Legal Profession

New Era University Canon 2

2016-2017 In the Matter of: Svitlana E. Sangary
http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/ca/SangarySvitlana.pdf
“The honorable peculiarities of Filipino English” by Lisandro Claudio http://documents.latimes.com/judges-recommendation-lawyer-svitlana-
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/200340/opinion/blogs/the- sangary/
honorable-peculiarities-of-filipino-english Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974)
See ROC Rule 141, Sec. 18; Rule 3, Sec. 21
http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/ftips/type.pdf
http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/ax_these_terms_from_you History of suits in forma pauperis
r_legal_writing Algura v. The City of Naga (G.R. No.150135, October 30, 2006)

Research: Canon 3
Etymology of “attorney”; “to attorn” Khan v. Simbillo, 409 SCRA 299 (2003)
Difference between the ff.: (Attorney, Barrister, Solicitor) In re Tagorda, 53 Phil 37 (1929)
Origin of the word “abogado” Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378 (1993)
Origin of the phrase “take up the cudgels” Assignment: Submit a photocopy of a page from a law list
Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzie, 136 SCRA 349 (1985)
Game of Thrones Season 01 Episode 06; Season 04 Ep. 06 & 08 See: http://www.bakermckenzie.com/Philippines/
Samonte v. Gatdula, 303 SCRA 756 (1999)
The Legal Profession Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1959)
In the matter of the Integration of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines,
January 9, 1973 Canon 4
Cayetano v. Monsod, GR 100113, September 3, 1991 Re: Request Of National Committee On Legal Aid To Exempt Legal Aid
(Note: See also dissenting opinion of Justice Padilla) Clients From Paying Filing, Docket And Other Fees, August 28, 2009
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Bar Matter (BM) No. 553, June 17, 1993
Rules of Court (ROC), Rule 138, Section 1 Canon 5
In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 562, (1970) B.M. 850, October 2, 2001 (MCLE)
In re: Cunanan 94 Phil 534 (1954) See also: Who are exempt
BAR MATTER (BM) NO. 702 May 12, 1994 B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008
Alawi v. Alauya, A.M. SDC-97-2-P, February 24, 1997
Cui v. Cui, 120 Phil. 729
Research: When may a non-lawyer practice law Canon 6
Vitriolo v. Dasig, 400 SCRA 172 (2003)
Requirements for admission to practice People v. Pineda, 20 SCRA 748 (1967)
Citizenship Collantes vs Romeren 200 SCRA 584 (1991)
1987 Constitution, Art. XII, Sec. 14 Huyssen vs Gutierrez 485 SCRA 244 (2006)
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 2 Misamin v. San Juan, 72 SCRA 491 (1976)
RA 9225 See also: RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Sec. 3(d);
In Re Arthur Castillo Reyes (1993) RA 6713 7(b)
B.M. 1678, Dacanay (2007) PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 526 (2005)
B.M. 2112, In re: Muneses (2012)
Canon 7
Residency RA 6397
Rule 138, Sec. 2 In re 1989 Elections of the IBP, 178 SCRA 398 (1989)
Santos v. Llamas, 322 SCRA 529 (2000)
Age Letter of Atty. CecilioArevalo, 458 SCRA 209 (2005)
Rule 138, Sec. 2 Foodsphere v. Mauricio, A.C. No. 7199 (22 July 2009)
Young v. Batuegas, 403 SCRA 123 [2003]).
Good moral character In re Parazo, 82 Phil. 230 [1948])
Narag v. Narag, 291 SCRA 451, June 29, 1998 Zaguirre v. Castillo, 398 SCRA 659 [2003]:
Olbes v. Deciembre, 457 SCRA 341 Tapucar v. Tapucar, 293 SCRA 331 [1998]:
In re: Argosino, A.M. No. 712 July 13, 1995; B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997
Canon 8
Education Camacho v. Pagulayan et al (A.C. No. 4807, March 22, 2000)
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 6 Reyes vs. Chiong, Jr., 405 SCRA 212 (2003)
Republic Act No. 7662 Legal Education Act Laput v. Remotigue A.M. No. 219 (1962)
Rule 138, Sec. 5 – 16
In re: Telesforo Diao, A.C. No. 244 March 29 (1963) Canon 9
In re: Application of Adriano M. Hernandez, Sept. 6, 1993 Aguirre v. Rana 403 SCRA 342 (2003)
Bar Matter 1153 Alawi v. Alauya, supra
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc, supra
Oath People v. Villanueva, supra
Rule 138, Sec. 17 Rule 138, Sec. 1, Rules of Court
In re: Argosino, supra Aguirre v. Rana, supra
Olbes v. Deciembre, supra OCA v. Ladaga, 350 SCRA 326
Rule 138, Sec. 34, Rules of Court in relation to People v. Sin Ben, 98
Qualifications for practice Phil. 138 (1955)
Rule 138, Sec. 1 Guballa v. Caguioa, 78 SCRA 302
Eco v. Rodriguez, 107 Phil. 612 (1960)
Exceptions: Robinson v. Villafuerte, 18 Phil 121 (1911)
Rule 138, Sec. 34 Amalgamated Laborers Assn. v. CIR. 22 SCRA 1266 (1968)
Rule 115, Sec 1 (c) Tan TekBeng v. David. 128 SCRA 389 (1983)
Halili v. CIR. 136 SCRA 113 (1965))
Prohibition from practice Five J Taxi v. NLRC, 235 SCRA 556
Art VI, Sec. 14; Art.VIII, Sec. 15; Art.IX-A, Sec. 2; Art. IX, Sec. 8 (2) (1987
Constitution) Canon 10
RA 7160, Sec. 90-91 Cobb Perez v. Lantin, 24 SCRA 291 (1968)
Rule 148, Sec. 35 Young v. Batuegas, supra
People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-19450 May 27, 1965 COMELEC v. Noynay, 292 SCRA 254 (1992)
RA 910, Sec 1 Rule 138, Sec. 20 (d) in relation to Garcia v. Francisco 220 SCRA 512
(1993)
Duties of a lawyer Gomez v. Presiding Judge 249 SCRA 432
Rule 138, Sec. 20
Research: What are the “four-fold duties” of a lawyer, Canon 11
counsel de oficio, counsel de parte In re Sotto 82 Phil 595 (1949)
See also: B.M. No. 1132, Nov. 12, 2000; De Gracia v. Warden of Makati, G.R. No. L-42032, January 9, 1976
B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008 Buenaseda v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645 (1993)
In re Almacen, 31 SCRA 562
Sangalang v. IAC, 177 SCRA 87
Code of Professional Responsibility Go v. Abrogar, 485 SCRA 457
1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 6.
Canon 1 Visit http://oca.judiciary.gov.ph/
Maceda v. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464 (1993)
Research: Barratry, Ambulance Chasing Ang v Castro, 136 SCRA 453 (May 15, 1985)
Barrios v. Martinez, A.C. No. 4585. November 12, 2004
Ui v. Bonifacio, A.C. No. 3319. June 8, 2000 Canon 12
Figueroa v. Barranco, SBC Case No. 519. July 31, 1997 1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 6
Cordova v. Cordova, 179 SCRA 680 (1989) Rule 138, Sec 20(g)
Guevarra v. Eala, 529 SCRA 1 (2007) Villasis v. Court of Appeals, 60 SCRA 120
Soriano v. Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006 Supreme Court Circular No. 28-91
Calub v. Suller, A.C. No. 1474, January 28, 2000 RULES OF COURT, RULE 7, SEC. 5:
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 416 SCRA 465 Achacoso v. Court of Appeals, 51 SCRA 424, 1973
Saburnido v. Madrono, 366 SCRA 1 (2001) Manila Pest Control v. WCC, 25 SCRA 700 (1968)
Castaneda v. Ago, 65 SCRA 505 (1975) Art. 184, Revised Penal Code
US v. Ballena, 18 Phil. 382
Rule 132, Sec. 3 Canon 22
PD1829-Penalizing Obstruction of Justice Montano vs. IBP 358 SCRA 1 (2001)
PNB v. UyTengPiao, 57 Phil 337 (1932) Obando vs. Figueras, 322 SCRA 148 (2000)

Canon 13 Liabilities of lawyers

Austria v. Masaquel, 20 SCRA 1247(1967) Kinds of contempt, supra
Nestle Phil. v. Sanchez 154 SCRA 542 (1987) Power to discipline errant lawyers
In re de Vera 385 SCRA 285 (2003) See ROC Rule 138, S. 27
Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1951) 139-B, S. 16
RE: Request Radio – TV Coverage, A.M. No. 01-4-03-S.C. June 29, 2001 Quingwa v. Puno, Admin. Case No. 398, Feb. 28, 1967
Magsalang v. People, G.R. No. 90083 October 4, 1990 Amaya v. Tecson, 450 SCRA 510
Aquino v. Mangaoang, 425 SCRA 572
Canon 14 In Re: Ruste, 70 Phil 243
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (i) Reinstatement, basis - 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5).
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (h) Cui v. Cui, 11 SCRA 755
Rule 138, Sec. 31 In re: Adriatico, 17 Phil 324
P.D. 543 (1974) Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, 192 SCRA 381
RA 6033 Yap Tan v. Sabandal, 170 SCRA 207
RA 6034 In re: Rusiana, 56 SCRA 240
RA 6035 In re: Rovero, 101 SCRA 803
RA 9999
BM 2012, Feb. 10, 2009 The Judiciary
Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974)
Blanza v. Arcangel, 21 SCRA 1 (1967) Code of Judicial Conduct
Algura v. The City of Naga, supra
Also read Rule 2.02 Bangalore Principles
http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/greco/evaluations/round4/Bang
Canon 15 alore_principles_EN.pdf
Revised Penal Code, Art. 209.
Rule 130, Section 24 (b) of the RRC) Qualifications
People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 115439-41. July 16, 1997 Sec. 7 (1), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution
Regala v. Sandiganbayan, 262 SCRA 122 (1996) BP 129
Dee v. CA 176 SCRA 651(1989) Canon 1
Nakpil v. Valdez, 286 SCRA 758 (1998) OCA vs. Floro, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460 March 31, 2006
People v. Veneracion, 249 SCRA 244
Canon 16 Go v. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 165
Tahil v. Eisma, 64 SCRA 378
Research: Privileged communication Padilla v. Zantua, 237 SCRA 670
Ordonio v. Eduarte, 207 SCRA 229 (1992) Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. A.M. No. 08-8-
Rubias v. Batiller, G.R. No. L- 35702 May 29, 1973 11-CA
Art. 1491, NCC Tan v. Rosete, A.M. No. MTJ-04- 1563, September 8, 2004
Tuazon v. Tuazon, 88 Phil. 42 Dimatulac et al v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679
Daroy v. Legaspi, A.M. No. 936 July 25, 1975
Rule 138, Sec. 37 Canon 2
Businos v. Ricafort, 283 SCRA 40 (1997) Romero v. Valle, A.M. No. R-192-RTJ January 9, 1987
Vda de Caina v. Victoriano, G.R. No. L-12905, February 26, 1959 Castillo v. Calanog, A.M. No. RTJ-90-447 December 16, 1994
Research: Macalintal v. Teh, 280 SCRA 623
Difference between Retaining and Charging lien
Barnachea v. Quicho, 399 SCRA 1 (2003) Canon 3
Parayno v. Meneses, 231 SCRA 807
Canon 17 Rule 137, ROC
Cantiller v. Potenciano, 180 SCRA 246 (1989) Lorenzo v. Marquez, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-87-123 June 27, 1988
Santiago v. Fojas, 248 SCRA 68 (1995)
Stemmerik v. Mas AC No. 8010 (2009) Canon 4
Arban v. Borja, A.M. No R-281-RTJ August 26, 1986
Canon 18 Saburnido v. Madrono, Sept. 26, 2001
Islas v.Platon, 47 Phil. 162 Sison v. Caoibes, Jr. A.M. No. RTJ-03-1771, May 27 2004
Legarda v. CA, G. R. No. 94457, March 18, 1991 Ompoc vs. Judge Torres, A.M. No. MTJ-86-11, 17 Sept. 1989
Uy v Tansinin [AC No. 8252 (July 21, 2009)
Garcia V. Bala [A.C. No. 5039(2005)]. Canon 5
In Re Judge Rojas, A.M. No. 98-6-185-RTC. October 30, 1998
Negligence of counsel In Re: Aguas, G.R. No. 12, August 8, 1901
Mapuav.Mendoza, 45 Phil. 424(1993)
Filinvest Land v.CA, 182 SCRA 664(1990) Canon 6
Joven-De Jesus v. PNB, 12 SCRA 447 Longboan v. Polig, A.M. No. 704-RTJ June 14, 1990
People v. Cawili, 34 SCRA 728(1970) Abad v. Bleza A.M. No. 227-RTJ October 13, 1986
Gaerlan v. Bernal, G.R. No.L-4049, Jan. 28, 1952 Maquiran v. Grageda, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1888. February 11, 2005
Agravante v. Patriarca, 183 SCRA 113(1990)) De la Cruz v. Pascua, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1461. June 26, 2001
Ventura v.Santos, 59 Phil. 123(1993)
Alcoriza v. Lumakang, Adm. Case No. 249, November 21, 1978) Liabilities of Judges
Capulong v. Alino, 22 SCRA 491(1968) Basis, 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Section 11
Raquiza vs. Castaneda, 82 SCRA 235
Instances where the client is not bound by counsel’s negligence: Galangi v. Macli-ing, Adm. Matter No. 75-DJ, Jan. 17, 1978
Republic v. Arro, 150 SCRA630(1987) Lapena v. Collado, 76 SCRA 82
Legarda v. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 418(1991) Secretary of Justice v. Marcos, 76 SCRA 301
PHHC v. Tiongco, 12 SCRA 471(1964) In re: Impeachment of Horilleno, 43 Phil. 212
Escudero v. Dulay, 158 SCRA 69, 78(1988) In re: Climaco, 55 SCRA 107
Republic vs. Arro, et al., Supra
Blanza v. Arcangel, A.C. No. 492 September 5, 1967 Grounds for Discipline
Montemayor v. Collado, 107 SCRA 258
Canon 19 Barja v. Beracio, 74 SCRA 355
Rule 138, Sec. 20(d) Haw Tay v. Singayao, 154 SCRA 107
Rural Bank of Calape Inc. vs. Florido, A.C. No. 5736 June 18, 2010 Lecaroz v. Garcia, A.M. No. 2271-MJ September 18, 1981
Pena vs. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298 Balagot v. Opinion, 195 SCRA 429
Rule 138, Sec. 23 Araza v. Reyes, 64 SCRA 347
Millare vs. Montero, A.C. No. 3283 July 13, 1995 In re: Paulin, 101 SCRA 605
Soriano v. Mabbayad, 67 SCRA 385
Canon 20 Monsanto v. Palarca, 126 SCRA 45
Rule 138, Sec. 23 Anguluan v. Taguba, 93 SCRA 179
Corpuz v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424, June 30, 1980 Espayos v. Lee, 89 SCRA 478
Albano v. Coloma, 21 SCRA 411 (1967)
Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v. NLRC, G.R. No.
120592, March 14, 1997 A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC
Rule 138, Sec, 24 See notarial rules as amended
Definition of amicus curiae, counsel de parte, counsel de oficio http://www.lawphil.net/courts/supreme/am/am_02_8_13_sc_2008.html
Rule 138, Sec. 32
Nocom vs. Camerino, et al., G.R. No. 182984 (February 10, 2009) Research: Difference between “acknowledgement” and “jurat”

Canon 21 See also: RA 9406

Rule 138, 20(e). Lapena vs. Marcos Adm. Matter No. 1969-MJ
Rule 130, sec. 21(b). Abadilla vs. Tabiliran, Jr., Adm. Matter MTC-92-716
Art. 209 Revised Penal Code.
Genato v. Silapan 453 Phil. 910 (2003)
Hilado v. David 83 Phil 569 (1949)