WRITING LEGAL OPINION

Keep In Mind:

1.Ascertain the purpose of you client

2.Pre-work
3.3. Write-up
1. Ascertain the purpose of you client
What: Try to understand client’s real problem.
1. Does he merely want to know his rights?
2. Does he have to make an important decision that could
have deep repercussions for him and others?
3. Is he facing a potential lawsuit?
The lawyer must go deep into his reason for seeking opinion.
Why? Because the client could be posing the wrong question
and consequently, the lawyer could be giving him the wrong
answers.
In case of doubt

• Refrain from giving an opinion or that you make it

very clear to the client that the opinion you give
might be the wrong one for her.
2. Pre-work

• Get all the facts you need for forming a competent opinion
• How?
• Go over all the materials you got from your client;
• Ascertain the legal dispute involved; and
• Put down into writing the principal issues it produces;
• Make a summary of the relevant facts of the case and put
them in correct sequence.
• Identify the issues that have to be resolved and rough out
the arguments that support your thesis.
3. Write-up

• Introduce the issues.

• How: By providing the background facts that are
needed to understand those issues. Summarize
for him the facts on which you rely in rendering
your opinion.
• Purpose: To prevent misunderstanding with your
client.
Chan vs. Century Bank
Substance must meet minimum requirements
of contents:

1. Background facts that adequately introduce the issues in the

case;
2. A statement of what those issues are;
3. Position you take on the issues;
4. The arguments that may be made against you;
5. The arguments in your favor; and
6. What you want your reader to do under the circumstances.
1a. Background facts . . .

On May 12, 2008 you applied with the Century Bank in

Binondo, Manila in behalf of Milan Furniture Co., for a
letter of credit covering its importation of hardwood from
Vietnam.
On arrival of the goods, the bank agreed to advance the
payment of the price . . .
You also signed a trust receipt covering receipt of the
goods.
1b. that adequately introduce the issues

• Because Milan Furniture had been unable to pay its

promissory note to the bank when it fell due, the bank
sent you a demand letter requesting full payment of the
debt.
• Since further negotiations also failed, the bank sent you
a final demand for payment under a threat of filing a
criminal complaint for estafa involving the trust receipt
that you executed in its favor.
2. Statement of issues

• The question you pose is whether or not, under the

above facts, you may be held liable for:
Estafa under PD 115, the Trust Receipt Law in relation to
Section 1 (b) of Art 315 of the Revised Penal Code.
3. Position you take on the issues

In my opinion, since the bank opted not to accept the

goods even when you offered to return them, it should be
deemed to have . . . Altogether removing the transaction
from the coverage of Section 13 of the Trust Receipt Law.
With legal basis
I base my opinion on the following:
The relevant provisions of PD 115 provides:
Sec. 13 . Penalty clause –
The related provisions of Section 1 (b) of Art 315 of the
Revised Penal Code, under which the violation is made to
fall, states:
Art 315. Swindling (estafa) –
From the above, the following are the elements of estafa
involving a trust receipt:
1.
2.
Application of the law to the facts

• The Trust Receipt Law states that the liability for estafa arises in
case of “the failure of an . . .
• In this case, the trust receipt echoes the above provisions. Under
it
4. The arguments that may be made against you;
5. The arguments in your favor; and

• The essence of the crime of conversion or misappropriation

is that the offender to whom money or goods has been
entrusted has unfaithfully or with abuse of confidence
failed to return what was merely entrusted to him and
appropriated it for his own. Here, neither Milan Furniture
nor you could be considered as such since Century did not
want those goods bank. Therefore, liability should be
considered purely civil.
• Section 13 does not embrace instances where the goods
are turned over by the entrustor to the entrustee for the
latter’s use in his own business. This is clear from the
ruling of the Supreme Court in Colinares vs. Court of
Appeals that reads:
6. What you want your reader to do under
the circumstances.

• Sine the transaction was a loan, Milan Furniture’s liability to

Century Bank should only be regarded as civil. The criminal action
against you must fail. It is but fair and the investigating prosecutor
or the court should see the point.
• A word of reservation: I base my opinion on the language of the
law involved as well as on settled judicial precedents. But, in the
event the bank files a criminal complaint against you, there is a
chance, however small, that the public prosecutor may just
decide to file it in court, subjecting you to hassle, expense and
risk that criminal trials entails.
In Sum

• Facts
• Issues
• Position
• Arguments
• Conclusion
“LAW IS BASED ON WISDOM BUT LAW IS NOT
WISDOM.”