[go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd
Upload
243 views1 page

Case Digest - Tapay v. Bancolo (Legal and Judicial Ethics)

Bancolo filed a complaint against Tapay and Rustia that was allegedly signed by Bancolo, but he later denied signing it. Bancolo's legal assistant then stated that their office accepted the case. Tapay and Rustia filed a disbarment case against Bancolo. The court found that Bancolo assisted in the unauthorized practice of law by allowing his secretary to sign pleadings for him. Bancolo was suspended from practice for one year for violating his duty to prevent unauthorized law practice by non-lawyers.

Uploaded by

Ivy Eunice Estorba
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
243 views1 page

Case Digest - Tapay v. Bancolo (Legal and Judicial Ethics)

Bancolo filed a complaint against Tapay and Rustia that was allegedly signed by Bancolo, but he later denied signing it. Bancolo's legal assistant then stated that their office accepted the case. Tapay and Rustia filed a disbarment case against Bancolo. The court found that Bancolo assisted in the unauthorized practice of law by allowing his secretary to sign pleadings for him. Bancolo was suspended from practice for one year for violating his duty to prevent unauthorized law practice by non-lawyers.

Uploaded by

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

Tapay v.

Bancolo

Facts: A complaint, which was allegedly signed by Bancolo, was filed against Tpaay and Rustia
for usurpation of authority, falsification of public document, and graft and corrupt practices. When
Bancolo and Rustia accidentally chanced upon each other, Rustia informed about the complaint
and Bancolo denied that he represented the complainant and he declared that the signature in the
complaint was not his. Bancolo then signed an affidavit denying his signature in the complaint.
However, Bancolo’s legal assistant issued an affidavit that the Jarder Bancolo Law Office accepted
the complainant’s case and was signed by the office secretary per Bancolo’sinstructions.
Thereafter, Tapay and Rustia filed a disbarment against Bancolo and his partner, Atty. Jarder for
allegedly subjecting them to harassment.
Issue: WON Bancolo assisted in the unauthorized practice of law (canon 9).
Ruling: Yes.
Atty. Bancolo admitted that the Complaint he �led for a former client before the Office of the
Ombudsman was signed in his name by a secretary of his law office.
The lawyer's duty to prevent, or at the very least not to assist in, the unauthorized practice of law
is founded on public interest and policy. Public policy requires that the practice of law be limited
to those individuals found duly qualified in education and character.
In Republic v. Kenrick Development Corporation , we held that the preparation and signing of a
pleading constitute legal work involving the practice of law which is reserved exclusively for
members of the legal profession. Atty. Bancolo's authority and duty to sign a pleading are personal
to him. Although he may delegate the signing of a pleading to another lawyer, he may not delegate
it to a non-lawyer.
The complainants did not present any evidence that Atty. Jarder was directly involved, had
knowledge of, or even participated in the wrongful practice of Atty. Bancolo in allowing or
tolerating his secretary to sign pleadings for him.
SUSPENDED for 1 year.

You might also like