Legal Ethics Case Digests Compilation

8/13/2019 Legal Ethics Case Digests Compilation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/legal-ethics-case-digests-compilation 1/6

Case 1. Cayetano vs. Monsod (201 SCRA 210)

Facts: Respondent Christian Monsod was nominated by President Corazon C. Aquino to theposition of chairman of the COMELEC. Petitioner opposed the nomination because alleedlyMonsod does not posses required qualification of ha!in been enaed in the practice of lawfor at least ten years. "he #$%& constitution pro!ides in 'ection #( Article )*+C, "here shall

be a Commission on Elections composed of a Chairman and si- Commissioners who shall benatural+born citizens of the Philippines and( at the time of their appointment( at least thirty+fi!e years of ae( holders of a collee deree( and must not ha!e been candidates for anyelecti!e position in the immediately precedin elections. owe!er( a ma/ority thereof(includin the Chairman( shall be members of the Philippine 0ar who ha!e been enaed inthe practice of law for at least ten years.

Issue: 1hether the respondent does not possessed the required qualification of ha!inenaed in the practice of

law for at least ten years.

Held: )n the case of Philippine Lawyers Association !s. Ara!a( stated, "he practice of law isnot limited to the conduct of cases or litiation in court2 it embraces the preparation ofpleadins and other papers incident to actions and special proceedin( the manaement ofsuch actions and proceedins on behalf of clients before /udes and courts( and in addition(con!eyin. )n eneral( all ad!ice to clients( and all action ta3en for them in mattersconnected with the law incorporation ser!ices( assessment and condemnation ser!ices(contemplatin an appearance before /udicial body( the foreclosure of mortae(enforcement of a creditor4s claim in ban3ruptcy and insol!ency proceedins( and conductinproceedins in attachment( and in matters of estate and uardianship ha!e been held toconstitute law practice. Practice of law means any acti!ity( in or out court( which requiresthe application of law( leal procedure( 3nowlede( trainin and e-perience. "he contentionthat Atty. Monsod does not posses the required qualification of ha!in enaed in thepractice of law for at least ten years is incorrect since Atty. Monsod4s past wor3 e-perienceas a lawyer+economist( a lawyer+manaer( a lawyer+entrepreneur of industry( a lawyer+neotiator of contracts( and a lawyer+leislator of both rich and the poor 5 !erily more thansatisfy the constitutional requirement for the position of COMELEC chairman( "herespondent has been enaed in the practice of law for at least ten years does )n the !iew ofthe foreoin( the petition is 6)'M)''E6.

2. BM 2540 In e: Atty. Medado



!. Cu" vs. Cu" II SCRA #5$ (%&S'S MA. C'I vs. A*I* MA. C'I)Facts:

• "he main concern in this case is the respecti!e qualifications of 7esus Cui and AntonioCui to the position of administrator of ospicio de 'an 7ose de 0arii( a charitableinstitution established by 6on Pedro Cui and 6ona0enina Cui.

• 7esus and Antonio are the sons of Mariano Cui( a nephew of the founders of theinstitution. Antonio4s claim to theposition is based on a 8con!enio9 where thenadministrator "eodoro resined in fa!or of him. 7esus( howe!er( hadno prior notice ofthis.

• 7esus4s claim is that he should be preferred pursuant to the deed of donation :whichreconized their fatherMariano as a leitimate descendant to the position; as he isthe older of the two.

• "he deed( howe!er( i!es preference to a descendant who has a 8titulo de aboado9or a doctor( or a ci!ilenineer( or a pharmacist :in order;. Or to the one who pays thehihest ta-es. 7esus holds the deree of 0achelorof Laws but is not a member of the0ar( while Antonio is a member of the 0ar :he was formerly disbarred( thouh(by the'C and was /ust reinstated wee3s before assumin the position;

)ssues,

1ho has a better riht to the position of administrator between 7ose and Antonio<

1hat does the term 8titulo de aboado9 mean<

eld,

Antonio. "he term 8titulo de aboado9 is not /ust mere possession of the academic deree of0achelor of Laws but membership in the bar after due admission thereto( qualifyin one tothe practice of law. Possession of the deree is not indispensable to qualify as a lawyer sincecompletion of the prescribed courses may be shown in some other way.

)t was also arued that Antonio is disqualified for ha!in been pre!iously disbarred since the

deed also pro!ided that an administrator may be remo!ed if found to lac3 a sound moralcharacter. owe!er( Antonio was reinstated. "his reinstatement is a reconition of his moralrehabilitation after pro!in what was required by the 0ar. Antonio4s restoration to the roll oflawyers wiped out restrictions and disabilities resultin from the pre!ious disbarment.



4. In e: Cunanan $4 +,"l. 5!4

=acts,

)n the manner of the petitions for Admission to the 0ar of unsuccessful candidates of #$>? to

#$@2 Albino Cunanan et al( petitioners.)n recent years few contro!ersial issues ha!e aroused so much public interest and concernas R.A. $&B popularly 3nown as the0ar =lun3ersD Act of #$@. Fenerally a candidate isdeemed passed if he obtains a eneral a!e of &@G in all sub/ects wHo fallinbelow @IG inany sub/ect( althouh for the past few e-ams the passin rades were chaned dependinon the strictness of thecorrectin of the bar e-aminations :#$>?+ &BG( #$>&+ ?$G( #$>%+&IG #$>$+&>G( #$@I+#$@ J &@G;.

0elie!in themsel!es to be fully qualified to practice law as those reconsidered and passedby the '.C.( and feelin that they ha!ebeen discriminated aainst( unsuccessful candidateswho obtained a!eraes of a few percentaes lower than those admitted to thebar went toconress for( and secured in #$@# 'enate 0ill no. #B( but was !etoed by the president afterhe was i!en ad!isead!erse to it. Kot o!erridin the !eto( the senate then appro!ed senatebill no. &B embodyin substantially the pro!isions of the!etoed bill. "he bill then becamelaw on 7une B#( #$@

Republic Act $&B has for its ob/ect( accordin to its author( to admit to the 0ar thosecandidates who suffered from insufficiency of readin materials and inadequatepreparations. 0y and lare( the law is contrary to public interest since it qualifies #(I$>lawraduates who had inadequate preparation for the practice of law profession( ase!idenced by their failure in the e-ams

)ssues,

6ue to the far reachin effects that this law would ha!e on the leal profession and theadministration of /ustice( the '.C. would see3 to 3now if it is COK'")"")OKAL.

eld,

nder the authority of the court,

#. "hat the portion of art. # of R.A. $&B referrin to the e-aminations of #$>? to #$@B and allof art. B of the said law are unconstitutional and therefore !oid and wHo force and effect.

B. "he part of AR" # that refers to the e-aminations subsequent to the appro!al of the law:#$@+ #$@@; is !alid and shall continue in force. :those petitions by the candidates whofailed the bar from #$>? to #$@B are denied( and all the candidates who in the e-aminationof #$@ obtained a FEK A!e. of &#.@G wHo ettin a rade of below @IG in any sub/ect areconsidered as ha!in passed whether they ha!e filed petitions for admissions or not.

@. )n re, Almacen # 'CRA @?B :IN THE MATTER OF PROCEEDINGS FOR DISCIPLINARY

ACTION AGAINST A-. IC&& RA'/ A/MAC&)



FACS :0efore us is Atty. icente Raul AlmacenNs Petition to 'urrender LawyerNs Certificateof "itle( filed on

'eptember B@( #$?&( in protest aainst what he therein asserts is a reat in/usticecommitted aainst his client

by this 'upreme Court. e indicts this Court( in his own phrase( as a tribunal peopled by

men who arecalloused to our pleas for /ustice( who inore without reasons their own applicable decisionsand commit

culpable !iolations of the Constitution with impunity. is clientNs he continues( who wasdeeply arie!ed by

this CourtNs un/ust /udment( has become one of the sacrificial !ictims before the altar ofhypocrisy. )n the

same breath that he alludes to the classic symbol of /ustice( he ridicules the members of thisCourt( sayin that

/ustice as administered by the present members of the 'upreme Court is not only blind( butalso deaf and

dumb. e then !ows to arue the cause of his client in the peopleNs forum( so that thepeople may 3now of

the silent in/usticeNs committed by this Court( and that whate!er mista3es( wrons andin/ustices that were

committed must ne!er be repeated. e ends his petition with a prayer that

... a resolution issue orderin the Cler3 of Court to recei!e the certificate of the undersinedattorney and

counsellor+at+law )K "R'" with reser!ation that at any time in the future and in the e!entwe reain our faith

and confidence( we may retrie!e our title to assume the practice of the noblest profession.

ISS'&: 1hether Atty. icente Raul Almacen must surrender his Lawyer4s Certificate of "itle.

R'/I: ACCOR6)KFL( )" )' "E 'EK'E of the Court that Atty. icente Raul Almacen be(as he is

hereby( suspended from the practice of law until further orders( the suspension to ta3eeffect immediately.

es. "he 'upreme Court first clarified that minute resolutions are needed because the'upreme Court cannot accept e!ery case or write full opinion for e!ery petition they re/ectotherwise the ih Court would be unable to effecti!ely carry out its constitutional duties.

"he proper role of the 'upreme Court is to decide 8only those cases which present questionswhose resolutions will ha!e immediate importance beyond the particular facts and partiesin!ol!ed.9 )t should be remembered that a petition to re!iew the decision of the Court ofAppeals is not a matter of riht( but of sound /udicial discretion2 and so there is no need tofully e-plain the court4s denial. =or one thin( the facts and the law are already mentioned inthe Court of Appeals4 opinion.



On Almacen4s attac3 aainst the 'upreme Court( the ih Court rearded said criticisms asuncalled for2 that such is insolent( contemptuous( rossly disrespectful and deroatory. )t istrue that a lawyer( both as an officer of the court and as a citizen( has the riht to criticize inproperly respectful terms and throuh leitimate channels the acts of courts and /udes. isriht as a citizen to criticize the decisions of the courts in a fair and respectful manner( andthe independence of the bar( as well as of the /udiciary( has always been encouraed by the

courts. 0ut it is the cardinal condition of all such criticism that it shall be bona fide( and shallnot spill o!er the walls of decency and propriety. )ntemperate and unfair criticism is a ross!iolation of the duty of respect to courts.

)n the case at bar( Almacen4s criticism is misplaced. As a !eteran lawyer( he should ha!e3nown that a motion for reconsideration which failed to notify the opposin party of the timeand place of trial is a mere scrap of paper and will not be entertained by the court. e hasonly himself to blame and he is the reason why his client lost. Almacen was suspendedindefinitely.

?. )n re, Lanue!o ?? 'CRA B>@



4. In e: Cunanan $4 +,"l. 5!4

Facts:

Documents

Legal Ethics Case Digests Compilation