The Lawyer and the Legal Profession

CANON 7 A LAWYER SHALL AT ALL TIMES UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND SUPPORT THE ACTIVITIES OF THE INTEGRATED BAR. The respect of the public to the legal profession is enhanced by the faithful performance of the lawyers duty to the court, to society, profession and to his client. Public confidence in law and lawyers may be eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of a member of the Bar. The practice of law is a privilege given to lawyers who meet the high standards of legal proficiency and morality.

Illustrative Case: In the case of Atty. Karen M. Silverio-Buffe the SC ruled that she failed to live up to her lawyers oath and thereby violated Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility when she blatantly and unlawfully practised law within the prohibited period by appearing before the RTC Branch she had just left. [A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC, August 19, 2009] By failing to live up to his oath and to comply with the exacting standards of the legal profession, respondent also violated Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which directs a lawyer to "at all times uphold the integrity and the dignity of the legal profession." [A.C. No. 7199, July 22, 2009]

RULE 7.01 A LAWYER SHALL BE ANSWERABLE FOR KNOWINGLY MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT OR SUPPRESSING A MATERIAL FACT IN CONECTION WITH HIS APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR. One who aspires to profess the law must show his fitness for admission by adherence to, or observance of, the standards of conduct required of members of the Bar. Observance of the duties and responsibilities of a lawyer begins even as a law student. A students failure to live up to them may be aground for SC to refuse admission to practice or for disbarment should SC learn later on about his/her transgressions. The applicant must not knowingly make false statements regarding the requirements for admission to the practice of law. If he is later found to have false statements in his application, he may e disbarred for such falsehood.

Page | 1

Illustrative Case: The non-disclosure of Meling of the criminal cases filed against him makes him also answerable under Rule 7.01 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which states that a lawyer shall be answerable for knowingly making a false statement or suppressing a material fact in connection with his application for admission to the bar. [B.M. No. 1154. June 8, 2004]

RULE 7.02 A LAWYER SHALL NOT SUPPORT THE APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF ANY PERSON KNOWN BY HIM TO BE UNQUALIFIED IN RESPECT TO CHARACTER, EDUCATION, OR OTHER RELEVANT ATTRIBUTE. The rationale behind this rule is the lawyers responsibility to uphold the integrity and dignity of the profession, by not blindly issuing certifications in support of applications for admission to the bar of person known to him or her to have questionable character, inadequate education or other relevant attributes not consistent with any of all the requirements for admission.

RULE 7.03 A LAWYER SHALL NOT ENGAGE IN CONDUCT THAT ADVERSELY REFLECTS ON HIS FITNESS TO PRACTICE OF LAW, NOR SHALL HE, WHETHER IN PUBLIC OR PRIVATE LIFE, BEHAVE IN A SCANDALOUS MANNER TO THE DISCREDIT OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. The act of a lawyer in issuing a check which is drawn against insufficient funds constitutes deceitful conduct or conduct unbecoming an officer of the court. It shows a lack of personal honesty and good moral character as to render him unworthy of public confidence. All lawyers should take heed that they are licensed officers of the courts who are mandated to maintain the dignity of the legal profession, hence they must conduct themselves honourably and fairly. The members of the Bar are expected at all times to uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and refrain from any act or omission which might lessen the trust and confidence reposed by the public in the fidelity, honesty and integrity of the legal profession. Membership in the legal profession is a privilege.

Page | 2

Illustrative Case: Atty. Ferrer violated Canon 7 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which enjoins lawyers to uphold the dignity and integrity of the legal profession at all times. Rule 7.03 of the Code provides: Rule 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflect on his fitness to practice law, nor shall he, whether in public or private life behave in scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. All lawyers should take heed that they are licensed officers of the courts who are mandated to maintain the dignity of the legal profession, hence they must conduct themselves honorably and fairly. Atty. Ferrers display of improper attitude, arrogance, misbehavior, and misconduct in the performance of his duties both as a lawyer and officer of the court, before the public and the court, was a patent transgression of the very ethics that lawyers are sworn to uphold. [A.C. No. 5768 March 26, 2010] In this case, evidence abounds that respondent has failed to live up to the standards required of members of the legal profession. Specifically, respondent has transgressed provisions of the Code of Professional Responsibility, to wit: CANON 1 A lawyer shall uphold the constitution, obey the laws of the land and promote respect for law and legal processes.

Rule 1.01. - A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.

CANON 7 A lawyer shall at all times uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal profession and support the activities of the integrated bar.

Rule 7.03. A lawyer shall not engage in conduct that adversely reflects on his fitness to practice law, nor should he, whether in public or private life, behave in a scandalous manner to the discredit of the legal profession. [A.C. No. 5338 February 23, 2009] It has been consistently held by the Court that possession of good moral character is not only a condition for admission to the Bar but is a continuing requirement to maintain one's good standing in the legal profession. It is the bounden duty of law practitioners to observe the highest degree of morality in order to safeguard the integrity of the Bar. Consequently, any errant behaviour on the part of a lawyer, be it in his public or private activities, which tends to show him deficient in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor, is sufficient to warrant his suspension or disbarment. [A.C. No. 4428 : December 12, 2011]
Page | 3

Lawyers Relation with Other Lawyers

Membership in the bar imposes upon lawyers certain obligations to one another. These include observance of honourable, candid and courteous dealings with other lawyers and fidelity to known and recognized customs and practices of the bar that make the practice of law a profession. [Agpalo, 2009. Legal and Judicial Ethics. p. 97 ]

CANON 8. A LAWYER SHALL CONDUCT HIMSELF WITH COURTESY, FAIRNESS AND CANDOR TOWARD HIS PROFESSIONAL COLLEAGUES, AND SHALL AVOID HARASSING TACTICS AGAINST OPPOSING COUNSEL. If once you forfeit the confidence of your fellow-citizens, you can never regain their respect and esteem. Abraham Lincoln

Without feelings of respect, what is there to distinguish men from beasts? Confucius

A great part of mans comfort, as well as of his success at the bar, depends upon his relations with his professional brethren. With them he is in daily necessary intercourse, and he must have their respect and confidence, if he wishes to sail along in smooth waters. xxx. Therefore, candor, fairness, and truthfulness should characterize the conduct of a lawyer with other lawyers. He should not also ignore recognized customs and practices of the bar. [Agpalo, 2009. Legal and Judicial Ethics. p. 98 ].

Rule 8.01. A LAWYER SHALL NOT, IN HIS PROFESSIONAL DEALINGS, USE LANGUAGE WHICH IS ABUSIVE, OFFENSIVE OR OTHERWISE IMPROPER. A kindhearted woman gains respect, but ruthless men gain only wealth. Proverbs 11:16

Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves. Romans 12:10

Page | 4

Instances of Disrespectful Language 1. Categorizes the Supreme Courts decision as false erroneous and illegal . [Suo vs. Cloribel , A.M. No. 01 1 15 RTC, July 2003] 2. Description of judges attitude as Unjust, hostile, vindictive and dangerous. (Cornejo vs. Judge Tan 85 Phil 772) 3. Calling an adverse counsel as bobo or using the word ay que bobo in reference to the manner of offering evidence [Castillio vs. Padillia Jr. A.M. No. 2339, Feb 18 1984] 4. Standing that justice is blind and also deaf and dumb. [In re: Almacen, L 27654 Feb 1970] 5. Attributing to the Supreme Court acts of dismissing judges without rhyme and reason and disbarring lawyers without due process. [ Zaldivar vs. Gonzalez G.R 79690 707, Feb 1989] Lesson : Treat others as you want them to treat you. What goes around comes around Illustrative Cases. The best teacher indeed is experience. Any undue ill feeling between clients should not influence counsels in their conduct and demeanor toward each other. While lawyers owe entire devotion to the interests of their clients, their office does not permit violation of the laws or any manner of fraud or chicanery. [Reyes vs. Chiong jr. A.C. No. 5148, July 2003] Any kind of language which attacks without foundation the integrity of the opposing counsel or the dignity of the court may be stricken off the records or may subject a lawyer to disciplinary action. Disrespectful, abusive and abrasive language, offensive personality, unfounded accusations or intemperate words tending to obstruct, embarrass or influence the court in administering justice, or to bring it into disrepute have no place in a pleading. The employment serves no useful purpose and on the contrary constitutes direct contempt or contempt in facie curiae. [Surigao Mineral Reservation Board vs. Cloribel 31 Scra 1, 1970] A lawyer who uses intemperate abusive , abrasive or threatening language portrays disrespect to the court, disgraces the bar and invites the exercise by the court of its disciplinary power. [In Re: Gomez, 43 Phil 376, 1992] A lawyers language should be forceful but dignified, emphatic but respectful as befitting an advocate and in keeping with the dignity of the legal profession. [In re: Climaco, 55 Scra 107, 1974] The lawyers arguments, whether written or oral, should be gracious to both the court and opposing counsel and be of such words as may be properly addressed by one gentleman to another. [National Security Co. Vs Jarvis 278 U.S. 610]

Page | 5

Lack or want of intention is no excuse for the disrespectful language employed. Counsel cannot escape responsibility by claiming that his words did not mean what any reader must have understood them as meaning. [Rheem of the Phil. Vs. ferrer, 20 Scra 441, 1967]

Today, May we give a stranger one of our smiles. It might be the only sunshine he sees all day. Quoted in P.S I Love you, Jacson brown Kindness is the Language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. Mark twain "A gentle answer deflects anger, but harsh words make tempers flare." Proverbs 15: 1

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. Thou shall not steal another lawyers client. For this reason, efforts, direct or indirect, in any way to encroach upon the professional employment of another lawyer, are unworthy of those who should who should be brethren at the bar. This proscribes competition among lawyers in the matter securing clientele. A lawyer should not steal another lawyers client nor induce the latter to retain him by a promise of better service, good result or reduced fees for his services. Neither should he disparage another, make comparisons or publicize his talent as a means to feather his law practice. [ Laput vs. Remotigue, 6 SCRA 45 (1962) ] A lawyer may not cast aspersion upon the integrity of another lawyer so as to deprive him of his clients nor pre-empt from the counsel of record the premiere control of the case in the absence of the latters consent without violating the ethical norm. [In Re Soriano, 33 SCRA 801 (1970) ] Illustrative Case: Linsangan vs. Tolentino AC No. 6672, September 4, 2009 Facts: Pedro Linsangan (Linsangan) of the Linsangan Linsangan & Linsangan Law Office filed a complaint of disbarment against Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino (Tolentino) for solicitation of
Page | 6

clients and encroachment of professional services alleging that respondent, with the help of paralegal Fe Marie Labiano, convinced his clients to transfer legal representation to said respondent with the promise of financial assistance and expeditious collection on their claims. To induce them to hire his services, he persistently called them and sent them text messages. Complainant presented the sworn affidavit of James Gregorio attesting that Labiano convinced him to sever his lawyer-client relations with complainant and use respondents services instead, in exchange for a loan of P50,000.00. Respondent, in his defense, denied knowing Labiano and authorizing the printing and circulation of the said calling card, but later on admitted it during the mandatory hearing held by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). Issue: Was the act of Atty. Tolentino an act of stealing clients from another lawyer, thus, in violation of Rule 8.02 of the Code? Held: Yes, the act of Atty. Tolentino, through Labiano, is an act of stealing clients from another lawyer, thus, he violated Rule 8.02 of the Code. Under Rule 8.02 of the CPR, settled is the rule that a lawyer should not steal another lawyers client nor induce the latter to retain him by a promise of better service, good result or reduced fees for his services. Again the Court notes that respondent never denied having these seafarers in his client list nor receiving benefits from Labianos referrals. Furthermore, he never denied Labianos connection to his office. Respondent committed an unethical, predatory overstep into anothers legal practice. He cannot escape liability under Rule 8.02 of the CPR. It is, however, the right of a lawyer, without fear or favour, to give proper advice to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel. He may properly accept employment to handle a matter which has been previously handled by another lawyer, provided, that the other lawyer has been given notice by the client that his services has been terminated. [ Laput vs. Remotigue, 6 SCRA 45 (1962) ] In the absence of such notice of termination by the client, a lawyer retained to take over a case from a peer in the bar should do so only after he shall have obtained the conformity of the counsel whom he would substitute. If such conformity cannot be had, he should at least give sufficient notice to such lawyer of the contemplated substitution. His entry of appearance in the case without notice to the first lawyer amounts to an improper encroachment upon the professional employment of the original counsel. [In Re Soriano, 33 SCRA 801 (1970) ] As the original lawyer has his remedy in law to protect his right against the client who terminated his services, he cannot insist that his professional brother refuse employment in the matter merely because he claims the termination of his services is a breach of contract. To hold otherwise would be to deny a litigant the right to be represented at all times by counsel of his choice. [ Laput vs. Remotigue, 6 SCRA 45 (1962) ]
Page | 7

Bar Question (2006) Myrna, a petitioner in a case for custody of children against her husband, sought advice from Atty. Mendoza whom she met at a party. She informed Atty. Mendoza that her lawyer, Atty. Khan, has been charging her exorbitant appearance fees when all he does is move for postponements which have unduly delayed the proceedings; and that recently, she learned that Atty. Khan approached her husband asking for a huge amount in exchange for the withdrawal of her Motion for Issuance of Hold Departure Order so that he and his children can leave for abroad. 1. Is it ethical for Atty. Mendoza to advise Myrna to terminate the services of Atty. Khan and hired him instead for a reasonable attorneys fees? 2. What should Atty. Mendoza do about the information relayed to him by Myrna that Atty. Khan approached her husband with an indecent proposal? Suggested Answer: 1. Such advice would be unethical. A lawyer shall conduct himself with courtesy, fairness and candor toward his professional colleagues (Canon 8, CPR). Specifically, he should not encroach upon the professional employment of another lawyer (Rule 8.02, CPR). 2. Atty. Mendoza can advise her client to advise her to terminate the services of Atty. Khan and/or file an administrative complaint against him. It is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance to those seeking relief against unfaithful counsel (Rule 8.02, CPR)

Preventing Unauthorized Practice of Law

CANON 9. A LAWYER SHALL NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ASSIST IN THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW. Purpose: To protect the public, the court, the client and the bar from the incompetence or dishonesty of those unlicensed to practice law and not subject to disciplinary control of the court. Public policy requires that the practice of law be limited to those individuals found duly qualified in education and character. RULE 9.01 - A LAWYER SHALL NOT DELEGATE TO ANY UNQUALIFIED PERSON THE PERFORMANCE OF ANY TASK WHICH MAY BE PERFORMED BY A MEMBER OF THE BAR IN GOOD STANDING.

Page | 8

Can a lawyer delegate legal work to non-lawyers? General Rule: A lawyer should not delegate to a layman any work which involves the application of law, such as the computation and determination of the period within which to appeal an adverse judgment. Thus, under Rule 9.01 of the code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the performance of any task which by law may only be performed by a member of the bar in good standing. Exceptions: 1. Lawyers can employ lay secretaries, lay unvestigators, lay detectives, lay researchers, accountants or non-lawyer draftsmen, to undertake any task involving the practice of law. 2. Lawyers may also avail themselves of the assistance of law students in many fields of the lawyers work such as: A. Examination of case law B. Finding and interviewing witnesses C. Examining court records D. Delivering papers E. Similar matters

RULE 9.02 A LAWYER SHALL NOT DIVIDE OR STIPULATE TO DIVIDE A FEE FOR LEGAL SERVICES WITH PERSONS NOT LICENSED TO PRACTICE LAW, EXCEPT: 1. Where there is a pre-existing agreement with a partner or associate that, upon the latters death, money shall be paid over a reasonable period of time to his estate or to persons specified in the agreement; or 2. Where a lawyer undertakes a complete unfinished legal business of a deceased lawyer; or 3. Where a lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a retirement plan, even if the plan is based in whole or in part, on a profit-sharing agreement.

The first and second exceptions to the rule, strictly speaking, represent compensation for legal services rendered by the deceased lawyer during his lifetime, which is paid to his estate or heirs The third, strictly speaking is not a division of legal fees but a pension representing deferred wages for the employees past services.

Page | 9

Illustrative Case: Lijuaco vs Terrado AC No. 6317, August 31, 2006 Facts: An administrative copmlaint was filed by Lijuaco against Atty. Terrado for gross misconduct, malpractice and conduct unbecoming of an officer of the court when he neglected a legal matter entrusted to him despite receipt to the IBP for investigation, report and recommendation. Respondent openly admitted that he divided tha attorneys fees to other individuals as commission or referral fees Issue: Whether or not Terrado violated Rule 9.02 of Canon 9. Held: Yes, Terrado violated Rule 9.02 of Canon 9 by admitting that he divided his attorneys fees to non- lawyers. By express provision of the law, a lawyer shall not divide or stipulate to divide a fee for legal services with persons not licensed to practice law, except in certain cases.

Page | 10