CASE VOLUNTARY OBLIGATIONS VIOLATED PENALTY IMPOSED MEANING OF PRACTICE OF LAW IMPORTANCE OF THE OATH

1. CAYETANO VS n/a n/a The practice of law is not limited to the n/a
MONSOD conduct of cases or litigation in court; it
embraces the preparation of pleadings and
other papers incident to actions and special
proceeding, the management of such actions
and proceedings on behalf of clients before
judges and courts, and in addition,
conveying.

In general, all advice to clients, and all action

taken for them in matters connected with the law
incorporation services, assessment and
condemnation services, contemplating an
appearance before judicial body, the foreclosure
of mortgage, enforcement of a creditor’s claim in
bankruptcy and insolvency proceedings, and
conducting proceedings in attachment, and in
matters of estate and guardianship have been
held to constitute law practice. Practice of law
means any activity, in or out court, which
requires the application of law, legal procedure,
knowledge, training and experience.”

2. PLA VS n/a n/a The practice of law is not limited to the n/a
AGRAVA conduct of cases or litigation in court but
also embraces all other matters connected
with the law and any work involving the
determination by the legal mind of the legal
effects of facts and conditions.
3. PP VS n/a n/a We believe that the isolated appearance of n/a
SIMPLICIO City Attorney Fule did not constitute private
VILLANUEVA practice within the meaning and
contemplation of the Rules. Practice is more
than an isolated appearance, for it consists
in frequent or customary actions, a
succession of acts of the same kind. In other
words, it is frequent habitual exercise.

Practice of law to fall within the prohibition of

statute has been interpreted as customarily or
habitually holding one's self out to the public, as
customarily and demanding payment for such
services. The appearance as counsel on one
occasion is not conclusive as determinative of
engagement in the private practice of law. The
following observation of the Solicitor General is
noteworthy: Essentially, the word private practice
of law implies that one must have presented
himself to be in the active and continued practice
of the legal profession and that his professional
services are available to the public for a
compensation, as a source of his livelihood or in
consideration of his said services
4. CUI VS CUI n/a n/a titulo de abogado" means not mere n/a
possession of the academic degree of
Bachelor of Laws but membership in the Bar
after duea dmission thereto, qualifying one
for the practice of law. A Bachelor's degree
alone,conferredby a law school upon
completion of certain academic
requirements, does not entitle itsholderto
exercise the legal profession
5. ALMACEN On Almacen’s attack against the Supreme Court, the Suspension n/a n/a
High Court regarded said criticisms as uncalled for;
that such is insolent, contemptuous, grossly
disrespectful and derogatory. It is true that a
lawyer, both as an officer of the court and as a
citizen, has the right to criticize in properly
respectful terms and through legitimate channels
the acts of courts and judges. His right as a
citizen to criticize the decisions of the courts in a fair
and respectful manner, and the independence of the
bar, as well as of the judiciary, has always been
encouraged by the courts. But it is the cardinal
condition of all such criticism that it shall be
bona fide, and shall not spill over the walls of
decency and propriety. Intemperate and unfair
criticism is a gross violation of the duty of
respect to courts.

6. AGRAVA n/a To be made the basis for n/a n/a

suspension or disbarment
of a lawyer, the charge
against him must be
established by convincing
proof. The record must
disclose as free from doubt
a case which compels the
exercise by this Court of its
disciplinary powers. The
dubious character of the act
done as well as of the
motivation thereof must be
clearly demonstrated."
7. TELESFORO n/a Thus, the name Telesforo A. The Supreme Court ruled that Telesforo A. n/a
DIAO Diao is deleted from the roll Diao was not qualified to take the Bar Exams,
of attorneys and he is but did by falsifying information. Admission
required to return his law under false pretenses thus give grounds for
diploma within thirty days. revoking his admission in the Bar, as
passing the Bar Exam is not the only
requirement to become an attorney at law.
8. KHAN VS Simbillo advertised himself as an “Annulment of The Supreme Court in n/a n/a
SIMBILLO Marriage Specialist.” These advertisements suspending petitioner from
appeared in the July 5, 2000 issue of the the practice of law for 1 year
Philippine Daily Inquirer, and further research and warning the latter that a
showed that similar advertisements were repetition of the same
published in the Manila Bulletin in August 2 and offense will result in more
6, 2000 and in the Philippine Star in August 5, severe punishment,
2000.
 Subsequently, Simbillo was charged for improper
advertising and solicitation of legal services, filed by
Assistant Court Administrator and Chief of Public
Information Office, Atty. Ismael G, Khan. Simbillo’s
advertisement undermined the stability and sanctity
of marriage

Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be

done any act designed primarily to solicit legal
business
Rule 3.01 - A lawyer shall not use or permit the use
of any
false, fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignifie
d, self-laudatory or unfair statement orclaim
regarding his qualifications or legal services.

9. CANOY VS His failure to do so constitutes a violation of The Supreme Court, in n/a n/a
ORTIZ Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional suspening respondent for 1
Responsibility month, ruled that Atty. Ortiz
should have filed the
Rule 18.03, Code of Professional position paper on time,
Responsibility — A lawyer shall not owing to his duty as counsel
neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, of Canoy to attend to this
and his negligence in connection therewith legal matter entrusted to
shall render him liable. him

10. BORJA VS n/a The Supreme Court ruled n/a n/a

SULYAP that while a judicial
compromise may be
annulled or modified on the
ground ofvitiated consent or
forgery, they find that the
testimony of the petitioner
failed to establish the
attendance of fraud in the
instant case. No evidence
was presented by petitioner
other than his bare
allegation that his former
counsel fraudulently
attached the page of the
genuine compromise
agreement where he affixed
his signature to
the compromise agreement
submitted to the court.

11. SCHULZ VS Atty. Flores knew too little of the provisions and suspended the latter for (6) n/a n/a
FLORES application of PD No. 1508 which mandates that all months and to return the
disputes, except those specifically cited (the dispute money of complainant with
between Lothar Schulz and Wilson Ong not interest. The SC also sternly
included), between and among residents of the warned Flores that a
same city or municipality should be brought first commission of the same or
under the system of barangay conciliation before similar act in the future will be
recourse to the court can be allowed dealt with more severely.
 CANON 17. – A LAWYER OWES FIDELITY TO
THE CAUSE OF HIS CLIENT AND HE SHALL BE
MINDFUL OF THE TRUST AND CONFIDENCE
REPOSED IN HIM.
CANON 18. – A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS
CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE
12. LEDESMA VS Sec. 32, Rule 127 of the Rules of Court (now Sec. n/a n/a n/a
CLIMACO 35 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court) -
The only attorneys who cannot practice law by
reason of their office are Judges, or other officials or
employees of the superior courts or the office of the
Solicitor General.
13. REYES VS Respondent Atty. Jeremias R. Vitan is guilty of he is suspended from the n/a n/a
VITAN violation of Canon 18 of the Code of Professional practice of law for a period of
Responsibility wherein he was unable to six (6) months effective upon
uphold his task as a lawyer and not neglect a notice of this Decision. He is
legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence ordered to return to
in connection therewith shall render him liable complainant within five (5)
days from notice the sum of
Canon 18 of the Code of Professional P17,000.00 with interest of
Responsibility - a lawyer shall serve his client with 12% per annum from the date
competence and diligence. of the promulgation of this
Decision until the full amount
shall have been returned.

14. OLBES VS n/a His misuse of the filled-up n/a By taking the lawyer’s oath, an
DECIEMBRE checks that led to the attorney becomes a guardian of
detention of one petitioner truth and the rule of law, and an
is loathsome. Thus, he is indispensable instrument in the fair
sentenced suspended and impartial administration of
indefinitely from the practice justice. Lawyers should act and
of law effective immediately. comport themselves with honesty
and integrity in a manner beyond
reproach, in order to promote the
public’s faith in the legal profession
15. COBB-PEREZ n/a n/a n/a If he finds that his client’s cause is
VS LANTIN defenseless, then it is his bounden
duty to advise the latter to
acquiesce and submit, rather than
traverse the incontrovertible. A
lawyer must resist the whims and
caprices of his client, and temper
his client’s propensity to litigate. A
lawyer’s oath to uphold the cause
of justice is superior to his duty to
his client; its primacy is
indisputable.
16. OCCENA VS The conduct of the lawyer before the court and n/a The rule is that when a lawyer has rendered Solemn oath that he will do no
OCCENA with other lawyers should be characterized by legal services to the executor or falsehood nor consent to the doing
candor and fairness. It is neither candid nor fair administrator to assist him in the execution of any in court, nor wittingly or
for a lawyer to knowingly make false allegations of his trust, his attorney's fees may be willingly promote or sue any false,
in a judicial pleading or to misquote the contents allowed as expenses of administration. The groundless or unlawful suit, and
of a document, the testimony of a witness, the estate is, however, not directly liable for his conduct himself as a lawyer with all
argument of opposing counsel or the contents of fees, the liability for payment resting good fidelity to courts as well as to
a decision primarily on the executor or administrator. If his clients. We find that Atty.
the administrator had paid the fees, he would Binamira, in having deliberately
be entitled to reimbursement from the estate. made these false allegations in his
pleadings, has been recreant to his
 oath
17. PP VS Generoso H. Hubilla. Emilio P. Jardinico, Jr. Angelo n/a The mere fact of taking an oath by
EUSTACIO, DE T. Lopez. Eustacio de Luna. Jaime P. Marco. Santos any person as a lawyer does not
LUNA L. Parina. Florencio P. Sugarol, and Maria Velez y make him automatically a lawyer
Estrellas pass the bar exams. (sa notary public pa without having completed the
jud) requirements prescribed by the
Supreme Court for the admission to
Oreste Arellano y Rodriguez. Pedro B. Ayuda. the practice by law. It is necessary
Alawadin I. Bandon. Roque J. Briones. Abraham C. before his admission to the Bar that
Calaguas. Balbino P. Fajardo. Claro C. Gofredo. he passes the required bar
Estela R. Gordo. -took an oath as a lawyer even examinations and is admitted by the
though they did not Supreme Court to practice as
attorney

The notary public Anatolio A. Alcoba, member of the Inasmuch as the oath as lawyer is a
Bar, who has illegally administered the oath to the prerequisite to the practice of law
said persons in disregard of this Court's resolution and may be taken only, before the
denying them admission to the Bar (except Capitulo, Supreme Court, by those authorized
Gofredo and Sugarol), is hereby given ten days to by the latter to engage in such
show cause why he should not be disbarred or practice, the resolution denying the
suspended from the pratice of law; aforementioned petition of
appellees herein, implied,
necessarily, a denial of the right to
said oath, as well as a prohibition of
or injunction against the taking
thereof.

18. UI VS n/a the complaint for Gross n/a n/a

BONFACIO Immorality against
Respondent is DISMISSED for
lack of merit. Atty. Iris is
REPRIMANDED for
knowingly and wilfully
attaching to her Answer a
falsified Certificate of
Marriage with a stern
warning that a repetition of
the same will merit a more
severe penalty
19. NARIDO VS The charge against respondent Linsangan filed n/a n/a n/a
LINSANGAN by a certain Flora Narido is that he violated the
attorney’s oath by submitting a perjured
statement

Do no falsehood nor consent to the doing of any

in court.
20. LAPUT VS n/a n/a This should estop petitioner from now n/a
REMOTIGUE complaining that the appearance of Atty.
Patalinghug was unprofessional. On the part
of Remotigue, there can be no irregularity for
he filed his entry of appearance only after
Laput was discharged as counsel for Barrera

21. BLANZA VS n/a n/a A lawyer has a more dynamic and positive n/a
ARCANGEL role in the community than merely complying
with the minimal technicalities of the statute.
As a man of law, he is necessarily a leader of
the community, looked up to as a model
 citizen. His conduct must, perforce, be par
excellence, especially so when, as in this
case, he volunteers his professional
services.
22. OPERAL VS The relationship being one of confidence, there is n/a n/a n/a
ABARIYA ever present the need for the latter being adequately
and fully informed of the mode and manner in which
their interest is defended. They should not be left in
the dark. They are entitled to the fullest disclosure of
why certain steps are taken and why certain matters
are either included or excluded from the documents
they are made to sign. It is only thus that their faith in
counsel may remain unimpaired. x x x the same zeal
should characterize a lawyer's efforts as when he is
defending the rights of property. As it is, there is
even the fear that a lawyer works harder when he
appears for men of substance. To show how
unfounded is such a suspicion, he must exert his
utmost, whoever be his client. At any rate, with
complainant having been satisfied with the
explanation of respondent, he could not be justly
charged of being recreant to his trust for personal
gain.
23. ARTHUR n/a n/a n/a The Supreme Court also stressed
CUEVAS that the lawyer’s oath is not a mere
formality recited for a few minutes
in the glare of flashing cameras and
before the presence of select
witnesses. As a lawyer, Cuevas
shall be expected to abide by the
oath strictly and to conduct himself
beyond reproach at all times. As a
lawyer he will now be in a better
position to render legal and other
services to the more unfortunate
members of society.

24. ULEP VS The Code of Professional Responsibility n/a n/a n/a

LEGAL CLINIC provides that a lawyer in making known his legal
services shall use only true, honest, fair,
dignified and objective information or statement
of facts

The best advertising possible for a lawyer is a

well-merited reputation for professional capacity
and fidelity to trust, which must be earned as the
outcome of character and conduct. Good and
efficient service to a client as well as to the
community has a way of publicizing itself and
catching public attention
25. TOLOSA VS Complainant filed a disbarment case towards The Supreme Court agreed n/a n/a
CARGO respondent claiming immorality. Alleging further that with the conclusion of the
Atty. Alfredo Cargo and his wife is having an affair Solicitor General in not finding
and that his wife even left their conjugal home to live the respondent guilty of
and rent in a place paid by the respondent. Several immorality due to lack of
issues were also raised alleging immorality and sufficient evidence. However,
altercations between the complainant the court ruled further to
WARN Atty. Alfredo Cargo
and REPRIMAND him of
conduct unbecoming a
member of the Bar and an
officer of the court.
26. AGUIRRE VS The court held that respondent did engaged in n/a The right to practice law is not a right but a n/a
RANA unauthorized practice of law. It held that all the privilege extended to those morally upright and
activities he participated during that time involves the with the proper knowledge and skills. It involves
practice of law despite the fact that he is not yet a strict regulation, one of which is on the moral
member of the Bar character of its members. Passing the bar is not
the only qualification to become an attorney-at-
Respondent should know that two essential law
requisites for becoming a lawyer still had to be
performed, namely: his lawyer’s oath to be
administered by this Court and his signature in
the Roll of Attorneys
27. MONSON VS :The respondent’s conduct is a careless and Respondent is reprimanded n/a n/a
REYES reckless behavior in making inaccurate or for being reckless in making
untruthful statements before the Court of statement of fact in his
Appeals as well as before the office of Solicitor pleadings and admonished
General, among others. As it does not appear that a repetition of such
that substantial prejudice has been actually offense would be dealt with
caused the complainant or the forum to whom more severely.
the statements have been addressed, the truth or
falsity of the statement or representation in
question being irrelevant in the resolution of the
cases at hand, the same does not justify
disbarment
28. ROGELIO VS The Court, however, ruled that complainant Subdivision is admissible only n/a n/a
BELTRAN failed to controvert by clear and convincing against them. Respondent
evidence the evidentiary weight with respect to was suspended from the
its due execution and presumption of regularity practice of law for a period of
conferred upon a notarized document and one (1) year and sternly
documents acknowledged before a notary warned that a commission of
public. Instead, the quantum of evidence showed the same or similar act in the
that complainant' s siblings appeared before the future will be dealt with more
respondent as notary public and in fact, signed severely
the deed. The claim of Renato and Benito Santos in
their affidavit that they did not sign the document in
the law office of the respondent but in their houses
at Villa Benita

29. UY VS No. Evidently, the facts alleged in the complaint for n/a n/a n/a
GONZALES Estafa Through Falsification of Public Documents
filed by respondent against complainant were
obtained by respondent due to his personal
dealings with complainant. Respondent
volunteered his service to hasten the issuance of
the certificate of title of the land he has
redeemed from complainant. Clearly, there was
 no attorney-client relationship between
respondent and complainant. The preparation
and the proposed filing of the petition was only
incidental to their personal transaction.

30. GAMILA VS n/a n/a The economic benefits package granted n/a
MARINO under the MOA did not constitute union
funds from which attorney’s fees could have
been validly deducted. Under Article 222(b),
attorney’s fees may only be paid from union
funds; yet the amount to be used in paying
for the same does not become union funds
until it is actually deducted as attorney’s fees
from the benefits awarded to the employees
31. BOLIVAR VS Respondent's acts of making a dupe of The fact that complainant n/a n/a
SIMBOL complainant, living on her bounty and allowing has withdrawn her
her to spend for his schooling and other complaint against
personal necessities while dangling before her respondent does not wipe
the mirage of a marriage, marrying another girl out the grievous offense he
as soon as he had finished his studies, keeping had committed. Respondent
his marriage a secret while continuing to "has failed to maintain the
demand money from complainant, and trying to highest degree of morality
sponge on her and persuade her to resume their expected and required of a
broken relationship after the latter's discovery of member of the bar”.
his immoral acts, are indicative of a character Therefore, he is guilty of
not worthy of a member of the bar. "grossly immoral conduct"
within the meaning of Section
27, Rule 138, Rules of Court

32. ARCIGA VS Maniwang’s refusal to marry Arciga was not so n/a n/a n/a
MANIWANG corrupt nor unprincipled as to warrant
disbarment (though not much discussion was
provided by the ponente as to why). But the
Supreme Court did say that it is difficult to state
with precision and to fix an inflexible standard as
to what is “grossly immoral conduct” or to
specify the moral delinquency and obliquity
which render a lawyer unworthy of continuing as
a member of the bar.

what appears to be unconventional behavior to

the straight-laced may not be the immoral
conduct that warrants disbarment. Immoral
conduct has been defined as “that conduct
which is willful, flagrant, or shameless, and
which shows a moral indifference to the opinion
of the good and respectable members of the
community”.
33. IN RE EDILLON n/a n/a Thus, when the respondent Edillon entered n/a
upon the legal profession, his practice of law
and his exercise of the said profession,
which affect the society at large, were (and
are) subject to the power of the body politic
to require him to conform to such regulations
as might be established by the proper
authorities for the common good, even to the
extent of interfering with some of his
liberties.

If he did not wish to submit himself to such

reasonable interference and regulation, he
should not have clothed the public with an
interest in his concerns.

34. HERNANDEZ Complainant engaged respondent’s services, she DISBARRED. n/a “A lawyer shall hold in trust all
VS GO entrusted to him her land titles and allowed him to moneys and properties of his client
sell her lots, believing that the proceeds thereof that may come into his
would be used to pay her creditors. Respondent possession.”
abused her trust and confidence when he did not sell
her properties to others but to himself and spent his “A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause
own money to pay her obligations of his client and he shall be mindful
of the trust and confidence reposed
in him.”

Membership in the legal profession

is a privilege. When it appears that
an attorney is no longer worthy of
the trust and confidence of his
clients and the public, it becomes
not only the right but also the duty
of this Court to withdraw the
privilege
35. BEL AIR
TRANSIT VS
MENDOZA
36. ANDERSON VS n/a n/a n/a Respondent should know that as a
CARDINO lawyer, he owes fidelity to the cause
of his client. When a lawyer accepts
a case, his acceptance is an implied
representation that he possesses
the requisite academic learning,
skill and ability to handle the case.

The lawyer has the duty to exert his

best judgment in the prosecution or
defense of the case entrusted to
him and to exercise reasonable and
ordinary care and diligence in the
pursuit or defense of the case.”
37. CUETO VS HELD: No. He violated Canon 20 of the Code of
RAMIREZ Professional Responsibility which states: “[a]
lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients
concerning his compensation and shall resort to
judicial action only to prevent imposition,
injustice or fraud.” There was no intention on the
part of Cueto to commit fraud against Jimenez as
he paid the P30k downpayment
38. YU VS Despite receipt of the amounts, respondent
BONDAL failed to file on of the cases. Complainant
demanded respondent to return all records.
Respondent returned only the records of estafa
case and continued to refuse to return the
records. Complainant filed a complaint against
him with violation of Canon 16 and 16.03 of the
CPR
39. ARTIAGA VS The court ruled that acts of Atty. Villanueva is in
VILLANUEVA violation of his oath that he wll do no falsehood nor
consent to doing of any in court. According to the
court it was clear that atty. Villanueva caused his
client to commit perjury so that the forceful entry
case will fall under the jurisdiction of the court
40. MARTELINO n/a
VS ALEJANDRO
41. IN RE SYCIP n/a
n/a n/a n/a
The SC dismissed the case, n/a n/a
but respondent is directed to
return all the records in his
possession
n/a n/a The court further states that it is
expected that a lawyer will defend
the client’s cause with zeal,
however in doing so it should not
disregard its duty to the court and
the truth. Due to his actions the
client was in another case charged
with perjury, which is detrimental to
the client.
n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a The Court believes that, in view of
the personal and confidential nature
of the relations between attorney
and client, and the high standards
demanded in the canons of
professional ethics, no practice
should be allowed which even in a
remote degree could give rise to the
possibility of deception. Said
attorneys are accordingly advised
to drop the names of the deceased
partners from their firm name.