Solicitation of legal services
Problem Areas in Legal Ethics
Arellano University School of Law – Arellano Law Foundation
2018-2019
 Code of Professional Responsibility
CANON 2 - A LAWYER SHALL MAKE HIS LEGAL SERVICES
AVAILABLE IN AN EFFICIENT AND CONVENIENT MANNER
COMPATIBLE WITH THE INDEPENDENCE, INTEGRITY AND
EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PROFESSION.
Rule 2.01 - A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid reasons, the cause
of the defenseless or the oppressed.
Rule 2.02 - In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he
shall not refuse to render legal advice to the person concerned if only to
the extent necessary to safeguard the latter's rights.
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed
primarily to solicit legal business.
Rule 2.04 - A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant.
 Code of Professional Responsibility
CANON 3 - A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES
SHALL USE ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION OR STATEMENT OF FACTS.
Rule 3.01 - A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or unfair
statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed
name shall be used. The continued use of the name of a deceased
partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased.
Rule 3.03 - Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw
from the firm and his name shall be dropped from the firm name unless
the law allows him to practice law currently.
Rule 3.04 - A lawyer shall not pay or give anything of value to
representatives of the mass media in anticipation of, or in return for
publicity to attract legal business.
 Rule 138
Sec. 27. Attorneys removed or suspended by Supreme Court on what
grounds. - A member of the bar may be removed or suspended from his
office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any deceit, malpractice, or
other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by
reason of his conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, or for any
violation of the oath which he is required to take before admission to
practice, or for a wilfull disobedience of any lawful order of a superior
court, or for corruptly or wilfully appearing as an attorney for a party to
a case without authority so to do. The practice of soliciting cases at
law for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid
agents or brokers, constitutes malpractice.
 Rule 2.03 should be read in connection with Rule 1.03 of
the CPR
 
Rule 2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed
primarily to solicit legal business.
RULE 1.03. A LAWYER SHALL NOT, FOR ANY CORRUPT MOTIVE OR
INTEREST, ENCOURAGE ANY SUIT OR PROCEEDING OR DELAY
ANY MAN’S CAUSE.
This rule proscribes “ambulance chasing” (the solicitation of almost any
kind of legal business by an attorney, personally or through an agent in
1
order to gain employment) as a measure to protect the community from
barratry and champerty. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672,
September 4, 2009
 Do not “pirate” a client
CANON 8 - A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH
COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARDS HIS
PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING
TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL.
Rule 8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the
professional employment of another lawyer, however, it is the right of
any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance to
those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.

The following elements distinguish the legal profession
from a business:
1. A duty of public service, of which the emolument is a by-product,
and in which one may attain the highest eminence without
making much money;
2. A relation as an “officer of the court” to the administration of
justice involving thorough sincerity, integrity and reliability;
3. A relation to clients in the highest degree of fiduciary;
4. A relation to colleagues at the bar characterized by candor,
fairness, and unwillingness to resort to current business methods
of advertising and encroachment on their practice, or dealing
directly with their clients. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No.
5299, August 19, 2003
 General rule
Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of
gain, either personally or through paid agents or brokers. Such
actuation constitutes malpractice, a ground for disbarment. - Linsangan
v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
 Thru all means of communication

Solicitation or obtaining of professional employment by any means of
communication." - Geffen v. Moss, 53 Cal.App.3d 215, 125 Cal.Rptr. 687
[1975]
………
The term "solicit" includes contact in person, by telephone or telegraph,
by letter or other writing, or by other communication directed to a
specific recipient, but does not include letters addressed or
advertising circulars distributed generally to persons not known to
need legal services of the kind provided by the lawyer in a particular
matter, but who are so situated that they might in general find such
services useful.- Shapero v. KBA, 726 S.W.2d 299 (1986)
 Pecuniary gain not an element in solicitation
It is axiomatic xxx that a lawyer may not engage in the in-person
solicitation of legal business. Even assuming Johnston did not solicit
Corcoran for pecuniary gain, [] prohibits in-person solicitation "under
any circumstance.”
We have no pecuniary gain requirement. This approach recognizes
that face-to-face solicitation by lawyers is "a practice rife with
possibilities for overreaching, . . . undue influence, and outright
fraud." - Iowa Supreme Court Attorney Disciplinary Board (Board) v.
Gregory Alan Johnston732 N.W.2d 448 (2007)

 Solicitation or Ambulance chasing
We need not labor the point that solicitation or ambulance chasing,
so-called, either directly or indirectly through the services of runners or
others, is conduct which is reprehensible and inimicable to the
traditions and best interests of the legal profession. Not only does
it provoke derision and disrespect in the eyes of the public, but it is an
overreaching of the other members of the profession who adhere to the
standards fixed by canons of ethics and the dictates of good conscience.
To permit such conduct to continue undeterred could only result
in unsavory competitions and consequences materially
detrimental to the dignity and honor of the legal profession as a
whole. - In re Krasner 204 N.E.2d 10 (1965)
 Ambulance chasing
This rule proscribes “ambulance chasing” (the solicitation of almost any
kind of legal business by an attorney, personally or through an agent in
order to gain employment) as a measure to protect the community from
barratry and champerty. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672,
September 4, 2009
 Solicitation of a political organization
Appellant, a practicing lawyer in South Carolina who was also a
cooperating lawyer with a branch of the American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU), after advising a gathering of women of their legal rights
resulting from their having been sterilized as a condition of receiving
public medical assistance, informed one of the women in a subsequent
letter that free legal assistance was available from the ACLU. Thereafter,
the disciplinary Board of the South Carolina Supreme Court charged and
determined that appellant, by sending such letter, had engaged in
soliciting a client in violation of certain Disciplinary Rules of the State
Supreme Court, and issued a private reprimand.
Issue: WON the lawyer engaged in unethical solicitation.
……
Solicitation of prospective litigants by nonprofit organizations that
engage in litigation as "a form of political expression" and "political
association" constitutes expressive and associational conduct
entitled to First Amendment protection, as to which government may
regulate only "with narrow specificity.”
The "collective activity undertaken to obtain meaningful access to
the courts is a fundamental right within the protection of the First
Amendment." - In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978)
 Lawyer visited 2 accident victims
He approached two young accident victims at a time when they were
especially incapable of making informed judgments or of assessing and
protecting their own interests. He solicited [the victim] in a hospital
room where she lay in traction, and sought out [the other victim] on the
day she came home from the hospital, knowing from his prior inquiries
that she had just been released.
Appellant urged his services upon the young women. He employed a
concealed tape recorder, seemingly to insure that he would have
evidence of [victim’s] oral assent to the representation. He
emphasized that his fee would come out of the recovery, thereby
tempting the young women with what sounded like a cost-free and
therefore irresistible offer.
……
Held: The Bar, acting with state authorization, constitutionally may
discipline a lawyer for soliciting clients in person, for pecuniary gain,
under circumstances likely to pose dangers that the State has a right to
2
prevent, and thus the application of the Disciplinary Rules in question
to appellant does not offend the Constitution.
(a) A lawyer's solicitation of business through direct, in-person
communication with the prospective clients has long been viewed as
inconsistent with the profession's ideal of the attorney-client
relationship and as posing a significant potential for harm to the
prospective client.
(b) The State does not lose its power to regulate commercial activity
deemed harmful to the public simply because speech is a component
of that activity.
(c) A lawyer's procurement of remunerative employment is only
marginally affected with First Amendment concerns. While entitled to
some constitutional protection, [respondent's] conduct is subject to
regulation in furtherance of important state interests. - Ohralik v.
Ohio State Bar Assn., 436 U.S. 447 (1978)
……
(d) In addition to its general interest in protecting consumers and
regulating commercial transactions, the State bears a special
responsibility for maintaining standards among members of the
licensed professions, especially members of the Bar. Protection of
the public from those aspects of solicitation that involve fraud, undue
influence, intimidation, overreaching, and other forms of "vexatious
conduct" is a legitimate and important state interest.
(e) Because the State's interest is in averting harm by prohibiting
solicitation in circumstances where it is likely to occur, the absence of
explicit proof or findings of harm or injury to the person solicited
is immaterial. The application of the Disciplinary Rules to appellant,
who solicited employment for pecuniary gain under circumstances likely
to result in the adverse consequences the State seeks to avert, does not
offend the Constitution.
 Champertous contract
Champerty n. an agreement between the party suing in a lawsuit
(plaintiff) and another person, usually an attorney, who agrees to
finance and carry the lawsuit in return for a percentage of the
recovery (money won and paid.) In Common Law this was illegal on the
theory that it encouraged lawsuits.
 Contingent fee is valid
Contingent fee contracts are permitted in this jurisdiction because
they redound to the benefit of the poor client and the lawyer "especially
in cases where the client has meritorious cause of action, but no means
with which to pay for legal services unless he can, with the sanction of
law, make a contract for a contingent fee to be paid out of the
proceeds of litigation. Oftentimes, the contingent fee arrangement is
the only means by which the poor clients can have their rights
vindicated and upheld."
As long as the lawyer does not exert undue influence on his client,
that no fraud is committed or imposition applied, or that the
compensation is clearly not excessive as to amount to extortion, a
contract for contingent fee is valid and enforceable. – Fabillo v. IAC G.R.
No. L-68838 March 11, 1991
 Acceptance fee
An acceptance fee is not a contingent fee, but is an absolute fee
arrangement which entitles a lawyer to get paid for his efforts
regardless of the outcome of the litigation. - Yu v. Bondal, A.C. No. 5534,
January 17, 2005
On the other hand, acceptance fee refers to the charge imposed by the
lawyer for merely accepting the case. This is because once the lawyer
agrees to represent a client, he is precluded from handling cases of the
opposing party based on the prohibition on conflict of interest. Thus,
the incurs an opportunity cost by merely accepting the case of the client
which is therefore indemnified by the payment of acceptance fee. Since
the acceptance fee only seeks to compensate the lawyer for the
lost opportunity, it is not measured by the nature and extent of
the legal services rendered. – Dalupan v. Gacott, A.C. No. 5067, June
29, 2015
 A misleading and deceptive public statement
By advertising a free initial consultation and free appointment and later
charging the woman for their initial meeting, the respondent made a
misleading and deceptive public statement. - In the Matter of Paul J.
PACIOR, 770 N.E.2d 273 (2002)

Touters - someone who advertises for customers in an especially
brazen way.
Common barratry consisting of frequently stirring up suits and
quarrels between individuals.
 Only way to announce legal service
For this reason, lawyers are only allowed to announce their services
by publication in reputable law lists or use of simple professional
cards. - Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
 Acceptable law list publication
The law list must be a reputable law list published primarily for that
purpose; it cannot be a mere supplemental feature of a paper,
magazine, trade journal or periodical which is published principally
for other purposes. For that reason, a lawyer may not properly publish
his brief biographical and informative data in a daily paper, magazine,
trade journal or society program. Nor may a lawyer permit his name
to be published in a law list the conduct, management, or contents of
which are calculated or likely to deceive or injure the public or the bar,
or to lower dignity or standing of the profession. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty.
Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
……..
Thus, the use of simple signs stating the name or names of the
lawyers, the office and residence address and fields of practice, as
well as advertisement in legal periodicals bearing the same brief data,
are permissible. Even the use of calling cards is now acceptable.
Publication in reputable law lists, in a manner consistent with the
standards of conduct imposed by the canon, of brief biographical and
informative data is likewise allowable. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo,
A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
 Uninformative fact
Somewhat more troubling is appellant's listing, in large capital letters,
that he was a member of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the
United States. The emphasis of this relatively uninformative fact is at
least bad taste. - In re: R.M.J. 455 U.S. 191 [1982]
 Acceptable publication
The use of an ordinary simple professional card is also permitted.
The card may contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law
firm which he is connected with, address, telephone number and special
branch of law practiced. The publication of a simple announcement of
the opening of a law firm or of changes in the partnership,
associates, firm name or office address, being for the convenience of
3
the profession, is not objectionable. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C.
No. 5299, August 19, 2003
 Telephone directory
He may likewise have his name listed in a telephone directory but not
under a designation of special branch of law. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty.
Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003

Professional calling cards may only contain the following details:
(a) lawyer’s name;
(b) name of the law firm with which he is connected;
(c) address;
(d) telephone number and
(e) special branch of law practiced.
- Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
 Brief biographical and informative data
Such data must not be misleading and may include only the following:
1. a statement of the lawyer’s name and the names of his professional
associates;
2. addresses, telephone numbers, cable addresses;
3. branches of law practiced;
4. date and place of birth and admission to the bar;
5. schools attended with dates of graduation, degrees and other
educational distinctions;
6. public or quasi-public offices;
……
7. posts of honor;
8. legal authorships;
9. legal teaching positions;
10. membership and offices in bar associations and committees
thereof, in legal and scientific societies and legal
fraternities;
11. the fact of listings in other reputable law lists;
12. the names and addresses of references; and,
13. with their written consent, the names of clients regularly
represented.
- Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
 Limits of solicitation
Nonetheless, the solicitation of legal business is not altogether
proscribed. However, for solicitation to be proper, it must be
compatible with the dignity of the legal profession. If it is made in a
modest and decorous manner, it would bring no injury to the lawyer
and to the bar. - Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19,
2003
 Rule in choosing a [law firm] name
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or assumed
name shall be used. The continued use of the name of a deceased
partner is permissible provided that the firm indicates in all its
communications that said partner is deceased.
………
A partnership for the practice of law cannot be likened to partnerships
formed by other professionals or for business. For one thing, the law on
accountancy specifically allows the use of a trade name in connection
with the practice of accountancy.
A partnership for the practice of law is not a legal entity. It is a mere
relationship or association for a particular purpose. ... It is not a
partnership formed for the purpose of carrying on trade or
business or of holding property." Thus, it has been stated that "the
use of a nom de plume, assumed or trade name in law practice is
improper.
 Whether or not the firm of Velasquez, Rodriguez, Respicio,
Ramos, Nidea, and Prado may call itself “A law Firm Of St.
Thomas More and Associate Members”

We agree with the OBC. Rule 3.02 is clear. No name not belonging to
any of the partners or associates may be used in the firm name for
any purpose. In one case, we have ruled that the use of the firm
name of a foreign law firm is unethical because that firm is not
authorized to practice law in this jurisdiction. In this case, “The Law
Firm of St. Thomas More and Associate Members” is not a law firm in
this jurisdiction or even in any other jurisdiction. A “St. Thomas More
and Associates” or STMA is in fact the socio-political ministry or the
couples for Christ, a Christian family-renewal community. - PP v.
Gonzalez, Jr., G.R. No. 139542 June 10, 2003
…..
To appellate to the name of the lawyers “The Law Firm of St. Thomas
More and Associate Members” indeed appears misleading. It implies
that St. Thomas More is a Law Firm when in fact it is not it would
also convey to the public the impression that the lawyers are members
of the law firm which does not exist. To the public, it would seem that
the purpose or intention of adding “The Law Firm of St. Thomas More
and Associates Members” is to bask in the name of a Saint, although
that may not really, be the purpose or intention of the lawyers. The
appellation only tends to confuse the public and in a way demean
both the saints and the legal profession whose members must
depend on their own name and record and merit and not on the
name/glory of other persons living or dead. – PP v. Gonzalez, Jr., G.R. No.
139542 June 10, 2003
 Unacceptable advertisement
LUIS B. TAGORDA
Attorney
Notary Public
CANDIDATE FOR THIRD MEMBER
Province of Isabela
(NOTE. — As notary public, he can execute for you a deed of sale for the
purchase of land as required by the cadastral office; can renew lost
documents of your animals; can make your application and final
requisites for your homestead; and can execute any kind of affidavit. As
a lawyer, he can help you collect your loans although long overdue, as
well as any complaint for or against you. Come or write to him in his
town, Echague, Isabela. He offers free consultation, and is willing to
help and serve the poor.)
 Prohibited advertisement or solicitation
In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37 (1929)
But solicitation of business by circulars or advertisements, or by
personal communications or interview not warranted by personal
relations, is unprofessional.
It is equally unprofessional to procure business by indirection through
toutersof any kind, whether allied real estate firms or trust companies
advertising to secure the drawing of deeds or wills or offering retainers
in exchange for executorships or trusteeships to be influenced by the
lawyer.
Indirect advertisement for business by furnishing or inspiring
newspaper comments concerning the manner of their conduct, the
magnitude of the interest involved, the importance of the lawyer's
4
position, and all other like self-laudation, defy the traditions and lower
the tone of our high calling, and are intolerable.

Philippine Daily Inquirer, which reads:
“ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE Specialist 532-4333/521-2667.”
- Atty. Khan Jr. v. Atty. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
 Calling card of Atty. Tolentino
NICOMEDES TOLENTINO
LAW OFFFICE
CONSULTANCY & MARITIME SERVICES
W/ FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
Fe Marie L. Labiano
Paralegal
1st MIJI Mansion, 2nd Flr. Rm. M-01 Tel: 362-7820
6th Ave., cor M.H. Del Pilar Fax: (632) 362-7821
Grace Park, Caloocan City Cel.: (0926) 2701719
Back
SERVICES OFFERED:
CONSULTATION AND ASSISTANCE
TO OVERSEAS SEAMEN
REPATRIATED DUE TO ACCIDENT,
INJURY, ILLNESS, SICKNESS, DEATH
AND INSURANCE BENEFIT CLAIMS
ABROAD.
…..
Complainant alleged that respondent, with the help of paralegal Fe
Marie Labiano, convinced his clients to transfer legal representation.
Respondent promised them financial assistance and expeditious
collection on their claims. To induce them to hire his services, he
persistently called them and sent them text messages.
To support his allegations, complainant presented the sworn
affidavit of James Gregorio attesting that Labiano tried to prevail upon
him to sever his lawyer-client relations with complainant and utilize
respondent’s services instead, in exchange for a loan of P50,000.
…..
Moreover, by engaging in a money-lending venture with his clients as
borrowers, respondent violated Rule 16.04:
Rule 16.04 – A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the
client’s interests are fully protected by the nature of the case or by
independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client
except, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary
expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the client. - Linsangan v.
Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
…..
The rule is that a lawyer shall not lend money to his client. The only
exception is, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance
necessary expenses (such as filing fees, stenographer’s fees for transcript
of stenographic notes, cash bond or premium for surety bond, etc.) for a
matter that he is handling for the client.

The rule is intended to safeguard the lawyer’s independence of mind so
that the free exercise of his judgment may not be adversely affected. It
seeks to ensure his undivided attention to the case he is handling as well
as his entire devotion and fidelity to the client’s cause. - Linsangan v.
Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
 Lending money to client
If the lawyer lends money to the client in connection with the client’s
case, the lawyer in effect acquires an interest in the subject matter of the
case or an additional stake in its outcome. Either of these circumstances
may lead the lawyer to consider his own recovery rather than that of
his client, or to accept a settlement which may take care of his
interest in the verdict to the prejudice of the client in violation of his
duty of undivided fidelity to the client’s cause. - Linsangan v. Atty.
Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009
 Including a government lawyer in a business card
Thus, while he may not be actually and directly employed with the firm,
the fact that his name appears on the calling card as a partner in
the Baligod, Gatdula, Tacardon, Dimailig& Celera Law Offices give the
impression that he is connected therein and may constitute an act of
solicitation and private practice which is declared unlawful under
Republic Act No. 6713. - Samonte v. Atty. Gatdula A.M. No. P-99-1292
[1999]
 A verified complaint, sought to enjoin Juan G. Collas, Jr.
and nine other lawyers from practicing law under the
name of Baker & McKenzie, a law firm organized in
Illinois
We hold that Baker & McKenzie, being an alien law firm, cannot
practice law in the Philippines (Sec. 1, Rule 138, Rules of Court). As
admitted by the respondents in their memorandum, Baker & McKenzie
is a professional partnership organized in 1949 in Chicago, Illinois with
members and associates in 30 cities around the world. Respondents,
aside from being members of the Philippine bar, practicing under the
firm name of Guerrero & Torres, are members or associates of Baker
&Mckenzie. - Dacanay v. Baker & McKenzie, et. al. Adm. Case No. 2131
[1985]
…..
As pointed out by the Solicitor General, respondents' use of the firm
name Baker & McKenzie constitutes a representation that being
associated with the firm they could "render legal services of the highest
quality to multinational business enterprises and others engaged in
foreign trade and investment“. This is unethical because Baker &
McKenzie is not authorized to practice law here. - Dacanay v. Baker &
McKenzie, et. al. Adm. Case No. 2131 [1985]
 Director of Religious Affairs v. Bayot,
A.C. No. L-1117, March 20, 1944
Sunday Tribune of June 13, 1943, which reads as follows:
Marriage license promptly secured thru our assistance & the
annoyance of delay or publicity avoided if desired, and marriage
arranged to wishes of parties. Consultation on any matter free
for the poor. Everything confidential.
Legal assistance service
12 Escolta, Manila, Room, 105
Tel. 2-41-60.
 Admonition to a young lawyer
5
"The most worth and effective advertisement possible, even for a young
lawyer, . . . is the establishment of a well-merited reputation for
professional capacity and fidelity to trust. This cannot be forced but
must be the outcome of character and conduct.“ - Director of Religious
Affairs v. Bayot, A.C. No. L-1117, March 20, 1944
 Volunteer [legal] advice is malpractice
It is unprofessional for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit,
except in rare cases where ties of blood, relationship or trust
make it his duty to do so. Stirring up strife and litigation is not only
unprofessional, but it is indictable at common law. - Canons of
Professionals Ethics adopted by the American Bar Association in 1908 and
by the Philippine Bar Association in 1917. Canons 27 and 28 of the Code of
Ethics - In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37 (1929)
 Your best advertisement as a lawyer
We repeat, the canon of the profession tell us that the best advertising
possible for a lawyer is a well-merited reputation for professional
capacity and fidelity to trust, which must be earned as the outcome of
character and conduct.
Good and efficient service to a client as well as to the community has a
way of publicizing itself and catching public attention. That publicity is
a normal by-product of effective service which is right and proper. A
good and reputable lawyer needs no artificial stimulus to generate it
and to magnify his success. He easily sees the difference between a
normal by-product of able service and the unwholesome result of
propaganda. - Ulep vs. Legal Clinic 223 SCRA 378
 Best mode of advertisement
The most worthy and effective advertisement possible, even for a young
lawyer, and especially with his brother lawyers, is the establishment of a
well-merited reputation for professional capacity and fidelity to
trust. This cannot be forced, but must be the outcome of character
and conduct. - In re: Tagorda, 53 Phil. 37 (1929)
 Law firm with a foreign lawyer as partner
In the year 1904 he made an arrangement with the defendant Ney, a
practicing attorney, to carry on business together, sending out a
circular signed "Ney & Bosque," stating that they had established an
office for the general practice of law in all the courts of the Islands and
that Bosque would devote himself especially to consultation and
office work relating to Spanish law. The paper was headed "Law
Office - Ney & Bosque. Juan G. Bosque, juris consultoespañol - C.W. Ney,
abogado americano."
Since that time the defendant Bosque has not personally appeared in the
courts, and with one exception, occuring through an inadvertance,
papers from the office were signed not with the firm name alone nor
with any designation of the firm as attorneys, but with the words "Ney &
Bosque - C.W. Ney, abogado.“ - U.S. vs. Ney and Bosque, 8 Phil. 146 (1907)
…..
Moreover the firm circular in setting forth the establishment of an office
for the general practice of law in all the courts of the Islands, amounted
to an assertion of his right and purpose, not effectively qualified by
the addition that he would devote himself to consultation and
office work relating to Spanish law.
Rule 3.01 - A lawyer shall not use or permit the use of any false,
fraudulent, misleading, deceptive, undignified, self-laudatory or
unfair statement or claim regarding his qualifications or legal services.
Rule 3.02 - In the choice of a firm name, no false, misleading or
assumed name shall be used. Xxx.
  A disbarred lawyer's name cannot be part of a firm's
name
A lawyer who appears under a firm name that contains a disbarred
lawyer's name commits indirect contempt of court. - David Yu Kimteng,
et. al. v. Atty. Young, et. al., G.R. No. 210554, August 05, 2015
Judge [] argues that, per commentary of Justice Ruperto G. Martin, "the
use of professional cards containing the name of the lawyer, his title, his
office and residence is not improper" and that the word "title" should
be broad enough to include a Judge’s legal standing in the bar, his
honors duly earned or even his Law School.

Moreover, other lawyers do include in their calling cards their

 etc., so where then does one draw the line?
“Informal partnership”
vis-a-vis
“acting together as a law firm”
……..
In their defense, respondents admitted that they indeed operated under
the name Valencia CioconDabao Valencia De La Paz
DionelaPandanRubica Law Office, but explained that their
association is not a formal partnership, but one that is subject to certain
"arrangements."
According to them, each lawyer contributes a fixed amount every
month for the maintenance of the entire office; and expenses for
cases, such as transportation, copying, printing, mailing, and the like are
shouldered by each lawyer separately, allowing each lawyer to fix
and receive his own professional fees exclusively.
…….
As such, the lawyers do not discuss their clientele with the other
lawyers and associates, unless they agree that a case be handled
collaboratively. Respondents claim that this has been the practice of the
law firm since its inception.
They averred that complainant's labor cases were solely and exclusively
handled by Atty. Dionela and not by the entire law firm. Moreover,
respondents asserted that the qualified theft case filed by FEVE Farms
was handled by Atty. Penalosa, a new associate who had no knowledge
of complainant's labor cases, as he started working for the firm after the
termination thereof.
former/present titles/positions like President of the Jaycees, Rotary Club,
……..
In Ulep v. Legal Clinic, Inc., we explained that the use of an ordinary
and simple professional card by lawyers is permitted and that the card
"may contain only a statement of his name, the name of the law firm
which he is connected with, address, telephone number and special
branch of law practiced." In herein case, Judge’s calling cards cannot be
considered as simple and ordinary. By including therein the honors
he received from his law school with a claim of being a bar
topnotcher, Judge [] breached the norms of simplicity and modesty
required of judges.
 Use of titles “Justice” and “Judge”
We have previously declared that the use of titles such as “Justice” is
reserved to incumbent and retired members of the Supreme Court, the
Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan and may not be used by any
other official of the Republic, including those given the rank of “Justice”.
By analogy, the title “Judge” should be reserved only to judges,
incumbent and retired, and not to those who were dishonorably
discharged from the service.
As correctly pointed out by the Investigating Commissioner, the right
to retain and use said title applies only to the aforementioned
members of the bench and no other, and certainly not to those who
were removed or dismissed from the judiciary, such as respondent.
Thank you for your attention!!

 Held

As the Court observes, the law firm's unethical acceptance of the

criminal case arose from its failure to organize and implement a
system by which it would have been able to keep track of all cases
assigned to its handling lawyers to the end of, among others,
ensuring that every engagement it accepts stands clear of any potential
conflict of interest.

As an organization of individual lawyers which, albeit engaged as a

collective, assigns legal work to a corresponding handling lawyer, it
behooves the law firm to value coordination in deference to the conflict
of interest rule. This lack of coordination, as respondents' law firm
exhibited in this case, intolerably renders its clients' secrets vulnerable
to undue and even adverse exposure, eroding in the balance the lawyer-
client relationship's primordial ideal of unimpaired trust and confidence.
– Anglo v. Attys. Valencia, et. Al., A.C. No. 10567, February 25, 2015

 By including self-laudatory details in his professional

card, did the Judge violate Canon 2, Rule 2.02 of the Code
of Judicial Conduct?

Judge [] was circulating calling cards bearing his name as the Presiding
Judge of RTC, Branch 73, Malabon City, and indicating therein that he is
a "bar exams topnotcher (87.55%)" and with "full second honors" from
the Ateneo de Manila University, A.B. and LL.B.

…….