Fact: Ferdinand A. Cruz (petitioner) filed before the MeTC a formal Entry of Appearance, as private prosecutor for Grave Threats, where his father, Mariano Cruz, is the complaining witness. The petitioner, describing himself as a third year law student, justifies his appearance as private prosecutor on the bases of Section 34 of Rule 138 ofContinue reading “CRUZ v. MINA – G.R. No. 154207, April 27, 2007”
Category Archives: Legal Ethics
Alawi v. Alauya – AM SDC-97-2-P. February 24, 1997
Fact: Complainant filed an Administrative case against the defendant for the following incident. 1. Imputation of malicious and libelous charges with no solid grounds through manifest ignorance and evident bad faith; 2. “Causing undue injury to, and blemishing her honor and established reputation 3. Unauthorized enjoyment of the privilege of free postage and Usurpation ofContinue reading “Alawi v. Alauya – AM SDC-97-2-P. February 24, 1997”
A. M. No. 139 March 28, 1983 – RE: ELMO S. ABAD, 1978 Successful Bar Examinee. ATTY. PROCOPIO S. BELTRAN, JR. President of the Philippine Trial Lawyers Association Inc. vs. ELMO S. ABAD
Fact: Respondent passed the bar and about to sign his Lawyer’s Oath when he was called by the Chief Justice and advised him to submit first an answer from a complaint against. Respondent while waiting for the decision of the SC on his case, receive invitation from the IBP-QC, assessment of membership dues, PTR, etc.Continue reading “A. M. No. 139 March 28, 1983 – RE: ELMO S. ABAD, 1978 Successful Bar Examinee. ATTY. PROCOPIO S. BELTRAN, JR. President of the Philippine Trial Lawyers Association Inc. vs. ELMO S. ABAD”
A.M. No. P-220 December 20, 1978 – JULIO ZETA vs. FELICISIMO MALINAO
Fact: A complaint against the Respondent was lodged in the CFI by a person named Julio Zeta. The complainant alleged that the respondent, not a member of the bar, appears in multiple occasion in various courts and constitute illegal practice of Law. All so, as a court employee, he falsifies his time sheet as presentContinue reading “A.M. No. P-220 December 20, 1978 – JULIO ZETA vs. FELICISIMO MALINAO”
B. M. No. 1036, June 10, 2003 – DONNA MARIE S. AGUIRRE vs. EDWIN L. RANA.
Fact: Complainant filed a complaint against the respondent for illegal practice of Law. Complainant aver that respondent appeared in multiple occasion and signed pleadings as a “counsel”. Respondent how recently passed the bar examination in 2000 averred that he appears for the alleged clients as a person who knows the law and not as aContinue reading “B. M. No. 1036, June 10, 2003 – DONNA MARIE S. AGUIRRE vs. EDWIN L. RANA.”
A.C. No. 7269, November 23, 2011 – ATTY. EDITA NOE-LACSAMANA, vs. ATTY. YOLANDO F. BUSMENTE,
Fact: Complainant and Respondent are opponent in a civil case when complainant inquired on the credentials of the Respondent’s alleged corroboration counsel Atty. Elizabeth Dela Rosa. It was found out the Dela Rosa is not a Lawyer and not authorized to practice law. Respondent defendant that she did not authorized Dela Rosa to appear inContinue reading “A.C. No. 7269, November 23, 2011 – ATTY. EDITA NOE-LACSAMANA, vs. ATTY. YOLANDO F. BUSMENTE,”
A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC August 19, 2009
QUERY OF ATTY. KAREN M. SILVERIO-BUFFE, FORMER Clerk of Court – BRANCH 81, ROMBLON, ROMBLON – ON THE PROHIBITION FROM ENGAGING IN THE PRIVATE PRACTICE OF LAW. Fact: Atty. Silverio-Buffe questioned the law stating that retired members of the government were not allowed to practice their Profession for one year. As per Atty. Silverio-Buffe, theContinue reading “A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC August 19, 2009”
Problem Areas in Legal Ethics
REQUIREMENTS BEFORE ADMISSION TO THE BAR OR PRACTICE OF LAW Query of Atty. Silverio-Buffe – AM No. 08-6-352-RTC (2009) “obey the law first before questioning its legality” Atty. Noe-Lacsamana v Atty. Busmente – AC No. 7269 (2011) ” Never aid anyone in an illegal practice of Law” Aguirre v Rana – BM No 1036 JuneContinue reading “Problem Areas in Legal Ethics”
Intestate Estate of Jose Uy vs. Atty. Pacifico Maghari A.C. No. 10525, Sept. 1, 2015
Facts: Lilia Hofileña (Hofileña) filed a Petition before the RTC praying that she be designated administratrix of the estate of her common-law partner, the deceased Jose Uy. Hofileña was initially designated administratrix. However, a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order designating Hofileña as administratix was filed by Wilson Uy, one of Jose Uy’s children, on behalfContinue reading “Intestate Estate of Jose Uy vs. Atty. Pacifico Maghari A.C. No. 10525, Sept. 1, 2015”
A.C. No. 6707, March 24, 2006 HUYSSEN vs. GUTIERREZ
Fact: Complainant alleged that in 1995, while respondent was still connected with the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID), she and her three sons, who are all American citizens, applied for Philippine Visas under Section 13[g] of the Immigration Law. Respondent told complainant that in order that their visa applications will be favorably acted uponContinue reading “A.C. No. 6707, March 24, 2006 HUYSSEN vs. GUTIERREZ”
adrianantazo.com 