Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 26

Legal Ethics

Syllabus and Course Guide

Legal Ethics course meets once a week 17 times over


the course in the second semester of SY 2017-2018
at the USJR SCHOOL OF LAW. Each 3-HOUR session
consists of oral recitations employing the Socratic
Method, quizzes, lectures and case analysis, and
group activities. Unless otherwise noted, all lectures
begin at 12:00 noon and ends at 3:00 p.m.

To successfully complete the course, each student


must satisfactorily complete:
- at least 100 cases digested
- 3 examinations
- a maximum of 17 quizzes
- at least 5 rounds of oral recitations

PROFESSOR:
- The professor for this course is Domingo P.
delos Angeles, Jr., who is a Priest, Attorney-at-
Law, Doctor in Management, Real Estate
Broker, and an Educator [BSE, Major in
Physics]
- He is currently a member of the board of
directors of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines, Cebu City Chapter, and chairs its
Committee on Bar Discipline.
- He is member of the Legal Panel of the Cebu
Archdiocese, and an Associate Lawyer at the
TSMLD Law Offices (Tequillo, Suson, Manuales,
Lerios, Dumaliang)

1
- He can be reached at
dan.delosangeles@gmail.com

COURSE DESCRIPTION:

This course covers basic notions on the practice of


law, and the basic principles governing the ethical
practice of law enshrined in the Code of Professional
responsibility, in the Rules of Court, in the
Constitution, in Jurisprudence and the different
issuances of the Supreme Court. It will also discuss
the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine
Judiciary.

The specific areas that this course will cover include


the duties of the lawyer to the Public, to his
Colleagues, to the Court, and to his Client, the nature
and definition of the practice of law, the Persons
Authorized to Practice Law and exceptions, Public
Officials Prohibited from Engaging in Practice of Law,
Public Officials with Restricted Right to Practice Law,
Power to Regulate Law Practice, Nature of Power to
Admit Candidates to Legal Profession, Requirements
for Bar Candidates, Requisites for Bar Admission,
Duties of the Office of a Lawyer, the Lawyer’s Oath,
the Code of Professional Responsibility for Lawyers,
and the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the
Philippine Judiciary.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:

At the completion of this course, the student should


be able to:

2
- Digest cases related to the Legal Practice, the
Code of Professional Responsibility, and the Code
of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
- Memorize by heart the Lawyer’s Oath.
- Describe and explain the duties of the lawyer to
the Public, to his Colleagues, to the Court, and to
his client.
- Identify who among the public officials who are
lawyers suffer absolute prohibition to practice law
while holding public office, and those who are
allowed a limited practice.
- Demonstrate with mastery of the 22 canons of
professional conduct of lawyers and the Code of
Judicial conduct.
- Enumerate the requirements for admission to the
Bar and the requirements for bar candidates.
- Demonstrate basic understanding of the Notarial
Law in the Philippines.
- Apply the ethical rules to issues on the advertising
of services of a lawyer.

3
READING ASSIGNMENTS:

Cases mentioned in the syllabus are required


reading. In addition to the assigned cases, students
should also familiarize themselves with the various
legal documents mentioned in the lecture.

WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS:

The student is required to submit digests in


handwritten format on a yellow pad of at least 10
cases per meeting. These will count for 10% of the
student’s grade for the course. Evaluation of the
digests will be as follows:

• Quantity (30%) - ten cases every week


• Quality (40%)-
neatness, legible handwriting, grammar and
English construction
• Timeliness (30%)-
a.
on or before the date due for submission – 100%
b. submitted on the following the week after due
date = 85%
c. submitted on 2nd week after due date = 75%.
d. beyond two (2) weeks late-65%

ORAL RECITATIONS

There will be random oral recitations on the cases


assigned. The student is expected to have recited at
least 5 times during the course. This is only the
minimum, and the student could be called more than

4
this minimum frequency. Recitations may also
involve matters other than the cases assigned.

Oral Recitation Grading Guide

Factor 4 3(Good) 2(Satisfacto 1 (Poor)


(Excellent) ry)
Thoroughn Thoroughly Identified Identified the Missed
ess identified the facts, facts, issues, many of the
the facts, issues, ratio ratio facts, and
issues, ratio decidendi decidendi and mixed up
decidendi and the fallo the fallo of the issues
and the fallo of the case, the case
of the case though facts though issues
are vague are vague

Understan The manner The manner The manner The manne


ding of recitation of recitation of recitation of recitation
Of the demonstrate demonstrate demonstrates shows a
Assigned s a thorough s a sufficient a vague high level o
case understandi understandi understandin confusion
ng ng g of the case about the
of the issues of the case issues
involved in involved in
the case and the case
the legal
doctrine
which the
case
demonstrate
s
For Student has Student has Student has Student ha
recitatio cited at least cited one cited cited
ns other two legal excellent appropriate inappropria

5
than bases with legal basis jurisprudence e legal
recitatio appropriate but has anchor, or
n of applications missed the has poorly
assigne best available established
d cases: legal anchor the
relevance o
LEGAL the sources
BASIS/ invoked
CITATIONS
The work is The work is The work is The work is
For Essay well well focused on poorly
Assignments organized organized too many organized,
: and but the logic points so illogical, an
coherent is skewed much so that badly hand
Organizati with it is hard to written
on arguments identify what
logically is its main
presented, point
and with
good legible
handwriting
For Excellent Good critical Adequate Minimal
recitatio critical thinking and critical critical
ns other thinking and analysis. The thinking and thinking an
than analysis. The student’s analysis. The analysis.
recitatio student was points are student’s The
n of able to apply well argued points are student’s
cases the cited law and well supported by arguments
assigne to the facts supported. logic, but are weak
d: of the given without legal and
Critical case in a basis unconvincin
Thinking clear and g.
and convincing
Analysis manner.

6
EXAMINATIONS:
The student is expected to accomplish several
quizzes (expect a quiz every meeting), and three
major exams, namely, the preliminary exam
tentatively happening on December 16, 2017, the
Midterm Exam tentatively scheduled on February 10,
2018, and the Final Exam tentatively set on March
24, 2018.
Examinations may also cover materials that have
been covered since the previous examination. The
instructor will provide information about the
coverage of each major exam as the exam date
approaches.

During the major exams, full credit is given if the


student

1)identifies the legal issue(s) involved;

2)correctly applies the law and/or jurisprudence


to the issues identified;

3)answers in a clear and understandable


manner

The professor will give partial credit proportionate to


the level of knowledge and legal skill demonstrated
by the student taking the exam.

The following factors also affect the student’s grade


in the examination:

1. Handwriting and the number of erasures

7
2. Grammar, including spelling.

Although examinations are meant to


measure legal knowledge and ability to apply
the law, handwriting, erasures, grammar and
spelling are major factors considered during the
bar exams. This subject would like to prepare the
student for the actual bar exam.

BASIC CLASSROOM REQUIREMENTS

1) Attend classes (only three absences, excused or


not excused are allowed)

2) Submit case digests and other assignments

3) Take quizzes (expect a quiz every meeting) and


three major examinations

4) Perform oral recitations (expect at least 5 rounds


of oral recitations)

5) Wear blazer as specified

6) Submit ¼ index cards with 1x1 photo on it and the


following information:
a. Name
b. birthday
c. Home Address
d. Email and contact numbers
7) Observe classroom policies outlined below

POLICIES

8
1. Class starts at 12:00 noon and ends at 3:00 p.m.
Students are requested to make an effort to be
on time so as not to disrupt the class.
2. Each student is allowed a maximum of three
(3) absences. This includes both excused and
unexcused absences. The fourth is room for
professor discretion. On the fifth absence, the
student is considered “FA – failed due to
absences”.
3. If a student is called to recite and he or she is
absent, the student will get a recitation grade of
65
4. If a surprise quiz is given and the student is
absent, whether excused or unexcused that
student gets a grade of 65 in that quiz
5. Keep mobile phone in silent mode. If a phone will
cause disruption of class, the owner will get a
grade of 75 for one recitation. If owner cannot be
identified, the class president will form an
investigation committee. If the investigation
committee fails to identify the owner, everyone
in the class will get a grade of 75 for one
recitation
6. Laptops may be used but only for purposes of
following the lecture and taking down notes.
7. Using the laptop for some other things will be
subject to disciplinary measures
8. We will declare a ten-minute break every hour
on the hour within the lecture. Going out of the
lecture room outside the allotted break is strictly
prohibited.

9
9. Cheating during exams is considered serious
breach. A student caught cheating will be
declared FD = failed due to dishonesty
10. Submitting an assignment done by a person
other than the student considered is likewise
considered serious breach. A student involved in
this anomaly is also considered an FD
11. Acts of discourtesy may be considered
serious or less serious depending on the damage
done
12. Blazers must be worn during class hours.
Every student is expected to wear shoes
13. Professor reserves the right to require a
student to get a decent haircut

GRADING PERCENTAGES
• PRELIM EXAM = 15%
• MIDTERM EXAM = 15%
• FINAL EXAM = 50%
• QUIZZES = 5%
• RECITATIONS = 15%
• ASSIGNMENTS = 10%

COURSE OUTLINE IN LEGAL ETHICS

PART 1 – LEGAL ETHICS

I. PRACTICE OF LAW – Definition; Its Nature; Persons


Authorized to Practice Law and exceptions; Public
Officials Prohibited from Engaging in Practice of Law;
Public Officials with Restricted Right to Practice Law;
Power to Regulate Law Practice; Nature of Power to

10
Admit Candidates to Legal Profession; Requirements
for Bar Candidates; Requisites for Bar Admission;
Duties of the Office of a Lawyer; The Lawyer’s Oath

Cases: (Note: the list of cases that follows may be


updated and added in the course of the discussions)
1. Cayetano vs. Monsod, GR#100113, 9/3/1991
2. Lee vs. Tambago, AC#5281, 2/12/2008
3. Docena vs. Atty. Limon, AC#2387, 9/10/1998
4. Santos vs. Atty. Llamas, AC#4749, 1/20/2000
5. Philippine Lawyer’s Association vs. Agrava 105
Phil 173
6. Cruz vs. Atty. Cabrera, AC#5737, 10/25/2004
7. Ulep vs. The Legal Clinic, BM#553, 6/17/1993,
8. Atty. Magno vs. Atty. Velasco-Jacoba,
AC#6296, 11/22/2005
9. Ziga vs. Judge Arejola, AM#MTJ-99-1203,
6/10/2003
10. Javellana vs. DILG, GR#102549, 8/10/1992
11. In re: Cunanan 94 PHIL 534
12. In re: Alamacen 31 SCRA 562
13. In re: Lanuevo 66 SCRA 245
14. Application for Bar Admission, Vicente
Ching, BM#914, 10/1/1999,
15. Petition to Resume Practice of Law,
Benjamin Dacanay, BM#1678, 12/17/2007
16. Petition to Reacquire Privilege to Practice
Law, Epifanio Muneses, BM#2112, 7/24/2012
17. Villa vs. Ama, BM#674, 6/14/2005
18. Narag vs. Atty. Narag, AC#3405, 6/29/1998
19. Aguirre vs. Rana, BM#1036, 6/10/2003
20. Tolentino vs. Atty. Mendoza, AC#5151,
10/19/2004,

11
21. Letter of Atty. Arevalo, Requesting
Exemption from IBP Dues Payment, BM#1370,
5/9/2005
22. Ting-Dumali vs. Atty. Torres, AC#5161,
4/4/2004

II. LEGAL ETHICS – Definition; Sources of Legal Ethics;


Code of Professional Responsibility

A. Lawyer’s Duty to the Public

(a) Canon 1

23. Endaya vs. Atty. Oca, AC#3967, 9/3/2003


24. Barrientos vs. Atty. Libiran-Meteoro,
AC#6408, 8/31/2004
25. Alejandro vs. Atty. Alejandro, AC#4256,
2/13/2004
26. Vda. De Espino vs. Atty. Prequito, AC#4762,
6/28/2004
27. Guevarra vs. Atty. Eala, AC# 7136, 8/1/2007
28. Bautista vs. Atty. Gonzales, 182 SCRA 151,
29. Mecaral vs. Atty. Vasquez, AC#8392,
6/29/10
30. Cham vs. Atty. Paita-Moya, AC#7494,
6/27/2008
31. Roa vs. Atty. Moreno, AC#8382, 4/21/10
32. Samaniego vs. Atty. Ferrer, AC#7022,
6/18/2008
33. Ventura vs. Atty. Samson, AC#9608,
11/27/2012
34. Manois vs. Atty. Deciembre, AC#5364,
8/20/2008
35. Ronquillo vs. Atty. Cezar, AC#6288, 2006

12
36. Lee vs. Abastillas, 234 SCRA 28
37. Vitug vs. Atty. Rongcal, AC#6313, 9/7/2006
38. Abella vs. Barrios, AC#7332, 6/18/2013
39. Ramos vs. Atty. Ngaseo, AC#6210,
12/9/2004
40. Bel-Air Transit Service Corp. vs. Atty.
Mendoza, AC#6107, 1/31/2005
41. De Guzman vs. Atty. De Dios, AC#4843,
1/26/2001

(b) Notarial Law

42. Tan Tiong Bio vs. Atty. Gonzales, AC#6634,


8/23/2007
43. Dela Cruz vs. Atty. Dimaano, AC#7781,
9/12/2008
44. Atty. Linco vs. Atty. Lacebal, AC#7241,
10/17/2011
45. Nevada vs. Atty. Casuga, AC#7591,
3/20/2012
46. Jandoquile vs. Atty. Revilla, AC#9514,
4/10/2013
47. Espinosa vs. Atty. Omana, AC#9081,
10/12/2011
48. Uy vs. Atty. Sano, AC#6505, 9/11/2008
49. Brennisen vs. Atty. Contawi, AC#7481,
4/24/2012
50. Williams vs. Atty. Icao, AC#6882,
12/24/2008
51. Pena vs. Atty. Paterno, AC#4191, 6/10/2013
52. Gokioco vs. Atty. Mateo, AC#4179,
11/11/2004

13
(c) Canon 2 & 3
53. Ulep vs. The Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378
54. Atty. Khan vs. Atty. Simbillo, AC#5299,
8/19/2003
55. Villatuya vs. Atty. Tabalingcos, AC#6622,
7/10/2012

(d)Canon 4 & 5 – MCLE (BM#850, 10/2/2001)

(e) Canon 6
56. Atty. Vitriolo vs. Atty. Dasig, AC#4984,
4/1/2003
57. Lim vs. Atty. Barcelona, AC#5438,
3/10/2004
58. Collantes vs. Atty. Renomeron, AC#3056,
8/16/1991
59. Catu vs. Atty. Rellosa, AC#5738, 2/19/2008
60. Sierra vs. Lopez, AC#7549, 8/29/2008
61. Abella vs. Barrios, Jr., AC#7332, 6/18/2013

(f) Canon 7
62. In Re Edillon, AM#1928, 8/3/1978
63. Francia vs. Atty. Abdon, AC#10031,
7/23/2014
64. In Re: Disqualification of Bar Examinee
Haron Meling, BM#114, 6/8/2004
65. Arnobit vs. Atty. Arnobit, AC#1481,
10/17/2008
66. Sps. Rafols vs. Atty. Barrios, AC#4973,
3/15/2010
67. Garrido vs. Atty. Garrido, AC#6593,
2/4/2010
68. Mendoza vs. Atty. Deciembre, AC#5338,
2/23/2009

14
69. Atty. Embido vs. Atty. Pe, AC#6732,
10/22/2013
70. Zaguirre vs. Atty. Castillo, AC#4921,
3/6/2003

B. Lawyer’s Duty to His Colleagues

(a) Canon 8

71. Atty. Reyes vs. Atty. Chiong, Jr., AC#5148,


7/1/2003
72. Alcantara vs. Atty. Pefianco, AC#5398,
12/3/2002
73. Saberon vs. Atty. Larong, AC#6567,
4/16/2008
74. Camacho vs. Pagulayan, AC#4807,
3/22/2000
75. Dallong-Galicinao vs. Atty. Castro, AC#6396,
10/25/2005
76. Garcia vs. Atty. Lopez, AC#6422, 8/28/2007
77. Atty. Barandon, Jr. vs. Atty. Ferrer, AC#5768,
3/26/2010

(b) Canon 9

72. Cambaliza vs. Atty. Cristal-Tenorio, AC#6290,


7/14/2004
73. Villatuya vs. Atty. Tabalingcos, AC#6622,
7/10/2012
74. Tumbokon vs. Atty. Pefianco, AC#6116,
8/1/2012
75. Petition to Sign Attorneys Roll, Michael
Medado, BM#2540, 9/24/2013

15
C. Lawyer’s Duty to the Court

(a) Canon 10

78. Hueysuwan-Florido vs. Atty. Florido,


AC#5624, 1/20/2004
79. De Zuzuarregui vs. Atty. Soguilon, AC#4495,
10/8/2008
80. Mariveles vs. Atty. Mallari 219 SCRA 44
81. Macias vs. Atty. Selda, AC#6442,
10/21/2004
82. Atty. Alonso vs. Atty. Relamida, AC#8481,
8/3/2010
83. Maligaya vs. Atty. Doronilla, AC#6198,
9/15/2006
84. Molina vs. Atty. Magat, AC#1900, 6/13/2012
85. Afurong vs. Atty. Aquino, AC#1571,
9/23/1999
86. Judge Cervantes vs. Atty. Sabio, AC#7828,
8/11/2008

(b) Canon 11
87. Judge Madrid vs. Atty. Dealca, AC#7474,
9/9/2014
88. Uy vs. Attys. Depasucat & De las Alas,
AC#5332, 7/29/2003
89. Racines vs. Judge Morallos, AM-MTJ-08-1698,
3/3/2008
90. Baculi vs. Atty. Battung, AC#8920,
9/28/2011
91. Judge Lacurom vs. Attys. Lacoba, AC#5921,
3/10/2006
92. Provincial Prosecutor Visbal vs. Judge Buban,
AM-MTJ-02-1432, 9/3/2004

16
93. Hon. Rodriguez-Manahan vs. Atty. Flores,
AC#8954, 11/13/2013

(c) Canon 12
94. Atty. Fabroa vs. Atty. Paguinto, AC#6273,
3/15/2010
95. Foronda vs. Atty. Guerrero, AC#5469,
8/10/2004
96. Que vs. Atty. Revilla, AC#7054, 12/4/2009

(d) Canon 13
97. Jimenez vs. Atty. Verano, AC#8198,
7/15/2014
98. FoodSphere, Inc. vs. Atty. Mauricio, Jr.,
AC#7199, 7/22/2009

D. Lawyer’s Duty to His Client

(a) Canon 14 & 15

99. Baens vs. Atty. Sempio, AC#10378,


6/9/2014
100.Hocorma Foundation vs. Atty. Funk,
AC#9094, 8/15/2012
101.Seares vs. Atty. Gonzales-Alzate, AC#9058,
11/14/2012
102.Castro-Justo vs. Atty. Galing, AC#6174,
11/16/2011
103.Sibulo vs. Atty. Cabrera, AC#4218,
7/20/2000
104.Samala vs. Atty. Valencia, AC#5439,
1/22/2007
105.Buted vs. Atty. Hernando, 203 SCRA 1
106.Perez vs. Atty. Dela Torre, AC#6160,
3/30/2006

17
107.Rural Bank of Calape vs. Atty. Florido,
AC#5736, 6/18/2010
108.Gonzales vs. Atty. Sabacajan, 249 SCRA 276
109.Penilla vs. Atty. Alcid, Jr. AC#9149, 9/4/2013

(b) Canon 16

110.Agot vs. Atty. Rivera, AC#8000, 8/5/2014


111.Reyes vs. Atty. Maglaya, 243 SCRA 214
112.Arroyo-Posidio vs. Atty. Vitan, AC#6051,
4/2/2007
113.Meneses vs. Atty. Macalino, AC#6651,
2/2/2006
114.Aldovino vs. Atty. Pujalte, AC#5082,
2/17/2004
115.Parinas vs. Atty. Paguinto, AC#6297,
7/13/2004
116.Atty. Salomon vs. Atty. Frial, AC#7820,
9/12/2008
117.Del Rosario vs. Atty. Millado, 26 SCRA 700
118.Reddi vs. Atty. Sebrio, AC#7027, 1/30/2009
119.Barcenas vs. Atty. Alvero, AC#8159,
4/23/2010
120.Small vs. Atty. Banares, AC#7021,
2/21/2007
121.Arellano University vs. Atty. Mijares III,
AC#8380, 11/20/2009
122.Ong vs. Atty. Grijaldo, AC#4724, 4/30/2003
123.Igual vs. Atty. Javier, 254 SCRA 416
124.Dizon vs. Atty. De Taza, AC#7676, 6/10/2014

(c) Canon 17

125.Tahaw vs. Atty. Vitan, AC#6441, 10/21/2004

18
126.Manalang vs. Atty. Angeles, AC#1558,
3/10/2003
127.Foronda vs. Atty. Alvarez, Jr., AC#9976,
6/25/2014

(d) Canon 18

128.Tan vs. Diamante, AC#7766, 8/5/2014


129.Cabauatan vs. Atty. Venida, AC#10043,
11/20/2013
130.Segovia-Ribaya vs. Atty. Lawsin, AC#7965,
11/13/2013
131.Cristobal vs. Atty. Renta, AC#9925,
9/17/2014
132.Nebreja vs. Atty. Reonal, AC#9896,
3/19/2014
133.Bueno vs. Atty. Raneses, AC#8383,
12/11/2012
134.Trinidad vs. Atty. Villarin, AC#9310,
2/27/2013
135.Cuizon vs. Atty. Macalino, AC#4334,
7/7/2004
136.Ford vs. Atty. Daitol, 250 SCRA
137.Barbuco vs. Beltran, AC#5092, 8/11/2004
138.Villariasa-Reisenbeck vs. Atty. Abarrientos,
AC#6238, 11/4/2004
139.Jinon vs. Atty. Jiz, AC#9615, 3/5/2013
140.Atty. Solidon vs. Atty. Macalalad, AC#8158,
2/24/2010
141.Gone vs. Atty. Ga, AC#7771, 4/6/2011
142.Overgaard vs. Atty. Valdez, AC#902,
9/20/2008
143.Mejares vs. Atty. Romana, AC#6196,
3/17/02004

19
144.Sps. Aranda vs. Atty. Elayda, AC#7907,
12/15/2010
145.Pesto vs. Atty. Millo, AC#9612, 3/13/2013
146.Figueras vs. Atty. Jimenez, AC#9116,
3/12/2014
147.Burber vs. Atty. Magulta, AC#513,
6/10/2002
148.Abay vs. Atty. Montesino, AC#5718,
12/4/2003
149.Bergonia vs. Atty. Merrera, AC#5024,
2/20/2003

(e) Canon 19
150.Pena vs. Atty. Aparicio, AC#7298, 6/25/2007
151.Vda. De Enriquez vs. Atty. San Jose,
AC#3569, 2/23/2007
152.Millare vs. Montero, 246 SCRA 1
153.Ong vs. Atty. Unto, AC#2417, 2/6/2002

(f) Canon 20
154.Vda. de Fajardo vs. Atty. Bugaring,
AC#5113, 10/7/2004
155.Law Firm of Raymundo Armovit vs. CA, 202
SCRA 6

(g) Canon 21& 22


156.Suntay vs. Atty. Suntay, AC#1890, 8/7/2002
157.Genato vs. Atty. Silapan, AC#4078,
7/14/2003
158.Orcino vs. Atty. Gaspar, AC#3773,
9/24/1997

E. Administrative Liabilities of Lawyers – Disciplinary


measures against lawyer; Contempt vs. Disbarment,
Objectives of Disbarment and Suspension; Nature of

20
Disbarment Proceedings; Restriction on Disbarment
Power; Grounds for Disbarment; Effects of Foreign
Disbarment; Reinstatement and Its Objective and
Criterion;

159.Yap-Paras vs. Atty. Paras, AC#4947,


6/7/2007
160.Lingan vs. Atty. Calubaquib, AC#5377,
6/30/2014
161.Souses Boyboy vs. Atty. Yabut, Jr., AC#5225,
4/29/2003
162.Felipe vs. Atty. Macapagal, AC#4549,
12/2/2013
163.Calub vs. Atty. Suller, AC#1474, 1/28/2000
164.Bengco vs. Atty. Bernardo, AC#6368,
6/13/2012
165.Tiong vs. Atty. Florendo, AC#4428,
12/12/2011
166.Advincula vs. Atty. Macabata, AC#7204,
3/7/2007
167.De Leon vs. Atty. Pedrena, AC#9401,
10/22/2013
168.Cojuangco vs. Atty. Palma, AC#2474,
6/30/2005
169.Suspension from Law Practice, Leon
Maquera, BM#793, 7/30/2004
170.Dumadag vs. Atty. Lumaya, AC#2614,
6/29/2000
171.Maniago vs. Atty. De Dios, AC#7472,
3/30/2010
172.Reyes vs. Atty. Vitan, AC#5835, 8/10/2010
173.Richards vs. Asoy, AC#2655, 10/12/2010
174.Macarrubo vs. Atty. Macarrubo, AC#6148,
1/22/2013

21
Part II - JUDICIAL ETHICS

I. JUDICIAL ETHICS – Definition, Sources, Importance,


Qualifications of Judges and Justices.

II. New Code of Judicial Conduct for Philippine


Judiciary

A. Canon 1. Independence

1. Vidal vs. Judge Dojillo, Jr., AM#MTJ-05-1591,


7/14/2005
2. Sps. Decena vs. Judge Malanyaon, AM#RTJ-10-
2217, 4/8/2013
3. Tobias vs. Judge Limsiaco, AM#MTJ-09-1734,
1/19/11
4. Carriaga vs. Judge Baldado, AM#RTJ-03-1810,
10/21/2004
5. Burber vs. Atty. Magulta, AC#513, 6/10/2002
6. Abay vs. Atty. Montesino, AC#5718, 12/4/2003
7. Bergonia vs. Atty. Merrera, AC#5024,
2/20/2003

B. Canon 2. Integrity

8. Re: Compliance of Judge Rosete, AM#04-5-


118-MTCC, 7/29/2004
9. Mondala vs. Judge Mariano, AM#RTJ-06-2010,
1/25/2007
10. Canada vs. Suerte, AM#RTJ-04-1884,
2/22/2008
11. Nabhan vs. Judge Calderon, AM#MTJ98-
1164, 2/4/2000
12. Perfecto vs. Judge Esidera, AM-RTJ-11-2270,
1/31/11

22
13. Atty. Seludo vs. Judge Fineza, AM#RTJ-04-
1864, 12/16/2004
14. Casamiro vs. Judge Fernandez, AM#MTJ-04-
1525, 1/29/2004
15. Simbajon vs. Judge Esteban, AM#MTJ-98-
1162, 8/11/1999
16. Vda. de Nepomuceno vs. Judge Bartolome,
AM#MTJ-03-1482, 7/25/2003
17. P/Insp. Fidel vs. Judge Caraos, AM#MTJ-99-
1224, 12/12/2002

C. Canon 3. Impartiality

18. Dialo vs. AJudge Macias, AM#RTJ-04-1859,


7/13/2004
19. Rallos vs. Judge Gako, AM#RTJ-99-1484,
3/17/2000
20. Burias vs. Judge Valencia, GR#176464,
2/4/2010
21. Versoza vs. Judge Contreras, AM#MTJ-06-
1636, 3/12/2007
22. Ortiz vs. Judge Jacube, Jr., AM#RTJ-04-1833,
6/28/2005
23. Tigganay vs. Judge Wacas, AM-OCA IPI#09-
3243-RTJ, 4/1/2013

D. Canon 4. Propriety

24. Dr. Alday vs. Judge Cruz, Jr., AM#RTJ-00-


153-, 3/14/2001
25. Decena vs. Judge Malanyaon, AM#RTJ-02-
1669, 4/14/2004
26. Reyes vs. Judge Duque,
AM#RTJ-08-2136, 9/21/10

23
27. Concerned Employees of RTC
Dagupan vs. Judge Falloran-Aliposa, AM#RTJ-
1446, 3/9/2000
28. Anonymous vs. Judge Achas, AM#MTJ-11-
1801, 2/27/2013
29. Galang vs. Judge Santos, AM#MTJ-99-1197,
5/26/1999
30. Rosauro vs. Judge Kallos, AM#RTJ-03-1796,
2/10/2006
31. Ladigon vs. Judge Garong, AM#MTJ-08-
1712, 8/20/2008
32. Perez vs. Judge Costales, AM#RTJ-04-1876,
2/23/2005
33. Dionisio vs. Hon. Escano, AM#RTJ98-1400,
2/1/1999
34. Abesa vs. Judge Nacional, AM#MTJ-05-
1605, 6/8/2006

E. Canon 5. Equality

35. Atty. Correa vs. Judge Belen, AM#RTJ-10-


2242, 8/6/2010
36. Nunez vs. Judge Ibay, AM#RTJ-06-1984,
6/30/2009
37. Anonymous Complaint vs. Judge Acuna,
AM#RTJ-04-1891, 7/28/2005

F. Canon 6. Competence & Diligence

38. Tugot vs. Judge Colliflores, AM#MTJ-00-


1332, 2/16/2004
39. Atty. Arnado vs. Judge Buban, AM#MTJ-04-
1543, 5/31/2004

24
40. Sps. Cabico vs. Judge Querijero, AM#RTJ-02-
1735, 4/27/2007
41. Borja-Manzano vs. Judge Sanchez, AM#MTJ-
00-1329, 3/8/2001
42. Pantilo III vs. Judge Canoy, AM#RTJ-11-
2262, 2/9/11
43. Tan vs. Judge Usman, AM#RTJ-11-2666,
2/15/11
44. Raymundo vs. Judge Andoy, AM No. MTJ-09-
1738, 10/6/2010
45. OCA VS. Judge Estrada, AM#RTJ-09-2173,
1/18/11
46. Atty. Jimenez vs. Judge Amdengan,
AM#MTJ-12-1818, 2/13/2013
47. Sevilla vs. Judge Lindo, AM#MTJ-08-1714,
2/9/11
48. Monticalbo vs. Judge Macaraya, AM#RTJ-09-
2197, 4/13/11
49. Navarro vs. Judge Del Rosario, AM#MTJ-96-
1091, 3/21/1997
50. Caneda vs. Judge Menchavez, AM# RTJ-06-
2026, 3/4/2009
51. Ruiz vs. Judge Bringas, AM#MTJ-00-1266,
4/6/2000
52. Atty. Dalawampu vs. Judge Yrastorza,
AM#RTJ-03-1793, 2/5/2004
53. Atty. Gacal vs. Judge Infante, AM#RTJ-04-
1845, 10/5/2011

G. Administrative Liabilities of Judges

54. Beso vs. Judge Daguman, AM#MTJ-99-1211,


1/28/2000

25
55. Batic vs. Judge Galapon, Jr., AM#MTJ-99-
1239, 7/29/2005
56. De la Paz vs. Judge Adiong, AM#RTJ-04-
1857, 7/29/2005
57. Liwanag vs. Judge Lustre, AM#MTJ98-1168,
4/21/1999
58. OCA VS. Former Judge Leonida, AM#RTJ-09-
2198, 1/18/11
59. Marcos vs. Judge Pamintuan, AM#RTJ-07-
2062, 1/18/11
60. Conquilla vs. Judge Bernardo, AM#MTJ-09-
1737, 2/9/11
61. Heck vs. Judge Santos, AM#RTJ-01-1657,
2/23/2004
62. Santos vs. Judge Arcaya-Chua, AM#RTJ-07-
2093, 2009
63. Palon, Jr. vs. Judge Villarta, AM#MTJ-04-
1530, 3/7/2007
64. Junio vs. Judge Rivera, AM#MTJ-91-565,
10/5/2005
65. Sison vs. Judge Caoibes, Jr., AM#RTJ-03-
1771, 5/27/2004
66. OCA vs. Judge Espanol, AM#RTJ-04-1872,
10/18/2004
67. Ali vs. Hon. Pacalna, AM#MTJ-03-1505,
11/27/2013

26