Andree Bera Fae Z.
Moraña JD-1
I. SHORT TITLE: Linsangan v. Tolentino
A.C. No. 6672 September 4, 2009
II. FULL TITLE: PEDRO L. LINSANGAN, Complainant, vs. ATTY. NICOMEDES
TOLENTINO, Respondent.
III. TOPIC: Code of Professional Responsibility - Canon 3, Rules 1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and
16.04
Rules of Court - Section 27, Rule 138
IV. STATEMENT OF FACTS:
This is a complaint for disbarment filed by Pedro Linsangan of the Linsangan
Linsangan & Linsangan Law Office against Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino for solicitation of
clients and encroachment of professional services. Complainant alleged that respondent,
with the help of paralegal Fe Marie Labiano, convinced his clients to transfer legal
representation. Respondent promised them financial assistance and expeditious collection
on their claims. To induce them to hire his services, he persistently called them and sent
them text messages.
To support his allegations, complainant presented the sworn affidavit of James
Gregorio attesting that Labiano tried to prevail upon him to sever his lawyer-client relations
with complainant. Complainant also attached "respondent’s" calling card.
V. STATEMENT OF THE CASE:
Based on testimonial and documentary evidence, the Commission on Bar and
Discipline, in its report and recommendation, found that respondent had encroached on
the professional practice of complainant, violating Rule 8.02 and other canons of the
Code of Professional Responsibility (CPR). Moreover, he contravened the rule against
soliciting cases for gain, personally or through paid agents or brokers as stated in Section
1
Andree Bera Fae Z. Moraña JD-1
27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court. Hence, the CBD recommended that respondent be
reprimanded with a stern warning that any repetition would merit a heavier penalty.
VI. ISSUES:
I. Whether or not Atty. Tolentino is guilty for advertising his services.
VII. RULING:
I. Yes. Atty. Tolentino suspended for violating Rules 1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and 16.04
and Canon 3 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. With regard to Canon
3, the practice of law is a profession and not a business. Thus, lawyers should
not advertise their talents as merchants advertise their wares. To allow lawyers
to advertise their talents/skill is a commercialization of the practice of law
(degrading the profession in the public’s estimation). With regard to Rule 2.03,
lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for purpose of gain, either personally
or through an agent. In relation to Rule 1.03, which proscribes “ambulance
chasing” (involving solicitation personally or through an agent/broker) as a
measure to protect community from barratry and champertry. As a final note
regarding the calling card presented as evidence by Linsangan, a lawyer’s best
advertisement is a well-merited. reputation for professional capacity and fidelity
to trust based on his character and conduct. For this reason, lawyers are only
allowed to announce their services by publication in reputable law lists or use of
simple professional cards.
Professional calling cards may only contain the following details:
(a) lawyer’s name;
(b) name of the law firm with which he is connected;
(c) address;
(d) telephone number and
(e) special branch of law practiced.
2
Andree Bera Fae Z. Moraña JD-1
Labiano’s calling card contained the phrase “with financial assistance.” The
phrase was clearly used to entice clients (who already had representation)
to change counsels with a promise of loans to finance their legal actions.
Money was dangled to lure clients away from their original lawyers, thereby
taking advantage of their financial distress and emotional vulnerability. This
crass commercialism degraded the integrity of the bar and deserves no place
in the legal profession.
II. DISPOSITIVE PORTION:
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino for violating Rules
1.03, 2.03, 8.02 and 16.04 and Canon 3 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
and Section 27, Rule 138 of the Rules of Court is hereby SUSPENDED from the
practice of law for a period of one year effective immediately from receipt of this
resolution. He is STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar
acts in the future shall be dealt with more severely.
3
Andree Bera Fae Z. Moraña JD-1
Canon 3 - A lawyer in making known his legal services shall use only true, honest, fair, dignified and
objective information or statement of facts.
1.03 - A lawyer shall not, for any corrupt motive or interest, encourage any suit or proceeding or delay
any man's cause.
2.03 - A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed primarily to solicit legal business.
8.02 - A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the professional employment of another
lawyer, however, it is the right of any lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance
to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.
16.04 - A lawyer shall not borrow money from his client unless the client's interest 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.
Section 27, Rule 138
Attorneys removed or suspended by Supreme Court on what grounds. — A member of the bar may be
removed or suspended from his office as attorney by the Supreme Court for any deceit, malpractice, or
other gross misconduct in such office, grossly immoral conduct, or by reason of his conviction of a
crime involving moral turpitude, or for any violation of the oath which he is required to take before the
admission to practice, or for a wilfull disobedience of any lawful order of a superior court, or for
corruptly or willful appearing as an attorney for a party to a case without authority so to do. The practice
of soliciting cases at law for the purpose of gain, either personally or through paid agents or brokers,
constitutes malpractice.
