MAX SHOOP

FACTS:

Max Shoop made an application to the US Supreme court for his admission to practice law in the
PH Islands under Paragraph 4 of RECAPL. Shoop has evidence via supporting papers showing that the
applicant has been admitted to practice, and has practiced for more than 5 years in the highest courts of
NY.

RULES according to RECALP: Applicant for admission who (a) have been admitted to practice in
the SC of US, or any circuit court of appleals or district courts, or in highest court, which (b) State or
territory by comity convers the same privilege on attorneys admitted to practice in the PH Islands, and
who can (c) show by satisfactory affidavits that they have practiced atleast 5 years in any of said courts
may, (d) in the discretion of the court, be admitted without examination

Rule above requires NYS by comity to admit without examination attorneys admitted to practice in
the PH Island (meaning PH Lawyers can also be admitted to practice in US the same way US lawyers are
admitted to practice here)

 Additional requirement of NY couers in admitting without examination: (a) practiced 5 years in

another country, (b) whose jurisprudence is based on principles of English Common Law
 Based on this rule, one PH lawyer was admitted and one was not (this being the most recent)

ISSUE:

Whether or not under the NY rule as it exists the principle of comity is established.

RULING:

WHAT IS COMMON LAW?

Common law basis in the US: (1) NYC in referring to a jurisdiction whose jurisprudence is based
on English Common Law, uses the phrase as a general sense (some states practice common laws, but
some states have been establishing codified laws by means of jurisprudence), (2) such Common Law
may become the basis of jurisprudence by decision of the courts where practical considerations and
effects of sovereignty gives ground for such a decision. If, in the PH, English Common Law principles as
embodied in the Anglo-American jurisprudence are used and applied by courts to the extent that such CL
principles are not in conflict with local written laws, customs, and institutions, and there is no foreign case
law system used to any substantial extent, then it is proper to say in the sense of NY rile that the
“jurisprudence” of PH is based on English Common Law.

COMMON LAW IN THE PH (This is needed so that principle in comity may come to fulfillment)

…”while certain rule was universally recognized and applied in courts of England and US, it was
not the law in the PH Islands”, nevertheless, many of rules and principles and doctrines of Common Law,
been imported to this jurisdiction.

“What we really have, if we were not too modest to claim It is a Philippine Common Law,
influence by the English and American Common Law, the derecho comun of Spain and the customary
law of the Islands and builded on a new case of precedents.”
  A survey of recent Philippine Reports shows increasing reliance upon English and American
authorities in formation of what can be called PH Common Law, as SUPPLEMENTAL to the
statute law of this jurisdiction.

PHILIPPINE STATUTE LAW

During the Spanish era, the PH was a solidly codified (19th century). There was no properly called
Common Law or Case Law of Spain to accompany and amplify statutes given to the PH. “The Partidas” is
a code and cannot be considered Common Law. It specifically provided, however, for recourse to
customs when the written law was silent.

SPANISH STATUTE LAW

By mere fact of the change of sovereignty, all portions of the statute law, which might be termed
political law, were ABROGATED immediately by change of sovereignty. Also, Spanish laws, customs and
rights of property inconsistent with the Constitution and American principles and institution were
thereupon SUPERSEDED.

CASES UNDER AMERCAN DERIVED STATUTE

This court has repeatedly held that in dealing with the cases, which arise under such statute law,
the court will be governed by the Anglo-American cases in construction and application. In the application
of those statutes in the many cases, which come before the court, there is bound to be developed as
substantial common law. THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT IT EXISTS. THE QUESTION LIES WITH ITS
EXTENT AND SOURCE.

CASES UNDER SPANISH STATUTES

“The foregoing two groups of combination, those under the subjects covered by Spanish statutes
and those subjects convered by American-PH legislation and effected by the change of sovereignty, show
conclusively that Anglo-American case law has formed the sole basis for guidance of this court in
developing the local jurisprudence.

The past 20 years have developed a Philippine Common Law or Case Law based almost
exclusively, except where conflicting with local customs and institutions, upon A-A Common law, The
Philippine Common Law supplements and amplifies our statutes.

CONCLUSION (FINALLY!!!!)

(2) In interpreting and applying the bulk of written laws of this jurisdiction, this court relies
upon theories and precedents of Anglo-American cases, subject to the limited exception where
remnants of Spanish Law present well-defined civil law theories and where such precedents are
inconsistent with local custims and institutions.

(3) Jurisprudence of this court is based on English Common Law/Anglo-American Law to

its almost exclusive extent

(4) NY rule, given a reasonable interpretation, permits conferring privileges on attorneys

admitted to practice in the PH Islands similar to those privileges accorded by the rule of this
court. (PRINCIPLE OF COMITY IS FULFILLED)