ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Legal Ethics Course Outline

I. INTRODUCTION / PRELIMINARIES a. Requirement of Good Moral Character i. In the matter of James Joseph Hamm, 211 Ariz 458, 123 p.3d 652, 2005 ii. Rolly Pentecostes vs Atty. Hermenegildo Marasigan, A.M. No. P07-2337, August 03, 2007 iii. Father Ranhilio C. Aquino et al vs. Atty. Edwin Pascua A.C. No. 5095, November 28, 2007 iv. Administrative case filed against Judge Jaime V. Quitain, JBC No. 013, August 22, 2007 v. Rodolfo M. Bernardo vs. Atty Ismael F. Mejia, Adm Case No. 2984, August 31, 2007 vi. GSIS vs. Hon. Vicente A. Pacquing, AM No. RTJ-04-1831, February 2, 2007 vii. Velez vs. Atty. De Vera A.C. No. 6697, July 25, 2006 viii. Cynthia Advincula vs. Atty. Ernesto M. Macabata, AC No. 7204, March 07, 2007 b. Rehabilitation from criminal conduct and good moral character * In the matter of James Joseph Hamm (supra) 9. Tucson Rapid Transit Co vs. Rubiaz, 21 Ariz, 221, 231, 187 P.568, 572 (1920) 10. In re: Petition to disqualify Atty. Leonardo De Vera, AC No. 6052, December 11, 2003 11. IRRI vs NLRC, GR No. 97239, May 12, 1993 12. Roberto Soriano vs. Atty Manuel Dizon, AC 6792, January 25, 2006 c. Passing the bar and the practice of law 13. Aguirre vs Rana, BM 1036, June 10, 2003 d. What is practice of law? 14. Cayetano vs. Monsod, GR No. 100113, September 3, 1991 15. Cruz vs Atty. Cabrera, AC No. 5737, October 25, 2004 16. Ruthie Lim-Santiago vs Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio, AC No. 6705, March 31, 2006 e. Law student and practice of law * Revised Rules of Court, Rule 138-A, Section 34

17. Cruz vs. Mina, GR No. 154207, April 27, 2007 f. Membership in the IBP 18. In re: Atty. Marcial Edillion, AM 1928, August 3, 1978 g. Exemption from payment of IBP dues? 19. Letter of Atty. Cecilio Y. Arevalo Jr. BM 1370, May 9, 2005 20. Santos Jr vs Llamas, AC 4749, January 20, 2001 h. Citizenship Requirement 21. Petition for Leave to Resume Practice of Law, B.M. 1678, December 17, 2007 * 1987 Philippine Constitution, Art. 12, par 14 i. j. k. l. II. Lawyers Oath Why is a lawyer an Officer of the Court? Read pages 1-30, Legal Ethics by Pineda, 2009 edition Rules of Court, Rule 138

CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY a. Canon 1 i. Rule 1.01 22. Tapucar vs Atty. Tapucar, AC No. 4148, July 30, 1998 23. Acejas III vs PP, GR No. 156643, June 27, 2006 ii. Rule 1.02 24. Donton vs. Dr. Tansingco, AC No. 6057, June 27, 2006 25. Velez vs. Atty. De Vera, AC No. 6697, July 25, 2006 Rule 1.03 26. Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, AC No. 6672, September 4, 2009 27. Atty. Vitriolo et al vs Atty Dasig, AC No. 4984, April 01, 2003 Rule 1.04 28. Sa Si III vs NLRC, GR No. 104599, March 11, 1994

iii.

iv.

b. Canon 2 i. Rule 2.01 ii. Rule 2.02 29. Santiago vs. Atty. Rafanan, AC No. 6252, October 5, 2004 iii. Rule 2.03 * Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, (supra) iv. Rule 2.04

c. Canon 3 30. Atty. Khan Jr. vs Atty. Simbillo AC No. 5299, August 19, 2003 i. Rule 3.01 * Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, (supra) * Atty. Khan Jr. vs Atty. Simbillo (supra) ii. Rule 3.02 31. BR Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. vs CA GR No. L-41862, February 7, 1992 iii. Rule 3.03 iv. Rule 3.04 d. Canon 4 e. Canon 5 f. Canon 6 32. Diana Ramos vs. Atty. Jose R. Imbang, AC No. 6788, August 23, 2007 33. Gisela Huyssen vs Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez, AC No. 6707, March 24, 2006 * Ruthie Lim-Santiago vs Atty. Carlos B. Sagucio (supra) i. Rule 6.01 34. Cuenca vs CA, GR No. 109870, December 1, 1995 ii. Rule 6.02 35. Ali vs Atty. Bubong, AC No. 4018, March 8, 2005 36. Olazo vs. Justice Tinga, AM No. 10-5-7-SC, December 07, 2010 iii. Rule 6.03 * Gisela Huyssen vs Atty. Fred L. Gutierrez (supra) * Olazo vs. Justice Tinga (supra) g. Canon 7 i. Rule 7.01 * Rodolfo M. Bernardo vs Atty Ismael F. Mejia (supra) ii. Rule 7.02 iii. Rule 7.03 h. Canon 8 37. Que vs. Atty. Revilla Jr. AC No. 7054, December 4, 2009 i. Rule 8.01 ii. Rule 8.02 * Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino, (supra)

i. i.

Canon 9 Rule 9.01 38. PP vs. Hon Maceda, GR No. 89591-96, January 24, 2000 39. Zeta vs. Malinao, AM No. P-220, December 20, 1978 40. Tan and Pagayokan vs. Balajadia, GR No. 169517, March 14, 2006

ii. Rule 9.02 41. Lijauco vs. Atty. Terrado AC No. 6317, August 31, 2006 42. Plus Builders Inc. vs. Atty. Revilla Jr. AC No. 7056, September 13, 2006 Class Policies: Attendance is checked at 10:15am. Please make an effort to be on time so as not to disrupt the class. Each student is allowed a maximum of four (4) absences. On the fifth, the student is considered FA failed due to absences. If a student is called to recite and he or she is absent, the student will get a recitation grade of 65. Keep mobile phone in silent mode. If the phone will cause disruption of class, every student present will get a grade of 75 for one recitation. Every week, ten (10) cases will be submitted in digest form, following the format below: o Facts (Relevant to the assigned topic) o Issue o Decision (Ratio decidendi) Submission of cases in digest form will be graded as follows: Quantity (30%) ten cases every week as listed in the syllabus; total of 75 cases for the entire semester Quality (40%) neatness, legible handwriting, grammar and English construction, relevance to the topic Timeliness (30%) o on or before the date due for submission 100% o submitted on the following week after its due date 85% nd o submitted on the 2 following week after its due date75% o beyond two (2) weeks late 65% Deadlines: June 27, 2011 cases 1 to 10 July 4, 2011 - cases 2 to 20, etc.

ARELLANO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW

Legal Ethics Course Outline

II. CODE OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY j. Canon 10 i. Rule 10.01 43. Maligaya vs Atty. Donorilla Jr. AC No. 6198, September 15, 2006 44. Manuel S. Sebastian vs Atty. Amily A. Bajar, AC No. 3731, September 7, 2007 45. Perea vs Atty. Almadro, AC No. 5246, May 02, 2006 ii. Rule 10.02 iii. Rule 10.03 k. Canon 11 i. Rule 11.01 ii. Rule 11.02 iii. Rule 11.03 46. Atty. Barandon Jr. vs. Atty. Ferrer Sr. AC No. 5768, March 26, 2010 47. Ng vs. Atty. Alar, AC No. 7252, November 22, 2006 iv. Rule 11.04 48. Asean Pacific Planners et al vs. City of Urdaneta et al, GR No. 162525, September 23, 2008 Rule 11.05 49. Judge Lacurom vs Atty. Jacoba, AC No. 5921, March 10, 2006 50. In the matter of proceedings for disciplinary action against Atty. Almacen In, GR No. 27654, February 18, 1970 51. Re: Atty. Bagabuyo, AC No. 7006, October 9, 2007

v.

l. Canon 12 i. Rule 12.01 52. De Espino vs Atty. Presquito, AM No. AC 4762, June 28, 2004 ii. iii. Rule 12.02 Rule 12.03 53. Atty. Vaflor-Fabroa vs. Atty. Paguinto, AC No. 6273, March 15, 2010 Rule 12.04 54. Bugaring and RBBI vs Hon Espanol, GR No. 133090, January 19, 2001

iv.

v. vi. vii. viii.

Rule 12.05 Rule 12.06 55. Sambajon et al vs Atty. Suing, AC No 7062, September 26, 2006 Rule 12.07 Rule 12.08 * Santiago vs. Atty. Rafanan (supra)

m. Canon 13 i. Rule 13.01 ii. Rule 13.02 * Re: Atty. Bagabuyo (supra) 56. Foodsphere, Inc vs Atty. Mauricio Jr., AC No. 7199, July 22, 2009 iii. Rule 13.03

n. Canon 14 i. Rule 14.01 57. Francisco vs. Atty. Portugal, AC No. 6155, March 14, 2006 ii. Rule 14.02 58. In Re: Atty. Adriano, GR No. L-26868, February 27, 1969

iii. Rule 14.03 59. Perez vs. Atty. Dela Torre, AC 6160, March 30, 2006 60. Canoy vs. Atty. Ortiz, AC No. 5485, March 16, 2005 iv. Rule 14.04 * In Re: Atty. Adriano (supra) o. Canon 15 i. Rule 15.01 ii. Rule 15.02 * Diana Ramos vs. Atty. Jose R. Imbang (supra) 61. Ma. Luisa Hadjula vs. Atty. Roceles F. Madianda, AC No. 6711, July 03, 2007 iii. Rule 15.03 * Perez vs. Atty. Dela Torre (supra) 62. Atty. Jalandoni vs. Atty. Villarosa, AC No. 5303, June 15, 2006 63. Hornilla vs. Atty. Salunat, AC No. 5804, July 01, 2003 *. Lim Jr. vs Atty. Villarosa, (AC No. 5303, June 15, 2006) 64. Gonzales vs. Atty. Cabucana, AC No. 6836, January 23, 2006

iv. v.

Rule 15.04 * Lim Jr vs. Atty. Villarosa (supra) Rule 15.05 65. Rollon vs Atty. Naraval, AC No. 6424, March 04, 2005 66. Yu vs. Bondal, AC No. 5534, January 17, 2005 Rule 15.06 67. Reddi vs. Atty. Sebrio Jr. AC No. 7027, January 30, 2009 Rule 15.07 68. Rural Bank of Calape, Inc. vs. Atty. Florido, AC No. 5736, June 18, 2010 Rule 15.08 69. Dr. Gamilla et al vs. Atty. Mario Jr. AC No. 4763, March 20, 2003

vi. vii.

viii.

p. Canon 16 i. Rule 16.01 70. Atty. Salomon Jr. vs. Atty. Frial, AC No. 7820, September 12, 2008 71. Almandrez Jr. vs. Atty. Langit, AC No.7057, July 25, 2006 72. Chua and Hsia vs. Atty. Mesina Jr. AC No. 4904, August 12, 2004 73. Dalisay vs. Atty. Mauricio Jr. AC No. 5655, January 23, 2006 ii. iii. iv. Rule 16.02 74. Tarog vs. Atty. Ricafort, AC No. 8253, March 15, 2011 Rule 16.03 Rule 16.04 * Linsangan vs. Atty. Tolentino (supra)

q. Canon 17 r. Canon 18 75. Parias vs. Atty. Paguinto, AC No. 6297, July 13, 2004 i. Rule 18.01 * Rollon vs Atty. Naraval (supra) 76. De Juan vs. Atty. Baria III, AC No. 5817, May 27, 2004 Rule 18.02 77. Fernandez vs. Atty. Novero Jr. AC No. 5394, December 02, 2002

ii.

iii. iv.

Rule 18.03 78. Barbuco vs. Atty. Beltran, AC No. 5092, August 11, 2004 Rule 18.04 79. Ruiz vs. Santos, GR No. 166386, January 27, 2009 80. Sps. Soriano vs. Atty. Reyes, AC No. 4676, May 04, 2006 81. Somosot vs. Atty. Lara, AC No. 7024, January 20, 2009

s. Canon 19 * Sambajon et al vs Atty. Suing (supra) i. Rule 19.01 * Que vs. Atty. Revilla Jr (supra) 82. Pena vs. Atty. Aparicio, AC No. 7298, June 25, 2007 Rule 19.02 * Dalisay vs. Atty. Mauricio Jr (supra) * Donton vs. Dr. Tansingco (supra) 83. Pena vs. Atty. Aparicio, AC No. 7298, June 25, 2007 Rule 19.03 84. Atty. Solidon vs. Atty. Macalalad, AC No. 8158, February 24, 2010

ii.

iii.

t. Canon 20 * Petition for authority to continue use of the firm name, July 30, 1979 i. Rule 20.01 85. Masmud vs. NLRC, GR No. 183385, February 13, 2009 86. Atty. Orocio vs. Angulan et al, GR No. 179892-93, January 30, 2009 87. Culpepper & Carroll vs. Coe, 929 So.2d 1224, 2006 Rule 20.02 Rule 20.03 Rule 20.04 88. Ramos vs. Atty. Ngaseo, AC No. 6210, December 9, 2004

ii. iii. iv.

u. Canon 21 89. Bun Siong Yao vs. Atty. Leonardo A. Aurelio, AC No. 7023, March 30, 2006 90. Junio vs. Atty. Grupo, AC No. 5020, December 18, 2001 i. ii. Rule 21.01 Rule 21.02

* Yao vs. Atty. Leonardo A. Aurelio (supra) 91. Uy vs. Atty. Gonzales, AC No. 5280, March 30, 2004 iii. iv. v. vi. vii. Rule 21.03 Rule 21.04 Rule 21.05 Rule 21.06 Rule 21.07

v. Canon 22 * Lim Jr vs. Atty. Villarosa (supra) 92. Felicisimo M. Montano vs. IBP and Atty. Juan S. Dealca, AC No. 4215, May 21, 2001 i. Rule 22.01 * Felicisimo M. Montano vs. IBP (supra) * Lim Jr vs. Atty. Villarosa (supra) 93. Elisa V. Venterez et al vs. Atty. Rodrigo R. Cosme, AC No. 7421, October 10, 2007 94. In Re: Atty. David Briones, AC No. 5486, August 15, 2001

ii. Rule 22.02