Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Noriega Vs Sison

    Uploaded by

    MuhammadIshahaqBinBenjamin
    948 views1 page
    Sison, a hearing officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, was accused of engaging in the private practice of law by representing Juan Sacquing in court under the name "Manuel Sison". Sison argued he had permission from the SEC Commissioner to represent Sacquing, who was a close family friend, free of charge. He also showed "Manuel Sison" was due to a clerical error and he always signed as "Emmanuel R. Sison". The court found Sison's isolated representation of a family friend for free did not constitute private practice of law. There was no evidence Sison committed acts warranting disbarment. His helping a close friend should not be used to harass him.

    Original Description:

    Ethics case

    Original Title

    Noriega vs Sison

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Sison, a hearing officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, was accused of engaging in the private practice of law by representing Juan Sacquing in court under the name "Manuel Sison". Sison argued he had permission from the SEC Commissioner to represent Sacquing, who was a close family friend, free of charge. He also showed "Manuel Sison" was due to a clerical error and he always signed as "Emmanuel R. Sison". The court found Sison's isolated representation of a family friend for free did not constitute private practice of law. There was no evidence Sison committed acts warranting disbarment. His helping a close friend should not be used to harass him.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    948 views1 page

    Noriega Vs Sison

    Uploaded by

    MuhammadIshahaqBinBenjamin
    Sison, a hearing officer for the Securities and Exchange Commission, was accused of engaging in the private practice of law by representing Juan Sacquing in court under the name "Manuel Sison". Sison argued he had permission from the SEC Commissioner to represent Sacquing, who was a close family friend, free of charge. He also showed "Manuel Sison" was due to a clerical error and he always signed as "Emmanuel R. Sison". The court found Sison's isolated representation of a family friend for free did not constitute private practice of law. There was no evidence Sison committed acts warranting disbarment. His helping a close friend should not be used to harass him.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    3. Herminio Noriega vs Atty.

    Emmanuel Sison

    125 SCRA 293 – Legal Ethics – Isolated Practice of Law


    FACTS:
    In 1981, Noriega filed a disbarment case against Sison. Noriega alleged that
    Sison as a hearing officer of the Securities and Exchange Commission is not allowed to
    engage in the private practice of law; yet Noriega alleged that Sison has created
    another identity under the name “Manuel Sison” in order for him to engage in private
    practice and represent one Juan Sacquing before a trial court in Manila.
    Sison, in his defense, argued that he is in fact representing Juan Sacquing but
    the same is with the permission of the SEC Commissioner; that he never held himself
    out to the public as a practicing lawyer; that he provided legal services to Sacquing in
    view of close family friendship and for free; that he never represented himself
    deliberately and intentionally as “Atty. Manuel Sison” in the Manila JDRC where, in the
    early stages of his appearance, he always signed the minutes as “Atty. Emmanuel R.
    Sison”, and in one instance, he even made the necessary correction when the court
    staff wrote his name as Atty. Manuel Sison”; that due to the “inept and careless work of
    the clerical staff of the JDRC”, notices were sent to “Atty. Manuel Sison”.

    ISSUE: Whether or not the disbarment case should prosper.

    HELD:
    No. The arguments presented by Sison are well merited and backed by
    evidence. The allegations in the complaint do not warrant disbarment of Sison. There is
    no evidence that Sison has committed an act constituting deceit, immoral conduct,
    violation of his oath as a lawyer, willful disobedience of any lawful order of the court, or
    corruptly and willfully appearing as an attorney to a part to a case without attorney to do
    so. His isolated appearance for Sacquing does not constitute private practice of law,
    more so since Sison did not derive any pecuniary gain for his appearance because
    Sison and Sacquing were close family friends. Such act of Sison in going out of his way
    to aid as counsel to a close family friend should not be allowed to be used as an
    instrument of harassment against him.

    You might also like