SAN BEDA COLLEGE MENDIOLA

COLLEGE OF LAW
Syllabus in Legal Ethics
I.

Preliminary Matters

A.

Legal Ethics - definition

B.

Legal Profession- definition

C.
Sources of Principles and Rules on Legal and Judicial
Ethics

Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution

Rules 135 to 142, Revised Rules of Court

Lawyer's Oath (MEMORIZE!)

The Notarial Law (Title IV, Chapter 11, Revised Administrative

Code)

2004 Rules on Notarial Practice, April 27, 2004

D.
1.

Practice of Law
Definition

Renato L. Cayetano vs. Christian Monsod, G.R. No. 100113,

September 3, 1991
Paguia v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 176278, June 25, 2010
Office of the Court Administrator vs. Ladaga, A.M. No. P-99-1287,
January 26, 2001

2.
Admission
a.
A judicial function

Art. VIII, Sec. 5(5), 1987 Constitution

In re Cunanan, Resolution, March 18, 1954

In re Almacen, G.R. No. L-27654, February 18, 1970

b.
Requirements
Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court
Re: Letter of Atty. Estelito Mendoza xxx, B.M. No. 1153, March 09,

2010
Re: 1999 Bar Examinations, B.M. No. 879 & 986, December 10,
2002
c.

Attorneys roll defined

Pangan vs. Ramos, Adm. Case No. 1053, September 7, 1979

3.
Characteristics of the Law Profession
a.
B.M. No. 712 July 13, 1995,
B.M. No. 712 March 19, 1997
In re: Edillon, Adm. Case No. 1928, August 3, 1978
b.
Docena v. Atty. Limon, A.C. No. 2387, September 10, 1998
c.
Philippine Lawyers' Association vs. Agrava, G.R. No. L-12426,
February 16, 1959
Marcos vs. Chief of Staff, G.R. No. L-4663, May 30, 1951
d.

Mauricio C. Ulep vs. Legal Clinic, Inc., B.M. No. 553, June 17,
1993
Exceptions to the Practice of Law
1)
i.

Rule 138, Sec. 34, Revised Rules of Court

Cantimbuhan vs. Cruz, Jr., G.R. Nos. L-51813-14, November

29, 1983
ii.

Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court

iii.
Rule 138-A, Sec. 1, Revised Rules of Court

 Cruz v. Judge Mijares, G.R. No. 154464, September 11, 2008.

iv.

Maderada v. Judge Mediodea, A.M. No. MTJ-02-1459, October

14, 2003
2)

Limitations of Lawyers to Practice Law

i.
Rule 138, Sec. 35, Revised Rules of Court
Art. VII, Sec. 13, 1987 Constitution
R.A. No. 7160, Sec. 90
R.A. No. 910, Section 1
Query of Atty. Buffee, A.M. No. 08-6-352-RTC, August 19, 2009

II.

Lawyer and Society

A.

Canon 1, Code of Professional Responsibility

Cases:

Gonzales v. Alcaraz, A.C. No. 5321, 27 September 2006

Saquing v. Mora, A.C. No. 6678, 09 October 2006

Atty. Dizon v. Atty. Lambino, A.C. No. 6968, August 9, 2006

B.

Canon 2, Code of Professional Responsibility

CASES:
Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 2009.
Khan v. Simbillo, A.C. No. 5299, August 19, 2003
C.

Canon 3, Code of Professional Responsibility

Ulep v. Legal Clinic, 223 SCRA 378 [1993]

D.

Canon 4, Code of Professional Responsibility

RE: Letter of the UP Law Faculty xxx , A.M. No. 10-10-4-SC,

March 8, 2011

E.

Canon 5, Code of Professional Responsibility

Bar Matter No. 850, 22 August 2000

Sps. Williams v. Enriquez, A.C. No.6353, 27 February 2006.
Dulalia v. Cruz, A.C. No. 6854, 27 April 2007.

F.

Canon 6, Code of Professional Responsibility

Pimentel v. Fabros, et. al. A.C. No. 4517, 11 September 2006

Igoy v. Soriano, A.M. No. 2001-9-SC, October 11, 2001
Section 7(b)(2) of R.A. No. 6713
Olazo v. Justice Tinga, A.M No. 10-5-7-SC, December 7, 2010.

III. THE LAWYER AND THE LEGAL PROFESSION

A. Canon 7, Code of Professional Responsibility
_
Royong v. Atty. Oblena, G.R. No. 376, April 30, 1963

Sps. Franklin and Lourdes Olbes vs. Victor V. Deciembre, A.C.

No. 5365,
April 27, 2005
Joseph Samala vs. Antonuitti K. Palaa, A.C. No. 6595, April 15,
2005
Gacias v. Bulauitan, A.C. No. 7280, 16 November 2006
Guevarra v. Atty. Eala, A.C. No. 7136,August 1, 2007
B. Canon 8, Code of Professional Responsibility
Ng v. Alar, A.C. No. 7252, 22 November 2006.
Dallong-Galicinao v. Castro, A.C. No. 6396, October 25, 2005
Reyes v. Chiong, Jr., A.C. No. 5148, July 1, 2003

C. Canon 9, Code of Professional Responsibility

Rule 138, Secs. 6 and 9, Revised Rules of Court

Rule 71, Sec. 3 (e), Revised Rules of Court

 Cambaliza v. Cristal-Tenorio, A.C. No. 6290, 14 July 2004.

Republic v. Kenrick Development Corp., G.R. No. 149576 , August
8, 2006
IV. LAWYER AND THE COURTS
A.
Canon 10, Code of Professional Responsibility
A lawyer owes CANDOR, FAIRNESS and GOOD FAITH
Court

to the

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (b), Revised Rules of Court

Rule 71, Sec. 3 (a), Revised Rules of Court
Afurong v. Aquino, Administrative Case No. 1571 September 23,
1999
Villaflor v. Sarita, A.C. CBD No. 471 June 10, 1999
Re: Subpoena Duces Tecum Dated January 11, 2010 xxx, A.M.
No. 10-1-13SC March 2, 2010

B.

Canon 11, Code of Professional Responsibility

Art. XI, Secs. 2-8, 1987 Constitution

Rule 139-B, Sec. 1, par. 2, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (b), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 71, Sec. 3 (a), Revised Rules of Court
Balaoing v. Judge Calderon, A.M. No. RTJ-90-580, April 27,
1993
Boquiren v. Del Rosario-Cruz, A.C. No. MTJ-94-894 June 2,
1995
Re: Suspension of Atty. Bagabuyo, Adm. Case No. 7006,
October 9, 2007.

C.

Canon 12, Code of Professional Responsibility

Agustin v. Atty. Empleo, A.C. No. 6986, March 6, 2006

1.

Rule 130, Sec. 3, Revised Rules of Court

Javellana v. Lutero, G.R. No. L-23956, July 21, 1967

2.

Olivares v. Atty. Villalon,Jr. A.C. No. 6323, April 13, 2007

3.

Edrial vs. Quilat-quilat, GR No. 133625, September 6, 2000

4.

Millare v. Atty. Montero, A.C. No. 3283

5.
Articles 181-184 Revised Penal Code
6.

7.

Canon 18, Canons of Professional Ethics

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (f), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 132, Section 3, Revised Rules of Court
Santiago v. Atty. Rafanan, A.C. No. 6252, October 5, 2004

D.

Canon 13, Code of Professional Responsibility

Art. 19, New Civil Code

Rule 2.03, Code of Judicial Conduct
Bildner v. Ilusorio, G.R. No. 157384, June 5, 2009

1.

Cruz vs. Salva, G.R. No. L-12871, July 25, 1959

In the Matter of the Alleged Improper Conduct of Sandiganbayan
Associate
Justice Badoy, A.M. No. 01-12-01-SC, 16 January 2003.

2.
de Bumanglag vs. Bumanglag, Adm. Case No. 188, November
29, 1976

V. LAWYER AND CLIENT

A.
A lawyer shall not refuse services to the needy (Canon 14,
Code of Professional Responsibility)
1.
A lawyer shall not decline to represent a person solely on
account of the latters race, sex, creed or status of life, or because of
his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person. (Rule 14.01)

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (i), Revised Rules of Court

Rule 138, Sec. 20 (c), Revised Rules of Court
Canon 5, Canons of Professional Ethics
Canon 31, Canons of Professional Ethics
Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155, March 14, 2006

2.
A lawyer shall not decline, except for serious and sufficient
cause, an appointment as counsel de oficio or as amicus curiae or a
request from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines or any of its
chapters for rendition of free legal aid. (Rule 14.02)

Sec. 4, R.A. No. 6033

Rule 116, Sec. 6, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 116, Sec. 8, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 124, Sec. 2, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 31, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 36, Revised Rules of Court
People vs. Rio, G.R. No. 90294, September 24, 1991

3.
A lawyer may not refuse to accept representation of an indigent
client unless:
a)
he is not in a position to carry out the work effectively or
competently;
b)
he labors under a conflict of interest between him and the
prospective client or between a present client and the prospective
client. (Rule 14.03)
_
Sps. Algura v. The Local Gov't Unit of the City of Naga, G.R.
No. 150135,
October 30, 2006

Ledesma vs. Climaco, G.R. No. L-23815, June 28, 1974

4.
A lawyer who accepts the cause of a person unable to pay his
professional fees shall observe the same standard of conduct
governing his relations with paying clients. (Rule 14.04)

In re: Filart, September 27, 1919

B.
A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and loyalty in dealings
and transactions with client (Canon 15, Code of Professional
Responsibility)
1.
A lawyer, in conferring with a prospective client, shall ascertain
as soon as practicable whether the matter would involve a conflict
with another client or his own interest, and if so, shall forthwith inform
the prospective client. (Rule 15.01)

Art. 209, Revised Penal Code

PNB vs. Cedo, Adm. Case No. 3701, March 28, 1995

2.
A lawyer shall be bound by the rule on privilege communication
in respect of matters disclosed to him by a prospective client. (Rule
15.02)

Canon 21, Code of Professional Responsibility

Rule 130, Sec. 24 (b), Revised Rules of Court
Rule 138, Sec. 20 (e), Revised Rules of Court


Rosa F. Mercado vs. Julito D. Vitriolo, A.C. No. 5108, May 26,
2005
3.
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by
written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the
facts. (Rule 15.03)
_

Hilado v. David, G.R. No. L-961, September 21, 1949

Paz v. Sanchez, A.C. No. 6125, 19 September 2006
Pacana, Jr. v. Atty. Pascual-Lopez, A.C. No. 8243, July 24,
2009

4.
A lawyer may, with the written consent of all concerned, act as
mediator, conciliator or arbitrator in settling disputes. (Rule 15.04)
5.
A lawyer, when advising his client, shall give a candid and
honest opinion on the merits and probable results of the client's case,
neither overstating nor understating the prospects on the case. (Rule
15.05)
_

Bergonia v. Merrera, A.C. No. 5024, February 20, 2003

6.
A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to influence any
public official, tribunal or legislative body. (Rule 15.06)
7.
A lawyer shall impress upon his client compliance with the laws
and the principles of fairness. (Rule 15.07)
Rural Bank of Calape v. Atty. Florido, A.C. No. 5736, June 18, 2010

8.
A lawyer who is engaged in another profession or occupation
concurrently with the practice of law shall make clear to his client
whether he is acting as a lawyer or in another capacity. (Rule 15.08)
C.
A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and properties of his
client in his possession (Canon 16, Code of Professional
Responsibility)

Barcenas v. Atty. Alvero, A.C. No. 8159, April 23, 2010

1.
A lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or
received for or from the client. (Rule 16.01)

Tarog v. Atty. Ricafort, A.C. No. 8253, March 15, 2011

2.
A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client separate and apart
from his own and those of others kept by him. (Rule 16.02)

Villanueva v. Atty. Ishiwata, A.C. No. 5041, November 23, 2004

3.
A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when
due or upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds
and may apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his
lawful fees and disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to
his client. He shall also have a lien to the same extent on all
judgments and executions he has secured for his client as provided
for in the Rules of Court.(Rule 16.03)

Rule 138, Sec. 37, Revised Rules of Court

Vda de Caia v. Hon. Victoriano, G.R. No. L-12905, February

26, 1959
4.
A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the
client's interests are fully protected by the nature of the case or by
independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money to a client
except, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary
expenses in a legal matter he is handling for the client. (Rule 16.04)

Linsangan v. Atty. Tolentino, A.C. No. 6672, September 4, 2009

D.
A lawyer owes fidelity to his clients cause (Canon 17, Code of
Professional Responsibility)

Hernandez v. Go, A.C. No. 1526, January 31, 2005

Marcial L. Abiero v. Bernardo G. Juanino, A.C. No. 5302,
February 18,
2005

E.
A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence
(Canon 18, Code of Professional Responsibility)

Dimarucot v. People, G.R. No. 183975, September 20, 2010.

Apex Mining, Inc. v CA, G.R. No. 133750, November 29, 1999
Rasmus G. Anderson vs. Reynaldo A. Cardeo, A.C. No. 3523,
January 17,
2005

1.
A lawyer shall not undertake a legal service which he knows or
should know that he is not qualified to render. However, he may
render such service if, with the consent of his client, he can obtain as
collaborating counsel a lawyer who is competent on the matter. (Rule
18.01)

Juan v. Atty. Baria, A.C. No. 5817, May 27, 2004.

2.
A lawyer shall not handle any legal matter without adequate
preparation. (Rule 18.02)

De Roy vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 80718, January 29,

1988

Legarda vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 94457, March 18, 1991
3.
A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and
his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. (Rule
18.03)

Sambajon, et. al. v. Suing, A.C. No. 7062, 26 September 2006

Adrimisin v. Javier, A.C. No. 2591, 08 September 2006

Valeriana U. Dalisay vs. Melanio Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, April

22, 2005
4.
A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case
and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client's request for
information. (Rule 18.04)

Peter D. Garrucho vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 143791,

January 14, 2005

Anastacio-Briones v. Zapanta, A.C. No. 6266, 16 November

2006

F.
A lawyer shall represent his client with zeal (Canon 19, Code of
Professional Responsibility)
1.
A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the
lawful objectives of his client and shall not present, participate in
presenting or threatening to present unfounded criminal charges to
obtain an improper advantage in any case or proceeding. (Rule
19.01)

Pena v. Atty. Aparicio,A.C. No. 7258 June 25, 2007

2.
A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the
course of the representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a person or
tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify the same, and
failing which, he shall terminate the relationship with such client in
accordance with the Rules of Court. (Rule 19.02)
Dalisay v. Atty. Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, January 23, 2006
3.
A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the procedure in
handling the case. (Rule 19.03)
Fernandez v. Atty. Novero, Jr., A.C. No. 5394, December 2, 2002

G.
A lawyer shall charge only fair and reasonable fees (Canon 20,
Code of Professional Responsibility)
Shirley Loria Toledo, et al.. vs. Alfredo E. Kallos, A.M. No. RTJ-051900, January 28, 2005
Dalisay v. Atty. Mauricio, A.C. No. 5655, January 23, 2006
Lijauco v. Atty. Terrado, A.C. No. 6317 August 31, 2006
Section 24, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court
1.
A lawyer shall be guided by the following factors in determining
his fees:
(a) the time spent and the extent of the service rendered or required;
(b) the novelty and difficulty of the questions involved;
(c) The importance of the subject matter;
(d) The skill demanded;

(e) The probability of losing other employment as a result of

acceptance of the proffered case;
(f) The customary charges for similar services and the schedule of
fees of the IBP chapter to which he belongs;
(g) The amount involved in the controversy and the benefits resulting
to the client from the service;
(h) The contingency or certainty of compensation;
(i) The character of the employment, whether occasional or
established; and
(j) The professional standing of the lawyer.(Rule 20.01)
Doy Mercantile, Inc. v. AMA Computer College, G.R. No. 155311,
March 31, 2004
2.
A lawyer shall, in case of referral, with the consent of the client,
be entitled to a division of fees in proportion to the work performed
and responsibility assumed. (Rule 20.02)
3.
A lawyer shall not, without the full knowledge and consent of
the client, accept any fee, reward, costs, commission, interest, rebate
or forwarding allowance or other compensation whatsoever related to
his professional employment from anyone other than the client. (Rule
20.03)
4.
A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his
compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent
imposition, injustice or fraud. (Rule 20.04)
Pineda v. Atty. De Jesus, G.R. No. 155224 August 23, 2006
H.
A lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of his
client even after the attorney-client relation is terminated (Canon 21,
Code of Professional Responsibility)

Sec. 20 (e), Rule 138, Revised Rules of Court

Atty. Alcantara v. Atty. De Vera, A.C. No. 5859, November 23,

2010

Palm v. Atty. Iledan, Jr. A.C. No. 8242, October 2, 2009

1.
A lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or secrets of his client
except;
(a) When authorized by the client after acquainting him of the
consequences of the disclosure;
(b) When required by law;
(c) When necessary to collect his fees or to defend himself, his
employees or associates or by judicial action (Rule 21.01)
2. A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his client, use
information acquired in the course of employment, nor shall he use
the same to his own advantage or that of a third person, unless the
client with full knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto.
(Rule 21.02)
3.
A lawyer shall not, without the written consent of his client, give
information from his files to an outside agency seeking such
information for auditing, statistical, bookkeeping, accounting, data
processing, or any similar purpose. (Rule 21.03)
4.
A lawyer may disclose the affairs of a client of the firm to
partners or associates thereof unless prohibited by the client. (Rule
21.04)
5.
A lawyer shall adopt such measures as may be required to
prevent those whose services are utilized by him, from disclosing or
using confidences or secrets of the clients. (Rule 21.05)
6.
A lawyer shall avoid indiscreet conversation about a client's
affairs even with members of his family. (Rule 21.06)
7.
A lawyer shall not reveal that he has been consulted about a
particular case except to avoid possible conflict of interest.(Rule
21.07)
I.
A lawyer shall withdraw his services only for good cause and
upon notice (Canon 22, Code of Professional Responsibility)

Montano vs. IBP, AM No. 4215, May 21, 2001

1.
A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the following case:
(a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in
connection with the matter he is handling;
(b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of
these canons and rules;

(c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the
best interest of the client;
(d) When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer renders it
difficult for him to carry out the employment effectively;
(e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services
or fails to comply with the retainer agreement;
(f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public office; and
(g) Other similar cases.(Rule 22.01 )
2.
A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall, subject to a
retainer lien, immediately turn over all papers and property to which
the client is entitled, and shall cooperative with his successor in the
orderly transfer of the matter, including all information necessary for
the proper handling of the matter.
(Rule 22.02)

VI.

Discipline of Lawyers

1.

Power to Discipline
Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 139-B, Sec. 16, Revised Rules of Court
Rule 71, Revised Rules of Court
Gatmaytan vs. Ilao, A.C. No. 6086, January 26, 2005

2.

Disbarment and Suspension

Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court
Yap-Paras vs. Paras, A.C. No. 4947, February 14, 2005

a.
Objectives

Sps. Rafols, Jr. v. Atty. Barrios, Jr. A.C. No. 4973, March 15,
2010
b.
Grounds

Rule 138, Sec. 27, Revised Rules of Court

Mendoza v. Mercado, A.M. No. 1484, June 19, 1980
In Re: Suspension of Pelaez, March 3, 1923.
c.

Procedure
Rule 139-B, Revised Rules of Court

Tabang v. Atty. Gacott, A.C. No. 6490, September 29, 2004

Cojuangco, Jr. v. Atty. Palma, A.C. No. 2474, June 30, 2005

3.
a.

Liabilities and Disabilities of Lawyers

Purchase of Clients Properties
Art. 1491, Civil Code
In Re: Suspension xxx, B.M. No. 793, July 30, 2004

b.

Civil Liability for Damages

Art. 1170, Civil Code
Arts. 1171 and 2201 par. 2, Civil Code
Art. 1173, Civil Code
Soriano v. Atty. Dizon, A.C. No. 6792, January 25, 2006

4.

Res Ipsa Loquitor

Guiang vs. Antonio, Adm Case No. 2473, February 3, 1993

5.
Reinstatement

Art. VIII, Sec. 5 (5), 1987 Constitution

Re: 2003 Bar Examinations, B.M. No. 1222, April 24, 2009
Overgaard v. Atty. Valdez, A.C. No. 7902, March 31, 2009
6.

Executive Pardon
In re: Avancea, Adm. Case No. 407, August 15, 1967
Gutierrez vs. Villegas, G.R. No. L-11848, May 31, 1962

VII. Judicial Ethics

Preliminary Matters
A.
Sources of Judicial Ethics

1987 Constitution (Arts. VIII, Art. XI and Art. III)

Civil Code (Arts. 9, 20, 27, 32, 35, 739, 1491, 2005, 2029 to
2035 & 2046)

Rules of Court (Rules 71, 135, 137, 139-B and 140)

Revised Penal Code (Arts. 204, 205, 206 & 207)

Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act (RA 3019)

Canons of Judicial Ethics, August 1, 1946

Code of Judicial Conduct, September 5, 1989


Code of Judicial Conduct, October 20, 1989

Code of Professional Responsibility

New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, April

27, 2004
B.
Qualifications of Judges

Sec. 7, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution

Art. 140, P.D. No. 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal Laws)

B.P. Blg. 129, Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980

Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council, October 18, 2000

Office of the Court Administrator vs. Filomeno Pascual, Adm.

Matter No. MTJ-93-783, July 29, 1996
VIII. New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary
A.
Canon 1. Independence
1.
Section 1

Ramirez v. Corpus-Macandog, Adm. Matter Nos. R-351-RTJ, R359-RJT, R-621-RTJ, R-684-RTJ, R-687-RTJ & 86-4-9987-RTC,
September 26, 1986
Ajeno v. Inserto, Adm. Matter No. 1098-CFI, May 31, 1976
Office of the Court Administrator v. Judge Floro, Jr., A.M. No. RTC99-146
2.

Section 2

3.
Section 3

Sec. 12, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution

Melencio P. Manansala III vs. Fatima G. Asdala, A.M. No. RTJ05-1916, May 10, 2005

In Re: Demetrio G. Demetria, A.M. No. 00-7-09-CA, March 27,

2001

Martinez v. Gironella, G.R. No. L-37635, July 22, 1975

4.
Section 4

Sulu Islamic Asso. v. Malik, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-92-691,

September 10, 1993
5.

Section 5
Muez v. Judge Ario, MTJ-94-985, February 21, 1995

6.
Section 6

Lecaroz v. Garcia, Adm. Matter No. 2271-MJ, September 18,

1981
7.

Section 7

8.
Section 8

Uy v. Capulong, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-91-766, April 7, 1993

Calilung v. Suriaga, A.M. Nos. MTJ-99-1191 & RTJ-99-1437,

August 31, 2000
B.

Canon 2. Integrity

1.
Section 1

Re: Procedure Adopted by Judge Daniel Liangco, Adm. Matter

No. 99-11-158-MTC, August 1, 2000

Editha O. Catbagan vs. Felixberto P. Barte, A.M. No. MTJ-021452, April 6, 2005
2.
Section 2

Inciong v. De Guia, Adm. Matter No. R-249-RTJ, September 17,

1987

In Re: Report on the Judicial and Financial Audit Conducted in

the MTCC, Koronadal City, A.M. No. 02-9-233-MTCC, April 27, 2005
3.
Section 3

In re: Jesus Cuenco, August 6, 1920

Thelma Canlas Trinidad-Pe Aguirre vs. Eduardo T. Baltazar,

A.M. No. P-05-1957, February 7, 2005
C.
Canon 3. Impartiality
1.
Section 1

Dimacuha v. Concepcion, G.R. No. L-60842, September 30,

1982

Julius Neri vs. Jesus S. de la Pea, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1896,

April 29, 2005
2.
Section 2

Dela Cruz v. Bersamira, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1567, July 24, 2000

Spouses Nazareno v. Judge Almario, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-94-

1195, February 26, 1997

3.

Section 3

4.
Section 4

Jugueta v. Boncaros, Adm. Matter No. 440-CFI, September 30,

1974
5.

6.

Section 5
People v. Judge Gako, GR No. 135045, December 15, 2000
People v. Kho, GR No. 139381, April 20, 2001
Gutierrez v. Santos, G.R. No. L-15824, May 30, 1961
Section 6

D.

Canon 4. Propriety

1.
Section 1

Re: immorality: Atienza v. Brilliantes, MTJ-92-706, March 29,

1995

Alday v. Cruz, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1530, March 14, 2001

Jaime Lim Co vs. Ruben R. Plata, A.M. No. MTJ-03-1501,

March 14, 2005
2.

Section 2
Martinez v. Pahimulin, Adm. Matter No. 78-MJ, August 30, 1982

3.

Section 3

4.

Section 4

5.

Section 5

6.

1982

7.

Section 6
Luzuriaga v. Bromo, Adm. Matter No. 2385-MJ, August 19,
Barrera v. Barrera, G.R. No. L-31589, July 31, 1970
Section 7
Sec. 7, RA 3019
Sec. 17, Art. XI, 1987

8.
Section 8

Mamba v. Garcia, A.M. No. MTJ-96-1110, June 25, 2001

Jordan P. Oktubre vs. Ramon P. Velasco, A.M. No. MTJ 021444, July 22, 2004
9.

Section 9

10.

Section 10

11. Section 11

Horst Franz Ellert v. Judge Galapon, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1294,

July 31, 2000

Villareal v. Diongson, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1520, November 22,

2000
12.

Section 12

13.

1994

Section 13
Arts. 210-211, Revised Penal Code
RA 3019
Art. 739, Civil Code
Capuno v. Jaramillo, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-944, July 20,

14.

Section 14

15.

Section 15

E.

Canon 5. Equality

1.

Section 1

2.

Section 2

3.
Section 3

Aquino v. Valenciano, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-746, December

27, 1994
4.

Section 4

5.

F.

Section 5
Parayno v. Meneses, G.R. No. 112684, April 26, 1994
Hurtado v. Judalena, G.R. No. L-40603, July 13, 1978
Canon 6 Competence and Diligence

1.

Section 1
Libarios v. Dabalos, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-89-286, July 11, 1991
Albos v. Alaba, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-91517, March 11, 1994

2.

Section 2
Lapena v. Marcos, Adm. Matter No. 1969-MJ, June 29, 1982
Barbarona v. Canda, A.M. No. MTJ-01-1355, April 20, 2000

3.
Section 3

Seares v. Salazar, A.M. No. MTJ-98-1160, November 22, 2000

Hold Departure Order issued by Acting Judge Aniceto

Madronio, A.M. No. 99-12-192-MTC January 26, 2000

Lucia Layola vs. Judge Basilio Gabo, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-001524, January 26, 2000

Purita Lim vs. Cesar M. Dumlao, A.M. No. MTJ-04-1556, March

31, 2005
4.

Section 4

5.
Section 5

Bentulan v. Dumatol, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-999, June 15,

1994

Office of the Court Administrator vs. Aniceto L. Madronio, Sr.,

A.M. No. MTJ-04-1571, February 14, 2005

Ma. Teresa D. Columbres vs. Aniceto L. Madronio, A.M. No.

MTJ-02-1461, March 31, 2005
6.
Section 6

Santos v. Silva, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1579, January 18, 2001

Impao v. Makilala, Adm. Matter No. MTJ-88-184, MTJ-88-217 &

MTJ-88-221, October 13, 1989
7.
Section 7

In re: Flordeliza, March 12, 1923

Re: Report of Acting Presiding Judge Wilfredo F. Herico on

Missing Cash Bonds, A.M. Nos. 00-3-108-RTC and 00-11-260-

MCTC, January 28, 2005

IX.Liabilities of Judges
A.
Administrative Liability

Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted at the Municipal Trial

Court in Cities (BR. 1), Surigao City, A.M. No. P-04-1835, January 11,
2005

In re: Climaco, Adm. Case No. 134-J, January 21, 1974

In re: Echiverri, Adm. Matter No. 697-CFI, October 30, 1975

Re: Judge Silverio Tayao, RTC Br. 141, Mkt., Adm. Matter No.
RTJ-93-978, February 7, 1994
B.
Civil Liability

State Prosecutors vs. Manuel T. Muro, A.M. No. RTJ-92-876,

September 19, 1994
C.
Criminal Liability

Dela Cruz v. Concepcion, Adm. Matter No. RTJ-93-1062,

August 25, 1994

Maceda v. Conrado Vasquez, G.R. No. 102781, April 22, 1993

In re: Climaco, Adm. Case No. 134-J, i 21, 1974