Scribd
Upload
67 views2 pages

Case Digests Legal Ethics CANONS 14-22 Chapter 4 The Lawyer and The Courts

This document summarizes 10 legal ethics cases related to Canons 14-22 involving lawyers' responsibilities to courts. It provides brief summaries of 4 sample cases: 1) Foodsphere v. Mauricio involved violation of Canon 13. 2) Nakpil v. Valdes established that the relationship between a lawyer and client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity and good faith. It involved a lawyer accused of conflict of interest while representing an estate. 3) Additional case summaries are provided but not in full detail.

Uploaded by

Martin Tongco Fontanilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
67 views2 pages

Case Digests Legal Ethics CANONS 14-22 Chapter 4 The Lawyer and The Courts

This document summarizes 10 legal ethics cases related to Canons 14-22 involving lawyers' responsibilities to courts. It provides brief summaries of 4 sample cases: 1) Foodsphere v. Mauricio involved violation of Canon 13. 2) Nakpil v. Valdes established that the relationship between a lawyer and client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity and good faith. It involved a lawyer accused of conflict of interest while representing an estate. 3) Additional case summaries are provided but not in full detail.

Uploaded by

Martin Tongco Fontanilla
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

CASE DIGESTS

Legal Ethics

CANONS 14-22
CHAPTER 4 THE LAWYER AND THE COURTS

I. Introduction

Responsibility of a Lawyer due to his Clients

CASE LIST
1. Foodsphere v. Mauricio – Violation of CANON 13
2. Suspension of Atty. Bagubayao – Violation of CANON 13
3. Hilado v. David
4. Nakpil v. Valdes
5. Hornilla v. Salunat
6. Northwestern University v. Arquillo
7. Quiambao v. Bamba
8. Heirs of Falame v. Baguio
9. Pacana v. Pascual-Lopez
10. Licuanan v. Melo

CASE 1

Parties
Complainant: Foodsphere Incorporated
Respondent: Atty. Melanio Mauricio

DOCTRINE:

FACTS:

CASE 3

Parties
Complainant: Blandina Hilado
Respondent: Jose David, et al.

FACTS:

CASE 4
NAKPIL v. VALDES
Complainant: Imelda Napkil
Respondent: Atty. Carlos Valdes

DOCTRINE:
The relationship between an attorney and his client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity
and good faith.

FACTS:

Herein respondent is a business consultant, accountant and a lawyer of Jose Napkil. Sometime in 1965,
Napkil became interested in purchasing a summer residence, but since he lack in funds, he requested the
respondent to purchase the said property in trust. Subsequently, the respondent obtained two (2) loans from
a bank, which he used to purchase and renovate the property.
Sometime in 1975, Jose Napkil died. Thereafter, respondent acted as counsel for Imelda Napkil for the
settlement of Jose’s estate.

ISSUES:
1) W/N the respondent violated CANON 17 of the CPR.
2) W/N the respondent is guilty of representing conflict of interest.

HELD:

1) Yes. CANON 17 of the CPR provides that “a lawyer owes fidelity to his client’s cause and enjoins
him to be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed on him.” In this case, the respondent

You might also like