Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

Research:

Etymology of attorney; to attorn


Difference between the ff.: (Attorney, Barrister, Solicitor)
Origin of the word abogado
Origin of the phrase take up the cudgels
Game of Thrones Season 01 Episode 06; Season 04 Ep. 06 & 08
The Legal Profession
In the matter of the Integration of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, January 9, 1973
Cayetano v. Monsod, GR 100113, September 3, 1991
(Note: See also dissenting opinion of Justice Padilla)
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Bar Matter (BM) No. 553, June 17, 1993
Rules of Court (ROC), Rule 138, Section 1
In re: Almacen, 31 SCRA 562, (1970)
In re: Cunanan 94 Phil 534 (1954)
BAR MATTER (BM) NO. 702 May 12, 1994
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
Requirements for admission to practice
Citizenship
1987 Constitution, Art. XII, Sec. 14
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 2
RA 9225
In Re Arthur Castillo Reyes (1993)
B.M. 1678, Dacanay (2007)
B.M. 2112, In re: Muneses (2012)
Residency
Rule 138, Sec. 2
Age
Rule 138, Sec. 2
Good moral character
Narag v. Narag, 291 SCRA 451, June 29, 1998
Olbes v. Deciembre, 457 SCRA 341
In re: Argosino, A.M. No. 712 July 13, 1995; B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997
Education
ROC, Rule 138, Sec. 6
Republic Act No. 7662 Legal Education Act
Rule 138, Sec. 5 16
In re: Telesforo Diao, A.C. No. 244 March 29 (1963)
In re: Application of Adriano M. Hernandez, Sept. 6, 1993
Bar Matter 1153
Oath
Rule 138, Sec. 17
In re: Argosino, supra
Olbes v. Deciembre, supra
Qualifications for practice
Rule 138, Sec. 1

Exceptions:
Rule 138, Sec. 34
Rule 115, Sec 1 (c)
Prohibition from practice
Art VI, Sec. 14; Art.VIII, Sec. 15; Art.IX-A, Sec. 2; Art. IX, Sec. 8 (2) (1987 Constitution)
RA 7160, Sec. 90-91
Rule 148, Sec. 35
People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-19450 May 27, 1965
RA 910, Sec 1
Duties of a lawyer
Rule 138, Sec. 20
Research: What are the four-fold duties of a lawyer,
counsel de oficio, counsel de parte
See also: B.M. No. 1132, Nov. 12, 2000;
B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008
Code of Professional Responsibility
Canon 1
Research: Barratry, Ambulance Chasing
Barrios v. Martinez, A.C. No. 4585. November 12, 2004
Ui v. Bonifacio, A.C. No. 3319. June 8, 2000
Figueroa v. Barranco, SBC Case No. 519. July 31, 1997
Cordova v. Cordova, 179 SCRA 680 (1989)
Guevarra v. Eala, 529 SCRA 1 (2007)
Soriano v. Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006
Calub v. Suller, A.C. No. 1474, January 28, 2000
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan, 416 SCRA 465
Saburnido v. Madrono, 366 SCRA 1 (2001)
Castaneda v. Ago, 65 SCRA 505 (1975)
Canon 2
In the Matter of: Svitlana E. Sangary
http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/ca/SangarySvitlana.pdf
http://documents.latimes.com/judges-recommendation-lawyer-/
Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974)
See ROC Rule 141, Sec. 18; Rule 3, Sec. 21
History of suits in forma pauperis
Algura v. The City of Naga (G.R. No.150135, October 30, 2006)
Canon 3
Khan v. Simbillo, 409 SCRA 299 (2003)
In re Tagorda, 53 Phil 37 (1929)
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378 (1993)
Assignment: Submit a photocopy of a page from a law list
Dacanay v. Baker and McKenzie, 136 SCRA 349 (1985)
See: http://www.bakermckenzie.com/Philippines/
Samonte v. Gatdula, 303 SCRA 756 (1999)
Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1959)
Canon 4
Re: Request Of National Committee On Legal Aid To Exempt Legal Aid Clients From Paying Filing, Docket
And Other Fees, August 28, 2009

Canon 5
B.M. 850, October 2, 2001 (MCLE)
See also: Who are exempt
B.M. No. 1922, June 3, 2008
Canon 6
Vitriolo v. Dasig, 400 SCRA 172 (2003)
People v. Pineda, 20 SCRA 748 (1967)
Collantes vs Romeren 200 SCRA 584 (1991)
Huyssen vs Gutierrez 485 SCRA 244 (2006)
Misamin v. San Juan, 72 SCRA 491 (1976)
See also: RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Sec. 3(d); RA 6713 7(b)
PCGG v. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 526 (2005)
Canon 7
RA 6397
In re 1989 Elections of the IBP, 178 SCRA 398 (1989)
Santos v. Llamas, 322 SCRA 529 (2000)
Letter of Atty. CecilioArevalo, 458 SCRA 209 (2005)
Foodsphere v. Mauricio, A.C. No. 7199 (22 July 2009)
Young v. Batuegas, 403 SCRA 123 [2003]).
In re Parazo, 82 Phil. 230 [1948])
Zaguirre v. Castillo, 398 SCRA 659 [2003]:
Tapucar v. Tapucar, 293 SCRA 331 [1998]:
Canon 8
Camacho v. Pagulayan et al (A.C. No. 4807, March 22, 2000)
Reyes vs. Chiong, Jr., 405 SCRA 212 (2003)
Laput v. Remotigue A.M. No. 219 (1962)
Canon 9
Aguirre v. Rana 403 SCRA 342 (2003)
Alawi v. Alauya, supra
Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc, supra
People v. Villanueva, supra
Rule 138, Sec. 1, Rules of Court
Aguirre v. Rana, supra
OCA v. Ladaga, 350 SCRA 326
Rule 138, Sec. 34, Rules of Court in relation to People v. Sin Ben, 98 Phil. 138 (1955)
Guballa v. Caguioa, 78 SCRA 302
Eco v. Rodriguez, 107 Phil. 612 (1960)
Robinson v. Villafuerte, 18 Phil 121 (1911)
Amalgamated Laborers Assn. v. CIR. 22 SCRA 1266 (1968)
Tan TekBeng v. David. 128 SCRA 389 (1983)
Halili v. CIR. 136 SCRA 113 (1965))
Five J Taxi v. NLRC, 235 SCRA 556
Canon 10
Cobb Perez v. Lantin, 24 SCRA 291 (1968)
Young v. Batuegas, supra
COMELEC v. Noynay, 292 SCRA 254 (1992)
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (d) in relation to Garcia v. Francisco 220 SCRA 512 (1993)
Gomez v. Presiding Judge 249 SCRA 432
Canon 11
In re Sotto 82 Phil 595 (1949)
De Gracia v. Warden of Makati, G.R. No. L-42032, January 9, 1976

Buenaseda v. Flavier, 226 SCRA 645 (1993)


In re Almacen, 31 SCRA 562
Sangalang v. IAC, 177 SCRA 87
Go v. Abrogar, 485 SCRA 457
1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 6.
Visit http://oca.judiciary.gov.ph/
Maceda v. Vasquez, 221 SCRA 464 (1993)
Ang v Castro, 136 SCRA 453 (May 15, 1985)
Canon 12
1987 Constitution, Art. III, Sec 6
Rule 138, Sec 20(g)
Villasis v. Court of Appeals, 60 SCRA 120
Supreme Court Circular No. 28-91
RULES OF COURT, RULE 7, SEC. 5:
Achacoso v. Court of Appeals, 51 SCRA 424, 1973
Manila Pest Control v. WCC, 25 SCRA 700 (1968)
Art. 184, Revised Penal Code
US v. Ballena, 18 Phil. 382
Rule 132, Sec. 3
PD1829-Penalizing Obstruction of Justice
PNB v. UyTengPiao, 57 Phil 337 (1932)
Canon 13
Austria v. Masaquel, 20 SCRA 1247(1967)
Nestle Phil. v. Sanchez 154 SCRA 542 (1987)
In re de Vera 385 SCRA 285 (2003)
Cruz v. Salva, 105 Phil 1151 (1951)
RE: Request Radio TV Coverage, A.M. No. 01-4-03-S.C. June 29, 2001
Magsalang v. People, G.R. No. 90083 October 4, 1990
Canon 14
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (i)
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (h)
Rule 138, Sec. 31
P.D. 543 (1974)
RA 6033
RA 6034
RA 6035
RA 9999
BM 2012, Feb. 10, 2009
Ledesma v. Climaco, 57 SCRA 473 (1974)
Blanza v. Arcangel, 21 SCRA 1 (1967)
Algura v. The City of Naga, supra
Also read Rule 2.02
Canon 15
Revised Penal Code, Art. 209.
Rule 130, Section 24 (b) of the RRC)
People v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 115439-41. July 16, 1997
Regala v. Sandiganbayan, 262 SCRA 122 (1996)
Dee v. CA 176 SCRA 651(1989)
Nakpil v. Valdez, 286 SCRA 758 (1998)
Canon 16

Research: Privileged communication


Ordonio v. Eduarte, 207 SCRA 229 (1992)
Rubias v. Batiller, G.R. No. L- 35702 May 29, 1973
Art. 1491, NCC
Tuazon v. Tuazon, 88 Phil. 42
Daroy v. Legaspi, A.M. No. 936 July 25, 1975
Rule 138, Sec. 37
Businos v. Ricafort, 283 SCRA 40 (1997)
Vda de Caina v. Victoriano, G.R. No. L-12905, February 26, 1959
Research:
Difference between Retaining and Charging lien
Barnachea v. Quicho, 399 SCRA 1 (2003)
Canon 17
Cantiller v. Potenciano, 180 SCRA 246 (1989)
Santiago v. Fojas, 248 SCRA 68 (1995)
Stemmerik v. Mas AC No. 8010 (2009)
Canon 18
Islas v.Platon, 47 Phil. 162
Legarda v. CA, G. R. No. 94457, March 18, 1991
Uy v Tansinin [AC No. 8252 (July 21, 2009)
Garcia V. Bala [A.C. No. 5039(2005)].
Negligence of counsel
Mapuav.Mendoza, 45 Phil. 424(1993)
Filinvest Land v.CA, 182 SCRA 664(1990)
Joven-De Jesus v. PNB, 12 SCRA 447
People v. Cawili, 34 SCRA 728(1970)
Gaerlan v. Bernal, G.R. No.L-4049, Jan. 28, 1952
Agravante v. Patriarca, 183 SCRA 113(1990))
Ventura v.Santos, 59 Phil. 123(1993)
Alcoriza v. Lumakang, Adm. Case No. 249, November 21, 1978)
Capulong v. Alino, 22 SCRA 491(1968)
Instances where the client is not bound by counsels negligence:
Republic v. Arro, 150 SCRA630(1987)
Legarda v. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 418(1991)
PHHC v. Tiongco, 12 SCRA 471(1964)
Escudero v. Dulay, 158 SCRA 69, 78(1988)
Republic vs. Arro, et al., Supra
Blanza v. Arcangel, A.C. No. 492 September 5, 1967
Canon 19
Rule 138, Sec. 20(d)
Rural Bank of Calape Inc. vs. Florido, A.C. No. 5736 June 18, 2010
Pena vs. Aparicio, A.C. No. 7298
Rule 138, Sec. 23
Millare vs. Montero, A.C. No. 3283 July 13, 1995
Canon 20
Rule 138, Sec. 23
Corpuz v. CA, G.R. No. L-40424, June 30, 1980
Albano v. Coloma, 21 SCRA 411 (1967)
Traders Royal Bank Employees Union-Independent v. NLRC, G.R. No. 120592, March 14, 1997
Rule 138, Sec, 24
Definition of amicus curiae, counsel de parte, counsel de oficio

Rule 138, Sec. 32


Nocom vs. Camerino, et al., G.R. No. 182984 (February 10, 2009)
Canon 21
Rule 138, 20(e).
Rule 130, sec. 21(b).
Art. 209 Revised Penal Code.
Genato v. Silapan 453 Phil. 910 (2003)
Hilado v. David 83 Phil 569 (1949)
Canon 22
Montano vs. IBP 358 SCRA 1 (2001)
Obando vs. Figueras, 322 SCRA 148 (2000)
Liabilities of lawyers
Kinds of contempt, supra
Power to discipline errant lawyers
See ROC Rule 138, S. 27
139-B, S. 16
Quingwa v. Puno, Admin. Case No. 398, Feb. 28, 1967
Amaya v. Tecson, 450 SCRA 510
Aquino v. Mangaoang, 425 SCRA 572
In Re: Ruste, 70 Phil 243
Reinstatement, basis - 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5).
Cui v. Cui, 11 SCRA 755
In re: Adriatico, 17 Phil 324
Prudential Bank v. Benjamin Grecia, 192 SCRA 381
Yap Tan v. Sabandal, 170 SCRA 207
In re: Rusiana, 56 SCRA 240
In re: Rovero, 101 SCRA 803
The Judiciary
Code of Judicial Conduct
Bangalore Principles
http://www.coe.int//eva/round4/Bangalore_principles_EN.pdf
Qualifications
Sec. 7 (1), Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution
BP 129
Canon 1
OCA vs. Floro, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1460 March 31, 2006
People v. Veneracion, 249 SCRA 244
Go v. Court of Appeals, 206 SCRA 165
Tahil v. Eisma, 64 SCRA 378
Padilla v. Zantua, 237 SCRA 670
Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. A.M. No. 08-8- 11-CA
Tan v. Rosete, A.M. No. MTJ-04- 1563, September 8, 2004
Dimatulac et al v. Villon, 297 SCRA 679
Canon 2
Romero v. Valle, A.M. No. R-192-RTJ January 9, 1987
Castillo v. Calanog, A.M. No. RTJ-90-447 December 16, 1994
Macalintal v. Teh, 280 SCRA 623
Canon 3
Parayno v. Meneses, 231 SCRA 807

Rule 137, ROC


Lorenzo v. Marquez, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-87-123 June 27, 1988
Canon 4
Arban v. Borja, A.M. No R-281-RTJ August 26, 1986
Saburnido v. Madrono, Sept. 26, 2001
Sison v. Caoibes, Jr. A.M. No. RTJ-03-1771, May 27 2004
Ompoc vs. Judge Torres, A.M. No. MTJ-86-11, 17 Sept. 1989
Canon 5
In Re Judge Rojas, A.M. No. 98-6-185-RTC. October 30, 1998
In Re: Aguas, G.R. No. 12, August 8, 1901
Canon 6
Longboan v. Polig, A.M. No. 704-RTJ June 14, 1990
Abad v. Bleza A.M. No. 227-RTJ October 13, 1986
Maquiran v. Grageda, A.M. No. RTJ-04-1888. February 11, 2005
De la Cruz v. Pascua, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1461. June 26, 2001
Liabilities of Judges
Basis, 1987 Constitution, Art. VIII, Section 11
Raquiza vs. Castaneda, 82 SCRA 235
Galangi v. Macli-ing, Adm. Matter No. 75-DJ, Jan. 17, 1978
Lapena v. Collado, 76 SCRA 82
Secretary of Justice v. Marcos, 76 SCRA 301
In re: Impeachment of Horilleno, 43 Phil. 212
In re: Climaco, 55 SCRA 107
Grounds for Discipline
Montemayor v. Collado, 107 SCRA 258
Barja v. Beracio, 74 SCRA 355
Haw Tay v. Singayao, 154 SCRA 107
Lecaroz v. Garcia, A.M. No. 2271-MJ September 18, 1981
Balagot v. Opinion, 195 SCRA 429
Araza v. Reyes, 64 SCRA 347
In re: Paulin, 101 SCRA 605
Soriano v. Mabbayad, 67 SCRA 385
Monsanto v. Palarca, 126 SCRA 45
Anguluan v. Taguba, 93 SCRA 179
Espayos v. Lee, 89 SCRA 478
A.M. No. 02-8-13-SC
See notarial rules as amended
http://www.lawphil.net/co/supreme//am_02_8_13_sc_2008.html
Research: Difference between acknowledgement and jurat
See also: RA 9406
Lapena vs. Marcos Adm. Matter No. 1969-MJ
Abadilla vs. Tabiliran, Jr., Adm. Matter MTC-92-716