64 Linsangan v. Tolentino

64 Linsangan v. Tolentino (Justin) 3.
Tolentino promised them financial assistance and expeditious collection

. September 4, 2009 | Corona, J | Duty to uphold integrity and dignity of the on their claims. To induce them to hire his services, he persistently
called them and sent them text messages.
legal profession - Solicitation  
4. James Gregorio attested that Paralegal Labiano tried to sever the
Petitioner: PEDRO L. LINSANGAN lawyer-client relations with Linsangan and Gregorio and utilize
Respondents: ATTY. NICOMEDES TOLENTINO Tolentino’s services instead, in exchange for a loan of P50,000.
5. Linsangan also attached "respondent's" calling card. (See end of digest)
SUMMARY: Linsangan filed this disbarment case against Tolentino on the ground 6. Tolentino, as a defense, denied knowing Labiano and authorizing the
that he was soliciting their clients and encroachment of professional services. printing and circulation of the said calling card. 
Tolentino and Labiano were allegedly enticing clients of Linsangan to join them 7. The complaint was referred to the Commission on Bar Discipline (CBD)
instead with a promise of financial assistance and speedy collection of their of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for investigation, report and
claims. The calling card also indicated “with financial assistance”. When the recommendation.
complaint was referred to the CBD, they confirmed the allegations against 8. CBD: Tolentino had encroached on the professional practice of
Tolentino. Hence, this petition. The issue in this case is W/N Tolentino is guilty of complainant, violating Rule 8.02 and other canons of the Code of
violating the Canons presented by Linsangan. The SC held in the affirmative. They Professional Responsibility (CPR). He also contravened the rule
found Tolentino guilty of violating numerous Canons of the CPR. This is because against soliciting cases for gain, personally or through paid agents
the evidence presented points out that Tolentino did in fact solicit the clients of or brokers as stated in Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
Linsangan and that they were indeed offering financial assistance. The SC said 9. Hence, the CBD recommended that respondent be reprimanded with a
that the practice of law is a profession and not a business. Allowing such degrades stern warning that any repetition would merit a heavier penalty.
the profession in the public’s estimation and impairs the ability to efficiently render 10. The complaint before the court is rooted on the alleged intrusion by
that high character of service to which every member of the bar is called. Lawyers Tolentino into Linsangan’s professional practice in violation of Rule 8.02
are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain. In addition, a lawyer of the CPR. And the means employed by respondent in furtherance of
shouldn’t steal another lawyer’s client nor induce the latter to retain him by a the said misconduct themselves constituted distinct violations of ethical
promise of a better service, good result, or reduced for his services. With regard to rules.
lending financial assistance, the SC said that a lawyer shall not lend money to
clients, except in the interest of justice and any act of solicitation constitutes as ISSUE/S:
malpractice. 1. W/N Tolentino is guilty of violating the Canons presented by Linsangan.
– YES
DOCTRINE: The practice of law is a profession and not a business. Allowing such RATIO:
degrades the profession in the public’s estimation and impairs the ability to On whether Tolentino is guilty of the allegations presented by Linsangan -
efficiently render that high character of service to which every member of the bar YES
is called. Lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain. In 1. Canons of the CPR are rules of conduct all lawyers must adhere to,
addition, a lawyer shouldn’t steal another lawyer’s client nor induce the latter to including the manner by which a lawyer's services are to be made
retain him by a promise of a better service, good result, or reduced for his known.
services. With regard to lending financial assistance, the SC said that a lawyer 2. Time and time again, lawyers are reminded that the practice of law is a
shall not lend money to clients, except in the interest of justice and any act of profession and not a business; lawyers should not advertise their talents
solicitation constitutes as malpractice. as merchants advertise their wares.
3. To allow a lawyer to advertise his talent or skill is to commercialize the
FACTS: practice of law, degrade the profession in the public's estimation and
1. Pedro Linsangan of Linsangan & Linsangan Law Office filed a disbarment impair its ability to efficiently render that high character of service to
case against Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino (Tolentino) for solicitation of clients which every member of the bar is called.
and encroachment of professional services. 4. Rule 2.03 of the CPR provides: 
2. It was alleged that Atty. Tolentino convinved his clients to transfer legal
representation with the help of a paralegal named Fe Marie Labiano.
1
a. RULE 2.03.: A LAWYER SHALL NOT DO OR PERMIT TO BE entire devotion and fidelity to the client's cause. If the lawyer lends
DONE ANY ACT DESIGNED PRIMARILY TO SOLICIT LEGAL money to the client in connection with the client's case, the lawyer in
BUSINESS. effect acquires an interest in the subject matter of the case or an
5. Hence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the purpose of gain, additional stake in its outcome. Either of these circumstances may lead
either personally or through paid agents or brokers. Such actuation the lawyer to consider his own recovery rather than that of his client, or
constitutes malpractice, a ground for disbarment. to accept a settlement which may take care of his interest in the verdict
6. Rule 2.03 should be read in connection with Rule 1.03 of the CPR which to the prejudice of the client in violation of his duty of undivided fidelity to
provides: the client's cause.
a. RULE 1.03.: A LAWYER SHALL NOT, FOR ANY CORRUPT 15. As previously mentioned, any act of solicitation constitutes malpractice
MOTIVE OR INTEREST, ENCOURAGE ANY SUIT OR which calls for the exercise of the Court's disciplinary powers. Violation
PROCEEDING OR DELAY ANY MAN'S CAUSE. of anti-solicitation statutes warrants serious sanctions for initiating
7. This rule proscribes "ambulance chasing" (the solicitation of almost any contact with a prospective client for the purpose of obtaining
kind of legal business by an attorney, personally or through an agent employment. 26 Thus, in this jurisdiction, we adhere to the rule to protect
in order to gain employment) as a measure to protect the community the public from the Machiavellian machinations of unscrupulous lawyers
from barratry and champerty. and to uphold the nobility of the legal profession.
8. Although respondent initially denied knowing Labiano in his answer, he later
admitted it during the mandatory hearing. DISPOSITION: WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino for
9. Through Labiano's actions, respondent's law practice was benefited. violating Rules 1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and 16.04 and Canon 3 of the Code of
Hapless seamen were enticed to transfer representation on the strength of Professional Responsibility and Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court is
Labiano's word that respondent could produce a more favorable result. hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of one year effective
10. With regard to Tolentino’s violation of Rule 8.02 of the CPR, settled is the immediately from receipt of this resolution. He is STERNLY WARNED that a
rule that a lawyer should not steal another lawyer's client nor induce the repetition of the same or similar acts in the future shall be dealt with more
latter to retain him by a promise of better service, good result or reduced severely.
fees for his services. Let a copy of this Resolution be made part of his records in the Office of the Bar
11. Tolentino never denied having these seafarers in his client list nor receiving Confidant, Supreme Court of the Philippines, and be furnished to the Integrated
benefits from Labiano's "referrals". Furthermore, he never denied Labiano's Bar of the Philippines and the Office of the Court Administrator to be circulated to
connection to his office. Tolentino committed an unethical, predatory all courts.
overstep into another's legal practice. He cannot escape liability under Rule
8.02 of the CPR. Calling Card Content
12. Moreover, by engaging in a money-lending venture with his clients as Front
borrowers, respondent violated Rule 16.04: NICOMEDES TOLENTINO  LAW OFFFICE *
a. Rule 16.04 — A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client CONSULTANCY & MARITIME SERVICES
unless the client's interests are fully protected by the nature of the W/ FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE 
case or by independent advice. Neither shall a lawyer lend money
to a client except, when in the interest of justice, he has to Fe Marie L. Labiano
advance necessary expenses in a legal matter he is handling for Paralegal
the client. 1st MIJI Mansion, 2nd Flr.
13. The rule is that a lawyer shall not lend money to his client. The only Rm. M-01 6th Ave.,
cor M.H. Del Pilar
exception is, when in the interest of justice, he has to advance necessary
Grace Park, Caloocan City
expenses (such as 􏰁ling fees, stenographer's fees for transcript of
Tel: 362-7820  Fax: (632) 362-7821
stenographic notes, cash bond or premium for surety bond, etc.) for a
Cel.: (0926) 2701719
matter that he is handling for the client.
14. The rule is intended to safeguard the lawyer's independence of mind so that Back
the free exercise of his judgment may not be adversely affected. It seeks to
ensure his undivided attention to the case he is handling as well as his
2
SERVICES OFFERED: CONSULTATION AND ASSISTANCE TO OVERSEAS SEAMEN
REPATRIATED DUE TO ACCIDENT, INJURY, ILLNESS, SICKNESS, DEATH AND INSURANCE
BENEFIT CLAIMS ABROAD.x

64 Linsangan v. Tolentino

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

64 Linsangan v. Tolentino

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

64 Linsangan v. Tolentino

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

64 Linsangan v. Tolentino (Justin) 3.

Tolentino promised them financial assistance and expeditious collection

You might also like