Ethics 2013 Bar Q and A

8/18/2019 Ethics 2013 Bar Q and A

1/29

ESSAY QUESTIONS

I

Code of Professional Responsibility

Atty. Bravo represents Carlos Negar (an insurance agent for Dormir Insurance Co.) ina suit led by insurance claimant Andy Limot !o also sued Dormir Insurance. "!einsurance policy re#uires t!e insured$claimant to give a ritten notice to t!einsurance company or its agent it!in %& days from t!e occurrence of t!e loss.

Limot testied during t!e trial t!at !e !ad mailed t!e notice of t!e loss to t!einsurance agent' but admitted t!at !e lost t!e registry receipt so t!at !e did not!ave any documentary evidence of t!e fact of mailing and of t!e timeliness of t!emailed notice. Dormir Insurance denied liability' contending t!at timely notice !adnot been given eit!er to t!e company or its agent. Atty. Bravos client' agent Negar'testied and conrmed t!at !e never received any notice.

A fe days after Negar testied' !e admitted to Atty. Bravo t!at !e !ad lied !en!e denied receipt of Limots notice !e did receive t!e notice by mail butimmediately s!redded it to defeat Limots claim.

If you ere Atty. Bravo' !at ould you do in lig!t of your clients (Carlos Negars)disclosure t!at !e per*ured !imself !en !e testied+ (,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

If I ere Atty. Bravo I s!all promptly call upon Carlos Negar' my client' to

rectify !is per*ured testimony by recanting t!e same before t!e court.

!ould !e refuse or fail to do so I s!all t!en terminate my relations!ip it!

!im (Code of /rofessional 0esponsibility' Canon 12' 0ule 12.&3) stating t!at it! !is

!aving committed per*ury !e pursued an illegal conduct in connection it! t!e case

(Ibid.' Canon 33' 0ule 33.&1).

ince my client Limot refuses to forego t!e advantage t!us un*ustly gained as

a result of !is per*ury' I s!ould promptly inform t!e in*ured person or !is counsel' so

t!at t!ey may ta4e t!e appropriate steps (Canons of /rofessional 5t!ics' Canon 61).

7inally' as part of my duty to do no false!ood' nor consent to t!e doing of any

in court (Code of /rofessional 0esponsibility' Canon 1&' 0ule 1&.&1' and t!eAttorneys 8at!). I s!all le a manifestation it! t!e court attac!ing t!ereto t!e

notice of termination as Limots counsel.


2/29

II

Code of Professional Responsibility

Atty. eran 0oto is t!e Corporate ecretary of a construction corporation t!at !assecured a multi9million infrastructure pro*ect from t!e government. In t!e course of !is duties as corporate secretary' !e learned from t!e company president t!at t!ecorporation !ad resorted to bribery to secure t!e pro*ect and !ad falsied records tocut implementing costs after t!e aard of t!e pro*ect.

"!e government led a civil action to annul t!e infrastructure contract and !assubpoenaed Atty. 0oto to testify against t!e company president and t!e corporationregarding t!e bribery. Atty. 0oto moved to #uas! t!e subpoena' asserting t!at

layer9client privilege prevents !im from testifying against t!e president and t!ecorporation.

0esolve t!e motion to #uas!. (,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

:otion denied.

"!e motion s!ould be denied because Atty. 0oto did not learn of t!e bribery

and falsication in connection it! a layer9client relation. Being a corporate

secretary does not create a layer9client relation because members!ip in t!e Bar is

not a re#uirement to perform functions of a corporate secretary. Conse#uently' Atty.

0oto does no oe any obligation of condentiality to t!e corporation.

Atty. 0oto may be compelled to testify. As an o;cer of t!e court' a ort and consider it !is duty to assist in t!e speedy and e;cient

administration of *ustice? (Code of /rofessional 0esponsibility' Canon 13).

7urt!ermore'


3/29

been constituted beteen Atty. 0oto and t!e corporation. Conse#uently' it is !is

duty as an attorney


4/29

B. If lig!t t!reats ould be led against !im' t!en anot!er potential ob*ection

ould be t!e pendency of c!arges against !im' involving moral turpitude (0ules of

Court' 0ule 1,' ec. 3).

"!e #uestion states'


5/29

@e !as li4eise violated t!e et!ical responsibility t!at !is appearance in court

s!ould be deemed e#uivalent to an assertion on !is !onor t!at in !is opinion !is

clients case is one proper for *udicial determination (Canons of /rofessional 5t!ics'

Canon &' 3nd par.' last sentence).

In counselling on t!e contradictory positions' Atty. Doblar !as li4eisecounseled or abetted activities aimed at deance of t!e la or at lessening

condence in t!e legal system (Code of /rofessional 0esponsibility' Canon 1' 0ule

1.&3) because conicting opinions may result arising from an interpretation of t!e

same la.

Atty. Doblar could not see4 refuge under t!e umbrella t!at !at !e !as done

as in protection of !is clients. "!is is so because a layers duty is not of !is client

but to t!e administration of *ustice. "o t!at end' !is clients success is !olly

subordinate. @is conduct oug!t to and must alays be scrupulously observant of

t!e la and et!ics (5rnesto /ineda' L5EAL AND DICIAL 5"@IC' 311 (1222)' citing

Maglasang v. People' E.0. No. 2&&,' 8ctober 6' 122&).

Any means' not !onorable' fair and !onest' !ic! is resorted to by t!e

layer' even in t!e pursuit of !is devotion to !is clients cause ' is condemnable and

unet!ical (Ibid.).

"#

RA ())*

Atty. 0epatriar' a la sc!ool classmate' approac!ed you on your 3Ft! Class 0eunion'it! #uestions on !o !e can resume t!e practice of la in t!e /!ilippines. @e leftt!e country in 12 after to (3) years of initial la practice' and migrated to t!enited tates !ere !e as admitted to t!e practice of la in t!e tate of Ne Kor4.@e as4s t!at you give !im a formal legal opinion on !is #uery.

8utline briey t!e steps and t!e supporting legal reasons you ould state in yourlegal opinion on !at Atty. 0epatriar s!ould do to resume !is /!ilippine practice.(,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

Atty. 0epatriar must prepare a sord petition to ac#uire t!e privilege to

practice la in t!e /!ilippines. @e s!ould manifest in !is petition !is desire to

resume !is la practice in t!e /!ilippines' and !e is not dis#ualied to practice la.

"!e


6/29

conditions. It is so delicately a>ected it! public interest t!at it is bot! t!e poer

and duty of t!e tate (t!roug! t!is Court) to control and regulate it in order to

protect and promote t!e public elfare.

Ad!erence to t!e rigid standards of mental tness' maintenance of t!e

!ig!est degree of morality' fait!ful observance of t!e legal profession' complianceit! t!e mandatory continuing legal education re#uirement and payment of

members!ip in good standing in t!e bar and for en*oying t!e privilege to practice

la. Any breac! by a layer of any of t!ese conditions ma4es !im unort!y of t!e

trust and condence !ic! t!e courts and clients repose in !im for t!e continued

e=ercise of !is professional privilege? (In re: Petition to re-acquire the privilege to

practice law in the Philippines !l"anio B. Muneses B.M. No. #$$# %ul& #' #($#).

@e s!ould le t!e petition it! t!e upreme Court' t!roug! t!e Bar Condant

to accompanied by t!e original or certied copies of t!e folloing documentsH

1. !oing t!at !e is still a 7ilipino CitiMen. < "!e court reiterates t!at 7ilipinocitiMens!ip is a re#uirement for admission to t!e bar and is' in fact' a

continuing re#uirement for t!e practice of la? (In re: Petition to re-

acquire the privilege to practice law in the Philippines B.M. No. #$$##

supra). @aving retained /!ilippine CitiMens!ip could be evidenced by t!e

/!ilippine passport' t!e .. Ereen card s!oing /!ilippine citiMens!ip and

.. residency or ot!er aut!entic documents !ic! t!e upreme Court

may reac#uire.8n t!e ot!er !and' if Atty. 0epatriar !as lost !is /!ilippine citiMens!ip' !e

must submit t!e folloingHa. /etition for 0e9ac#uisition of /!ilippine CitiMens!ip

b. 8rder (for 0e9ac#uisition of /!ilippine citiMens!ip)

c. 8at! of Allegiance to t!e 0epublic of t!e /!ilippines

d. Identication Certicate (IC) issued by t!e Bureau of Immigration.

"!e loss of 7ilipino citiMens!ip means termination of Atty. 0epatriars

members!ip in t!e bar ipso *ure t!e privilege to engage in t!e practice of la.


7/29

. /roof of payment of professional ta= and

6. Certicate of compliance issued by t!e :CL5 8;ce. (Ibid.)

F. A certicate of good moral c!aracter attested to by at least t!ree () members of

t!e bar and

%. A certication from t!e tate Bar of Ne Kor4 t!at Atty. 0epatriar does not !ave

any previous or pending disciplinary action les against !im before t!at body.

"I#

R$les of Co$rt+ Code of ,$di-ial -ond$-t

An audit team from t!e 8;ce of t!e Court Administrator found t!at udge

Contaminada committed serious infractions t!roug! t!e indiscriminate grant of petitions for annulment of marriage and legal separation. In one year' t!e *udgegranted && of suc! petitions !en t!e average number of petitions of similarnature granted by an individual *udge in !is region as only 36 petitions per annum.

"!e audit revealed many di>erent defects in t!e granted petitionsH many petitions!ad not been veried t!e re#uired copies of some petitions ere not furnis!ed tot!e 8;ce of t!e olicitor Eeneral and t!e 8;ce of t!e /rovincial /rosecutor doc4etfees !ad not been fully paid t!e parties ere not actual residents it!in t!eterritorial *urisdiction of t!e court and' in some cases' t!ere as no record of t!ecross9e=aminations conducted by t!e public prosecutor or any documentaryevidence mar4ed and formally o>ered. All t!ese' vieed in t!eir totality' supported

t!e improvident and indiscriminate grant t!at t!e 8CA found.

If you ere t!e counsel for Andy :alasuerte and ot!er litigants !ose marriages!ad been improperly and nally annulled' discuss your options in administrativelyproceeding against udge Contaminada' and state !ere and !o you oulde=ercise t!ese options. (,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

As counsel for Andy :alasuerte' I !ave t!e option of participating in t!e

administrative proceedings by ling a veried complaint in riting against udge

Contaminado' it! t!e 8;ce of t!e Court Administrator' supported by a;davits of

persons !o !ave personal 4noledge of t!e facts alleged t!erein or by documents

!ic! may substantiate said allegations. "!e complaint s!all state clearly and

concisely t!e acts and omissions constituting violations of standards of conduct

prescribed for *udges by la' t!e 0ules of Court' t!e Code of udicial Conduct (0ules

of Court' 0ule 16&' ec. 1) and t!e ne Code of Conduct for t!e /!ilippine udiciary.


8/29

(N8"5 AND C8::5N"H "!e #uestion clearly refers to s failed to appeal on time. udge Cerdo andAtty. Cocodrilo' counsel for t!e developer' t!ereafter separately purc!ased acondominium unit eac! from t!e developer.

Did udge Cerdo and Atty. Cocodrilo commit any act of impropriety or violate anyla for !ic! t!ey s!ould be !eld liable or sanctioned+ (,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

udge Cerdo and Atty. Cocodrilo did not commit any act of impropriety nor did

t!ey violate any la.

"!e pro!ibition imposed by t!e Civil Code' Art. 1621(F)' pro!ibiting *udges

and attorneys' and t!at contained in t!e Canons of /rofessional 5t!ics' Canon 1&'it! regard to purc!ase of any interest in t!e sub*ect matter of t!e litigation bot!

refer only to instance !ere t!e property is still t!e sub*ect of t!e litigation.

"!e pro!ibition does not apply to instance' suc! as in t!e problem' !ere t!e

conveyance ta4es place after t!e *udgment because t!e property can no longer be

said to t!e


9/29

be t!e

Conduct for t!e /!ilippine udiciary' Canon 6' ec. ,). 7urt!ermore' t!e

andiganbayan sits in Divisions' so t!e fears of ustice Cobarde are unfounded.

ustice Cobarde s!ould not s!ir4 from t!e performance of !is *udicial duties.


10/29

I ould le a motion it! t!e Division of t!e andiganbayan in !ic! ustice

Cobarde is sitting for t!e remittal of !is voluntary in!ibition. I ould advance in

motion t!e reasons !y t!e


11/29

layer to misconstruction of motive and s!ould be avoided (Canons of /rofessional

5t!ics' Canon ' 3nd par.' 1st sentence). 5ven if t!e purpose of t!e meeting as

merely to


12/29

notariMation of contracts and documents. @e !ad t!e foresig!t of investing in a good!eavy duty copier mac!ine t!at reproduces #uality documents' and c!arges areasonable fee for t!is service. @e dras electric poer from an e=tension ireconnected to an ad*oining small restaurant. @e put up a s!ingle t!at readsH PAtty.Novato' pecialist in mall Claims' 7astest in NotariMation t!e Best and C!eapest inCopier ervices.P

Is Attorney Novatos manner of carrying out !is professional practice J i.e.' mi=ingbusiness it! t!e practice of la' announcing !is activities via a s!ingle andlocating !is o;ce as above9described J in 4eeping it! appropriate et!ical andprofessional practice+ (,-)

SUGGESTED ANSWER

No. Attorney Novatos manner of carrying out !is professional practice is not

in 4eeping it! t!e appropriate et!ical and professional practice. @e !as

disregarded t!e la profession !ic! may result to loss of respect to layers as a

!ole.

"!e use of a ma4es!ift !ut standing alone ould create t!e impression t!at

t!e layer does no !ave a permanent address !ic! is re#uired to be stated in all

pleadings !e signs as ell as re#uired to be s!on in documents !e notariMes.

@is s!ingle s!os t!at !e !as considered t!e la profession as a business. @e

s!ould !ave a separate s!ingle for !is copier services business.

!en !e included in !is s!ingle t!e p!rases


13/29

4U!TIP!E C5OICE QUESTIONS

I. A#4# No# 6)7'7%& SC R$le ) Se-# %)

nder t!e 3&&6 0ules of Notarial /ractice' !at may be used to satisfy t!e

re#uirement of


14/29

8D9 To do no false.ood+ nor -onsent to t.e doin= of any in -o$rt

8!ain= o$t of na2es in t.e Roll of Attorneys

Atty. Avaro !as consistently failed to pay !is annual IB/ dues for several

years. Demand letters !ave been sent to !im and !e !as ac4noledged

receipt of t!ese letters. @oever' all t!e IB/s e>orts proved futile. As a

result' t!e IB/ sent Atty. Avaro a notice t!at !is name ould be stric4en o>

t!e 0oll of Attorneys.

as t!e IB/s action correct+ (1-)

(A) No' because default in t!e payment of annual dues only arrants

suspension of Integrated Bar members.

(B) Kes' because non9payment of annual dues is an indicator of t!e layers

moral tness refusal to pay is refusal to !onor !is obligation to t!e IB/.

(C) No' because failure to pay a>ects a members capability to practise' but

not !is members!ip in t!e Bar.

(D) Kes' because payment of members!ip dues and ot!er laful assessments

are conditions sine #ua non to t!e privilege of practising la and to t!eretention of !is name in t!e 0oll of Attorneys.

(5) None of t!e above c!oices is correct.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8E9 None of t.e abo3e -.oi-es is -orre-t#

T.e stri>in= o$t of na2es in t.e Roll of Attorneys -an be

ordered only by t.e S$pre2e Co$rt# Also+ d$e pro-ess 2$st be

obser3ed#

T.e Constit$tion 3ests $pon t.e S$pre2e Co$rt t.e po


15/29

IQ. Irre=$larity in t.e pay2ent of t.e notarial fees

:s. eller and :r. Buyer presented to a commissioned notary public a deed of

sale for notariMation. "!e notary public e=plained to t!em t!e transaction t!e

deed embodies and as4ed t!em if t!ey ere freely entering t!e transaction.

After t!e document as signed by all t!e parties' t!e notary public collectedt!e notarial fee but did not issue any BI09registered receipt.

"!e notariMation of t!e deed is RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)

(A) neit!er unlaful nor improper because !e e=plained t!e basis for t!e

computation of t!e notarial fee

(B) unlaful because !e did not issue a BI09registered receipt and did not

post in !is o;ce t!e complete sc!edule of c!argeable notarial fees

(C) proper because !e is not re#uired to issue receipts for notarial fees

(D) improper because !e did not as4 :s. eller and :r. Buyer if t!ey needed

a receipt

(5) proper because any irregularity in t!e payment of t!e notarial fees does

not a>ect t!e validity of t!e notariMation made.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8E9 proper be-a$se any irre=$larity in t.e pay2ent of t.e

notarial fees does not a@e-t t.e 3alidity of t.e notariation 2ade#

8Ocampo v. Land Bank of the Philippines, G#R# No# %B(B'+ /$ly &+

)66(9

Q. 4andatory Contin$in= !e=al Ed$-ation+ R$le %)

In order to comply it! t!e :CL5 re#uirements' Atty. Ausente enrolled in a

seminar given by an :CL5 provider. !enever !e !as court or ot!er

professional commitments' !e ould send !is messenger or a member of !islegal sta> to register !is attendance at t!e :CL5 sessions so !e could be

credited it! t!e re#uired #ualifying attendance. @e ould also as4 t!em to

secure t!e printed !andouts and t!e lecturers CDs' all of !ic! !e studied in

!is free time.

Atty. Ausente s!ould be RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)


16/29

(A) re#uired to ma4e up for !is absence by attending lecture sessions in ot!er

:CL5 providers

(B) sanctioned because !e circumvented or evaded full compliance it! t!e

:CL5 re#uirements

(C) e=cused because !e attended to profession9related tas4s' and fully

studied t!e courses t!roug! t!e materials and CDs !e secured

(D) penaliMed by forfeiting all !is earned :CL5 units

(5) e=cused because attendance by pro=y is a idespread and tolerated

:CL5 practice

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8;9 san-tioned be-a$se .e -ir-$23ented or e3aded f$ll-o2plian-e un A!orro led a complaint for collection of sum of money before t!e

0egional "rial Court of :anila. Because of t!e large amount of !is claim' !e

!ad to pay a siMeable doc4et fee. @e insisted on paying t!e doc4et fee and

ot!er fees in installments because staggered payment is alloed under 0ule

161' as amended. "!e 8;ce of t!e Cler4 of Court (8CC) refused to accept t!e

complaint unless !e paid t!e full amount of t!e doc4et and ot!er re#uired

fees.

/lainti> un A!orros position RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)

(A) is alloed because of t!e large amount of t!e doc4et fee

(B) is *ustied because it is discretionary on t!e part of t!e 8CC to accept

staggered payment

(C) is incorrect because t!e amendment on staggered payment !as been

suspended

(D) is not alloed because t!e full payment of doc4et fee is *urisdictional


17/29

(5) cannot be alloed because of its pre*udicial impact on t!e *udiciarys

nancial operations

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8D9 is not alloet fee is

,$risdi-tional 8R$les of Co$rt+ R$le %%+ Se-# %9#

QII. Atty. Anunciante is engaged in t!e practice of la and !as a regular' live'

ee4ly "Q program !ere !e gives advice to and ansers #uestions from t!e

audience and program vieers concerning .. immigration problems.

8ccasionally' advertisements inviting vieers to atc! !is "Q program are

s!on outside !is regular program sc!edule. Because of t!e popularity of !is

"Q program' t!e number of !is la practice clients increased tremendously.

"!e "Q program of Atty. Anunciante is RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)

(A) permissible because it is public service in nature

(B) ob*ectionable because t!e or4 involves indirect advertising or

solicitation of business

(C) improper because it gives !im an unfair advantage over ot!er layers

(D) et!ically alloable because it does not violate t!e traditional standards of

t!e legal profession

(5) None of t!e above.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8E9 None of t.e abo3e#

QIII. Ser3i-es of a -o$nsel

Qito is a notorious gangster in t!e province !o !as been accused of raping

and mercilessly 4illing a 1%9year old girl. entiments run very strongly against

!im and t!e local Bar Association met and decided t!at no layer in t!e

locality ould represent !im. Qito could not a>ord t!e services of an out9of9

ton counsel.


18/29

C!oose t!e most appropriate legal and et!ical c!aracteriMation of t!e

decision of t!e local Bar Association. (1-)

(A) It is it!in its rig!t to ma4e' since layers may freely decide !o to

represent and !o not to represent.

(B) It is unet!ical it constitutes a collective denial of Qitos rig!t to t!e

assistance of counsel.

(C) It constitutes an anticipated act of contempt toards t!e court t!at may

order any of t!e members of t!e association to represent t!e accused.

(D) It must be concurred in by eac! member of t!e Bar Association to !ave

any binding force.

(5) It is unet!ical because t!e Bar Association already pre*udged Qito.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8;9 It is $net.i-al? it -onstit$tes a -olle-ti3e denial of "ito:s

ri=.t to t.e assistan-e of -o$nsel 8Code of Professional

Responsibility+ Canon %+ R$le %#6%? %('F Constit$tion+ Art# III+ Se-#

)9#

IS.

Eraft Investigator Atty. 0etirada served t!e 8;ce of t!e Deputy 8mbudsman

for eig!t years before retiring from t!e service. !ile still a Eraft Investigator'

s!e investigated a government contract for o;ce supplies !ere :r. a4im

as t!e supplier. "!e transaction as supposedly overpriced. Atty. 0etirada

recommended t!at no c!arges be led against t!e o;cials involved and t!e

recommendation beneted :r. a4im as t!e supplier involved in t!e

transaction.

After !er retirement from t!e service' Atty. 0etiradas services as counsel

ere engaged by :r. a4im as counsel to represent t!e a4im family in aclaim against t!e tate arising from a family property t!at !ad been

e=propriated. Atty. 0etirada no consults you about t!e et!ical permissibility

of accepting t!e engagement.

!at advice ould you give Atty. 0etirada+ (1-)


19/29

(A) @aving been in government service' s!e cannot no represent a party

it! a claim against t!e tate.

(B) @aving once !andled a case involving !er prospective client' a conict of

interest ould e=ist if s!e ere to accept t!e engagement.

(C) 0epresenting t!e a4im family ould involve t!e unet!ical use of

information s!e obtained !ile in government service.

(D) "!ere is no et!ical ob*ection to !er acceptance of t!e engagement

because t!e case is neit!er criminal nor administrative in c!aracter.

(5) Acceptance of t!e engagement s!ould be on condition t!at Atty. 0etirada

ould it!dra if a conict of interest situation arises.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8D9 T.ere is no et.i-al ob,e-tion to .er a--eptan-e of t.e

en=a=e2ent be-a$se t.e -ase is neit.er -ri2inal nor ad2inistrati3e

in -.ara-ter#

T.ere is no -oni-t of interest sin-e t.e -ase in3ol3ed is an

epropriation -ase 8R#A# (%6+ Se-# %9#

S.

Kour client is t!e plainti> in a civil case for damages arising from a car

accident !ere !e sustained serious p!ysical in*uries and damages

amounting to /1:illion. "!e counsel for t!e defendant as4s you to give !im a

proposed amount for purposes of settlement and you are aare t!at

!atever amount you tell !im ould not readily be accepted and ould

probably be cut into !alf.

!at is your best legal and et!ical course of action+ (1-)

(A) Inate your proposal to ma4e alloances for a compromise.

(B) "ell t!e defendants counsel t!e correct amount of damages.

(C) 8>er !im a reasonably lo amount so t!at t!e case can immediately be

settled.

(D) As4 t!e defendants counsel to rst submit !is negotiating gure.


20/29

(5) /lay !ard9to9get and initially refuse all t!e defendants initiatives to settle.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8D9 As> t.e defendant:s -o$nsel to Hrst s$b2it .is ne=otiatin=

H=$re#

It is t.e defendant t.at 2$st s$b2it Hrst t.e ne=otiatin=

H=$re#

SI. Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %

Candido engaged t!e services of Atty. Lebron in a criminal case. In t!e course

of t!eir consultations' Candido admitted to Atty. Lebron t!at !e committed

t!e crime and in fact actively planned its commission. @e stressed' !oever't!at under no circumstance ould !e admit or confess to t!e murder c!arge

!e is facing and' in fact' ould enter a plea of Pnot guiltyP on arraignment.

If Candido insists on !is planned plea' Atty. Lebron s!ould RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)

(A) discontinue !is representation to continue ould be unet!ical since !e

ould t!en be aiding t!e accused in foisting a deliberate false!ood on t!e

court

(B) allo Candido to c!oose !is course of action Atty. Lebrons duty is to

protect all !is legal and statutory rig!ts

(C) convince Candido to plead guilty and it!dra from t!e case if Candido

refuses to !eed !is advice

(D) le a manifestation' if Candido pleads Pnot guilty'P declaring to t!e court

!at !e 4nos of t!e trut!.

(5) play matters by ear and ait for developments as Candido may still plead

guilty.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8;9 Allo< Candido to -.oose .is -o$rse of a-tion? Atty# !ebron:s

d$ty is to prote-t all .is le=al and stat$tory ri=.ts 8Code of

Professional Responsibility+ Canon %+ R$le %#6%9#

8r


21/29

8C9 Con3in-e Candido to plead =$ilty and


22/29

8A9 It is $net.i-al sin-e .e -o$nseled -i3il ser3ants to disre=ard

a -o$rt order 8Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %)9#

SIII. Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %*

"!e mediator assigned to a civil case !appens to be your la sc!ool

classmate and !e ma4es a doctrinal statement about t!e rig!ts of t!e parties.

Kou 4ne t!at t!e statement' alt!oug! favorable to your clients case' is

incorrect.

"!e et!ical move to ma4e under t!e circumstances is to RRRRRRRRRR. (1-)

(A) correct t!e mediator and state t!e rig!t doctrine

(B) *ust 4eep #uiet because t!e ot!er counsel mig!t learn about your

relations!ip it! t!e mediator

(C) reveal your relations!ip it! t!e mediator and as4 t!e opposing counsel if

!e !as any ob*ections

(D) re#uest t!e :ediation upervisor to immediately c!ange t!e mediator

(5) simply it!dra from t!e case because of t!e unfair advantage t!at you

en*oy

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8A9 Corre-t t.e 2ediator and state t.e ri=.t do-trine# T.is is

part of 2y d$ty as a la


23/29

problem due to a valve defect' and t!at !er c!ances of carrying a baby to full

term are slim. anda is scared and contemplates t!e possibility of abortion.

!e t!us soug!t legal advice from Diana' a layer9friend and fello c!urc!

member' !o !as been informally advising !er on legal matters.

!at is Dianas best et!ical response+ (1-)

(A) Beg o> from giving any advice because it is a situation t!at is not purely

legal.

(B) Advise anda on t!e purely legal side of !er problem and assure !er t!at

abortion is alloed by la if t!e pregnancy endangers t!e life of t!e mot!er.

(C) Advise t!at it is a religious problem before it is a medical or legal one' and

anda s!ould consult and follo t!e advice of !er religious confessor.

(D) Advise anda t!at abortion' above everyt!ing else' is a moral problem

and s!e s!ould only !ave an abortion if it is an act s!e can live it!.

(5) 0efrain from giving any 4ind of advice as abortion is a serious matter t!at

cannot be resolved t!roug! informal consultations it! friends and fello

c!urc! members.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8;9 Ad3ise Wanda on t.e p$rely le=al side of .er proble2 and

ass$re .er t.at abortion is allo


24/29

Diana advised anda t!at s!e is fully protected in la and !er best course of

action is to !ave an abortion !ile !er pregnancy is not yet far advanced.

Did Diana violate t!e pro!ibition against representing conicting interests

!en s!e provided legal advice to anda it!out @oracios 4noledge+ (1-)

(A) Kes. "!e decision of !et!er to !ave an abortion s!ould be decided by

bot! spouses t!us' Diana s!ould not !ave provided legal advice in t!e

absence of @oracio !ose concerns and positions are un4non to !er.

(B) No. Diana did not give any formal advice t!at ould constitute legal

practice calling for t!e strict observance of t!e conict of interest rules.

(C) No. "!e decision on !et!er or not to !ave an abortion lies solely it!

anda it is !er body and !ealt! t!at is in issue.

(D) No. @oracio and anda are married' any advice given to anda is

deemed to !ave been given to @oracio as ell.

(5) No. Eiving advice to anda is not necessarily acting against @oracios

interest Diana as giving advice based on t!e couples best interest.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8A9 Yes# T.e de-ision of


25/29

impleaded as co9defendants for incorporating and actively !andling t!e

a>airs of Cable Co.

In its bid to strengt!en its case against t!e defendants' t!e prosecution

approac!ed you (as t!e least guilty defendant !o ould #ualify for a

disc!arge as a state itness) and o>ers to ma4e you a state itness.

Can you accept' it!in t!e bounds of professional et!ics' t!e prosecutions

o>er+ (1-)

(A) No' as antinos layer you are duty9bound to protect !is interests' ably

represent !im in court' and not turn against !im.

(B) Kes' as an o;cer of t!e court' you !ave t!e duty to disclose to t!e court

information crucial to t!e case.

(C) No' t!e information you ac#uired involving t!e criminal case against

antino is covered by t!e privileged communications rule.

(D) Kes' a layer may testify against !is client provided !e rst severs t!e

layer9client relations!ip.

(5) Kes' t!e la of self9preservation is a4in to t!e la of self9defense and

stands !ig!er t!an any obligation you may !ave it! your client.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8C9 No+ t.e infor2ation yo$ a-$ired in3ol3in= t.e -ri2inal

-ase a=ainst Santino is -o3ered by t.e pri3ile=ed -o22$ni-ations

r$le 8Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %*+ R$le %*#6)9?

8Pri3ile=ed Co22$ni-ation R$le9#

8r

8;9 Yes+ as an o-er of t.e -o$rt+ yo$ .a3e t.e d$ty to dis-lose

to t.e -o$rt infor2ation -r$-ial to t.e -ase 8Code of Professional

Responsibility+ Canon %6+ R$le %6#6%9#

SQII. Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %*

nder t!e same essential facts as t!e preceding Tuestion SQI' assume t!at

you !ave resigned from ABL5 La 8;ce and t!at you ere never impleaded


26/29

as a co9defendant' but during your stay it! t!e rm' you assisted in

!andling t!e Cobra Co. account' !ic! is largely oned by Cable Co.

"!e prosecutor !andling t!e case against antino and t!e la rm as4s you'

as a former la rm member' if you can !elp strengt!en t!e prosecutions

case and !ints t!at you' too' may be impleaded as a co9defendant if you donot cooperate.

!at is your best legal and et!ical course of action+ (1-)

(A) 8>er to testify on !at you 4no and provide evidence against t!e

defendants in e=c!ange for a guarantee of immunity from prosecution in t!e

case.

(B) 8>er to provide evidence against antino' but clarify t!at you cannot

testify against antino because of t!e privileged communications rule

(C) Decline to testify against t!e defendants and to provide evidence in t!e

case as t!e attorney9client privilege lasts even beyond t!e termination of t!e

relations!ip.

(D) Decline to testify against t!e defendants as !atever information you

ac#uired from antino and Cable Co. in t!e course of t!e layer9client

relations!ip is privileged.

(5) Alert t!e la rm to t!e prosecutions o>er so t!at t!ey can prepare for

t!e evidence it!in your 4noledge t!at t!e prosecution may use.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8C9 De-line to testify a=ainst t.e defendants and to pro3ide

e3iden-e in t.e -ase as t.e attorney7-lient pri3ile=e lasts e3en

beyond t.e ter2ination of t.e relations.ip 8Code of Professional

Responsibility+ Canon %*+ R$le %*#6)9#

0"III# Per2issible a-ts

Kou are a layer or4ing in t!e /ublic Assistance 8;ce. Kolly' a 4ey itness

in t!e case (rec4less imprudence resulting in !omicide) you are !andling' is

indigent and illiterate. !ile Kolly is illing to testify in court' you orry t!at

t!e *udge mig!t not be able to appreciate t!e impact of !er testimony' as s!e

!as a di;cult time ansering 5nglis! #uestions. Kou also orry t!at t!is

mig!t a>ect !er credibility. 7urt!er' Kolly !as indicated t!at s!e mig!t not


27/29

!ave t!e money to pay t!e fare to attend t!e trial. Kou are presenting !er as

a itness for t!e defense at t!e !earing ne=t ee4.

!ic! of t!e folloing is N8" a permissible act for you to do+ (1-)

(A) /rovide Kolly it! money for fare to ensure !er attendance in court.

(B) Intervie Kolly before trial' so t!at s!e ill be more at ease !en s!e

testies before t!e court.

(C) /repare a *udicial a;davit of Kollys testimony' !ic! s!e ill t!en verify

before t!e court.

(D) /rovide !er it! sample #uestions t!at you mig!t as4 in t!e !earing

tomorro.

(5) All t!e above are permissible.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8D9 All t.e abo3e are per2issible#

All are per2issible? t.erefore+ 8E9 s.o$ld be e$i3alent to none of

t.e abo3e#

SIS. Code of Professional Responsibility+ Canon %)

Kou are a layer or4ing at t!e 8;ce of t!e pecial /rosecutor and you are

part of t!e team !andling t!e case against former enator Avido !o is

c!arged it! plunder. Based on your assessment of t!e evidence t!at t!e

complainant Linda submitted' you 4no t!at t!e case against former enator

Avido is ea4' alt!oug! you instinctively feel t!at !e is guilty. Kou inform your

friend Atty. Curioso (!o or4s it! t!e o;ce of enator 5lmismo' a 4non

political rival of enator Avido) regarding your instinctive feeling about

enator Avido. Atty. Curioso springs a surprise by giving you a recording of

t!e iretapped conversation beteen enator Avido and Napo' a privateparty co9accused' about t!e transaction complained of and !o t!ey ould

split t!e proceeds.

!at ill you do under t!ese circumstances+ (1-)

(A) Disregard t!e iretapped conversation as it is inadmissible and ill not

serve any useful purpose in t!e trial of t!e case.


28/29

(B) /resent t!e iretapped conversation in court alt!oug! inadmissible' its

introduction and t!e disclosure of its e=istence is a rig!t t!at t!e public is

entitled to.

(C) Lea4 t!e iretapped conversation to t!e media' to let t!e public 4no

!at really !appened.

(D) ubmit t!e iretapped conversation to t!e enate !ic! is in t!e best

position to determine !at to do it! it.

(5) Let Napo privately 4no' t!roug! rd parties' t!at you are aare of t!e

e=istence of t!e taped conversation' it! t!e !int t!at !e can still !ope for a

lig!ter penalty if !e ould cooperate.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8A9 Disre=ard t.e


29/29

(D) Agree to draft t!e deed of sale' since it is only a draft t!at Bobby still !as

to consider and sign.

(5) 0efuse to !ave anyt!ing to do it! Armins re#uest because it is a

potentially problematic situation given t!e price of lots in donton

Calamba.

SUGGESTED ANSWER

8;9 Ref$se to draft t.e deed of sale+ as Ar2in .as not

presented a spe-ial po

Date post:	07-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	izza
View:	217 times
Download:	0 times

Ethics 2013 Bar Q and A

Documents