Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
CANDOR AND FAIRNESS (CANON 10) .................................................................................. 1 KOMATSU INDUSTRIES (PHILS.) V. COURT OF APPEALS .............................................. 1 HEIRS OF HERMAN RAY ROMERO V. REYES .................................................................... 1 IN RE: 1989 ELECTION OF IBP ......................................................................................... 2 BERENGUE V. CARRANZA..................................................................................................... 6 MUOZ V. PEOPLE ................................................................................................................. 7 ARTIAGA, JR. V. VILLANUENA ............................................................................................. 8 OCCEA V. MARQUEZ .........................................................................................................10 QUASHA V. JUAN ..................................................................................................................11 SURIGAO V. CLORIBAL (MISSING) .................................................................................12 ADEZ REALTY, INC. V. COURT OF APPEALS ...................................................................12 SEEING THE JUDGE IN CHAMBERS (RULE 13.01) ...........................................................13 AUSTRIA V. MASAQUEL ......................................................................................................13 RESPECT TO COURT/DISCIPLINARY (CANON 11) AUTHORITY OF THE COURT .......15 ZALDIVAR V. GONZALES .....................................................................................................15 IN RE: PONCIANO B. JACINTO...........................................................................................16 IN RE: ALMACEN .................................................................................................................18 RHEEM OF THE PHILIPPINES V. FERRER ........................................................................20 MONTECILLO V. GICA..........................................................................................................21 BALAOING V. CALDERON....................................................................................................22 MACEDA V. ABIERRA ..........................................................................................................24
L E G AL E TH ICS C AS E D I GE ST S | BY: ALOJADO, ATIENZA, BALDERAMA, CAMARAO, CARANDANG, CRUZ, ESTILLES, GARCIA, GONZAGA, HUI, LAZARO, SENAJON | 2D 2015|
The Court reprimanded KIPI for insinuating that Padilla Law Offices used the friendship and connection of retired Justice TeodoroPadilla with the ponente of the CA decision for disposing the case in their favour as a birthday and parting gift. When the said ponente declined and unloaded case, it was still allegedly raffled to another good friend of Justice Padilla. However, based on therecords, the case was directly raffled to the Second Division and there was no prior ponente to whom it was assigned.The Court said that it should prove its charges and refrain from conduct tending to create mistrust our judicial system throughinnuendos on which no evidence is offered or indicated to be proffered.
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[1]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[2]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[3]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[4]
3. The former system of having the IBP President and Executive Vice-President elected by the Board of Governors (composed of the governors of the nine [91 IBP regions) from among themselves (as provided in Sec. 47, Art. VII, Original IBP By-Laws) should be restored. The right of automatic succession by the Executive VicePresident to the presidency upon the expiration of their two-year term (which was abolished by this Court's resolution dated July 9,1985 in Bar Matter No. 287) should be as it is hereby restored. xxx 12. Special elections for the Board of Governors shall be held in the nine (9) IBP regions within three (3) months, after the promulgation of the Court's resolution in this case. Within thirty (30) days thereafter, the Board of Governors shall meet at the IBP Central Office in Manila to elect from among themselves the IBP national president and executive vice-president. In these special elections, the candidates in the election of the national officers held on June 3,1989, particularly identified in Sub-Head 3 of this Resolution entitled "Formation of
2D 2015|
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[5]
BERENGUE V. CARRANZA
EDUARDO J. BERENGUER, complainant, respondent. A.C. No. 716 FACTS Atty. Caranza was counsel who appeared for a client before a cadastral proceeding in Sorsogon. A complaint was filed against Atty. Caranza accusing him of knowingly introducing into evidence an Affidavit of Adjudication and Transfer executed by the mother of his client to the effect that her own mother (the grandmother) left no legitimate ascendants or descendants or any other heirs except herself, when, as a matter of fact, the deceased was survived by four other daughters and one son, father of the complainant thereby doing falsehood in court. In his defense, he claims that he had no hand in the preparing the affidavit introduced in the cadastral proceeding and he only introduced the same in evidence to prove the fact of transfer. Atty. Caranza also admitted that he was not very meticulous about the affidavit. The Solicitor General argues that while Atty. Caranza may not have willfully introduced a false statement in court, the latter could not be totally excused from liability for failing to properly inform himself of the evidence in court. Accordingly he charges the lawyer with charged with "violation of his oath of office, [having] caused confusion and January 30, 1969
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[6]
MUOZ V. PEOPLE
VICENTE MUOZ, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE COURT OF APPEALS, respondents, DELIA T. SUTTON,respondent. Facts: Respondent Delia T. Sutton was a member of the Philippine Bar and connected with the law firm of Salonga, Ordoez, Yap, Parlade, and Associates. In a petition for certiorari prepared by her to review a Court of Appeals decision, she attributed to it a finding of facts in reckless disregard of what in truth was its version as to what transpired (the petition makes reference to "findings" of the Court of Appeals which is not true; refers to a portion of the same quotation, as "the established uncontroverted facts recognized by the Court of Appeals," which is, likewise, untrue). When given an opportunity to make proper amends, both in her appearance before us and thereafter in her memorandum, there was lacking any showing of regret for such misconduct. Background:
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[7]
The properties involved here are three parcels of land in Los Banos, Laguna. Estolano was able to acquire an Original title to the first parcel of land. The second and third parcels were the object of Revocable Permit Applications filed by Malabayabas and Suyo. 3 months after the filing, Canuto transferred his right over the third parcel to Estolano. Later on, Malabayabas also sold his rights over the second parcel to Estolano. Estolano filed Insular Government Property Sales Application (New) covering the second and third parcels. Aquino filed his Revocable Permit Application over an area of 8,000 sq.m, which was later found to cover a part of the first parcel already titled in favor of Estolano and of the third parcel transferred to him by Suyo. Guanzon, Aquino's sister-in-law, also filed Revocable Permit Application over the second parcel. Eventually, the conflicts were taken cognizance of by the Bureau of Lands, and ruled in favor of Estolano. Aquino and Guanzon moved for the reconsideration of the decision, and the Director of Lands, amended his previous Decision and awarding to Aquino preferential right to that area actually occupied and cultivated by him. Estolano, Aquino and Guanzon appealed to the Secretary of Agriculture and Natural Resources who affirmed the first decision of the Bureau of Lands (in favor of Estolano only). Guanzon moved for the reconsideration of the Secretary's Decision but said Motion was denied. Aquino appealed the Decision of the Secretary to the Office of the President of the Philippines, which likewise affirmed the Decision appealed from. The Decision of the Director of Lands having become final, an order of Execution thereof was issued. However, Aquino and Guanzon remained in possession of the subject property. Estolano then filed the ejectment
2D 2015|
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[8]
They also filed a complaint with the Court of Agrarian Relations (CAR) at San Pablo City and the CAR issued an order requiring Estolano to respect Aquino's possession. Atty. Luis V. Artiaga Jr. then sought the disbarment of Atty. Enrique C. Villanueva for alleged unethical practices. 1. That Atty. Villanueva had caused his client to perjure himself; 2. That he lacks candor and respect toward his adversary and the courts; and 3. That he had been abusive of the right of recourse to the courts. W/N Atty. Villanueva is guilty of the alleged unethical practices. HELD: Yes. We find Atty. Villanueva Atty. Villanueva guilty as above charged. RATIO: The complaint for forcible entry filed by Villanuevas client are clear proofs that Atty. Villanueva had indeed caused his client Aquino to perjure himself as to the date he lost possession of the subject property so as to place the case within the jurisdiction of the court. In the original complaint, Atty. Villanuevas client alleged that he was dispossessed of the subject land in 1960, while in the amended complaint, he alleged it was in June, 1973. Clearly, this was a ploy concocted by Atty. Villanueva to enable the court to acquire jurisdiction over the case since a forcible
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[9]
OCCEA V. MARQUEZ
Facts: Petitioners, Atty. Jesus V. Occea and Atty. Samuel C. Occea, are the lawyers for the estate executrix, Mrs. Necitas Ogan Occea, and they had been representing the said executrix since 1963, defending the estate against claims and protecting the interests of the estate. In order to expedite the settlement of their deceased father's estate, the seven instituted heirs decided to enter into compromise with the claimants, as a result of which the total amount of P220,000.00 in cash was awarded to the claimants, including co-executor Atty. Isabelo V. Binamira, his lawyers and his wife. A partial distribution of the corpus and income of the estate was made to the heirs in the total amount of P450,000.00. On November 18, 1966, the estate and inheritance taxes were completely settled by the executrix.
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
2D 2015|
[10]
QUASHA V. JUAN
FACTS: A sea vessel, MV San Vicente - registered in the Philippines, was chartered by foreigners and foreign companies to deliver cargo from Sweden to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The payment scheme was supposed to be by time charter. Payment would have been in the amount of US $ 3,200 a day. However, after two months, the foreigners failed to pay the daily hire. It had docked in Jeddah but did not unload its cargo due to the fact of non-payment. Filipinas Carriers (FILCAR) exercised its lien over the goods transported as per the Charter Party (their contract). FILCAR asked to court for sale of the goods in the ship to satisfy the debt of the foreign companies to them. Later, the law firm of Quasha Asperilla Ancheta Valmonte Pea & Marcos intervened in the case on behalf of the agent of some of the foreign companies/defendants of the case. The agents name was Ahmed Baroom and he was supposedly the agent of AB Charles Thorburn & Co. and some companies in Saudi Arabia. Later, Baroom withdrew from pursuing the case but he failed to pay his lawyers (Quasha). The law firm of Quasha then filed a writ of preliminary attachment in a different CFI (Pasig the original case was in the CFI of Manila) claiming that it has a right to a portion of the goods as payment for its attorneys fees. The goods however have already been sold by the respondent court, the law firm now goes after the proceeds of the sale.
2D 2015|
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[11]
RULING: No. The law firm should have pursued its claim to attorneys fees in the same court as an intervention petition for recovery of attorneys fees. The respondent CFI of Manila had already acquired jurisdiction over the goods as the case pending with it was already deciding upon the question of who the real owner of the cargo was. In filing with another CFI, multiplicity of suits occurred. The charging lien filed in Pasig was erroneous, an intervention petition for recovery of attorneys fees in the CFI of Manila was the proper action that should have been taken. This negligence by the law firm entitles it to no relief, the instant petition must be dismissed. Besides the goods have already been sold and delivered to a foreign buyer, the court has lost jurisdiction over it. Everything is already fait accompli (already done and beyond alteration).
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
2D 2015|
[12]
DOMINGO V. AUSTRIA, petitioner, HON. ANTONIO C. MASAQUEL, in his capacity as the Presiding Judge of Branch II of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan, respondent. FACTS Austria was one of the plaintiffs in a Civil Case against Bravo. Judge rendered a decision declaring the plaintiffs the owners of the 3 parcels of land in question and ordering Bravo to vacate the lands and pay Austria and company damages only with respect to the land located at Bayambang. The plaintiffs filed a motion for the immediate execution of the judgment which motion was granted and, upon the plaintiffs' having posted a surety bond in the sum of P2K, the sheriff placed them in possession of the lands in San Carlos. Atty. Mariano C. Sicat, a former assistant or associate of the Judge entered his appearance as the new
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
2D 2015|
[13]
appeal not being available to him, petitioner filed the instant petition for certiorari before this Court. ISSUE
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[14]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[15]
-Under either the clear and present danger test or the balancing-ofinterest, the Court held that the statements made by respondent
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[16]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[17]
IN RE: ALMACEN
IN
THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS FOR DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST ATTY. VICENTE RAUL ALMACEN Facts: CASE: Virginia Y. Yaptinchay vs. Antonio H. Calero - Atty. Vicente Almacen was counsel for the defendant. The trial court rendered judgment against his client. He moved for its reconsideration. He served on the adverse counsel a copy of the motion, but did not notify the latter of the time and place of hearing on said motion. Plaintiff moved for execution of the judgment. For "lack of proof of service," the trial court denied both motions. 2nd motion for reconsideration was filed by Almacen but withdrawn by the trial court
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[18]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[19]
PETITIONERS: Rheem of The Philippines, Inc. and Gordon W. Mackay RESPONDENTS: Zoilo R. Ferrer, Mario Tatlonghari, Santo Marilag and Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) FACTS: The CIR denied Rheem of the Philippines motion to dismiss the principal respondents' complaint and said court's refusal to reconsider the order of denial. Rheem of the Philippines, on a petition for certiorari, challenges the jurisdiction of the CIR to hear and determine a case. The petitioners are seeking the following:
1. Reinstatement with back wages, which accumulated since their illegal separation, on the ground of unjustified dismissal; 2. Payment of increase in salary and separation pay; 3. Night differential pay; and 4. Premium pay for work done on Sundays and legal holidays.
ISSUE: Whether or not the CIR has jurisdiction.
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[20]
MONTECILLO V. GICA
G.R. No. L-36800 October 21, 1974 FACTS: Jorge Montecillo was accused by Francisco Gica of oral defamation (the former allegedly calling the latter "stupid" or a "fool'). Atty. del Mar represented Montecillo and he successfully defended Monteceillo in the lower court. Del Mar was even able to win their counterclaim thus the lower court ordered Gica to pay Montecillo the adjudged moral damages. Gica appealed the award of damages to the Court of Appeals where the latter court reversed the same. The Fourth Division of the CA in a decision penned by Justice Gatmaitan and concurred in by Associate Justices Leuterio and Gaviola, reversed the lower courts decision. INFRACTION AGAINST THE CA (FOR ISSUE #1):
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[21]
Through his Motion for Reconsideration, in one breath and in a language certainly not complimentary to the Appellate Court and to Us, respondent del Mar again made his veiled threat of retribution aimed at the Appellate Court and at Us for Our judicial acts. And taking heed on his memorandum entitled Explanation, and with the full realization that a practicing lawyer and officer of the court facing contempt proceedings cannot just be allowed to voluntarily retire from the practice of law. The Court, addressing the aged brethren of the bar reminded them that second only to the duty of maintaining allegiance to the Philippines and to support the Constitution and obey the laws of the Philippines, is the duty of all attorneys to observe and maintain the respect due to the courts of justice and judicial officers. It is the duty of the lawyer to maintain towards the courts a respectful attitude. As an officer of the court, it is his duty to uphold the dignity and authority of the court to which he owes fidelity, according to the oath he has taken. Respect for the courts guarantees the stability of our democratic institutions which, without such respect, would be resting on a very shaky foundation. For a lawyer in the twilight of his life, with supposed physical and mental ailments at that, who dares to challenge the integrity and honor of both the Supreme Court and Court of Appeals, We have nothing but commiseration and sympathy for his choosing to close the book of his long years of law practice not by voluntary retirement with honor but in disciplinary action with ignominy and dishonor. To those who are in the practice of law and those who in the future will choose to enter this profession, We wish to point to this case as a reminder for them to imprint in their hearts and minds that an attorney owes it to himself to respect the courts of justice and its officers as a fealty for the stability of our democratic institutions.
BALAOING V. CALDERON
Facts:
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
2D 2015|
[22]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[23]
MACEDA V. ABIERRA
BONIFACIO SANZ MACEDA, Presiding Judge, Branch 12, Regional Trial Court, Antique, petitioner, vs. HON. OMBUDSMAN CONRADO M. VASQUEZ AND ATTY. NAPOLEON A. ABIERA, respondents. G.R. No. 102781. April 22, 1993.
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
[24]
BY: ALOJADO ASAMA ATIENZA BALDERAMA BRIONES CAMARAO CARANDANG CRUZ DUMA ESTILLES GARCIA GONZAGA LAZARO LIM LORENZO RELOJO SENAJON TONGSON TRONQUED |
2D 2015|
[25]