OCA VS LADAGA

Facts: Atty. Misael Ladaga, Branch Clerk of Court of the Regional Trial Court of Makati, appeared as
counsel for and inbehalf of his cousin, Narcisa Naldoza Ladaga, an accused in Criminal Case No. 84-885
for ―Falsification of Public Documents‖ before the METC of Quezon City. It is also denied that the
appearance of said respondent in said case was without the previous permission of the Court. During
the occasions that the respondent appeared as such counsel before the METC of Quezon City, he was on
official leave of absence. Moreover, his Presiding Judge, Judge Napoleon Inoturan was aware of the case
he was handling. Respondent appeared as pro bono counsel for his cousin-client Narcisa Ladaga.
Respondent did not receive a single centavo from her. Helpless as she was and respondent being the
only lawyer in the family, he agreed to represent her out of his compassion and high regard for her. This
is the first time that respondent ever handled a case for a member of his family who is like a big sister to
him. He appeared for free and for the purpose of settling the case amicably. Furthermore, his Presiding
Judge was aware of his appearance as counsel for his cousin. On top of this, during all the years that he
has been in government service, he has maintained his integrity and independence. He failed to obtain a
prior permission from the head of the Department. The presiding judge of the court to which
respondent is assigned is not the head of the Department contemplated by law. For one thing, it has
never been refuted that City Attorney Fule had been given permission by his immediate superior, the
Secretary of Justice, to represent the complainant in the case at bar, who is a relative. Based on the
foregoing, it is evident that the isolated instances when respondent appeared as pro bono counsel of his
cousin in Criminal Case No. 84885 does not constitute the ―private practice‖ of the law profession
contemplated by law.

Issue:

Whether or not Atty. Ladaga, upon such several appearances, was engages into private practice?

Held:

NO Respondent is charged under Sec. 7(b)(2) of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public
Officials and Employees which prohibits civil servants from engaging in the private practice of their
profession. A similar prohibition is found under Sec. 35, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court which
disallows certain attorneys from engaging in the private practice of their profession. PRINCIPLE: the
word private practice of law implies that one must have presented himself to be in the active and
continued practice of the legal profession and that his professional services are available to the public
for a compensation, as a source of his livelihood or in consideration of his said services.

1. Letter of Atty. Mendoza

BM no. 1153 March 9 2010EN BANC[B.M. No. 1153, March 09, 2010]

RE: LETTER OF ATTY. ESTELITO P. MENDOZA PROPOSING REFORMS IN THE BAR EXAMINATIONS THROUGH
AMENDMENTS TO RULE 138 OF THE RULES OF COURT Sirs/Mesdames: Quoted hereunder, for your
information; is a resolution of the ; Court En Banc dated B.M. No. 1153 (Re: Letter of Atty. Estelito P.
Mendoza Proposing Reforms in the Bar Examinations Through Amendments to Rule 138 of the Rules of
Court).- The Court Resolved to the proposed amendments to Sections 5 and 6 of Rule 138, to wit SEC.
5.Additional requirement for other applicants.- All applicants for admission other than those referred to in
the two preceding sections shall, before being admitted to the examination, satisfactorily show that they
have successfully completed all the prescribed courses for the degree of Bachelor of Laws or its equivalent
degree, in a law school or university officially recognized by the Philippine Government or by the proper
authority in the foreign jurisdiction where the degree has been granted. No applicant who obtained the
Bachelor of Laws degree in this jurisdiction shall be admitted to the bar examination unless he or she
has satisfactorily completed the following course in a law school or university duly recognized by the
government: civil law, commercial law, remedial law, criminal law, public and private international law,
political law, labor and social legislation, medical jurisprudence, taxation and legal ethics. A Filipino citizen
who graduated from a foreign law school shall be admitted to the bar examination only upon submission to
the Supreme Court of certifications showing: (a) completion of all courses leading to the degree of Bachelor
of Laws or its equivalent degree; (b) recognition or accreditation of the law school by the proper authority;
and (c) completion of all the fourth year subjects in the Bachelor of Laws academic program in a law school
duly recognized by the Philippine Government. SEC. 6. Pre-Law. - An applicant for admission to the bar
examination shall present a certificate issued by the proper government agency that, before commencing the
study of law, he or she had pursued and satisfactorily completed in an authorized and recognized university
or college, requiring for admission thereto the completion of a four-year high school course, the course of
study prescribed therein for a bachelor's degree in arts or sciences. A Filipino citizen who completed and
obtained his or her Bachelor of Laws degree or its equivalent in a foreign law school must present proof of
having completed a separate bachelor's degree course. The Clerk of Court, through the Office of the Bar
Confidant, is hereby directed to this resolution among all law schools in the country." Very truly yours,
MA.LUISA D. VILLARAMA\--Re: 1999 Bar Examination.

RE: PETITION OF AL ARGOSINO TO TAKE THE LAWYERS OATH B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997

FACTS:

Al Argosino passed the bar examinations of 1993. The Court however deferred his oath-taking due to his
previous conviction for Reckless Imprudence Resulting In Homicide. The criminal case arose from the
death of a neophyte during fraternity initiation rites. Argosino and seven (7) other accused initially
entered pleas of not guilty to homicide charges but later withdrew their initial pleas and upon re-
arraignment all pleaded guilty to reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. On the basis of such pleas,
the trial court rendered judgment imposing on each of the accused a sentence of imprisonment of from
(2) years four (4) months and one (1) day to four (4) years. The trial court granted herein petitioner's
application for probation. The trial court issued an order approving a report submitted by the Probation
Officer recommending Argosino's discharge from probation. Argosino filed before the SC a petition to be
allowed to take the lawyer's oath based on the order of his discharge from probation. The Court then
issued a resolution requiring petitioner Al C. Argosino to submit to the Court evidence that he may now
be regarded as complying with the requirement of good moral character imposed upon those seeking
admission to the bar. In compliance, Argosino submitted no less than fifteen (15) certifications/letters
executed by 2 senators, 5 trial court judges, and 6 members of religious orders. He likewise submitted
evidence that a scholarship foundation had been established in honor of the hazing victim. The SC
required the attorney-father of the victim to comment on Argosino's prayer but the latter submitted the
matter to the sound discretion of the Court.

ISSUE: Whether or not a Bar-passer convict be allowed to take his lawyer‘s oath after release?

HELD:

In allowing Mr. Argosino to take the lawyer's oath, the Court recognizes that Mr. Argosino is not
inherently of bad moral fiber. On the contrary, the various certifications show that he is a devout
Catholic with a genuine concern for civic duties and public service. The Court is persuaded that Mr.
Argosino has exerted all efforts to atone for the death of Raul Camaligan. We are prepared to give him
the benefit of the doubt, taking judicial notice of the general tendency of youth to be rash, temerarious
and uncalculating. We stress to Mr. Argosino that the lawyer‘s oath is NOT a mere ceremony or
formality for practicing law. Every lawyer should at ALL TIMES weigh his actions according to the sworn
promises he makes when taking the lawyer's oath. If all lawyers conducted themselves strictly according
to the lawyer's oath and the Code of Professional Responsibility, the administration of justice will
undoubtedly be faster, fairer and easier for everyone concerned. The Court sincerely hopes that Mr.
Argosino will continue with the assistance he has been giving to his community. As a lawyer he will now
be in a better position to render legal and other services to the more unfortunate members of society.

PRINCIPLE:

The practice of law is a privilege granted only to those who possess the strict intellectual and moral
qualifications required of lawyers who are instruments in the effective and efficient administration o f
justice.