REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

ZAMBOANGA CITY
WESTERN MINDANAO STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF LAW

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

MIDTERM & FINAL REQUIREMENTS
SECTIONS A & B

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS IDENTIFIED:

1. LAW IS NOT A TRADE OR BUSINESS; IT IS A PROFESSION, thus the

motivation for practicing it should not be to earn or gain from it, or to
get rich fast; but to serve one’s fellowmen;

Read: BALICANTA CASE; FAM VS. ATTY. CPR, A.C. NO. 11256,
MARCH 7, 2017. The I’m Still Married Case; LDP and MS vs. ATTY. EMO;
AC NO. 11149; AUGUST 15, 2017; The Serial Violator case; DIM VS.
ATTY. PC, AC NO. 19675, MAY 31, 2016; The Datu and the Young Lawyer
Case; VICTORY VS. ATTY. MERCADO; JULY 12, 2017; unsuccessful
business venture; CORTEZ VS. CORTES; MARCH 12, 2018; Lawyer’s
fee in labor cases; 10%; YAP-PARAZ VS. PARAZ; DISBARRED lawyer
still suspended for record purposes; PUNLA VS. ATTY. MARAVILLA-
ONA; AUGUST 15, 2017; failure to return monies of client held by
lawyer; no double disbarment;

2. PRACTICE OF LAW IS THE NOBLEST PROFESSION; disagree

agreeably; debate respectfully; accept defeat professionally; succeed
humbly;

Read: NDS VS. RGA, AC NO 10543, MARCH 16, 2016. The

Quantum Meruit Case; YU VS. ATTY. BDC, AC NO. 10912; JANUARY 19,
2016; The abandoning/Borrowing Lawyer Case; BELO-HENARES VS.
ATTY. ROBERTO “ARGEE” C. GUEVARRA; Libel case; REYES VS.
ATTY. NIEVA, SEPTEMBER 6, 2016; sexual harassment; TUMBAGA VS.
ATTY. TEOXON; NOVEMBER 21, 2017; Having extra-marital affairs; SPS
GV AND LV VS. ATTY. MJSM, AC NO. 10580; JULY 12, 2017; The
investment case; ASG VS. ATY. CACL, AC NO. 10576, JANUARY 14,
2015; ALMARIO VS. ATTY. AGNO; JANUARY 8, 2018; SPA erroneously
notarized; parties did not appear before notary public; document was
merely mailed for signature; CESAR O. STA. ANA, ET.AL. VS. ATTY.
ANTONIO JOSEF CORTES; AUGUST 30, 2017; falsification of pubic
document; IGNACIO VS. ATTY. ALVIAR, JULY 17, 2017, failure to
comply with lawyer’s duties to client; JAPITANA VS. ATTY. PARADO;
JANUARY 26, 2016; not a notary public but notarized documents;
SISTUAL VS. ATTY. OGENA, FEBRUARY 2, 2016; notarized documents
without parties;

3. THE LEGAL PROFESSION GIVES A PERSON THE GREATEST

OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE HIS FELLOWMEN; the founding fathers of
the Republic of the Philippines were mostly lawyers; great statesmen

1|P age
and jurists of this country were also lawyers; BUT LAWYERS HAVE
ALSO PLAYED A HAND DURING THE MOST DIFFICULT AND TRYING
TIMES OF OUR NATION; thus, the law profession gives you the
GREATEST OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE YOUR COUNTRYMEN AND
ALSO THE GREATEST OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OVER
THEM;

Read: Balicanta Case; ZARCILLA VS. ATTY. QUESADA, MARCH

13, 2018; allegation of falsification cannot be litigated in an
administrative case; ATILANO VS. EXAMEN, MARCH 24, 2015; Cases
against lawyers for violation of the CPR have no prescriptive period;
HECK VS. SANTOS, FEBRUARY 23, 2015; no private complainant; no
prescriptive period; civil or criminal liability not the issue; COBALT
RESOURCES VS. ATTY. AGUADO, APRIL 12, 2016; Cases against
lawyers separate from criminal cases; SPS. CHAMBON VS. ATTY. RUIZ,
SEPTEMBER 5, 2017; Mortgage of piece of Land; falsified a release of
mortgage;

4. The GROWING TREND IN LAWYERS TO ESTABLISH NETWORKS

WITH POLITICAL AGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT, WITH THE QUASI-
JUDICIAL AGENCIES, WITH THE BENCH, WITH THE PROSECUTING
ARM; they feel that this is a very vital component in successful practice
of law; COMPETENCE is MERELY SECOND; what comes first in the
consideration of choosing lawyers for big businessmen is that who are
the lawyers who have proper connections; so INSTEAD OF STUDYING
THE LAW, LAWYERS PLAY GOLF WITH THOSE PEOPLE AND TAKES
THEM TO DINNER IN EXPENSIVE RESTAURANTS; this is the MOST
UNFORTUNATE DEVELOPMENT IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION.

Read: FOSTER VS. ATTY. AGTANG, DECEMBER 10, 2014;

5. MASTERING TECHNICAL RULES NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF

ADVANCING THE CAUSE OF JUSTICE, BUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF
THWARTING THE PROPER ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE; the reason
why many final decisions cannot be executed; winning party holds on
to an empty bag;

Example: Winning party filed a Motion for Execution of Judgment;

Losing party opposes on the GROUND: that there are intervening
circumstances which would make the enforcement of the judgment
unfair and unjust; if DENIED – file PETITION FOR CERTIORARI to the
appellate court; if denied – Petition for Review on Certiorari to SC; if
denied – case remanded to lower court; Lower court will issue an ALIAS
WRIT OF EXECUTION; Opposition again is filed perhaps on the
GROUND that there is NOVATION OF THE JUDGMENT, an implied
novation; trial will ensue again all the way to SC; remanded back to
Lower Court; another ALIAS WRIT OF EXECUTION is issued;
Opposition again for whatever reason…there are a handful of reasons
that one can raise to thwart the execution of a final judgment;….
- some law firms now practice EXTRA-LEGAL MEANS TO WIN A
CASE, through MEDIATION, ARBITRATION, CONCILIATION…

Read: Balicanta Case;

2|P age
6. ISSUE ON COMPROMISES; extent of control of lawyer and client in
a case; lawyer controls the procedural aspect of the case; preparation
of pleadings to Court; filing of appeal; client controls the substantive
aspect of the case; content of his/her testimony and to enter into
compromise; confession; withdrawal of appeal; waiver of appeal; client
can enter into compromise agreement without the consent of the
lawyer; lawyer-client relationship is one of principal (client)-agent
(lawyer);

Read: LSC VS. ATTY. SSL, AC NO. 11483; OCTOBER 3, 2017; The
SPA case;

7. REPRESENTATION OF CONFLICTING INTEREST; Canon 15, Rules

1 and 3 states that a LAWYER SHOULD NOT REPRESENT
CONFLICTING INTERESTS; means a LAWYER REPRESENTS THE
INTEREST of TWO CONFLICTING PARTIES; as it is against public
policy; it impairs the dignity and propriety of legal advocacy; it is also
in bad taste; against our culture and our values; conflict may be as to
the interest of the client or your own interest;

ESSENCE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST: It PREVENTS THE

LAWYER FROM DEVOTING HIS TIME TO THE FULL MEASURE OF
LAWYERLY DEVOTION TO ONE CLIENT.

Read: LORENZANA FOOD CORP. VS. DARIA; 197 SCRA 428

(1991); NOMBRADO VS. HERNANDEZ; 26 SCRA 13 (1968); CAPINPIN
VS. ATTY. CESA; JULY 5, 2017; conflict of interest; CELEDONIO VS.
ATTY. ESTREBILLO, JULY 5, 2017; conflict of interest;

8. CONFLICT OF DUTIES; a LAWYER CANNOT RENDER SERVICE TO

UNDO WHAT HE HAS DONE PROFESSIONALLY IN THE PAST.

EXAMPLE:

 Lawyer prepared and notarized a Deed of Sale for one client.

He cannot later on file a case for the annulment of the very
same DOS he prepared and notarized, for Conflict of Duties.

 Lawyer succeeded in securing a patent over an invention; then

he filed a case on behalf of another client to nullify the patent
which he himself secured.

 Duty owed to the client; Lawyer, with an accounting firm; he

was the lawyer for the settlement of estate in a probate case;
his accounting firm prepared the inventory of the assets of the
estate, yet at the same time, prepared the money claims of
creditors against the estate. Note that the lawyer took
participation in the preparation of the claims against the estate,
but the lawyer is still part of the accounting firm. The Court
therefore said it was still a conflict of interest situation.

3|P age
9. ISSUES ON CONFIDENTIALITY;

PROBLEM:

- client tells you that he killed someone-privileged? YES

confidential; PAST CRIMES OR PAST FRAUDULENT ACTS
WHEN COMMUNICATED TO A LAWYER – PRIVILEGED;

- client tells you that he has plans to kill someone-privileged?

NO, not privilege communication; FUTURE OR INTENDED
CRIMES – NOT PRIVILEGE; THUS YOU MAY DIVULGE THE
SAME TO THE PROPER AUTHORITIES; NOT VIOLATING THE
ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE;

- client jumped bail as he believed he had no chances; called up

his lawyer and told him of his whereabouts; IS IT THE DUTY OF
THE LAWYER TO INFORM THE COURT OF HIS
WHEREABOUTS FOR HIS CLIENT TO BE ARRESTED? – no
jurisprudence in the Philippines; AMERICAN
JURISPRUDENCE states that the LOYALTY OR THE DUTY OF
THE LAWYER TO THE COURT IS HIGHER THAN HIS DUTY TO
HIS CLIENT; therefore, CONFIDENTIALITY OF INFORMATION
CAN BE BREACHED IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE; (See:
hierarchy of obligations of lawyers in the CPR; society;
profession; court; client)

- DOCUMENTS delivered by client to the lawyer- privilege?

RULE: communication between the client and the lawyer are
privilege; Pre-existing documents i.e. DOS, etc. delivered by
client to lawyer - privileged if they are originally privileged in
the hands of the client; otherwise – not privileged; Determined
whether the documents in the hands of the client are
impressed with the privilege.

2 ASPECTS ON THE RULE ON CONFIDENTIALITY:

 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION GIVEN BY THE CLIENT TO THE
LAWYER;
 LEGAL ADVICE GIVEN BY THE LAWYER TO CLIENT.
- all privilege; perpetual; goes beyond the grave

EXCEPTIONS:

 When the law provides that the lawyer or the client should
disclose what transpired between the two of them;

 When it is necessary in order to collect the fees of the lawyer

or to defend himself from the accusations of the client;

4|P age
10. ISSUES ON REPRESENTATION;
- can a non-lawyer represent himself? G.R. YES; in all level of
Courts;
EXCEPTION:
 if the party is a juridical person; needs to be represented by a
lawyer;

 When the non-lawyer accused is charged with an afflictive

penalty (RP/RT/Prision Mayor; Perpetual/Temporary Absolute
Disqualification; Perpetual/Temporary Special
Disqualification), he needs to be represented by a lawyer; de
parte or de officio;

WHAT ARE THE RULES FOR NON-DISCLOSURE OF CURRENT MCLE

COMPLIANCE/EXEMPTION NUMBER IN THE PLEADINGS?

See: SC EN BANC RESOLUTION on BM No. 1922 and OCA Circular No.

79-2014, May 26, 2014

OLD: Failure to disclose the required information would cause the

dismissal of the case and the expunction of the pleadings from the
records of the case. UNFAIR TO CLIENT – he has nothing to do with it;

NEW: Failure to disclose the required information would SUBJECT

THE COUNSEL TO APPROPRIATE PENALTY AND DISCIPLINARY
ACTION.

PENALTY:

The lawyer shall be imposed a fine of P2,000 for the first offense; P3,000
for the second offense and P4,000 for the third offense; Counsel may
also be listed as a DELINQUENT MEMBER of the BAR pursuant to
Section 2, Rule 13 of Bar Matter No. 850 and its Implementing Rules
and Regulations; The non-compliant lawyer shall be discharged from
the case and the client/s shall be allowed to secure the services of a
new counsel with the concomitant right to demand the return of fees
already paid to the non-compliant lawyer.

OCA CIRCULAR NO. 56-2015, MARCH 17, 2015 RE: BM NO. 850, SC EN
BANC RESOLUTION dated FEBRUARY 17, 2015, TOOK EFFECT
MARCH 1, 2015;

The Court resolved to REQUIRE all members of the IBP to file a

written entry of appearance indicating their MCLE exemption or
compliance number for the current or immediately preceding
compliance period and date of issuance thereof before appearing as
counsel or engaging in oral argument in open court or a quasi-judicial
body. However, counsels who affixed their signatures in their pleadings
and indicated their MCLE exemption or compliance number in their
pleadings need not file a separate entry of appearance. Henceforth, all

5|P age
counsels, including partners of law firms whose names appear in said
pleadings, shall also indicate their MCLE exemption or compliance
number.

Read: EAC VS. LSC, AC NO. 10245; AUGUST 16, 2017; the MCLE
Deficient and Negligent lawyer; Bar Matter 850 MCLE; CABILES VS.
ATTY. CEDO; AUGUST 15, 2017; neglect and gross ignorance of the
law; no MCLE compliance; MAPALAD VS. ATTY. ECHANES; JUNE 6,
2017; used false MCLE compliance number

IN SUM:
REASONS WHY PEOPLE GO TO LAWYERS to litigate:
 TO PROSECUTE A VALID CLAIM;
 TO VINDICATE A LEGAL WRONG.
IF YOU LEND YOUR SERVICES OTHER THAN THESE TWO BASIC
REASONS AND FILE A CASE FOR OTHER PURPOSES, THEN YOU ARE
COMMITTING A VERY UNETHICAL ACT;
On the part of the defendant, if the claim of the Plaintiff is not
valid, then you, as the lawyer of Defendant, are doing a great service
by taking up the cudgels for the defendant;
But it’s not saying that when the case is weak, you decline ….it is
only IF THE CLIENT ASK YOU TO TAKE THEIR CASE BUT AFTER
PROPER STUDY YOU FOUND OUT THAT THEY ARE NOT PURSUING A
VALID CLAIM, BUT IS RATHER FILING A CASE FOR SOME OTHER
PURPOSES, then DECLINE.

CHARACTER REQUIREMENTS OF A LAWYER:

1. He must POSSESS INTEGRITY AND MORALITY; before and
during his practice of the law;
2. He must be COMPETENT;
3. He must be COMMITTED TO THE RULE OF LAW;
4. He must have COURAGE AND LOYALTY; taking up unpopular
but principled cases – these are lawyers with moral courage; they are
the lawyers who are unafraid to lose, as they want to prove that their
position is correct; and go up to the SC to question the decision of the
Court if meritorious; but done in a temperate and respectful language;
that is why do not prepare your pleadings if you are angry;
5. He must AVOID ANY APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY;
ex. You fraternize with the other party or the lawyer of the
opposing party; do not make it appear that you are compromising the
case of your client.

==========================================================

6|P age
MIDTERM REQUIREMENT:

INDIVIDUAL REFLECTION PAPER;

 Reflect on five (5) administrative/disbarment cases involving

erring lawyers/judges from the list already provided by
Instructor or other cases you have encountered relative to the
subject;
 Summarize the violation/s done based on the facts of the case;
 Point out which provision/s of the CPR was/were violated;
 What penalty was imposed?
 Give your reflections on why and what could have caused the
lawyer to commit such act/s;
 What problem area/s in legal ethics is/are portrayed in the
case?
 Reflect unto yourself how you could avoid committing the
same mistake; and,
 Give your reflections on whether or not the CPR has fully
addressed the concern/s involved; if not, how do you think can
the CPR be better improved to address modern unethical acts
of lawyers/judges.

The class presidents for both Sections must collect all the
reflection papers of their respective classmates on or before May 25,
2020 and submit the same, in one folder, through email to:

DJMargie_29@yahoo.com

With file name:

PROBLEMAREASINLEGALETHICS.MIDTERMREQUIREMENT.SECTIONA

for Section A; and,

PROBLEMAREASINLEGALETHICS.MIDTERMREQUIREMENT.SECTIONB

for Section B,

on or before May 30, 2020.

7|P age
FINAL REQUIREMENT:

GROUP SURVEY OF ADMINISTRATIVE/DISBARMENT CASES FROM 2012-

2019; INSTRUCTIONS:

 Group yourselves into twelve (12) or less; Class Presidents for both
Sections shall submit the group listings, in one folder, with
filename: GROUPLISTING.PALEIIIA (for Section A) and
GROUPLISTING.PALEIIIB (for Section B) to your Instructor on or
before May 8, 2020, through email, at DJMargie_29@yahoo.com.
Make sure that each group has all the names of their respective
group members. There shall only be a total of four (4) groups per
class.
 Upon receipt of your group listings, Instructor shall assign the
period to be surveyed by the respective groups, to avoid
overlapping of assignment.
 Every group must survey all administrative/disbarment cases of
lawyers/judges promulgated within: 2012-2013; 2014-2015; 2016-
2017; and, 2018-2019, whichever period is assigned to their group;
 Determine which provisions of the CPR it
(disbarment/administrative case) falls and come up with a Tabular
Presentation (sample hereto attached) of all the
administrative/disbarment cases, within the assigned period, as
they fall under the provisions of the CPR;
 Analyze why at this period, majority of the acts committed fall on a
certain provision or chapter of the CPR;
 Compare with the findings of the other three (3) groups; thus, each
group shall copy furnish the other three groups of their findings for
purposes of comparison;
 Come up with a short analysis of all the four (4) periods covered as
to what could be the reason why such acts were committed mostly
within such period;
 Submit your FINAL GROUP SURVEY OF CASES to your respective
class president on or before June 15, 2020, who shall likewise
collate, in one folder, all of the four groups’ survey output per
section, and email the same to:

DJMargie_29@yahoo.com

With file name:

GROUPSURVEYOUTPUT.PALE.IIIA for Section A; and,

GROUPSURVEYOUTPUT.PALE.IIIB for Section B,

on or before June 20, 2020.

8|P age
 On a final and more personal note, much as I wanted to meet you
and do actual lectures before you on these matters, however, the
current situation we are all in does not allow, hence this resolve. I know
that you may feel being shortchanged under this arrangement, but this
is the best we can do to protect ourselves. Please understand that not
all of us have internet facilities at home, thus we cannot do online
lectures.

Please read thoroughly the problem areas identified and the cases
exemplifying the same. May you imbibe in your hearts all the lessons it
brings. I fervently pray for all of you to be safe.

GOD BLESS YOU ALL and STAY SAFE!

Prepared by:

(SGD.)
ATTY. MARGARITA T. PALAD-BERNANTE
Visiting Instructor
Problem Areas in Legal Ethics

9|P age
ANNEX “A”: TABULAR PRESENTATION

Case Docket 2012 2013 CPR

(2014) (2015) PROVISION/S
(2016) (2017) VIOLATED
(2018) (2019)

TOTAL CASES:

CANON/S VIOLATED
MOST:

Note: This is just a sample. You may modify it as you wish.

10 | P a g e