People Vs Villanueva
People Vs Villanueva
People Vs Villanueva
1. People vs Villanueva
-Strictly speaking, the word practice of law implies the customary or habitual
holding of oneself to the public as a lawyer and demanding compensation for his
legal services.
-Practice is more than an isolated appearance, for it consists in frequent or
customary actions, a succession of acts of the same kind. In other words, it is
frequent habitual exercise.
-Practice of law to fail within the prohibition of statute has been interpreted as
customarily or habitually holding ones self out to the public, as a lawyer and
demanding payment for such services.
2. Dia-Anonuevo vs Bercasio Rule 3.03
-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.
-A judge is among the public officers who is not allowed to practice law.
-A lawyer, like any other professional, may very well be an employee of a private
corporation or even of the government. It is not unusual for a big corporation to hire
a staff of lawyers as its in-house counsel, pay them regular salaries, rank them in its
table of organization, and otherwise treat them like its other officers and
employees. At the same time, it may also contract with a law firm to act as outside
counsel on a retainer basis. The two classes of lawyers often work closely together
but one group is made up of employees while the other is not. A similar
arrangement may exist as to doctors, nurses, dentists, public relations practitioners,
and other professionals.
10. Ramos vs Rada Canon 1
-Canon 1 A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and
promote respect for law and legal processes.
11. Beltran vs Eliao Abad Rule9.01
-Rule 9.01 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.
-Held: Atty. Ruben Jacobe is required to explain within ten (10) days from notice why
he should not be disciplined for collaborating and associating in the practice of the
law with the respondent who is not a member of the bar.
12. Bacarro vs Pinatacan
-One of the indispensable requisites for admission to the Philippine Bar is that the
applicant must be of good moral character. This requirement aims to maintain and
uphold the high moral standards and the dignity of the legal profession, and one of
the ways of achieving this end is to admit to the practice of this noble profession
only those persons who are known to be honest and to possess good moral
character. "As a man of law, (a lawyer) is necessary a leader of the community,
looked up to as a model citizen" He sets an example to his fellow citizens not only
for his respect for the law, but also for his clean living
13. Diao vs Martinez Rule 7.01, Rule 10.01
-Rule 7.01 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.
-Held: The name of Telesforo A. Diao was stricken of the Roll of Attorneys for false
pretense on his educational attainment. He misrepresented that he finished
Associate in Arts Degree when the truth is he had no such degree. The fact that he
hurdled the Bar Examination is immaterial. Passing such examination is not the only
qualification to become an attorney-at-law; taking the prescribed courses of legal
study in the regular manner is equally essential.
-Rule 10.01 A lawyer shall not do any falsehood, nor consent to the doing of any in
court; nor shall he mislead or allow the court to be misled by any artifice.
14. In Re: Argosino Rule 7.02
-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 practice of law is a privilege granted only to those who possess the strict,
intellectual, and moral qualifications required of lawyers who are instruments in the
effective and efficient administration of justice.
15. Collantes vs Renomeron Canon 6, Rule 6.02
-Had appellant been but prudently advised by her counsel to confess judgment and
ask from her creditor the reasonable time she needed to discharge her lawful
indebtedness, the expenses of litigation that she has incurred would have been
more than sufficient to pay of her just debt to appelle.
6. People vs Rosqueta Canon 1
-Canon 1 A lawyer shall uphold the Constitution, obey the laws of the land and
promote respect for law and legal processes.
-Atty. Estacio should be aware that in the pursuance of the duty owed this Court as
well as to the client, he cannot be too casual and unconcerned about the filing of
pleadings. It is not enough that he prepares them; he must see to it that they are
duly mail. Such inattention as shown in this case is inexcusable.
7. De Roy vs CA Canon 5
-Canon 5 A lawyer shall keep abreast of legal developments, participate in
continuing legal education programs, support efforts to achieve high standards in
law schools as well as in the practical training of law students and assist in
disseminating information regarding the law and jurisprudence.
8. Far Eastern Shipping Co. vs CA Rule 6.01
-Rule 6.01 The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that ustice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment
of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
9. Jose vs Gonzalo Garcia - Rule 6.01
-Rule 6.01 The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that ustice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment
of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
10. People vs Pineda Rule 6.01
-Rule 6.01 The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment
of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
11. People vs Madera Rule 6.01
-Rule 6.01 The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment
of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
12. People vs Sendaydiego Rule 6.01
-Rule 6.01 The primary duty of a lawyer engaged in public prosecution is not to
convict but to see that justice is done. The suppression of facts or the concealment
of witnesses capable of establishing the innocence of the accused is highly
reprehensible and is cause for disciplinary action.
13. Misamin vs San Juan Rule 6.02
-Rule 6.02 A lawyer in the government service shall not use his public position to
promote or advance his private interests, nor allow the latter to interfere with his
public duties.
14. PCCG vs Sandiganbayan and Mendoza Rule 6.03
-Rule 6.03 A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept
engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had
intervened while in said service.
-The evils sought to be remedied by the Rule do not exist where the government
lawyer does an act which can be considered as innocuous such as x x x drafting,
enforcing or interpreting government agency procedures, regulations or laws, or
brief abstract principles of law.