In Re Sycip
In Re Sycip
In Re: Sycip
PETITION FOR AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE USE OF THE FIRM NAME "SYCIP, SALAZAR,
FELICIANO, HERNANDEZ & CASTILLO" and IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR
AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE USE OF THE FIRM NAME "OZAETA, ROMULO, DE LEON,
MABANTA & REYES."
Melencio-Herrera
FACTS:
Two firms ask that they be allowed to continue using the names of their firms despite the
fact that Attys. Sycip and Ozaeta died.
letterheads indicating the years when their respective deceased partners were
connected with the firm. Petitioners will notify all leading national and
international law directories of the fact of their deceased partners' deaths.
5. No local custom prohibits the continued use of a deceased partner's name in a
professional firm's name. There is no Philippine custom or usage that recognizes
that the name of a law firm identifies the firms individual members.
6. The continued use of a deceased partner's name in the firm name of law partnerships
has been consistently allowed by U.S. Courts and is an accepted practice in
the legal profession of most countries.
ISSUE: WON the continued use of the deceased partners names will run counter the
personal relation between attorney and client.
HELD:
YES. Petitioners advised to drop the names SYCIP and OZAETA from their respective
firm names.
The right to practice law does not only presuppose in its possessor integrity, legal standing
and attainment, but also the exercise of a special privilege, highly personal and
partaking of the nature of a public trust.
Neither the widow nor the heirs can be held liable for transactions entered into after
the death of their lawyer-predecessor. There being no benefits accruing, there can be no
corresponding liability.
In view of the personal and confidential nature of the relations between attorney and
client, and the high standards demanded in the canons of professional ethics, no practice
should be allowed which even in a remote degree could give rise to the possibility
of deception in view of the personal and confidential nature of the relations
between attorney and client, and the high standards demanded in the canons of professional
ethics, no practice should be allowed which even in a remote degree could give
rise to the possibility of deception.
Petitions DENIED
CONCURRENCE OF J. FERNANDO
It is out of delicadeza that the undersigned did not participate in the disposition of these
petitions. Sycip Salazar started with partnership of Quisumbing, Sycip, and Quisumbing, the
senior partner, the late Ramon Quisumbing, being the father-in-law of the undersigned, and
the most junior partner then, Norberto J. Quisumbing, being his brother- in-law.
DISSENT OF J. AQUINO
The petition may be granted with the condition that it be indicated in the letterheads of the
two firms (as the case may be) that A. Sycip, former J. Ozaeta and H. Ozaeta are dead or the
period when they served as partners should be stated therein.
The purpose of the two firms in continuing the use of the names of their deceased
founders is to retain the clients who had customarily sought the legal services of Attys.
Sycip and Ozaeta and to benefit from the goodwill attached to the names of those respected
and esteemed law practitioners. That is a legitimate motivation. The retention of their
names is not illegal per se.