You are on page 1of 2

MCQ on Legal Ethics 1. Due to sour relationship between Atty.

Masigasig and his driver Max, Max reported to the IBP that Atty. Masigasig, although single, has 3 common-law wives whom he visited on intervals. Decide whether Max may validly file a complaint before the IBP for proper disciplinary action against Atty. Masigasig ? a. no. Max has no cause action against Atty. Masigasig for having 3 common-law wives b. no. Max is not the aggrieved party in that relationship c. Yes. disciplinary action against a lawyer is sui generies d. Yes, the good moral character of a lawyer is a continuing requirement. Hence, any breach thereof is a ground for disciplinary action 1.1 To depend Atty. Masigasig, the 3 common-law wives executes a joint affidavit stating that they are not interested in prosecuting Atty. Masigasig and that they are happy and contented with their relationship. How would such affidavit be treated ? a. as evidence to proved that Atty. Masigasig had not offended the 3 wives b. as evidence to proved that their relationship was established under mutual consent c. as evidence of the existence of 3 common-law relationship d. as a ground for the dismissal of the action against Atty. Masigasig 1.2 35 years old, single, Atty. X was retained by alta sociada matrona and widow Dona Maldita as her family counsel. Due to loads of paper works, the daughter of Dona Maldita, Melody, have to visit the office of Atty. X to fetch the documents for signature of Dona Maldita. The constant meeting of the two blossoms into a love affair which finally landed in a marriage ceremony in HongKong because Melody is under age under the family code and to avoid from Dona Malditas knowledge. The marriage was performed despite of the secret love affairs between the lawyer and Dona Maldita. Comment on the actuation of Atty. X a. it is an unethical conduct. Having a love affair with a mother and her daughter is not acceptable in the present society; b. such conduct should not be tolerated. It is against the norm of an ordinary person, more so of a lawyer c. the act of the lawyer is proper and moral. He being single has the privilege to choose who will be his partner in life d. the act is morally upright. Both parties are single. And if there is an error, it is the age of the woman which is waivable by herself and does not affect the actuation of Atty. X. 2. Judge Magpantay was designated by the SC as the RTC presiding judge. On May 5, 2010. he filed a leave, which was approved, for he was summoned to attend a whole day investigation by the senate in aid of legislation. Unfortunately, the investigation was deferred to May 10, 2010. and forgot to file a leave of absence when he appeared on that date. Decide. a. he is considered absent from his post on May 10, 2010 due to failure to file a leave b. he is considered on leave due to his approved leave on May 5, 2010 c. he is considered absent on May 10, 2010 due to failure to report to work d. he is considered on leave on May 10, 2010 as an extension of his approved leave 3. Atty. X was hired by the DCWD as its private retained counsel for 1 year. In one case attended by him in behalf of the DCWD, his opposing counsel move to expunged his pleadings on the ground that he is a private practitioner. Decide. a. the court should expunged his pleading because he is not authorized to represent the DCWD b. the court should expunged his pleading because it was not signed by the solicitor general c. his pleadings should not be expunged because he can validly represent the DCWD due to the employment contract good for 1 year. d. his appearance as counsel is valid as a retained counsel of the DCWD 4. Finding that there was a probable cause, the prosecutor filed information before the court. After arraignment, the accused file a motion for suspension of the trial due to his appeal before the DOJ of the resolution of the prosecutor. The court suspended the trial and finally the DOJ reversed the findings of the prosecutor and a motion to withdraw the case is filed and granted without asserting on the judge whether there is a ground for dismissal. Hence, a witness for the prosecution is asking you whether he could file an administrative complaint against the judge?

a. no. as witness, he has no lucos standi to file an administrative complaint in regards to the case b. no. as witness, he is not considered as party-in-interest c. yes. as witness or any person has the capacity to institute administrative complaint against any employee of the judiciary to determine whether such employee breach the standard norm d. yes. as a witness, he can institute an administrative complaint against the judge. He is affected by such actuation