ANNOTATION

LEGAL ETHICS
By *

JUDGE ALICIA GONZALEZ-DECANO

Law Professor, & Professorial Lecturer and Consultant,
UST Graduate School (Law & Political Science Cluster)
(Ret.)

________________

§ I. Preliminary Statement, p. 931

§ II. Legal Ethics defined, p. 932
§ III. Importance of Legal Ethics, p. 932
§ IV. The Need For Lawyers, p. 933
§ V. Expectations from Lawyers, p. 933
§ VI. Application of Legal Ethics, p. 934
§ VII. Scope of Lawyers Functions, p. 934
§ VIII. Relevant Cases, p. 935

________________

§ I. Preliminary Statement

Lawyers very well know that there is such a subject as

Legal ethics in the College of Law be it situated in the
provincial or metropolitan areas. Of course, they all studied
this subject. As a matter of fact it is one of the bar subjects
usually scheduled on the last Sunday of the four Sundays
bar examination.

_______________

* Law Professor, & Professorial Lecturer and Consultant, UST

Graduate School (Law & Political Science Cluster)

932

932 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

 Legal Ethics

They are aware of the cases filed against their brother

lawyers. They are likewise cognizant of the strict
enforcement of these laws and rules. Many litigants are
now litigious-conscious even if the case involves their own
lawyers. Yet, despite all these laws and rules, many
lawyers could still afford to engage themselves in unethical
conduct and malpractices. Is it because of the glitter of
gold? Is it because of dire want and need? Or is it simply
because of they wanted to get rich quick and live like that
of the Joneses! How many of them were disbarred? How
many of them were suspended? Because of these intriguing
questions, this article is written.
Before discussing the details of Legal Ethics, the writer
deems it wise to give a definition of Legal Ethics.
 

§ II. Legal Ethics defined.

Legal Ethics is a branch of moral science which treats of

the duties which a member of the legal profession owes to
the public, to the court, to his professional brethren, and to
his client. (Francisco, V.J., Legal Ethics)
It is defined by Bouvier's Law Dictionary as "that body
of principles by which the conduct of members of the legal
profession is controlled."
 

§ III. Importance of Legal Ethics

The importance of legal ethics, in a public point of view can

not be underestimated considering that lawyers, and law
students deal with people in their lives and properties and
freedom.
In any community, lawyers are a great necessity. Their
absence is usually felt whenever and wherever some
controversy arises particularly involving legal questions
which cannot be resolved by laymen or men not learned in
the science of law. People are faced with lawsuits at one
time or another, to prosecute their causes or defend their
rights, to name only a few of the litigation in which people
may find themselves

933

VOL. 45, APRIL 5, 1924 933

 Legal Ethics

involved. Hence, they are practically forced into hiring

lawyers to manage their stead. Lawyers are considered
inherent in our judicial system. (In re Maresh's Will, 187,
1009, 1011) cited by Amado Dimayuga in his Report on
Legal and Judicial Ethics.
 

§ IV. The Need For Lawyers

A lawyer is an indispensable and valuable member of

society. He fills the gap that would otherwise tend to
disrupt the social and political order.
With the growing complexity of modern life and the ever
increasing volumes of principles and procedure of legal
control, the lawyer becomes not only a necessity to the
parties but also a blessing to the judicial system.
It would be too much to require the parties to
understand and know the law. The maxim that ignorance
of the law excuses no one is more a necessity than a reality.
To expect parties to present their side of the case in
accordance with the rules of procedure of judicial
determination will make legal education mandatory on
every citizen. And to encourage the parties to manage their
own litigation before the magistrates would be an undue
imposition on the judiciary and a very effective clog on the
speedy administration of justice.
It is here that the lawyer's usefulness manifests itself.
By special aptitude, long training and continuous study, a
lawyer has acquired the necessary knowledge and skill to
present other people's litigation before the courts of justice.
The goal of his entire preparation has been an efficient and
competent handling of legal matters. Into his hands, a
party to an action may with all compliance entrust his
interests. (Justice Regalado, Maambong, Law and the
Legal Profession, Lecture Notes on Legal Profession, pp.
20-21)
 

§ V. Expectations from Lawyers

934

934 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Legal Ethics
What a lawyer is expected to do. This refers to the lawyer's
functions, and legal education is aimed principally at
preparing lawyers to discharge adequately their functions
as such.
Two-fold functions. These functions are two-fold,
namely: (1) that of counselor or legal adviser; and (2) that
of an advocate. Others add the teaching of law to these
functions. In whatever capacity, a lawyer is supposed to
know the law. (Maambong, loc. Cit.)
 

§ VI. Application of Legal Ethics

To be sure, lawyers often have to make use of the principles

and tenets of Legal Ethics in the practice of the legal
profession.
Thus, for instance, the settlement of most disputes
usually requires: (1) a determination of the facts; and (2)
the application of the law thereto.
As an officer of the court, it is the duty of lawyers to help
the court find the truth, determine the proper law and
apply the same correctly. The performance of such duty
usually demands the exercise of the lawyers professional
skill. More often than not, it put counsel's much fiber to the
acid test.
The factual issues in most cases offer a strong
temptation to omit events or exaggerate incidents material
to the case or defense on one's client. The temptation is
irresistible when a fact is believed to be within his
exclusive knowledge or that of his witness. In many cases,
the established facts do not therefore reflect the whole
truth, if they are not an actual distortion of the truth or its
exact opposite. As a consequence, even if the pertinent law
were properly applied thereto, the result is rank injustice
made more odious by the circumstances that it bears the
official authority of the state. The people's faith in the Rule
of Law, in courts of justice and in the government is
thereby jeopardized. Just as lamentable is the injury
thereby caused upon the image of the Bar. (Regalado, op.
cit, p. 26)
 

§ VII. Scope of Lawyers Functions

935

VOL. 45, APRIL 5, 1924 935

 Legal Ethics

A lawyer can specialize in any field of law. He may be a

criminal lawyer, a corporate lawyer, a civilist, or desk
lawyer. The latter function entails researching, assembling
of facts, interviewers, or counselors, or interviewers. At
present, lawyers can be conciliators, negotiators, mediators
or arbitrators. In all these functions, the lawyer's oath has
much to say. These functions likewise entail the
implementation of legal ethics.
 

§ VIII. Relevant Cases

1. Vitriolo vs. Dasig, A.C. No. 4984, April 1, 2003, 400

SCRA 172, emphasizes the compliance of a lawyer with his
oath.
The Supreme Court ruled:

"x x x The attorney's oath is the source of the obligations and

duties of every lawyer and any violation thereof is a ground for
disbarment, suspension, or other disciplinary action. The
attorney's oath imposes upon every member of the bar, the duty to
delay no man for money or malice. Said duty is further stressed in
Rule 1.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Respondent's
demands for a sum of money to facilitate the processing of
pending applications for requests before her office violates such
duty and runs afoul of the oath she took when admitted to the
Bar. x x x This is clear from Canon 6 of said Code. Lawyers in
government are public servants who owe the utmost fidelity to the
public service. Thus, they should be more sensitive in the
performance of their professional obligations, as their conduct is
subject to the ever-consistent scrutiny of the public."

2. Jardin vs. Villa Jr., A.C. No. 5474, August 28, 2003, 410
SCRA 1, stresses the duty of a lawyer to assist in the
speedy and efficient administration of justice and to do his
level best to give entire devotion to his client's cause.
The Supreme Court ruled:

936

936 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Legal Ethics

"x x x Manifestly, the respondent has fallen short of the

competence and diligence required of every member of the bar.
The pertinent Canons of the Code of Professional Responsibility
provide: Canon 12. A lawyer shall exert every effort and consider
it his duty to assist in the speedy and efficient administration of
justice... Rule 12.03—A lawyer shall not, after obtaining
extensions of time to file pleadings, memoranda, or briefs, let the
period lapse without submitting the same or offering an
explanation for his failure to do so."

The Highest Court of the Land further held:

"x x x It is indeed dismaying to note the respondent's patent

violation of his duty as a lawyer. He committed a serious
transgression when he failed to exert his utmost learning and
ability and to give entire devotion to his client's cause. His client
relied on him to file the former offer of exhibits among other
things. But he failed him. Resulting as it did in the dismissal of
the case, his failure constitutes inexcusable default. It therefore
behooves the court to take action on the respondent's moral
infraction, which caused undeserved and needless prejudice to his
client's interest, adversely affected the confidence of the
community in the legal profession and eroded the public trust in
the judicial system. x x x"

3. Whitson vs. Atienza, A.C. No. 5535, August 28, 2003, 410
SCRA 10, shows the gross misconduct exhibited by the
lawyer against his client.
The Supreme Court decreed:

"x x x It is shown that Atty. Atienza exhibited gross misconduct in

his dealing with the Whitsons. Gross misconduct is 'improper or
wrong conduct', the transgression of some established and definite
rule of action, a forbidden act, a dereliction of duty, willful in
character, and implies a wrongful intent not mere error in
judgment."

In the case at bar, the medical certificate presented proved

that Steven Whitson suffered contusion from the blow
delivered by Atty. Atienza. Respondent failed to exercise
the propriety and proper decorum expected from members
of the bar. Even in the heat of anger, his act along with
vehement words and shouts was uncalled for. Furthermore,
the Board of Gov-

937

VOL. 45, APRIL 5, 1924 37

Legal Ethics

ernors correctly noted that Atty. Atienza should have been

more magnanimous in dealing with the Whitsons,
especially since he already vindicated himself with the
filing of the libel suit.
Thus, Atty. Atienza should be properly penalized for his
conduct which is unbecoming of a lawyer. The penalty of
suspension recommended by IBP of the Philippines, is not
commensurate to the act committed by Atty. Atienza.
Pursuant to the Court's power of discipline over the
members of the Bar and Bench, we reduce the penalty to a
fine considering that it is the respondent's first offense. x x
x"
4. Endaya vs. OCA, A.C. No. 3967, September 3, 2003,
410 SCRA 244, reiterates the professional responsibility of
lawyers in public or private practice.
The Supreme Court postulated:

"x x x The Court is convince that respondent violated the lawyers

oath not only once but a number of times in regard to the
handling of his client's cause. The repeated violations also value
defilement of several Canons in the Code of Professional
Responsibility. Right off, the Court notes that respondent
attributes his failure to file the required pleadings for the
complainant and his wife invariably to his strong personal belief
that it was unnecessary or futile to file the pleadings. This was
true with respect to the affidavits and position paper at the
MCTC level, the appeal memorandum at the RTC level and the
rejoinder at this court's level. In the last instance, it took
respondent as long as three years, under compulsion of a show
cause order at that, only to manifest his predisposition not to file
a rejoinder after all. In other words, at the root of respondent's
transgression is his seeming stubborn mindset against the acts
required of him by the courts. This intransigent attitude not only
belies lack of diligence and commitment but evinces absence of
respect for the authority of this court and the other courts
involved. x x

The Supreme Court continued:

938

938 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Legal Ethics

"The facts and circumstances in the case indubitably show

respondent's failure to live up to his duties as a lawyer in
consonance with the strictness of the lawyer's oath and the Code
of Professional Responsibility, thereby warranting his suspension
from the practice of law. At various stages of the unlawful
detainer case, respondent was remiss in the performance of his
duty as counsel."
"All thing considered, we conclude that suspension for two (2)
months from the practice of law is the proper and just penalty. x x
x"

5. Berbano vs. Barcelona, A.C. no. 6084, September 3, 2003,

410 SCRA 258, expounds disciplinary proceedings against
lawyers.
The Supreme Court postulated citing the ruling in the
Almacen, as follows:

"x x x Disciplinary proceedings against lawyers are sui generis.

Neither purely civil nor purely criminal, they do not involve a
trial of an action or a suit but are rather investigations by the
Court into the conduct of one of its officers not being intended to
inflict punishment, [they are] in no sense a criminal prosecutor
therein. [They] may be initiated by the Court motu proprio. Public
interest is the primary objective, and the real question for
determination is whether or not the attorney is still a fit person to
be allowed the privileges as such. x x x"
"x x x The act of respondent in not filing his answer and
ignoring the hearings set by the Investigatory Commission,
despite due notice, emphasizes his contempt for legal proceedings.
In the present case, respondent collected money from the
complainant and the nephew of the detained person the total
amount of P64,000.00 for the immediate release of the detainee
through his alleged connection with a Justice of the Supreme
Court. He deserves to be disbarred from the practice of law."

6. Fernandez vs. Cabrera, A.C. No. 5623, December 11,

2003, 418 SCRA 1, emphasizes the duty of fidelity to the
client's cause.
The Supreme Court postulated:

939

VOL. 45, APRIL 5, 1924 939

Legal Ethics

"x x x The circumstances of this case indubitably show

respondent's failure to live up to his duties as a lawyer in
consonance with the strictness of the lawyer's oath and the Code
of Professional Responsibility, thereby warranting his suspension
from the practice of law. Respondent's actions projects his
appalling indifference to his client's cause and a brazen disregard
of his duties as a lawyer. Not only did he fail to render service of
any kind; he also absconded with the records of the cases with
which he was entrusted. Then to top it all, he kept the money
complainant paid to him. Such a conduct is unbecoming of a
member of the bar, for a lawyer's professional and personal
conduct must at all times be kept beyond reproach and above
suspicion.
Respondent was suspended from the practice of law for one (1)
year for serious neglect of duty.

7. Garcia vs. De Vera, A.C. No. 6052, December 11, 2003,

418 SCRA 29, contends that a lawyer has discretion to
choose the particular chapter where he wishes to gain
membership and to register with the particular IBP
chapter of his preference—it is not automatic that a lawyer
will be member of the chapter where his place of residence
or work is located. Petitioner's contend that Leonard de
Vera is disqualified for the post because he is not really
from Eastern Mindanao. His place of residence is
Parañaque and he was originally a member of the PPLM
IBP Chapter. He only changed his IBP Chapter
membership to pave the way for his ultimate goal of
attaining the highest IBP post, which is the National
Presidency. The contention of petitioner has no merit.
In this case, it cannot be said that the act of expressing
one's opinion on a public interest issue can be considered as
an act of baseness, vileness or depravity. Respondent De
Vera did not bring suffering nor cause undue injury or
harm to the public when he voiced his view on the Plunder
Law. Consequently, there is no basis for petitioner to
invoke the administrative case as evidence of respondent
de Vera's immorality.
On the administrative charge that was filed against de
Vera while he was still practicing in California, he
explained that no final judgment was rendered by
California Supreme

940

940 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Legal Ethics

Court finding him guilty of the charge. He surrendered his

license to protect the discrimination he suffered at the
hands of the investigator and he found it impractical to
pursue the case to the end. We find these explanations
satisfactory in the absence of contrary proof.
Petition to disqualify de Vera to run as governor for
Eastern Mindanao is dismissed. x x x"
8. Tolentino vs. Mendoza, A.C. No. 5151, October 14,
2004, 440 SCRA 519, theorizes that a member of the Bar
and officer of the court is only required to refrain from
adulterous relationships or the keeping of mistresses but
also behave himself as to avoid scandalizing the public by
creating the belief that he is flouting those moral standards
and, thus, ruled that siring a child with a woman other
than his wife is a conduct way below the standards of
morality required every lawyer.
The Supreme Court ruled:

"x x x The fact that respondent continues to publicly and openly

cohabit with a woman who is not his legal wife, thus siring
children by her, shows his lack of good moral character.
Respondent should keep in mind that the requirement of good
moral character is not only a condition precedent to admission to
the Philippine Bar but is also a continuing requirement to
maintain one's good standing in the legal profession.
Wherefore, respondent Atty. Norberto M. Mendoza is hereby
found Guilty of Immorality, in violation of Rule 1.01 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility. He is suspended indefinitely from the
practice of law until he submits a satisfactory proof that he has
abandoned his immoral course of conduct.

9. Villanueva Ishiwata, A.C. No. 5041, December 23, 2004,

443 SCRA 401, shows that the respondent's failure to
return the balance to complainant upon demand gave rise
to the presumption that he misappropriated it in violation
of the trust reposed on him. His act is indicative of lack of
integrity and propriety. He was clinging to something not
his and

941

VOL. 45,  APRIL 5, 1924 941

Legal Ethics

which he had no right. As found by the Investigation

Commissioner, out of the settlement amount of
P225,000.00, respondent gave complainant only
P45,000.00. His claim that he gave complainant's alleged
wife the amount of P11,000.00 1,000.00 and P79,000.00 is
not true. He could not show the corresponding receipts.
This is gross violation of professional ethics and a betrayal
of the public confidence in the legal profession."
10. Borbon vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 138495,
December 9, 2004, 445 SCRA 617 expounds the practice of
lawyers repeatedly seeking extensions of time to file
pleadings and the exercise of due diligence to protect his
client.
 The Supreme Court pronounced:

"x x x We frown upon lawyer's practice of repeatedly seeking

extensions of time to file pleadings and thereafter simply let the
period lapse without submitting any pleading or even any
explanation or manifestation of their failure. X x x We fail to see
any good reason why Atty. Marquez failed to transfer the case to
another lawyer in the same office. We likewise fail to understand
why the parties therein did not properly supervise and monitor
the work of Atty. Marquez. Indeed the delay is, by any standard,
simply inexcusable."
Canon 18 provides: "A lawyer shall serve his client with
competence and diligence." And
Canon 19 provides likewise: "A lawyer shall represent his
client with zeal within the bounds of law."

11. Barriento vs. Libiran-Meteoro, A.C. No. 6408, August

31, 2004, 437 SCRA 209, postulates that the lawyer's
deliberate failure to pay just debts and the issuance of
worthless checks constitutes gross misconduct for which a
lawyer may be sanctioned with suspension from the
practice of law.
In this case, respondent in her answer initially tried to
deny having any obligation towards Isidra Barriento. Upon
appearing before the IBP-CBD, however, respondent
eventually acknowledge her indebtedness to Isidro in the
amount of P134,000.00 promising to pay only on a
staggered basis. Her

942

942 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

Legal Ethics

attempt to evade her financial obligations runs counter to

the precepts of the Code of Professional Responsibility,
above quoted, and violates the lawyer's oath which imposes
upon every member of the bar the duty to delay no man for
money or malice. x x x"
Atty. Elerizza A. Libiran-Meteoro is found guilty of gross
misconduct and is hereby suspended for six months from
the practice of law, and to return to Isidra Barrientos
P84,000.00 plus 6% interests, from the finality of the
decision.
12. Moreno vs. Araneta, A.C. No. 1109, April 27, 2005,
456 SCRA 329, is focused, among others on the gross
misconduct, moral turpitude of a lawyer.
The Supreme Court enunciated:
 "x x x By his own admission, the respondent issued two checks in
favor of Moreno knowing fully well that the same were drawn
against a closed account. The IBP correctly found his act as
"abhorrent and against the exacting standards of morality and
decency required as a member of the Bar, which belittles the
confidence of the public in him and reflects upon his integrity and
morality. x x x Thus, we have held that the act of a person in
issuing a check knowing at the time of the issuance that he or she
does not have sufficient funds in, or credit, with, the drawee bank
for the payment of the check in full upon its presentment is also a
manifestation of moral turpitude."

In Co vs. Bernardino, A.C. Case No. 3919, January 28,

1998, 285 SCRA 102, and Lao vs. Medel, A.C. No. 5916,
July 1, 2003, 405 SCRA 227, we held that for issuing
worthless checks, a lawyer may be sanctioned with one
year's suspension from the practice of law, or a suspension
of six months upon partial payment of the obligation. In
this case however, the respondent has been found guilty by
final judgment of estafa thru falsification of a commercial
document, a crime involving moral turpitude, for which he
has been indefinitely suspended. Moral turpitude includes
everything which is done contrary to justice, honesty,
modesty, or good morals. It involves 'an act of baseness,
vileness or depravity, in the private
943

VOL. 45,  APRIL 5, 1924 943

Legal Ethics

duties which a man owes his fellowman, or to society in

general. x x x"
Atty. Araneta was disbarred and his name is ordered
stricken from the Roll of attorneys."

——o0o——

© Copyright 2022 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.