Melanio Deodoro Benjamin G. Singson Melanio Deodoro Benjamin G. Singson Atty. Pedro L. Linsangan vs Atty. Nicomedes Nicome des Tolentin Tolentino o A.C. No. 667! Se"tem#er $! %%& 'acts( Atty. Pedro Linsangan filed a disbarment case against Atty. Atty. Nicomede Nicomedess Tolentino olentino for solicita solicitation tion of clients clients and encr encroa oach chme ment nt of prof profes essi sion onal al serv servic ices es alle allegi ging ng that that responden respondent, t, with the help of paralega paralegall Fe Marie Labiano, Labiano, convin convinced ced his client clientss to transf transfer er legal legal repres represent entati ation on to Tolent olentino ino with with the promis promisee of financ financial ial assist assistanc ancee and expeditios collection on their claims. To indce them to hire his services, he persistently called them and sent them text messages. Linsangan presented the sworn affidavit of !ames "regorio attesting that Labiano convinced him to sever his lawyer#c lawyer#clien lientt relations relations with Linsangan Linsangan and se Tolentin olentino$s o$s servic services es instea instead, d, in exchan exchange ge for a loan loan of P%&,&& P%&,&&&.& &.&&. &. Frther, Linsangan$s calling card was also attached wherein it appeared that aside from legal services, financial assistance was offered as well. )ss*e( 'hether Tolentino Tolentino is gilty of miscondct +eld( +eld( (es. The cort adopted the )*P$s finding of nethical condct, whereby it fond Tolentino to have encroached on the professional practice of Linsangan violating +le .&-, which prohibits a lawyer from stealing another lawyer$s client or indce the latter$s client to retain him by a promise of better service, good reslt or redced fees for his services.
Moreover, by engaging in a money#lending ventre with his clients as borrowers, Tolentino violated +le /.&0 The cort frther added that Tolentino violated +le -.&1 of the 2P+ which provides 3A LA'(4+ 56ALL N7T 87 7+ P4+M) P4+M)T T T7 *4 87N4 87N4 AN( AN( A2T 845) 845)"N4 "N48 8 P+)MA+)L( P+)MA+)L( T7 T7 57L)2)T L4"AL L4"AL *95)N455.: *95)N455.: 6ence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the prpose of gain, either personally or throgh paid agents or bro;ers. 5ch actation actation constitt constittes es malpract malpractice, ice, a grond grond for disbarmen disbarment. t. Moreover, +le -.&1 shold be read in connection with +le .&1 of the 2P+ which provides< +le .&1. A LA'(4+ 56AL 56ALL L N7T N7T, F7+ AN( 27++ 27++9P 9PT T M7T) M7T)=4 =4 7+ )NT4+45T, 4N279+A"4 AN( 59)T 7+ P+72448)N" 7+ 84LA( 84LA( AN( AN( MAN$5 MAN$5 2A954. 2A954. This rle proscribe proscribess amblance chasing >the solicitation of almost any ;ind of legal bsiness by an attorney, personally or throgh an agent in orde orderr to gain gain empl employ oyme ment nt?? as a meas measr ree to prot protec ectt the the commnity from barratry and champerty. champerty. The calling card contained with the phrase financial assist assistanc ance, e, was clearl clearly y sed sed to entice entice client clientss to change change consels with a promise of loans to finance their legal actions. This crass commercialism degraded the integrity of the bar and deserved no place in the legal profession. Additi Additiona onally lly,, the cort cort said said that that a lawyer lawyer$s $s best best advertise advertisement ment is a well#mer well#merited ited reptatio reptation n for profession professional al capaci capacity ty and fideli fidelity ty to trst trst based based on his chara characte cterr and cond condc ct. t. For For this this reas reason on,, lawy lawyer erss are are only only allo allowe wed d to annonce their services by pblication in reptable law lists or se of simple professional cards. 6ence, Atty. Tolentino was sspended from the practice of law for a period of one year.
Atty. Pedro L. Linsangan vs Atty. Atty. Nicomedes Tolentino Tolentino A.C. No. 667! Se"tem#er $! %%& 'acts( Atty. Pedro Linsangan filed a disbarment case against Atty. Atty. Nicomedes Nicomedes Tolentin Tolentino o for solicitat solicitation ion of clients clients and encr encroa oach chme ment nt of prof profes essi sion onal al serv servic ices es alle allegi ging ng that that respondent respondent,, with the help of paralegal paralegal Fe Marie Marie Labiano, Labiano, convin convinced ced his client clientss to transf transfer er legal legal repres represent entati ation on to Tolen Tolentin tino o with with the promis promisee of financ financial ial assist assistanc ancee and expeditios collection on their claims. To indce them to hire his services, he persistently called them and sent them text messages. Linsangan presented the sworn affidavit of !ames "regorio attesting that Labiano convinced him to sever his lawyer#c lawyer#client lient relations relations with Linsanga Linsangan n and se Tolentino olentino$s $s servic services es instea instead, d, in exchan exchange ge for a loan loan of P%&,& P%&,&&&. &&.&&. &&. Frther, Linsangan$s calling card was also attached wherein it appeared that aside from legal services, financial assistance was offered as well. )ss*e( 'hether Tolentino is gilty of miscondct +eld( +eld( (es. The cort adopted the )*P$s finding of nethical condct, whereby it fond Tolentino to have encroached on the profession professional al practice practice of Linsanga Linsangan n violating violating +le .&-, which prohibits a lawyer from stealing another lawyer$s client or indce the latter$s client to retain him by a promise of better service, good reslt or redced fees for his services.
Moreover, by engaging in a money#lending ventre with his clients as borrowers, Tolentino violated +le /.&0 The cort frther added that Tolentino violated +le -.&1 of the 2P+ which provides 3A LA'(4+ 56ALL N7T 87 7+ P4+M) P4+M)T T T7 *4 87N4 87N4 AN( AN( A2T A2T 845) 845)"N "N48 48 P+)MA+)L( P+)MA+)L( T7 T7 57L)2)T L4"AL L4"AL *95)N455. *95)N455.:: 6ence, lawyers are prohibited from soliciting cases for the prpose of gain, either personally or throgh paid agents or bro;ers. 5ch actation actation constitte constittess malpracti malpractice, ce, a grond grond for disbarmen disbarment. t. Moreover, +le -.&1 shold be read in connection with +le .&1 of the 2P+ which provides< +le .&1. A LA'(4+ 56AL 56ALL L N7T N7T, F7+ F7+ AN( 27++ 27++9P 9PT T M7T) M7T)=4 =4 7+ )NT4+45T, 4N279+A"4 AN( 59)T 7+ P+72448)N" 7+ 84LA( 84LA( AN( AN( MAN$5 MAN$5 2A954. 2A954. This This rle proscribes proscribes amblance chasing >the solicitation of almost any ;ind of legal bsiness by an attorney, attorney, personally or throgh an agent in orde orderr to gain gain empl employ oyme ment nt?? as a meas measr ree to prot protec ectt the the commnity from barratry and champerty. champerty. The calling card contained with the phrase financial assist assistanc ance, e, was was clearl clearly y sed sed to entice entice client clientss to change change consels with a promise of loans to finance their legal actions. This crass commercialism degraded the integrity of the bar and deserved no place in the legal profession. Additi Additiona onally lly,, the cort cort said said that that a lawye lawyer$s r$s best best advertisem advertisement ent is a well#mer well#merited ited reptatio reptation n for professio professional nal capaci capacity ty and fideli fidelity ty to trst trst based based on his charac character ter and cond condc ct. t. For For this this reas reason on,, lawy lawyer erss are are only only allo allowe wed d to annonce their services by pblication in reptable law lists or se of simple professional cards. 6ence, Atty. Tolentino was sspended from the practice of law for a period of one year.
