Case Digest: In re Abad, 98 Phil 899

In re Abad, 98 Phil 899

Subject: Basic Legal Ethics

FACTS

Charged by Atty. Procopio S. Beltran, Jr., president of the Philippine Trial Lawyers Association, Inc., of practicing law without having been previously admitted to the Philippine Bar, Mr. Elmo S. Abad could not deny and had to admit the practice.

In Mr. Abad’s explanation, it was stated that prior to his taking the oath of office as a member of the bar, he paid his Bar Admission Fee, Certification Fee, and Membership dues for 19799-1980 to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. On July 26, 1979, while waiting for his turn to take the oath as a member of the bar, he was made to sign his Lawyer’s Oath. The then clerk of court informed him that the then Chief Justice Fernando wants to talk to him regarding the reply of one Mr. Jorge Uy to his answer to his Complaint and told him that he had to answer the Reply for which reason the taking of his oath was further suspended. Believing that with his signing of the Lawyer’s Oath and his Reply to Mr. Uy’s Answer, the court not ordering for the striking of his name in the Roll of Attorneys with IBP, thus making him a member in good Standing, he paid his membership due and other assessments (until 1982). Likewise, he has a certificate of membership in the IBP and a certificate of membership in Good Standing with the QC chapter of the IBP.

ISSUE

Whether or not Abad is a member of the Philippine Bar.

RULING

No.

Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, Section 17. Admission and oath of successful applicants. — An applicant who has passed the required examination or has been otherwise found to be entitled to admission to the bar, shall take and subscribe before the Supreme Court the corresponding oath of office.

Rule 138 of the Rules of Court, Section 19. Attorney's roll. — The clerk of the Supreme Court shall keep a roll of all attorneys admitted to practice, which roll shall be signed by the person admitted when he receives his certificate.

In this case, SC held that respondent Abad should know that the circumstances which he has narrated do not constitute his admission to the Philippine Bar and the right to practice law thereafter; that he should know that two essential requisites for becoming a lawyer still had to be performed, namely: his lawyer's oath to be administered by this Court and his signature in the Roll of Attorneys. (Rule 138, Secs. 17 and 19, Rules of Court.) The proven charge against respondent Abad constitutes contempt of court (Rule 71, Sec. 3(e), Rules of Court.) Therefore, Mr. Elmo S. Abad is hereby fined Five Hundred (P500.00) pesos payable to this Court within ten (10) days from notice failing which he shall serve twenty-five (25) days imprisonment.