Legal Ethics
Legal Ethics
Legal Ethics
Muning
10%
OF
REINSTATEMENT
INDUSTRIAL
WITH
RELATIONS
BACKWAGES
FOR
ORDERED
ENTILA
ii
AND
i.
Atanaci
TENAZAS.
Pacis
total backwages.
i.
En
iii.
CA
providing
their backwages
for
the
division
of
No
equivalent
ruling,
to
20%
of
the
backwages.
1. Opposed
Cid
&
by
Cipriano
Associates
for
that
the
person
representing
the
party-
litigant
the
justification
in
the
Court
of
he
lawyer.
Court
of
is
not
a.
lawyer,
Duty
is
and
Industrial Relations
obligation
of
awarded
Court
Hearing
25%
of
or
the
the backwages as
Officer to examine
compensation
for
professional
witnesses on behalf
services
in
rendered
the
apportioned
case,
to
as
assist
in
the
orderly
follows:
presentation
of
evidence.
b. Representation
should
be
exclusively
entrusted
i.
Ciprian
0%
qualified
to
duly
members
of the bar.
2.The permission for a non-member does not entitle the
representative to compensation for such representation.
a.Sec 24, Rule 138 Compensation of attorney's agreement
as to fees:
i.
ii.
Quinti
An
c.Prayed
that
Court
allow
reinstatement
taking
into
received,
moral
character
for
having
i.
Co
ii.
Pe
merit.
PU
Tap
Mi
srepresentation
committed
was
precipitated
his
that
not
and reported:
be
by
expected
uncle;
to
act
ii.
with
No
already testified.
the petitions.
falsified
his
Re
school
records
ii.
Th
of
Court,
which
require
ISSUE:
May a non-lawyer recover attorney's fees for legal services
rendered?
The award of 10% to Quintin Muning who is not a lawyer
according to the order, is sought to be voided in the
present petition.
WON a union may appeal an award of attorney's fees which
are deductible from the backpay of some of its members.
YES.
It was PAFLU that moved for an extension of time to file the
present petition for review; union members Entila and
Tenazas did not ask for extension but they were included as
HELD:
because
such
union
or
labor
organization
is
6. Unfair
Labor
Se
Practice
David shall give Tan Tek Beng 50% of the attorneys fees
three pesos.
constitutes malpractice.
conduct.
advertisements,
or
himself
interviews
warranted
or
through
others
for
to
do
so
would
be
Solicitation
not
of
by
business
personal
by
by
circulars
or
communications
or
personal
relations,
is
unprofessional.
offering
and
lawyer.
lawyers
responsibilities
and
retainers
in
exchange
for
executorships
or
In re: Tagorda
In 1928, Luis Tagorda was a provincial board member of
Isabela. Before his election, he campaigned that he is a
lawyer and a notary public; that as a notary public he can
month.
NICOMEDES TOLENTINO
LAW OFFICE
CONSULTANCY & MARITIME SERVICES
W/ FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
Fe Marie L. Labiano
Paralegal
BACK
SERVICES OFFERED:
CONSULTATION AND ASSISTANCE
TO OVERSEAS SEAMEN
REPATRIATED DUE TO ACCIDENT,
INJURY, ILLNESS, SICKNESS, DEATH
AND INSURANCE BENEFIT CLAIMS
ABROAD.
In his defense, Atty. Tolentino denied knowing Labiano. He
ISSUES:
or
brokers,
constitutes
malpractice.
The
. It is highly
HELD:
1. Yes. Atty. Tolentino violated Rule 8.02 of the Code of
Professional
Responsibility.
A lawyer
should
not
steal
Linsangan vs Tolentino
Labianos
allegations.
actions,
Atty.
Tolentinos
law
practice
was
client.
this time?
The
rule
is
intended
to
safeguard
the
lawyers
HELD:
YES. On all issues.
RATIO:
Case No. 526 and the authoritative materials and the mass
cause.
FACTS:
ISSUES:
Philippine Bar?
(2) Would the integration of the Bar be constitutional?
the
Rule
of
Court
139-A
and
the provisions of par. 2, Section 24, Article III, of the IBP ByLaws pertaining to the organization of IBP, payment
ofmembership fee
pay
the
same.
to
pay
the
corresponding
dues,
and
that
as
Rule and of the IBP By-Laws are void and of no legal force
and
effect.
to
pay
hismembership fee
to
the
IBP.
reasonable
annual
fees
as
one
of
are excused.
regulatory
program
the
lawyers.
designed
as
jurisdiction
disbarment,
to enforce its
over
and
payment
matters
reinstatement
is
not
void
of admission, suspension,
of
lawyers
and
is a
their
EVANGELINE
ARGAOZA, complainant,
vs.
This Court, on April 16, 1970, resolved: "... (a) to note the
contents of the telegram of Evangeline Argaoza
requesting that the oath-taking of Benito P. Tubaces be
withheld on the ground of immorality; (b) to require that a
copyof the letter of Evangeline Argaoza be sent to Benito
P. Tubaces and (c) require respondent Tubaces to answer
said
letter-complaint,
within
10
daysfrom
notice
hereof." 4 Instead of answering, respondent Benito P.
Tubaces waited until August 26, 1970 when he filed a
petition alleging that complainantwas retracting or
withdrawing her complaint and that therefore he should be
allowed to take the lawyer's oath. Enclosed in such petition
is a letter signedby Evangeline Argaoza where, after
referring to the complaint filed by her against respondent,
there was this declaration of retraction or withdrawal. Thus:
"Without pressure nor influence exerted upon me, I
voluntarily, irrevocably, and unconditionally retract or
withdraw the said complaint on theground that we have
applied and was granted a marriage license having agreed
to get married on December of this year. The marriage
FERNANDO, J.:p