Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CYNTHIA ADVINCULA v. ATTY. ERNESTO M. MACABATA

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	AC. No. 7353 2015-11-16	NELSON P. VALDEZ v. ATTY. ANTOLIN ALLYSON DABON PER CURIAM
There is no fixed standard of what constitutes gross immoral conduct, or "moral delinquency and obliquity which render a lawyer unworthy of continuing as a member of the bar."[50] Hence, "what appears to be unconventional behavior to the straight-laced may not be the immoral conduct that warrants disbarment."[51]
	AC. No. 9401 2013-10-22	JOCELYN DE LEON v. ATTY. TYRONE PEDRENA BERSAMIN, J.
Verily, the determination of the penalty to impose on an erring lawyer is within the Court's discretion. The exercise of the discretion should neither be arbitrary nor despotic, nor motivated by any animosity or prejudice towards the lawyer, but should instead be ever controlled by the imperative need to scrupulously guard the purity and independence of the Bar and to exact from the lawyer strict compliance with his duties to the Court, to his client, to his brethren in the profession, and to the general public.[18]
	Adm. Case No. 7332 2013-06-18	EDUARDO A. ABELLA v. RICARDO G. BARRIOS PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
To note, "the possession of good moral character is both a condition precedent and a continuing requirement to warrant admission to the Bar and to retain membership in the legal profession."[28] This proceeds from the lawyer's duty to observe the highest degree of morality in order to safeguard the Bar's integrity.[29] Consequently, any errant behavior on the part of a lawyer, be it in the lawyer's public or private activities, which tends to show deficiency in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor, is sufficient to warrant suspension or disbarment.[30]
	AC. No. 6760 2013-01-30	ANASTACIO N. TEODORO III v. ATTY. ROMEO S. GONZALES BRION, J.
The present case finds favorable comparison with Guanzon. Like Espiritu, Atty. Gonzales misused court processes in contravention of the express rule against forum shopping. We held then that Espiritu should be penalized and we imposed the penalty of censure the penalty usually imposed for an isolated act of misconduct of a lesser nature.[19]
	AC. No. 4428 2011-12-12	ELPIDIO P. TIONG v. ATTY. GEORGE M. FLORENDO PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
It has been consistently held by the Court that possession of good moral character is not only a condition for admission to the Bar but is a continuing requirement to maintain one's good standing in the legal profession. It is the bounden duty of law practitioners to observe the highest degree of morality in order to safeguard the integrity of the Bar.[9] Consequently, any errant behaviour on the part of a lawyer, be it in his public or private activities, which tends to show him deficient in moral character, honesty, probity or good demeanor, is sufficient to warrant his suspension or disbarment.
	AC. No. 6593 2010-02-04	MAELOTISEA S. GARRIDO v. ATTYS. ANGEL E. GARRIDO PER CURIAM
Moral character is not a subjective term but one that corresponds to objective reality.[36] To have good moral character, a person must have the personal characteristics of being good. It is not enough that he or she has a good reputation, i.e., the opinion generally entertained about a person or the estimate in which he or she is held by the public in the place where she is known.[37] The requirement of good moral character has four general purposes, namely: (1) to protect the public; (2) to protect the public image of lawyers; (3) to protect prospective clients; and (4) to protect errant lawyers from themselves.[38] Each purpose is as important as the other.