A.

5 LAWYERS THAT ARE WORTH EMULATING: THEIR LEGAL CAREERS AND

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

1. Gloria Allred 
o An American women’s rights attorney notable for taking high-profile and often
controversial cases, particularly those involving the protection of women’s rights and
have even won hundreds of millions of dollars for victims. She’s also the current
president of the Women’s Equal Rights Legal Defense and Education Fund
(WERLDEF). She’s also a major leader among the feminist movement.

o She’s among other lawyers who represent victims who’ve been discriminated against by
their age, sex, race, physical handicap or even sexual orientation. Her firm also stands
for victims of AIDS discrimination, sexual harassment and wrongful termination. In
addition, she’s well known for the work she’s done for victims in sexual assault, child
sexual abuse, rape, and battered women cases. 

2. Miriam Defensor Santiago

o She earned the degree, Doctor of Juridical Science, in the United States. The first
Filipino and the first Asian from a developing country, to be elected in the United
Nations as judge of the International Criminal Court. 

o She was chosen as Laureate of the Magsaysay Award for Government Service, known
as the Asian equivalent of the Nobel Prize. She was cited “for bold and moral leadership
in cleaning up a graft-ridden government agency.” She was named one of “The 100
Most Powerful Women in the World” by The Australian magazine.

o Dr. Santiago holds an amazing record of excellence in all three branches of government
– judicial, executive, and legislative. In the judicial branch, she has been presiding judge
of the Regional Trial Court at Quezon City. In the executive branch, she has been an
immigration commissioner; and a cabinet member being the agrarian reform secretary.
In the legislative branch, she served as a senator for three terms.

o Dr. Santiago also worked abroad where she served as legal officer of the United Nations
in Geneva, Switzerland. She was also a consultant of the Philippine embassy in
Washington, D.C.

3. Abraham Lincoln
o He was an American statesman and lawyer who served as the 16th president of the
United States from March 1861 until his assassination in April 1865. Lincoln led the
nation through the American Civil War, its bloodiest war and its greatest moral,
constitutional, and political crisis. He preserved the Union, abolished slavery,
strengthened the federal government, and modernized the U.S. economy.

o Born in Kentucky, Lincoln grew up on the frontier in a poor family. Self-educated, he

became a lawyer, Whig Party leader, Illinois state legislator and Congressman. In 1849,
he left government to resume his law practice, but angered by the success of Democrats
in opening the prairie lands to slavery, reentered politics in 1854. He became a leader in
the new Republican Party and gained national attention in 1858 for debating national
Democratic leader Stephen A. Douglas in the 1858 Illinois Senate campaign. He then
ran for President in 1860, sweeping the North and winning. Southern pro-slavery
elements took his win as proof that the North was rejecting the constitutional rights of
Southern states to practice slavery. They began the process of seceding from the union.
To secure its independence, the new Confederate States of America fired on Fort
Sumter, one of the few U.S. forts in the South. Lincoln called up volunteers and militia
to suppress the rebellion and restore the Union.
 o As the leader of the moderate faction of the Republican Party, Lincoln confronted
Radical Republicans, who demanded harsher treatment of the South; War Democrats,
who rallied a large faction of former opponents into his camp; anti-war Democrats
(called Copperheads), who despised him; and irreconcilable secessionists, who plotted
his assassination. Lincoln fought the factions by pitting them against each other, by
carefully distributing political patronage, and by appealing to the American people. His
Gettysburg Address became an iconic call for nationalism, republicanism, equal rights,
liberty, and democracy. He suspended habeas corpus, and he averted British
intervention by defusing the Trent Affair. Lincoln closely supervised the war effort,
including the selection of generals and the naval blockade that shut down the South's
trade. As the war progressed, he maneuvered to end slavery, issuing the Emancipation
Proclamation of 1863; ordering the Army to protect escaped slaves, encouraging border
statesto outlaw slavery, and pushing through Congress the Thirteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution, which outlawed slavery across the country.

o Lincoln managed his own re-election campaign. He sought to reconcile his damaged
nation by avoiding retribution against the secessionists. A few days after the Battle of
Appomattox Court House, he was shot by John Wilkes Booth, an actor and Confederate
sympathizer, on April 14, 1865, and died the following day. Abraham Lincoln is
remembered as the United States' martyr hero. He is consistently ranked both by
scholars and the public as among the greatest U.S. presidents.

4. Ruth Bader Ginsburg

o Ruth Bader Ginsburg was one of the first few women who were able to attend Law
School in the United States of America. She initially enrolled in Harvard Law, but later
transferred and graduated from Columbia University.  She excelled academically,
despite the obstacle of toxic masculinity and the patriarchal view of who should be able
to study and practice law. She is an incumbent associate justice of the Supreme Court of
America. 
o She is a staunch courtroom advocate for the fair treatment of women and worked with
the ACLU’s Women’s Rights Project. She started and won numerous cases that
questioned oppressive laws against women, slowly breaking the glass ceiling for women
through the changes she forced upon the law. 

o Ginsburg is a revolutionary. If the practice of law is meant to be something, what she

did as a lawyer is worth emulating. She studied the law, learned how it applied, and saw
imperfections to it. Then, she began to change it through her practice. Her practice of
law was geared towards making a huge impact to the lives of as many people as possible
through fighting for equality. This selfless practice of law, I think, is worth emulating. 

5. Antonio A. Oposa, Jr.

o Antonio A. Oposa, Jr. is an activist for environmental legislation. He is well-known for

his legal work establishing the right to sue on behalf of future generations to stop
environmental dama.

B. 15 SKILLS OR COMPETENCIES NEEDED TO BE GLOBALLY COMPETITIVE AS

A LAWYER ESPECIALLY IN THE LIGHT OF ASEAN INTEGRATION

1. Finely tuned collaborative skills

In today’s world of economic integration and easy access across countries, a lawyer must also
have finely tuned collaborative skills, which does not merely means the ability to work within teams
but the capacity to work with other professional disciplines. 
2. Financial Literacy
3. Management Skills
4. Culture Sensitivity
Add too financial literacy and management skills (planning, organizing and utilizing resources),
as well as culture sensitivity.

5. Capacity to Confront Issues

Ultimately, a lawyer must have the capacity to confront issues not merely from the black-and-
white legalities but also from the perspective of the corporation or organization (or community) he is a
part of.

6. Specialization
Instead of being a generalist, lawyer is required to be a specialist in a particular area of law i.e.
advertising or trademark – and the specialized area of law has to be cross jurisdictional boundaries.

7. Consideration of Conflicts
The lawyer needs to consider the conflicts between these different levels of law and the extent
to which each applies in place of, reinforces or displaces the other due to the fact that ASEAN has not
yet harmonised law.
8. English Skills
If you are a non-native speaking lawyer, to compete globally you will need English speaking
skills. Efforts on English should be for both English in general and international legal English.

9. Competitive
10. Flexible
Lawyers must be competitive at all times. They need to be flexible to move into new
jurisdictions and to new area of practice according to the changing need of the market forces.

11. Global Mind set

Lawyers who constantly work with professionals, clients, and other parties in many countries
can help clients navigate the many challenges of doing business in a global environment by having a
global mindset.

12. Outsourcing
Lawyers must have the ability to successfully outsource to deliver the best services, we must
find the best service providers and combine what they can offer with the best of what lawyers can
offer. 

13. Understand Analytics

The ability of understanding analytics does not mean being able to take 10% off an invoice for
legal services. The world is awash in data and by 2020 we will have as many as 1 trillion inter-
connected devices talking to each other.

14. Focus on Solutions

15. Identify and Implement
Lastly, see what works across the globe and adapt it; focus on solutions, not regulatory barriers; and
collaborate with technologists, process experts, and other ‘non-lawyers’ to identify and implement
more accessible, efficient, and cost effective ways to deliver legal services. 

C. EXPECTATIONS FROM THE SUBJECT LEGAL PROFESSION

1. For me, legal profession as a course is as crucial as bar subjects in that it lays down the
qualifications of a good lawyer. As a student, grasping the qualities of a good lawyer is tantamount
to eagerly learning the provisions of the law. Furthermore, I expect the subject of legal profession
to introduce me to the real nature and purpose of the practice of law. In the forthcoming classes, I
 hope that I would eventually be able to instill in myself, the fundamental ethical and moral
obligations of a lawyer to the court, to the client and to the society. 
2. This course shall enable every student to comprehend the pertinent ethical standards necessary for
every lawyer to embody all throughout in their legal career. Not just merely learning the legal
concepts, but knowing the code of conduct that every lawyer must abide in the performance of
their duties and obligations. Moreover, I expect that the course of legal profession would introduce
me further to the realities of being a legal practitioner.  
3. Bearing in mind that the practice of law entails ethics, professionalism, and importantly,
discipline, this subject would be the most adequate course to help aspiring lawyers to exercise and
practice aforementioned virtues. My expectation for this course is that it would be able to give us,
not just a surface value knowledge of what lawyering is, but actually embodying the needed
characteristic for a lawyer, and how to effectively practice it to help society as a whole. 
4. This subject, Legal Profession will ultimately give me a solid foundation as to what it means to
practice law and what it truly means to be an ethical, competent lawyer. Often times core values
are forgotten in favor of more stringent subjects. The Legal Profession course will bring us back to
the core of good lawyering --- not merely an extensive knowledge of the law, but also the idea of
creating a positive impact to society. 
5. To be able to firm my professionalism in a way that it sets a standard and fulfil those qualifications
to be recognized as a whole on what role I am going to play as a lawyer in the near future to the
contemporary world. Thus, professionalism indeed needs a strong foundation to be able to function
properly and this class will be a great instrument to help me.
6. This class will teach me the essence of legal profession. This will teach us lawyer’s duty in the
legal profession. This class will instill in us the basic traits and skills needed to be a respectable
and honorable lawyers we aspire to be.

D. EXPECTATIONS FROM USC COLLEGE OF LAW

1. USC College of Law will give me the best legal education there is to offer that will equip me
with the necessary knowledge to top the Bar Exams. The edge USC Law has over the rest of the
law schools is what drew me to it --- not only does it produce brilliant lawyers, it also produces
empathetic and socially responsive lawyers. 
2. Being one of the most prestigious universities in the Philippines, I expect USC law to produce
students who are not only capable of passing the bar, but would eventually become good
lawyers who are devoted to the profession. Thus, I expect that USC law’s training would not
simply be bar-oriented, but would also put great weight in molding their students’ characters as
future lawyers. 
3. I am looking forward that this institution shall mold its law students into a competent lawyers
being a life-long learners that fulfills and extends its duties and obligations beyond the walls of
the institution. Moreover, USC Law shall illuminate its students to carry on the essentials of a
Carolinian identity; virtus, scientia and devotio at all times and more particularly, as we
immerse ourselves into the realities of being a legal practitioner. 

4. This university, specifically, USC law is a pioneering school that produces competent lawyers
and provide society a competent law defenders, and I seek and expect to become one of the
lawyers being molded by this university and become competent enough due to the legal
education given by this law school. I am looking forward to graduate such prestigious
university who is known to be one of the best law schools in the country.

5. USC will help me learn how to maintain poise under great pressure. This school will help me
practice and master the art of knowing, interpreting and applying the law. USC will mold me
into becoming a lawyer who is not afraid to make a stand on something I believe in. 

E. SHORT-TERM GOALS (1 YEAR) & LONG-TERM GOALS (4 YEARS) IN LAW SCHOOL.

 1. The most practicable and achievable short-term goal for me is to be able to fully adjust to the
new environment and working conditions, so as to consider it as conducive to thriving academic
endeavors.  
Since passing and graduating from law school is already a given Holy Grail, the most
significant long-term goal for me is to intensively and extensively comprehend the language of
the law. By this, I mean to transcend the bounds of merely knowing the law’s provisions and,
with ardour, assimilate the very essence of the law in our day-to-day undertakings. In 4 year’s
time, I would like to see myself apply my knowledge and understanding of the law and that I
would already be equipped to practice what I have learned. 

2. The most straightforward way in pursuing this short-term goals is to be able to fully analyze the
strategic ways on how to think like a lawyer and to understand the law itself. Also, it is deemed
beneficial to build an active rapport of collaboration from the people who strive for excellence
from the beginning up to the end. 
In addition, long-term goals involves an act to make an end in this prestigious institution with a
degree that set forth me in making use of my acquired skills and capabilities. To continuously
give life to the law itself by not just a means of passive understanding and comprehension but in
a more in-depth analysis in the application of its intent in accordance to what is just and right.

3. Growing up and finishing under-graduate study without good study habits really took a toll on
me, especially that law school is not something where stock knowledge wins; you actually, and
should really study religiously. So for the first year in law school, I would try my best to help
myself build good study habits. Explore on how I can maximize these study habits and try to
constantly avoid unnecessary activities.

That being a short-term goal, it warrants, of course, a long-term goal, for me not just be a mere
dictionary of laws and legal principles, I should be able to apply it. For that to happen, I will
consider every single day a learning experience, and synthesize this knowledge to further my
understanding of things and be better, at most, best, on my day to day dealing as a law student
and a lawyer in the future. 

4. Short-term goals: To let go of my bad study habits and to develop my diligence and ability to
comprehend my lessons. 
Long- term goals:  To be able to establish a system that allows me to absorb as much
knowledge as I can and to master my lessons in order to prepare myself for the Bar Exam. 

5. Short-term goals: To learn the art of time management and be able to balance different aspects
of my life.
Long-term goals: To learn about the law without taking any shortcuts.

F. HOW WILL YOU ACHIEVE THE FOREGOING GOALS?

Aside from establishing good time management skills and study habits, I would strive to
maintain my motivation, if not fuel it more in the long run. Along with this is to gather perseverance
and resilience, since these can be used as my leverage if I were to enduringly persist in law school. 
Among all things in pursuing these goals, it is very important to stay focused on the journey.
Distractions will always be there, but it’s a matter of establishing a firm walls that will help you get out
of unwanted habits that may hamper your determination in making it towards the end law school. 
The only thing I need to do to achieve these goals is to constantly push myself to do better. I need
to focus on how badly I want to be a part of this prestigious profession and all the responsibilities it
entails. 

G. WHAT SKILLS AND QUALITIES ARE NEEDED TO SUCCEED IN LAW SCHOOL?

Law school is the primary grounds that set forth every law student in engaging themselves to
lawyering. It will train you on how to approach the law in a manner for you to “think like a lawyer” and
to learn the law on your own. In order to succeed in law school, you must be able to firmly establish the
necessary skills and qualities that every law student must embrace. The following are divided into three
categories: before, during and after classes. 

1. PREPARING FOR CLASS

Prior to class, effective class preparation requires active reading and active writing.
Active reading asserts that you are able to fully understand the legal doctrines you’re reading and you
were able to distinguish the relevant facts and those which are not. Moreover, this entails that you get
the gist in a clear and unambiguous manner the doctrines you are reading. 

In addition, active writing involves that you are able to annotate the casebook based on your
own understanding by highlighting the important language or key principles. This also suggests that
you paraphrase all these concepts out from your understanding. 

The common ground in between your preparation for class is for you to understand the legal
doctrine, able to use it and to extend your knowledge of legal doctrine in your own interpretation. 

2. DURING CLASS

The core and most important thing to do to succeed in law school is to attend classes as it is a
must and obligatory duty to perform. During classes, be an active listener where you must instill every
legal concept gathered from the discussions and not just being a passive listener. Besides, you must
also practice note-taking habits in which you just don’t simply transcribe the lectures but rather
paraphrasing it within on your own understanding.

Furthermore, at classes you will not only be trained how to think like a lawyer but also it will
prepare you how to communicate like a lawyer. 

First, be organized. Only state one fact at a time and it is very significant to create a linear arguments. 
Second, be precise. Make use of precise language and legal terms applicable to the context. 
Lastly, be concise. Answer directly the questions being asked and avoid making irrelevant arguments. 

3. AFTER CLASS

Struggles in law school, don’t just happen before and during classes but as well after classes. 
It is beneficial to review and organize your notes because this will help you reveal the relevant points
you missed during the discussion. Additionally, you also need to reread the relevant assigned reading
materials in order to resolve the complexity of the ambiguous concepts.

H. WHAT ARE YOUR TRAITS OR ATTITUDES THAT SHOULD BE MINIMIZED, IF NOT,

AVOIDED IN LAW SCHOOL?

 CRAMMING

As a law student, you should learn how to properly manage your time. Pulling an all nighter will
not work. Learn how to manage your time well and learn to find the balance between work and play.

 SKIMMING

In law school, every word matters. As much as possible, practice the habit of reading full text cases
for you to be able to analyze and understand concepts, principles, doctrines and even judicial decisions.

 DON’T ASSUME THE MEANING

 When you read about the law or the law itself, never assume the meaning of a word to be same as
its ordinary meaning. Sometimes words have their own legal meaning that is totality different from its
ordinary meaning.

SUMMARY: CHAPTER I- INTRODUCTION

 
1.    INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL PROFESSION
 
The legal profession is a very vital element in nation building since there is no progress in a
country without a rule of law.
 
·      Legal Profession as Affected with Public Interest
It is a branch of the administration of justice whose main purpose is to uphold justice
according to law between state and the individual and among themselves. Hence, legal
profession is affected with public interest.
 
·      Role of Lawyers in the Society
They are regarded as leaders of the community or someone whom they can ask for help
or support. Since every layman is ought to know the law, lawyers are indispensable part of the
community. Men and women from all walks of life seek his advice and his assistance.
 
·      Opportunities in Law
A lawyer has a diversity of opportunities awaiting him. In the government, lawyers
enjoy first grade civil service liability. Military and police personnel take up law for career
advancement. Lawyers can also be found in businesses occupying top executive positions.
 
·      Commons Misconceptions about Lawyers and the Legal Profession
Though looked up to by community, many do not necessarily like them. They are
categorized as big-mouthed crocodiles waiting for a pray for a “Judas” willing to sell his master
for some silver coins. There are some who are a disgrace to the profession, but they do not
embody the entire population.
Another misconception is that there are too many lawyers in the Philippines and a
majority of them are engaged in governmental affairs. Some contend that their contradicting
opinions about issues hinder their task to frame programs for the country’s development.
Nonetheless, lawyers will always respect their right to say it, regardless of how erroneous their
contentions may be.
 
2.    NATURE OF AN ATTORNEY
 
Also called an advocate or counsel, an attorney aids in the administration of justice. “Attorney”
generally refers to a class of persons who are constituted officers of courts of justice and empowered to
appear, prosecute and defend someone. In short, an attorney is a person set apart by the laws of the land
relating to the high interest of life, liberty and property.
 
As an advocate of justice, he must administer it regardless of political, social, economic or
religious stations in life of the parties. A lawyer should dissociate himself from the facts of the case and
keep himself beyond the influences of the litigants since his primary purpose is to uphold the truth.
 
However, the cause of the parties does not insinuate resort to foul tactics or outright falsehoods.
Rather, he must carry on the practical and formal parts of the suit and proclaim what is right. As earlier
mentioned, the first and foremost duty of a lawyer is the administration of justice and his duty to his
client is subordinate to that. It is important that he is not an insurer of the result in a case in which he is
employed.
 
3.    LEGAL PROFESSION AS A SUBJECT
 
 Since the real nature, purpose and legal profession has not been given much attention by law
schools, additional significant courses were added in order to stress the moral responsibility expected
of every lawyer. These are Legal Profession, Legal Counseling and Problem Areas in Legal Ethics.
These three subjects introduce a law student the ethical and moral obligations of a lawyer to the court,
to his client, to his colleagues in the bar and to the society.
 
4.     BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LEGAL EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES
 
·      1733: Legal Education in the Philippines began with the establishment of Faculty of Civil Law
at UST.
·      1898: The Universidad Literia Filipinas was established in Malolos, Bulacan and offered
courses in law and notary public.
·      1899: Don Felipe Calderon founded the Escuela de Derecho de Manila
 
From then on, other law schools followed.
 
·      1911: only educational requirements for a law profession were a high school degree as a pre-
law and a three-year law course.
·      Later, the pre-law requisite was increased to two years of college studies in addition to a high
school degree. I
·      1960, the Supreme Court increased the pre-law requisite to four-year bachelor’s degree in arts
and science and the law course to four years of legal studies.
 
The four-year law course put emphasis on the bar subjects listed under Sec. 6, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court as well as non-bar subjects.
 
·      1989: the Department of Education Culture and Sports adopted a revised model curriculum
composed of 51 subjects which took effect in 1990.
·      1964: RA No. 3870 created the University of the Philippines Law Center.
·      1993: RA No. 7662 or the Legal Education Act was enacted to emphasize on the areas of
advocacy, counseling, ethics and nobility of the legal profession, bench-bar partnership,
selection of law students, quality of law schools, the law faculty as well as the law curriculum.
The Legal Education Board was likewise created.
 
The latest update on legal education is the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education program for
members of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, which requires members of the bar to pursue further
studies and update themselves with the current laws and jurisprudence.

CHAPTER II – THE STUDY OF LAW

A SUMMARY

1. Reasons and implications in the study of law

There are various reasons as to why individuals take up courses in law. One thing, however, is
to be kept in mind to succeed in the study of law is to love it. 

Whatever the reason behind students’ enrollment in the college of law is already besides the
point as they are already in the battle. The method of instruction is far more different compared to other
fields of study. Law professors expect students already have knowledge on the subject matter, thus they
would usually test the students’ knowledge on the lesson immediately. The discussion  in law school is
not to teach students’ the law but test the students knowledge on the subject matter. The rationale for
this one is for the student to depend on their research, analysis, and study on the subject matter, not on
their professor’s lectures. The professor will only supply deficiency. 
 In law school, you enter the premises of a law school, to learn how to study the law, and not
solely to learn the laws. If one intends to do the latter, it would take his entire lifetime. The Congress
pass legislation from time to time to conform with the complexities of modern life, thus law schools
don’t teach their students to learn the law, but to study it. A lawyer is bound to study the law in order to
keep himself abreast with the current legislation. At the same time, he is duty-bound to update himself
with current jurisprudence rendered by the Supreme court.

In a nutshell, the study of law demands much of your attention.

2. Basic skills and qualities required in the study of law

Let us start with the proper attitude as this will have a great bearing in his preparation for the bar
examinations.

a. Dreams/Ambitions
A student should dream to become a lawyer. This will serve as his energy in taking day-
to-day tasks. There is no place for half-heartedness in law school.

b. Perseverance
A law student must be determined to hurdle the bar even if it will take a great degree of
sacrifice for his part. Those less important activities should be taken at the sideline.

c. Patience
Studying law requires a great degree of patience. But if he is patient and taking his
everyday activities in school at a time with full concentration, it will definitely bring him to the
ladder of success. 
In every professional endeavor, dreams, perseverance, and patience are required to become
successful. You have to experience the pain of rigorous study, in order to gain ample skills in legal
studies. As they say, “no pain, no gain”.

Basic tools one must have to study law and pass bar examinations are provided by Dean
Fortunato Gupit in his article “How to be a lawyer”, namely, Language, Logic, and Law.

a. Language is the tool of the law. It is the instrument by which you understand, analyze and
express the law.
b. Logic or Critical Analysis is very important in the study of law. You need to accurately
evaluate a certain state of facts using your logical analysis, you are trekking the right path. This
goes hand in hand with language.

c. Law is the only tool in the law study that one will learn in law school. One has to keep reading
and reading to keep himself abreast with the current legislations and jurisprudence on the
country. 

3. Study of law, a serious matter

From all what have been mentioned above, the study of law is not an easy task but is rather a
serious and difficult matter. It entails a great deal of sacrifice. One must be ready to spend sleepless
nights to do all the things necessary to pass the bar examinations. Always live by the motto that
lawyers are made, not born.
 10 SUPREME COURT CASE DIGESTS WHICH DISCUSSES THE PRACTICE OF LAW
AND THE OBJECTIVES OF LEGAL PROFESSION

DAYAN STA. ANA CHRISTIAN NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION, INC VS. ESPIRITU

FACTS:
Complainants sought the services of respondent in November 1997. They were being sued in
their respective capacities as officers and members of the association. The complainants lost but
respondent advised them to file a supersedeas bond to stay their eviction. Complainants entrusted him a
total of P207,162 but deposited only P48,000 before the Clerk of Court as evidenced by receipts.
Genato demanded for the return of the remaining balance upon which respondent delivered a check for
P141,904 in the name of Atty. Leonardo Ocampo. The check bounced but Ocampo demanded Genato
to make good the payment of the check. Nonetheless, Genato continued to make verbal demands for
the payment, to no avail. The association thus sought the help of IBP. Through Atty. Cabasal,
respondent was demanded to return the remaining balance. An information-charging respondent with
estafa was likewise filed before the RTC of Manila.
 
ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent may be disbarred pursuant to Rule 16.01 of Canon 16 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility for depositing receiving funds from complainants and deposited only
P48,481 with the Clerk of Court.
 
RULING:
It is clear that respondent misappropriated the money, which his clients had entrusted to him
and such act cannot be countenanced. Rule 16.01 of Canon 16 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility provides that a lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for
or form his client. A lawyer should be scrupulously careful in handling money entrusted to him in his
professional capacity, because a high degree of fidelity and good faith on his part is exacted.
 
However, the power to disbar must be exercised with great caution, and only in a clear case of
misconduct that seriously affects the standing and character of a lawyer as an officer f the Court and
member of the bar. In this case, the Court finds that one-year suspension from the practice of law will
suffice as penalty against respondent.

WHEREFORE, Atty. Napoleon Espiritu is guilty of violating the Code of Professional

Responsibility. Accordingly, he is penalized with SUSPENSION from the practice of law for One Year
effective immediately.

LEE YICK HON VS. INSULAR COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS

FACTS: 
This is an appeal by the Insular Collector of Customs from the action of the CFI of Manila in
imposing upon him a fine of P50 for an alleged contempt of court. 

On July 23, 1920, a petition for the writ of habeas corpus was filed in the CFI of Manila by one
Lee Yick Hon. He alleged that he had lately arrived from China at the port of Manila with a view to
entering the Philippine Islands, but was prevented from doing so by the Insular Collector of Customs,
who was detaining him for deportation. 
 Upon the presiding in Sala IV of said court, cited the collector to appear and show cause in
writing why the writ of habeas corpus should not be issued as prayed. Citation was served at about 11
a.m., at which house arrangement had already been perfected for the deportation of Lee Yick Hon on a
boat scheduled to leave Manila for Hongkong at noon on the same day; 

Insular Collector failed to countermand the order for his embarcation on that boat. Lee Yick Hon was
deported within two or three hours after the Insular Collector had been served with the citation to show
cause in the habeas corpus proceeding. Contempt proceedings were instituted against the Insular
Collector. CFI Manila imposed him a fine of P50.

ISSUE:

Whether or not any lawful writ, process, order, judgment or command of the court or judge
below was disobeyed or resisted by the appellant. 

HELD:

None. The citation that was served upon the appellant required him to appear at a stated time in
the CFI of Manila and show cause if any there might be, why the writ prayed for should not issue. 

Citation was literally complied with when, on July 30, 1920, the Attorney-General, on behalf of
the Insular Collector, filed his answer.  The sole ground relied upon to sustain the judgment finding the
appellant guilty to contempt is that by allowing Lee Yick Hon to be deported under the conditions
stated he has frustrated the possible issuance of the writ of habeas corpus for which application had
been made.

The order served in the case was merely a preliminary citation requiring the respondent to
appear and show cause why the peremptory writ should not be granted. It is well settled that a person
cannot be held liable for contempt in the violation of an injunction or in fact of any judicial order
unless the act which is forbidden or required to be done is clearly and exactly defined, so as to leave no
reasonable doubt or uncertainty as to what specific act or thing is forbidden or required. A party cannot
be punished for contempt in failing to do something not specified in the order. 

In this case, the deportation of the petitioner Lee was not forbidden by any order of the court,
and hence that act cannot be considered as disobedience to the court. THEREFORE, Judgment is
reversed and the defendant absolved. 

CAYETANO VS. MONSOD

G.R. NO. 100013 – SEPTEMBER 3, 1991
 
FACTS:
Monsod was nominated by President Aquino as Chairman of the Comelec. The Commission on
Appointments confirmed the appointment despite Cayetano's objection, based on Monsod’s
alleged lack of the required qualification of 10 year law practice. Cayetano filed this certiorari and
prohibition. The 1987 constitution provides in Section 1, Article IX-C: There shall be a Commission on
Elections composed of a Chairman and six Commissioners who shall be natural- born citizens of the
Philippines and, at the time of their appointment, at least thirty-five years of age, holders of a college
degree, and must not have been candidates for any elective position in the immediately preceding
elections. However, a majority thereof, including the Chairman, shall be members of the Philippine Bar
who have been engaged in the practice of law for at least ten years.
 
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not Monsod has been engaged in the practice of law for 10 years.
2. Whether or not the Commission on Appointments committed grave abuse of discretion in
confirming Monsod’s appointment.

 
HELD:
1.     YES. The practice of law is not limited to the conduct of cases or litigation in court. It
embraces the preparation of pleadings and other papers incident to actions and special
proceedings, the management of such actions and proceedings on behalf of clients, and other
works where the work done involves the determination of the trained legal mind of the legal
effect of facts and conditions (PLA vs. Agrava.) The records of the 1986 constitutional
commission show that the interpretation of the term practice of law was liberal as to consider
lawyers employed in the Commission of Audit as engaged in the practice of law provided that
they use their legal knowledge or talent in their respective work. The court also cited an article
in the January 11, 1989 issue of the Business Star, that lawyers nowadays have their own
specialized fields such as tax lawyers, prosecutors, etc., that because of the demands of their
specialization, lawyers engage in other works or functions to meet them. These days, for
example, most corporation lawyers are involved in management policy formulation. Therefore,
Monsod, who passed the bar in 1960, worked with the World Bank Group from 1963-1970,
then worked for an investment bank till 1986, became member of the CONCOM in 1986, and
also became a member of the Davide Commission in 1990, can be considered to have been
engaged in the practice of law as lawyer-economist, lawyer-manager, lawyer-entrepreneur, etc.

2.     NO. The power of the COA to give consent to the nomination of the Comelec Chairman by the
president is mandated by the constitution. The power of appointment is essentially within the
discretion of whom it is so vested subject to the only condition that the appointee should
possess the qualification required by law. From the evidence, there is no occasion for the SC to
exercise its corrective power since there is no such grave abuse of discretion on the part of the
CA.
 
PHILIPPINE LAWYER’S ASSOCIATION VS. AGRAVA
105 PHIL 773
 
FACTS:
On May 27, 1957, respondent Director issued a circular announcing that he had scheduled an
examination for the purpose of determining who are qualified to practice as patent attorneys before the
Philippines Patent Office. According to the circular, members of the Philippine Bar, engineers and
other persons with sufficient scientific and technical training are qualified to take the said examination.
The petitioner contends that one who has passed the bar examination sand is licensed by the Supreme
Court to practice law in the Philippines and who is in good standing is duly qualified to practice before
the Philippines Patent Office and that the respondent Director’s holding an examination for the purpose
is in excess of his jurisdiction and is in violation of the law. The respondent, in reply, maintains the
prosecution of patent cases “ does not involve entirely or purely the practice of law but includes the
application of scientific and technical knowledge and training as a matter of actual practice so as to
include engineers and other individuals who passed the examination can practice before the Patent
office. Furthermore, he stressed that for the long time he is holding tests, this is the first time that his
right has been questioned formally.
 
ISSUE:
Whether or not the appearance before the patent Office and the preparation and the prosecution
of patent application, etc., constitutes or is included in the practice of law.
 
HELD:
The Supreme Court held that the practice of law includes such appearance before the Patent
Office, the representation of applicants, oppositors, and other persons, and the prosecution of their
applications for patent, their opposition thereto, or the enforcement of their rights in patent cases.
Moreover, the practice before the patent Office involves the interpretation and application of other laws
and legal principles, as well as the existence of facts to be established in accordance with the law of
evidence and procedure. The practice of law is not limited to the 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. Furthermore, the law provides that any
party may appeal to the Supreme Court from any final order or decision of the director. Thus, if the
transactions of business in the Patent Office involved exclusively or mostly technical and scientific
knowledge and training, then logically, the appeal should be taken not to a court or judicial body, but
rather to a board of scientists, engineers or technical men, which is not the case.
 

PEOPLE VS. VILLANUEVA

121 PHIL 894
 
FACTS:
On Sept. 4, 1959, the Chief of Police of Alaminos, Laguna, charged Simplicio Villanueva with
crime of Malicious Mischief, before the Justice of the Peace Court of said Municipality.  Said accused
was represented by counsel de oficio, but later on replaced by counsel de parte. The complainant in the
same case was represented by City Attorney Ariston Fule of San Pablo City, having entered his
appearance as private-prosecutor, having securing the permission of the Secretary of Justice.
Counsel for the accused presented a “Motion in inhibit Fiscal Fule from Acting as Private prosecutor in
this case, “this time invoking sec. 32, Rule 127, now sec. 35, Rule 138, Revised Rules, which bars
certain attorneys from practicing.
 
ISSUE: 
Whether or not Atty. Fule violate sec. 32 of Rule 127 now Sec. 35, Rule 138, revised Rules of
Court, which bars certain attorneys from practicing.
 
HELD: 
The Court holds that the appearance of Attorney Fule did not constitute private practice, within
the meaning and contemplation of the Rules.  Practice is more than isolated appearance, for it consists
in frequent or customary action, a succession of acts of the same kind. 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 compensation, as a source of
his livelihood or in consideration of his said services. It has never been refuted that City Attorney Fule
had been given permission by his immediate supervisor, the Secretary of Justice, to represent the
complainant in the case at bar, who is a relative.

CUI VS. CUI

11 SCRA 758
 
FACTS:
The Hospicio de San Jose de Barili, is a charitable institution established by the spouses Don
Pedro Cui and Dona Benigna Cui for the care and support, free of charge, of indigent invalids, and
incapacitated and helpless persons.” It acquired corporate existence by legislation (Act No. 3239). Sec.
2 of the Act gave the initial management to the founders jointly and, in case of their incapacity or
death, to “such persons as they may nominate or designate, in the order prescribed to them. (embodied
in Sec. 2 of the spouses deed of donation)” Plaintiff Jesus Ma. Cui and defendant Antonio Ma. Cui are
brothers, being the sons of Mariano Cui, one of the nephews of the spouses Don Pedro and Dona
Benigna Cui. In 1960, the then incumbent administrator of the Hospicio, resigned in favor of Antonio
Cui pursuant to a “convenio” entered into between them that was embodied on a notarial document.
Jesus Cui, however had no prior notice of either the “convenio” or of his brother’s assumption of the
position. Upon the death of Dr. Teodoro Cui, Jesus Cui wrote a letter to his brother Antonio,
demanding that the office be turned over to him. When the demand was not complied, Jesus filed this
case. Lower court ruled in favor of Jesus.
 
ISSUE:
Who is best qualified as administrator for the Hospicio?
 
HELD:
Antonio should be the Hospicio’s administrator. Jesus is the older of the two and under equal
circumstances would be preferred pursuant to sec.2 of the deed of donation. However, before the test of
age may be, applied the deed gives preference to the one, among the legitimate descendants of the
nephews named, who if not a lawyer (titulo de abogado), should be a doctor or a civil engineer or a
pharmacist, in that order; or if failing all theses, should be the one who pays the highest taxes among
those otherwise qualified. Jesus Ma. Cui holds the degree of Bachelor of laws but is not a member of
the Bar, not having passed the examinations. Antonio Ma. Cui, on the other hand, is a member of the
Bar and although disbarred in 1957, was reinstated by resolution, about two weeks before he assumed
the position of administrator of the Hospicio.
 
The term “titulo de abogado” means not mere possession of the academic degree of Bachelor of
Laws but membership in the Bar after due admission thereto, qualifying one for the practice of law. A
Bachelor’s degree alone, conferred by a law school upon completion of certain academic requirements,
does not entitle its holder to exercise the legal profession. By itself, the degree merely serves as
evidence of compliance with the requirements that an applicant to the examinations has “successfully
completed all the prescribed courses, in a law school or university, officially approved by the Secretary
of Education. The founders of the Hospicio provided for a lawyer, first of all, because in all of the
works of an administrator, it is presumed, a working knowledge of the law and a license to practice the
profession would be a distinct asset. Under this criterion, the plaintiff Jesus is not entitled as against
defendant, to the office of administrator. Reference is made to the fact that the defendant Antonio was
disbarred (for immorality and unprofessional conduct). However, it is also a fact, that he was reinstated
before he assumed the office of administrator. His reinstatement is recognition of his moral
rehabilitation, upon proof no less than that required for his admission to the Bar in the first place. Also,
when defendant was restored to the roll of lawyers the restrictions and disabilities resulting from his
previous disbarment were wiped out.
 
IN RE: ALMACEN
31 SCRA 562
 
FACTS:
Atty. Almacen was the counsel of one Virginia Yaptinchay in a civil case. They lost in said
civil case but Almacen filed a Motion for Reconsideration. He notified the opposing party of said
motion but he failed to indicate the time and place of hearing of said motion. Hence, his motion was
denied. He then appealed but the Court of Appeals denied his appeal as it agreed with the trial court
with regard to the motion for reconsideration. Eventually, Almacen filed an appeal on certiorari before
the Supreme Court which out rightly denied his appeal in a minute resolution. This earned the ire of
Almacen who called such minute resolutions as unconstitutional. He then filed before the Supreme
Court a petition to surrender his lawyer’s certificate of title as he claimed that it is useless to continue
practicing his profession when members of the high court are men who are calloused to pleas for
justice, who ignore without reasons their own applicable decisions and commit culpable violations of
the Constitution with impunity. He further alleged that due to the minute resolution, his client was
made to pay P120k without knowing the reasons why and that he became “one of the sacrificial victims
before the altar of hypocrisy.” He also stated “that justice as administered by the present members of
the Supreme Court is not only blind, but also deaf and dumb.” The Supreme Court did not immediately
act on Almacen’s petition as  the Court wanted to wait for Almacen to ctually surrender his certificate.
Almacen did not surrender his lawyer’s certificate though as he now argues that he chose not to.
Almacen then asked that he may be permitted “to give reasons and cause why no disciplinary action
should be taken against him . . . in an open and public hearing.” He said he preferred this considering
that the Supreme Court is “the complainant, prosecutor and Judge.” Almacen was however
unapologetic.
 
ISSUE: 
Whether or not Almacen should be disciplined
 
HELD: 
 Yes. The Supreme Court first clarified that minute resolutions are needed because the Supreme
Court cannot accept every case or write full opinion for every petition they reject otherwise the High
Court would be unable to effectively carry out its constitutional duties. The proper role of the Supreme
Court is to decide “only those cases which present questions whose resolutions will have immediate
importance beyond the particular facts and parties involved.” It should be remembered that a petition to
review the decision of the Court of Appeals is not a matter of right, but of sound judicial discretion; and
so there is no need to fully explain the court’s denial. For one thing, the facts and the law are already
mentioned in the Court of Appeals’ opinion. On Almacen’s attack against the Supreme Court, the 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. In the case at bar, Almacen’s criticism is misplaced. As a veteran lawyer, he should have known
that a motion for reconsideration which failed to notify the opposing party of the time and place of trial
is a mere scrap of paper and will not be entertained by the court. He has only himself to blame and he is
the reason why his client lost. Almacen was suspended indefinitely.

HERNANDEZ V. GO
450 SCRA 1

FACTS: 
The complainant Nazaria Hernandez was currently facing suits for money against her because
of the unpaid loans that her husband had left when he had abandoned his family. Hernandez availed of
the legal aid of respondent Luciano Go. The latter advised the former to sell all her lots to him without
any monetary consideration for each of the lots. The respondent promised to sell the lands to third
parties and the funds collected from the sales would be used to pay Hernandez’s creditors. In 1974, it
turned out that the respondent did not in fact sell the lots in question. What he did was to pay off the
loans using his own money. Up to the point of this complaint, the respondent still owns the lots in
question. The respondent denies all the allegations and claims that he did not breach the trust between
him and his client.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the respondent abused the trust given to him by his client and if such constitutes
disbarment. 

HELD: 
YES. Respondent Atty. Jose Go is found to be unfit to practice the law profession and is duly
DISBARRED from the brotherhood of lawyers. 
The respondent clearly abused his client’s trust in him in having convinced her to sell the lots in
question in his favor without so much as a cent going to Hernandez. He not only deceived Hernandez
but he had taken advantedg of the latter during a financial plight.

The IBP Commissioner for Bar Discipline found the respondent to be guilty of violating Canons
16 and 17 and improperly rendered a resolution to penalize him with 6 months of suspension. The IBP
Board of Governors found this penalty to be too light and sentenced him to 3 years of suspension.
The Supreme Court, however, relied on Section 27 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court which
states that a lawyer may be disbarred from the practice if he is found to have done a gross misconduct
in his office. The court found that the respondent truly did perform misconduct and the punishment that
is due him should be disbarment. 

It bears reiterating that a lawyer who takes advantage of his client’s financial plight to acquire
the latter’s properties for his own benefit is destructive of the confidence of the public in the fidelity,
honesty, and integrity of the legal profession.
CANONS:
- Canon 16. "A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client that may come into his
possession."
- 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."

GENATO V. SILAPAN
406 SCRA 75

FACTS: 
July 1992, respondent allegedly asked the complainant if he could rent a small office space in
complainant’s building in Quezon City for his law practice.  Complainant acceded and introduced
respondent to Atty. Benjamin Dacanay, complainant’s retained lawyer, who accommodated respondent
in the building and made him handle some of complainant’s cases.  Respondent borrowed two hundred
thousand pesos (P200,000.00) from complainant which he intended to use as down payment for the
purchase of a new car. In return, respondent issued to complainant a postdated check in the amount of
P176,528.00 to answer for the six (6) months interest on the loan.  He likewise mortgaged to
complainant his house and lot in Quezon City but did not surrender its title claiming that it was the
subject of reconstitution proceedings before the Quezon City Register of Deeds. The respondent bought
the car but the document of sale was issued in the complainant’s name and financed through City Trust
Company. January 1993: respondent introduced to complainant a certain Emmanuel Romero who
wanted to borrow money from complainant.  Complainant lent Romero the money and, from this
transaction, respondent earned commission in the amount of P52,289.90. Complainant used the
commission to pay respondent’s arrears with the car financing firm. Subsequently, respondent failed to
pay the amortization on the car and the financing firm sent demand letters to complainant.
Complainant tried to encash respondent’s postdated check with the drawee bank but it was dishonored
as respondent’s account therein was already closed. Respondent failed to heed complainant’s repeated
demands for payment. Complainant then filed a criminal case against respondent for violation of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 22 and a civil case for judicial foreclosure of real estate mortgage. In the foreclosure
case, the respondent alleged that the complainant is engaged in buy and sell of deficiency taxed
imported cars, shark loans and shady deals, and has many cases pending in court, which the
complainant denied, adding that the allegations were libelous and were irrelevant to the foreclosure
case. A particular allegation states that in one case, the complainant would only give the respondent the
document of sale of the car if the latter would bribe the review committee of the DOJ for a case of the
complainant. According to the complainant, the allegation was, aside from being false, immaterial to
the foreclosure case and maliciously designed to defame him, the respondent was also guilty of
breaking their confidential lawyer-client relationship and should be held administratively liable. The
complainant then filed this complaint for disbarment, praying also that an administrative sanction be
meted against respondent for his issuance of a bouncing check.

ISSUE: 
Whether or not the respondent committed a breach of trust and confidence by imputing to
complainant illegal practices and disclosing complainant’s alleged intention to bribe government
officials in connection with a pending case, and thus would be sanctioned.

HELD:
YES, respondent’s allegations and disclosures in the foreclosure case amount to a breach of
fidelity sufficient to warrant the imposition of disciplinary sanction against him.  

A lawyer must conduct himself, especially in his dealings with his clients, with integrity in a
manner that is beyond reproach.  His relationship with his clients should be characterized by the
highest degree of good faith and fairness.
 Canon 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer owes fidelity to the
cause of his client and shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed on him.  The long-
established rule is that an attorney is not permitted to disclose communications made to him in his
professional character by a client, unless the latter consents. The obligation to preserve the confidences
and secrets of a client arises at the inception of their relationship. The protection given to the client is
perpetual and does not cease with the termination of the litigation, nor is it affected by the party’s
ceasing to employ the attorney and retaining another, or by any other change of relation between them.
It even survives the death of the client. However, the privilege against disclosure of confidential
communications or information is limited only to communications which are legitimately and properly
within the scope of a lawful employment of a lawyer.

It does not extend to those made in contemplation of a crime or perpetration of a fraud. If the
unlawful purpose is avowed, as in this case, the complainant’s alleged intention to bribe government
officials in relation to his case, the communication is not covered by the privilege as the client does not
consult the lawyer professionally.  It is not within the profession of a lawyer to advise a client as to
how he may commit a crime as a lawyer is not a gun for hire. Thus, the attorney-client privilege does
not attach, there being no professional employment in the strict sense. The disclosures were not
indispensable to protect his rights as they were not pertinent to the foreclosure case.  It was improper
for the respondent to use it against the complainant in the foreclosure case as it was not the subject
matter of litigation therein and respondent’s professional competence and legal advice were not being
attacked in said case.  

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES V. REMIGIO ESTEBIA

27 SCRA 106

FACTS:  
Remigio Estebia was convicted of rape by the Court of First Instance of Samar and was
sentenced to suffer the capital punishment. On December,  Lope Adriano was appointed as Estebia’s
counsel de oficio when his case came up before the Supreme Court on review. Adriano was required to
prepare and file his brief within 30 days from notice. On January 19,1967, Adriano sought a 30-day
extention to file appellant’s brief in mimeograph form. On February 18, Adriano again moved for a 20-
day extension. A third extensionwas filed on March 8 for 15 days. On March 27 Adriano filed for
another 15-day extension and on April 11 he moved for a “last” extension of ten days. However, on
April 21 he sought a special extension of five days. All of these motions for extension were granted by
the Court and the brief was due on April 26, 1967. However, no brief was filed. For failing to comply,
the Supreme Court resolved to impose upon Adriano a fine of P500 with a warning that a more drastic
disciplinary action will be taken against him upon further non-compliance. On December 5, 1968,
Adriano was ordered to show cause why he should not be suspended from the practice of law for gross
misconduct and violation of his oath of office as attorney.  A resolution was personally served upon
him on December 18, 1968 however Adriano ignored the said resolution.

ISSUE: 
Whether or not the conduct of Atty Lope E. Adriano as member of the bar deserve disciplinary
action for failure to prepare a brief for his indigent client. 

HELD: 
YES, by specific authority, this Court may assign an attorney to render professional aid to a
destitute appellant in a criminal case who is unable to employ an attorney. Correspondingly, a duty is
imposed upon the lawyer so assigned "to render the required service."  A lawyer so appointed "as
counsel for an indigent prisoner", our Canons of Professional Ethics demand, "should always exert his
best efforts" in the indigent's behalf. No excuse at all has been offered for non-presentation of
appellant's brief. And yet, between December 20, 1966, when he received notice of his appointment,
and December 5, 1968, when the last show cause order was issued by this Court, more than sufficient
time was afforded counsel to prepare and file his brief de oficio.
 In the face of the fact that no brief has ever been filed, counsel's statements in his motions for
extension have gone down to the level of empty and meaningless words; at best, have dubious claim to
veracity. Adriano’s pattern of conduct reveals a propensity to benumb appreciation of his obligation as
counsel de oficio and of the courtesy and respect that should be accorded this Court. For the reasons
given Attorney Lope E. Adriano was suspended from the practice of law throughout the Philippines for
a period of one (1) year.

ARANES V OCCIANO

FACTS:
Petitioner Arañes charges respondent Judge with Gross Ignorance of the Law. Respondent is the
Presiding Judge of the MTC of Balatan, Camarines Sur. Petitioner alleged that respondent judge
solemnized her marriage to her late room without the requisite of marriage license at Nabua, Camarines
Sur which is outside of his territorial jurisdiction.

Since the marriage was a nullity, petitioner’s right to inherit the properties of her late husband
was not recognized. She was likewise deprived of receiving the pension of her late husband, a retired
Commodore of the PH Navy. 

Respondent judge argued that he was requested by a certain Juan Arroyo to solemnize the
marriage of the parties. He agreed assuming that the parties already have all the required documents.
However, Arroyo informed that the late spouse of the petitioner had a difficulty walking because he
recently suffered from stroke. Arroyo then requested the marriage to be solemnized in Nabua.
Respondent judge argued that when he discovered that there was no marriage license, he refused to
solemnize the marriage. However, due to the earnest pleas of the parties, the respondent judge
proceeded to solemnize the marriage out of human compassion. Petitioner and her late spouse then
assured respondent that they would give him the license in the afternoon of the same day but failed.

Petitioner then filed her Affidavit of Desistance claiming that she filed the Administrative case
out of rage and is now bothered by her conscience.

The Office of the Court Administrator found the respondent judge guilty of solemnizing a
marriage without marriage license and for doing so outside his legal jurisdiction.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the respondent judge is guilty of solemnizing a marriage without marriage
license and for doing so outside his legal jurisdiction.

HELD:
YES. Under the Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980, the authority of the RTC judges and
judges of inferior courts to solemnize marriage is confined to their territorial jurisdiction as defined by
the Supreme Court. 

In Navarro v Domagtoy it was held that the act of solemnizing marriage outside a judge’s
jurisdiction constitutes gross ignorance of the law. SC further held that: “the judiciary should be
composed of persons who, if not experts, are at least, proficient in the law they are sworn to apply,
more than the ordinary laymen. They should be skilled and competent in understanding and applying
the law. It is imperative that they be conversant with basic legal principles…”

The act of respondent judge solemnizing a marriage outside of his jurisdiction subjects him to
administrative liability.
 IV.  PERTINENT OR LEGAL BASIS OF THE FOLLOWING

A. NON-LAWYERS WHO MAY BE AUTHORIZED TO APPEAR BEFORE COURT

1. RULE 138 RRC (ATTORNEYS AND ADMISSION TO BAR)

SEC. 34- By whom litigation conducted. — In the court of a justice of the peace a party may conduct
his litigation in person, with the aid of an agent or friend appointed by him for the purpose, or with the
aid an attorney. In any other court, a party may conduct his litigation personally or by aid of an
attorney, and his appearance must be either personal or by a duly authorized member of the bar.

2. RULE 116 (ARRANGEMENT AND PLEA)

Sec. 7. Appointment of counsel de officio. – The court, considering the gravity of the offense and the
difficulty of the questions that may arise, shall appoint as counsel de officio such members of the bar in
good standing who, by reason of their experience and ability, can competently defend the accused. But
in localities where such members of the bar are not available, the court may appoint any person,
resident of the province and of good repute for probity and ability, to defend the accused.

3. RULE 138-A RRC (LAW STUDENT PRACTICE RULE)

SEC. 2 - The appearance the Law student authorized by this rule, shall be under direct supervision and
control of  a member of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines duly accredited by the law school. Any
and all pleadings, motions, briefs, memoranda or other papers to be field, must be signed by the
supervising attorney for and in behalf of the legal clinic. 

4. THE NEW RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE NATIONAL LABOR

RELATIONS COMMISSION

SECTION 8.  APPEARANCES. - An attorney appearing for a party is presumed to be properly

authorized for that purpose. However, he shall be required to indicate in his pleadings his PTR and IBP
numbers for the current year.

 Non-lawyer may appear before the Commission or any Labor Arbiter only if:
(a) he represents himself as party to the case;
(b) he represents a legitimate labor organization, as defined under Article 222 and 242 of the Labor
Code, as amended, or its members, provided, that he shall be made to present a verified certification
from said organization that he is properly authorized, or;
(c) he is a duly-accredited member of any legal aid office duly recognized by the Department of Justice
or Integrated Bar of the Philippines.

Appearances may be made orally or in writing. In both cases, the complete name and office address of
both parties shall be made on record and the adverse party or his counsel/representative properly
notified.
Any change in the address of counsel/representative should be filed with the records of the case and
furnished the adverse party or counsel.

Any change or withdrawal of counsel/representative shall be made in accordance with the Rules of
Court.

5. ACT NO. 2259 - THE CADASTRAL ACT

SEC. 9 - Any person claiming any interest in any part of the lands, whether named in the notice or not,
shall appear before the Court by himself, or by some person in his behalf and shall file an answer on or
before the return day or within such further time as may be allowed by the Court. The answer shall be
signed and sworn to by the claimant or by some person in his behalf, and shall state whether the
claimant is married or unmarried, and, if married, the name of the husband or wife and the date of the
marriage, and shall also contain:

(a) The age of the claimant.

(b) The cadastral number of the lot or lots claimed, as appearing on the plan filed in the case by the
Director of Lands, or the block and lot numbers, as the case may be.
(c) The name of the barrio and municipality, township, or settlement in which the lots are situated.
(d) The names of the owners of the adjoining lots as far as known to the claimant.
(e) If the claimant is in possession of the lots claimed and can show no express grant of the land by the
Government to him or to his predecessors in interest, the answer shall state the length of time he has
held such possession and the manner in which it has been acquired, and shall also state the length of
time, as far as known, during which his predecessors, if any, held possession.
(f) If the claimant is not in possession or occupation of the lands, the answer shall fully set forth the
interest claimed by him and the time and manner of its acquisition.
(g) If the lots have been assessed for taxation, their last assessed value.
(h) The encumbrance, if any, affecting the lots and the names of the adverse claimants as far as known.

B. PROCEEDINGS WHERE LAWYERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO APPEAR

1. RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR SMALL CLAIMS CASES, AM NO. 08-8-7, SEC 17,
Appearance of Attorneys Not Allowed — No attorney shall appear in behalf of or represent a
party at the hearing, unless the attorney is the plaintiff or defendant.

2. RA 7160, SEC. 415 — in all Katarungang Pambarangay proceedings the parties must appear in
person without the assistance of counsel or representative except for minors and incompetents
who may be assisted by their next of kin who are not lawyers.

C. PUBLIC OFFICIALS WHO CANNOT ENGAGE IN THE PRIVATE PRACTICE OF LAW

IN THE PHILIPPINES

1. RULE 38 - ATTORNEYS ADMISSION AT BAR

Section 35. Certain attorneys not to practice. — No judge or other official or employee of the superior
courts or of the Office of the Solicitor General, shall engage in private practice as a member of the bar
or give professional advice to clients.

2. ART. 9 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION

Section 2. No member of a Constitutional Commission shall, during his tenure, hold any other office or
employment. Neither shall he engage in the practice of any profession or in the active management or
control of any business which, in any way, may be affected by the functions of his office, nor shall he
be financially interested, directly or indirectly, in any contract with, or in any franchise or privilege
granted by the Government, any of its subdivisions, agencies, or instrumentalities, including
government-owned or controlled corporations or their subsidiaries. 

3. ART. 6 OF THE 1987 CONSTITUTION

Section 14. No Senator or Member of the House of Representatives may personally appear as counsel
before any court of justice or before the Electoral Tribunals, or quasi-judicial and other administrative
bodies. Neither shall he, directly or indirectly, be interested financially in any contract with, or in any
franchise or special privilege granted by the Government, or any subdivision, agency, or
instrumentality thereof, including any government-owned or controlled corporation, or its subsidiary,
during his term of office. He shall not intervene in any matter before any office of the Government for
his pecuniary benefit or where he may be called upon to act on account of his office. 
 4. REPUBLIC ACT 6713 - AN ACT ESTABLISHING A CODE OF CONDUCT AND
ETHICAL STANDARDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES, TO
UPHOLD THE TIME-HONORED PRINCIPLE OF PUBLIC OFFICE BEING A
PUBLIC TRUST, GRANTING INCENTIVES AND REWARDS FOR EXEMPLARY
SERVICE, ENUMERATING PROHIBITED ACTS AND TRANSACTIONS AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF AND FOR OTHER
PURPOSES

SEC. 7- PROHIBITED TRANSACTIONS. In addition to acts and omissions of public officials and
employees now prescribed in the Constitution and existing laws, the following shall constitute
prohibited acts and transactions of any public official and employee and are hereby declared to be
unlawful: 

(b) Outside employment and other activities related thereto. — Public officials and employees during
their incumbency shall not: 
(2) - Engage in the private practice of their profession unless authorized by the Constitution or law,
provided, that such practice will not conflict or tend to conflict with their official functions; 

5. LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF THE PHILIPPINES

SECTION 90. Practice of Profession. - (a) All governors, city and municipal mayors are prohibited
from practicing their profession or engaging in any occupation other than the exercise of their functions
as local chief executives. 

6. Those who, by special law, are prohibited from engaging in the practice of their
legal profession.
 LEGAL PROFESSION
EH 305
SAT 3:30 P.M. – 4:30 P.M.

EVANGELISTA, NICOLE G.

FLORES, JEDAN ROY J.

GREGORIO, ARWELLA GRACE B.

LIM, CHRISTINA EVANNE B.

NACUA, VINCENT JOHN V.

ORBISO, ALYSSA BIANCA C.