty. Perez, believing that the compromise agreement
was authored by Kraft Foods Phils to evade a possible loss of P182,000,000.00 or more as a
result of the labor litigation, refused to withdraw the case. Considering Atty. Perez as a major
stumbling block in the settlement of her case, Malvar terminated his services. Claiming that
Malvar unceremoniously and without any justifiable reason terminated his legal service and
required him to withdraw from the case, Atty. Perez filed a Motion for Intervention to recover his
full compensation based on his written agreement with Malvar. Can the Motion for Intervention
prosper? A: Atty. Perez has the right recover in full its compensation based on its written
agreement with his client who unceremoniously and without any justifiable reason terminated its
legal service and required it to withdraw from the case. A client may at any time dismiss his
attorney or substitute another in his place, but if the contract between client and attorney has
been reduced to writing and the dismissal of the attorney was without justifiable cause, he shall
be entitled to recover from the client the full compensation stipulated in the contract. However,
the attorney may, in the discretion of the court, intervene in the case to protect his rights. For the

payment of his compensation the attorney shall have a lien upon all judgments for the payment
of money, and executions issued in pursuance of such judgment, rendered in the case wherein his
services had been retained by the client. 11. Medado graduated from the University of the
Philippines with the degree of Bachelor of Laws in 1979 and passed the same years bar
examinations. He took the Attorneys Oath but failed to Sign the Roll of Attorneys allegedly
because he had misplaced the Notice to Sign the Roll of Attorneys given by the Bar Office when
he went home to his province for a vacation. Several years later, while rummaging through his
old college files, Medado found the Notice to Sign the Roll of Attorneys. It was then that he
realized that he had not signed in the roll, and that what he had signed at the entrance of the
PICC was probably just an attendance record. By the time Medado found the notice, he was
already working. He stated that he was mainly doing corporate and taxation work, and that he
was not actively involved in litigation practice. Thus, he operated under the mistaken belief that
since he had already taken the oath, the signing of the Roll of Attorneys was not as urgent, nor as
crucial to his status as a lawyer; and the matter of signing in the Roll of Attorneys lost its urgency
and compulsion, and was subsequently forgotten. In 2005, when Medado attended Mandatory
Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) seminars, he was required to provide his roll number in
order for his MCLE compliances to be credited. Not having signed in the Roll of Attorneys, he
was unable to provide his roll number. About seven years later, Medado filed a Petition to the
Supreme Court praying that he be allowed to sign in the Roll of Attorneys. Should the petition be
granted? A: Yes. Not allowing Medado to sign in the Roll of Attorneys would be akin to
imposing upon him the ultimate penalty of disbarment, a penalty that we have reserved for the
most serious ethical transgressions of members of the Bar. In this case, the records do not show
that this action is warranted. Under the Rules of Court, the unauthorized practice of law by
ones assuming to be an attorney or officer of the court, and acting as such without authority,
may constitute indirect contempt of court, which is punishable by fine or imprisonment or both.
Such a finding, however, is in the nature of criminal contempt and must be reached after the
filing of charges and the conduct of hearings. In this case, while it appears quite clearly that
Medado committed indirect contempt of court by knowingly engaging in unauthorized practice
of law, we refrain from making any finding of liability for indirect contempt, as no formal charge
pertaining thereto has been filed against him. Knowingly engaging in unauthorized practice of
law likewise transgresses Canon 9 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which provided
that a lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, assist in the unauthorized practice of law. While a
reading of Canon 9 appears to merely prohibit lawyers from assisting in the unauthorized
practice of law, the unauthorized practice of law by the lawyer himself is subsumed under this
provision, because at the heart of Canon 9 is the lawyers duty to prevent the unauthorized
practice of law. This duty likewise applies to law students and Bar candidates. As aspiring
members of the Bar, they are bound to comport themselves in accordance with the ethical
standards of the legal profession. 12. Atty. Espejo, after being introduced to Victoria by a
common friend, obtained a loan from the latter in the amount of P250,000.00. Despite successive
demands by Victoria, Atty. Espejo failed to fulfill her obligation. Instead, she issued worthless
checks to settle her loan. Can Atty. Espejo be disbarred due to the fact that she issued worthless
checks despite the fact that the loan was obtained in her private capacity? A: The fact that Atty.
Espejo obtained the loan and issued the worthless checks in her private capacity and not as an
attorney of Victoria is of no moment. A lawyer may be disciplined not only for malpractice and
dishonesty in his profession but also for his misconduct outside of his professional capacity.
While the Court may not ordinarily discipline a lawyer for misconduct committed in his non-

professional capacity, the Court may be justified in suspending or removing him as an attorney
where his misconduct outside the lawyers professional dealings is so gross in character to
show him morally unfit and unworthy of the privilege which his licenses and the law confer. 13.
Atty. Lacaya and Vicente Cadavedo entered into a contract with the following stipulation:
That due to the above circumstances, the plaintiffs were forced to hire a lawyer on
contingent basis and if they become the prevailing parties in the case at bar, they will pay the
sum of P2,000.00 for attorneys fees. Is the stipulation in the contract is valid? A: This
agreement is champertous and is contrary to public policy. Champerty, along with maintenance
(of which champerty is an aggravated form), is a common law doctrine that traces its origin to
the medieval period. The doctrine of maintenance was directed "against wanton and in officious
intermeddling in the disputes of others in which the intermeddler has no interest whatever, and
where the assistance rendered is without justification or excuse. "Champerty, on the other hand,
is characterized by "the receipt of a share of the proceeds of the litigation by the intermeddler.
"Some common law court decisions, however, add a second factor in determining champertous
contracts, namely, that the lawyer must also, "at his own expense maintain, and take all the risks
of, the litigation." As matters currently stand, any agreement by a lawyer to "conduct the
litigation in his own account, to pay the expenses thereof or to save his client therefrom and to
receive as his fee a portion of the proceeds of the judgment is obnoxious to the law." The rule of
the profession that forbids a lawyer from contracting with his client for part of the thing in
litigation in exchange for conducting the case at the lawyers expense is designed to prevent
the lawyer from acquiring an interest between him and his client. To permit these arrangements
is to enable the lawyer to "acquire additional stake in the outcome of the action which might lead
him to consider his own recovery rather than that of his client or to accept a settlement which
might take care of his interest in the verdict to the sacrifice of that of his client in violation of his
duty of undivided fidelity to his clients cause." 14. The Heirs of Mcabangkit sued National
Power Corporation for recovery of damages and of property with the alternative prayer for the
payment of just compensation. Atty. Dibaratun was the original counsel of the Heirs of
Macabangkit. When the appeal was submitted for decision in the Court of Appeals, Atty. Ballelos
filed his entry of appearance and a motion for early decision. When the Court of Appeals
rendered its decision, the same was furnished solely to Atty. Ballelos. However, shortly before
the rendition of the decision, Atty. Dibaratun filed in the Court of Appeals a motion to register
attorneys lien, alleging that he did not withdraw his appearance and he was not aware of the
entry of appearance by Atty. Ballelos. Amir Macabangkit, one of the heirs of Macabangkit,
confirmed Atty. Dibaratuns representation through an ex parte manifestation that he filed in
his own behalf and on behalf of his siblings. Amir imputed malpractice to Atty. Ballelos for
having filed an entry of appearance bearing his forged signature and for plagiarism for copying
verbatim the arguments contained in the pleadings previously filed by Atty. Dibaratun. Atty.
Ballelos claimed that he was hired by the other heirs of Mcabangkit. Both Atty. Dibaratun and
Atty. Ballelos posited that their entitlement to attorneys fees was contingent. What is the
appropriate attorneys fees? Who is entitled to attorneys fees? A: With neither Atty.
Dibaratun nor Atty. Ballelos presenting a written agreement bearing upon their supposed
contingent fees, the only way to determine their right to appropriate attorneys fees is to apply
the principle of quantum meruit. Quantum meruit literally meaning as much as
he deserves is used as basis for determining an attorneys professional fees in
the absence of an express agreement. The recovery of attorneys fees on the basis
of quantum meruit is a device that prevents an unscrupulous client from running away with

the fruits of the legal services of counsel without paying for it and also avoids unjust enrichment
on the part of the attorney himself. An attorney must show that he is entitled to reasonable
compensation for the effort in pursuing the clients cause, taking into account certain factors
in fixing the amount of legal fees. Atty. Dibaratun, the attorney from the outset, unquestionably
carried the bulk of the legal demands of the case. His representation of all the Heirs of
Macabangkit was not denied by any of them. In fairness and justice, the Court accords full
recognition to Atty. Dibaratun as the counsel de parte of the Heirs of Macabangkit who
discharged his responsibility in the prosecution of the clients cause to its successful end. It is
he, not Atty. Ballelos, who was entitled to the full amount of attorneys fees that the clients
ought to pay to their attorney. Given the amount and quality of his legal work, his diligence and
the time he expended in ensuring the success of his prosecution of the clients cause, he
deserves the recognition, notwithstanding that some of the clients might appear to have retained
Atty. Ballelos after the rendition of a favorable judgment. Atty. Ballelos may claim only from
Cebu, Batowa-an, Sayana, Nasser, Manta and Edgar, the only parties who engaged him. The
Court considers his work in the case as very minimal. 15. Robert Seares, Jr. filed a complaint
against Atty. Alzate charging her with incompetence, professional negligence and violation of the
prohibition against conflicting interests. Seares alleged that Atty. Alzate was his legal counsel
when he ran for the position of Municipal Mayor of Dolores, Abra. When he lost, Atty. Alzate
filed in his behalf a Petition of Protest Ad Cautelam, however, the same was dismissed for being
fatally defective. Several months later, Atty. Alzate insisted on filing a Petition of Protest, but the
petition was also dismissed on the ground that it was already time barred. After sometime, Seares
again ran for Municipal Mayor and won. He subsequently learned that his political opponents
retained Atty. Alzate as their counsel. Barely two months in office, Seares was charged by one
Carlito Turqueza with abuse of authority, oppression and grave misconduct and Atty. Alzate was
the one who represented the latter as counsel. Seares stated that Atty. Alzate made false and
hurtful statements in the memorandum that she prepared in that administrative case in order to
attack him. He asserts that Atty. Alzate violated Canon 15, Canon 17 and Canon 18 of the Code
of Professional Responsibility for negligently handling his election protest, for prosecuting him,
and for uttering false and hurtful allegations against him. Hence, he prays that she should be
disbarred. Did Atty. Alzate violated the Code of Professional Responsibility? A: There is no
conflict of interest in a situation where a lawyer represents his present client against his former
client, so long as no confidential information acquired during the previous employment was used
against the former client by the lawyer. The prohibition does not cover a situation where the
subject matter of the present engagement is totally unrelated to the previous engagement of the
attorney. 16. Rey Decena had brought an administrative case against Judge Malanyaons wife,
Dr. Amelita, the then Assistant Provincial Health Officer of Camarines Sur. During the hearing of
the administrative case, Judge Malanyaon was occupying a seat beside his daughter, Atty. Maria
Kristina Malanyaon, the counsel of Dr. Amelita. The Judges presence therein enabled him to
advise his daughter on what to do and say during the hearing. When the counsel of Decena
inquired regarding the personality of Judge Malanyaon, being seated at the lawyers bench,
the Judge then proudly introduced himself and manifested that he was the counsel of the
respondents counsel. The Judge stated that he was merely assisting her daughter who just passed
the bar. Subsequently, the complainants lodged an administrative complaint for conduct
unbecoming a judge against Judge Malanyaon. Are the actuations of Judge Malanyaon constitute
conduct unbecoming of a judge? A: The act of a judge coaching her daughter who is the counsel
of the respondent during a hearing is considered as engaging in private practice of law. A judge

may not involve himself in any activity that is an aspect of the private practice of law. His
acceptance of an appointment to the Bench inhibits him from engaging in such practice,
regardless of the beneficiary of the activity being a member of his immediate family. The
judges act of doing so renders him guilty of conduct unbecoming of a judge. 17. Atty. De
Leon persuaded Arthur, Liza and Ethel to invest in a business venture that later went bankrupt.
Arthur, Liza and Ethel charged Atty. De Leon with estafa. Simultaneously, they filed an
administrative complaint against Atty. De Leon with the Supreme Court. If Atty. De Leon is
convicted of estafa, will he be disbarred? If Atty. De Leon is acquitted of the estafa charge, will
the disbarment complaint be dismissed? A: Moral turpitude includes everything which is done
contrary to justice, honesty, or good morals. In essence and in all respects, estafa, no doubt, is a
crime involving moral turpitude because the act is unquestionably against justice, honesty and
good morals. If Atty. De Leon is convicted of estafa, then his guilt cannot now be questioned and
his disbarment is inevitable. On the other hand, if he is acquitted, the disbarment case will not be
automatically dismissed since the quantum of proof required for a criminal case may not have
been sufficient for his conviction but may suffice for his disbarment 18. The Supreme Court
suspended indefinitely Atty. Cruz from the practice of law for gross immorality. He asked the
Municipal Circuit Trial Court Judge of his town if he can be appointed counsel de oficio for
Martin, a childhood friend who is accused of theft. The judge refused because Atty. Cruz's name
appears in the Supreme Court's List of Suspended Lawyers. Atty. Cruz then inquired if he can
appear as a friend for Martin to defend him. If you were the judge, will you authorize him to
appear in your court as a friend for Martin? A: Suspension is the removal of a lawyer from the
practice of law for a specified minimum period of time. Generally, suspension should be for a
period of time equal to or greater than six months, but in no event should the time period prior to
application for reinstatement be more than three years. Procedures should be established to allow
a suspended lawyer to apply for reinstatement, but a lawyer who has been suspended should not
be permitted to return to practice until he has completed a reinstatement process demonstrating
rehabilitation, compliance with all applicable discipline or disability orders and rules, and fitness
to practice law. Allowing him to act as an agent or friend of a litigant before the MCTC is akin to
doing indirectly what he cannot do directly. 19. Sheila consulted Atty. Fernandez whether she can
successfully prosecute her case for declaration of nullity of marriage she intends to file against
her husband. Atty. Fernandez advised her in writing that the case will not prosper for the reasons
stated therein. Sheila, however, decided to file the case and engaged the services of another
lawyer, Atty. Lim. Her husband, Noel, having learned about the opinion of Atty. Fernandez, hired
him as his lawyer. Is Atty. Fernandezs acquiescence to be Noel's counsel ethical? A: Yes.
There is conflict of interest since the confidential information Atty. Fernandez acquired during
his previous employment with Sheila can be used against the latter. A lawyer-client relationship
was established from the very first moment complainant asked respondent for legal advise
regarding the formers business. To constitute professional employment, it is not essential that
the client employed the attorney professionally on any previous occasion. It is not necessary that
any retainer be paid, promised, or charged; neither is it material that the attorney consulted did
not afterward handle the case for which his service had been sought. If a person, in respect to
business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults a lawyer with a view to obtaining professional
advice or assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or acquiesces with the consultation,
then the professional employments is established. 20. Atty. Toquerro was admitted as a member
of the New York Bar. While in Manhattan, he was convicted of estafa and was disbarred. Does
his disbarment in New York a ground for his automatic disbarment in the Philippines? A: No.

Disbarment in the NY bar is not a ground for disbarment in the Philippines. At most, it can serve
as prima facie evidence for the disbarment case in the Philippines.
I. LEGAL ETHICS
A. Practice of law (Rule 138)
1. Concept
a) Privilege
b) Profession, not business
2. Qualifications
3. Appearance of non-lawyers
a) Law student practice (Rule 138-A)
b) Non-lawyers in courts
c) Non-lawyers in administrative tribunals
d) Proceedings where lawyers are prohibited from appearing
4. Sanctions for practice or appearance without authority
a) Lawyers without authority
b) Persons not lawyers
5. Public officials and practice of law
a) Prohibition or disqualification of former government attorneys
b) Public officials who cannot practice law or with restrictions
6. Lawyers authorized to represent the government
7. Lawyers oath
B. Duties and responsibilities of a lawyer
1. To society

a) Respect for law and legal processes

b) Efficient and convenient legal services
c) True, honest, fair, dignified and objective information on legal services
d) Participation in the improvement and reforms in the legal system
e) Participation in legal education program
2. To the legal profession
a) Integrated Bar of the Philippines (Rule 139-A)
(i) Membership and dues
b) Upholding the dignity and integrity of the profession
c) Courtesy, fairness and candor towards professional colleagues
d) No assistance in unauthorized practice of law
3. To the courts
a) Candor, fairness and good faith towards the courts
b) Respect for courts and judicial officers
c) Assistance in the speedy and efficient administration of justice
d) Reliance on merits of his cause and avoidance of any impropriety which
tends to influence or gives the appearance of influence upon the courts
4. To the clients
a) Availability of service without discrimination
(i) Services regardless of a persons status
(ii) Services as counsel de officio
(iii) Valid grounds for refusal
b) Candor, fairness and loyalty to clients
(i) Confidentiality rule

(ii) Privileged communications

(iii) Conflict of interest
(iv) Candid and honest advice to clients
(v) Compliance with laws
(vi) Concurrent practice of another profession
c) Clients moneys and properties
(i) Fiduciary relationship
(ii) Commingling of funds
(iii) Delivery of funds
(iv) Borrowing or lending
d) Fidelity to clients cause
e) Competence and diligence
(i) Adequate protection
(ii) Negligence
(iii) Collaborating counsel
(iv) Duty to apprise client
f) Representation with zeal within legal bounds
(i) Use of fair and honest means
(ii) Clients fraud
(iii) Procedure in handling the case
g) Attorneys fees
(i) Acceptance fees
(ii) Contingency fee arrangements

(iii) Attorneys liens

(iv) Fees and controversies with clients
(v) Concepts of attorneys fees
(a) Ordinary concept
(b) Extraordinary concept
h) Preservation of clients confidences
(i) Prohibited disclosures and use
(ii) Disclosure, when allowed
i) Withdrawal of services
C. Suspension, disbarment and discipline of lawyers (Rule 139-B, Rules of Court)
1. Nature and characteristics of disciplinary actions against lawyers
a) Sui generis
b) Prescription
2. Grounds
3. Proceedings
4. Discipline of Filipino lawyers practicing abroad
D. Readmission to the Bar
1. Lawyers who have been suspended
2. Lawyers who have been disbarred
3. Lawyers who have been repatriated
E. Mandatory Continuing Legal Education
1. Purpose
2. Requirements

3. Compliance
4. Exemptions
5. Sanctions
6. Bar Matter 2012, Rule on Mandatory Legal Aid Service
F. Notarial Practice (A. M. No. 02-8-13-SC, as amended)
1. Qualifications of notary public
2. Term of office of notary public
3. Powers and limitations
4. Notarial register
5. Jurisdiction of notary public and place of notarization
6. Revocation of commission
7. Competent evidence of identity
8. Sanctions
G. Canons of Professional Ethics
II. JUDICIAL ETHICS
A. Sources
1. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (Bangalore Draft)
2. Code of Judicial Conduct
B. Qualities
1. Independence
2. Integrity
3. Impartiality
4. Propriety

5. Equality
6. Competence and diligence
C. Discipline of members of the Judiciary
1. Members of the Supreme Court
a) Impeachment
b) Ethical Lessons from Former Chief Justice Coronas Impeachment
2. Lower court judges and justices of the Court of Appeals and Sandiganbayan
(Rule 140)
3. Grounds
4. Impeachment (ethical aspects)
5. Sanctions imposed by the Supreme Court on erring members of the Judiciary
D. Disqualification of Justices and Judges (Rule 137)
1. Compulsory
2. Voluntary
E. Powers and Duties of Courts and Judicial Officers (Rule 135)
F. Court Records and General Duties of Clerks and Stenographer (Rule 136)
G. Legal Fees (Rule 141)
1. Manner of payment
2. Fees in lien
3. Persons authorized to collect legal fees
H. Costs
1. Recovery of costs (Rule 142)
a) Prevailing party
b) Dismissed appeal or action

c) Frivolous appeal
d) False allegations
e) Non-appearance of witness