Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

ATTY. ISMAEL KHAN, JR.

vs ATTY RIZALINO SIMBILLO

FACTS: Paid advertisement in the newspaper Philippine Daily Inquirer reads: ANNULMENT OF
MARRIAGE Specialist 532-4333/ 521-2667.

Ms. Ma. Theresa Espeleta, a staff member of the Public Information Office of the Supreme
Court, called up and pretended to be an interested party. She was able to talk with Mrs.
Simbillo, the respondent’s wife. Mrs. Simbillo guaranteed the caller a court decree within four to
six months, provided the case will not involve separation of property or custody of children. The
fee will be P48,000; half of it is payable at the time of filing of the case, and the other half after a
decision has been rendered.

Atty. Ismael Khan Jr., in his capacity as Assistant Court Administrator and Chief of the Public
Information Office filed an administrative complaint against Atty. Rizalino Simbillo for violation of
the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Rules of Court.

ISSUE: Whether or not Atty. Simbillo is liable of the charges against him.

HELD: Yes. Atty. Simbillo is liable for knowingly and repeatedly violating Rule 2.03 and Rule
3.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Rule 138, Section 27 of the Rules of Court.
It was stated that… “a lawyer may not properly publish his brief biographical and
informative data in a daily paper, magazine, trade journal or society program. Nor may a
lawyer permit his name to be published in a law list the conduct, management, or contents of
which are calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public or the bar, or to lower dignity or
standing of the profession.” Atty. Simbillo is SUSPENDED from the practice of law for ONE
YEAR and is likewise STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar offense will
be dealt with more severely.

LETTER OF ATTY. CECILIO AREVALO, JR. REQUESTING EXEMPTION FROM PAYMENT


OF IBP DUES

FACTS: Atty. Arevalo, Jr. was admitted to the Philippine Bar in 1961. From July 1962 to 1986,
he worked for the Philippine Civil Service; then he migrated and worked in the USA in
December 1986 until his retirement in 2003. He contends that he cannot be assessed IBP dues
for the years that he was working for the government service as the law prohibits the practice of
the law profession while in said service. Neither can he be assessed when he was working in
USA. He requested for exemption from payment of P12,035 IBP dues for the years 1977-2005.

ISSUE: Whether Atty. Arevalo is exempted in payment of IBP dues.

HELD: No. There is nothing in the law or rules which allow exemption from payment of
membership dues. Membership in the bar is a privilege burdened with conditions,one of which is
the payment of dues. Failure to abide by any of them entails the loss of such privilege if the
gravity thereof warrants such drastic move. Atty. Arevalo’s request for exemption from payment
of IBP dues is DENIED and he is ordered to pay the amount assessed by the IBP as
membership fees for the years 1977-2005.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen