I. Why is law a profession and not a trade or business?

As stated by the Supreme Court in the case of Burbe vs. Magulta

June 10, 2002

“In this day and age, members of the bar often forget that the
practice of law is a profession and not a business. Lawyering is not
primarily meant to be a money-making venture, and law advocacy is not
a capital that necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a livelihood is not
a professional but a secondary consideration. Duty to public service
and to the administration of justice should be the primary
consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their personal
interests or what they owe to themselves. The practice of law is a
noble calling in which emolument is a by-product, and the highest
eminence may be attained without making much money. Duty to public
service and administration of justice, emolument is a by-product.”

II. Why is an attorney/a lawyer considered an officer of the court?

Lawyers are particularly called upon to obey court orders and

processes, and this deference is underscored by the fact that willful
disregard thereof may subject the lawyer not only to punishment for
contempt but to disciplinary sanctions as well.

A lawyer is first and foremost an officer of the court. Thus, while

he owes his entire devotion to the interest and causes of his client he
must ensure that he acts within the bounds of reason and common
sense, always aware that he is an instrument of truth and justice. More
importantly, as an officer of the court and its indispensable partner in
the sacred task of administering justice, graver responsibility is imposed
upon a lawyer than any other to uphold the integrity of the courts[ and
to show respect to its processes. Thus, any act on his part which tends
visibly to obstruct, pervert or impede and degrade the administration of
justice constitutes professional misconduct calling for the exercise of
disciplinary action against him. BANTOLO vs. CASTILLO, Adm. Case No.
6589, December 19, 2005
III. Is there a distinction between “practicing lawyer” and “trial
lawyer”?

Yes, one is a practicing lawyer when he is engaged in the practice

of law as defined under the case of Cayetano vs. Monsod

“Practice of law means any activity, in or out of court, which

requires the application of law, legal procedure, knowledge, training
and experience. ‘To engage in the practice of law is to perform those
acts which are characteristics of the profession. Generally, to practice
law is to give notice or render any kind of service, which device or
service requires the use in any degree of legal knowledge or skill.”

While a trial lawyer is a lawyer who engages chiefly in the trial of

cases before courts of original jurisdiction.

Based on the foregoing, a practicing lawyer is a much broader

concept than a trial lawyer.

IV. Enumerate the instances when a law student may appear in

court as counsel for a litigant.

1. Cases before the MTC when the student is a party to the litigation, in
person OR through an agent or friend or appointed by him for that
purpose (Sec. 34, Rule 138, Rules of Court)

2. Criminal case before the MTC in a locality where a duly licensed

member of the Bar is not available – the judge may appoint a non-
lawyer who is: a. Resident of the province b. Of good repute for probity
and ability to aid the accused in his defense (Rule 116, Sec. 7, Rules of
Court).

3. Legal Aid Program – A senior law student, who is enrolled in a

recognized law school’s clinical education program approved by the
Supreme Court may appear before any court without compensation, to
represent indigent clients, accepted by the Legal Clinic of the law school.
The student shall be under the direct supervision and control of an IBP
member duly accredited by the law school.
4. Before the NLRC or any Labor Arbiter, if: a. They represent
themselves, or if b. They represent their organization or members
thereof (Art 222 of the Labor Code, PD 442, as amended).

5. Before the Cadastral Court, Act 2259, Sec. 9 provides that a non-
lawyer can represent a claimant
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES)
CITY OF MALOLOS )
x-------------------------------------------x

AFFIDAVIT OF DESISTANCE

I, Eowyn Cruz, of legal age, Filipino, single and a resident of

Gondor St., Fausta, Malolos, Bulacan, after having been duly sworn in
accordance with law, hereby, depose and say:

That I am the private complainant in the criminal case entitle

“People of the Philippines vs. Aragorn De Castro” for Acts of
Lasciviousness docketed as Crim: 121-2019 before the Regional Trial
Court Branch 83, Malolos City, Philippines.

That after a thorough analysis of my memories of the incident that

occurred on February 14, 2019, I have realized that I cannot indict the
accused Aragorn De Castro, of the the above stated crime of Acts of
Lasciviousness on February 14, 2019, for it was only a mere lover’s
embrace and kiss.

Since accused, Aragorn De Castro, acts are not lascivious, I feel

compelled to withdraw my complaint against him and I clear him of
whatever responsibility or liability to me;

That in view of the foregoing, I finally manifest that I now

completely and absolutely exonerate the accused Aragorn De Castro
from any liability in connection with the above-mentioned criminal case
and that I am no longer interested, and I hereby desist, in prosecuting
the said criminal case;

That I execute this Affidavit of Desistance so that the above-

mentioned criminal case be immediately dismissed and considered
finally closed and the bond posted by the herein accused be released to
him;
 As such, I respectfully pray that the aforementioned case against
the Accused Aragorn De Castro be dismissed and finally closed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this

_____________ at _____________ City, Philippines.

EOWYN CRUZ
Affiant

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me, this _____________, by _____________

who exhibited to me (his/her) Driver’s license, _____________ issued at
_____________, Philippines on _____________.

Notary Public

Doc. No. ______;

Page No. ______;

Book No. ______;

Series of ______;
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Third Judicial Region
Branch 83
Malolos City, Bulacan

Richard Hammond, CIVIL CASE NO. 171-CIV-2019

Plaintiff,

-versus FOR: Damages, Medical

expenses and Attorney’s
fees
James May
Defendant

x----------------------------------x

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW, plaintiff, Richard Hammond, by counsel, and unto

this Honorable Court, most respectfully avers THAT:

1. Plaintiff is a Filipino, of legal age, married, and residing at

Hermogenes St., Pulong Buhangin, Sta. Maria, Bulacan where he may
be served with summons, papers and other process of this Honorable
Court.
2. Defendant James May is a Filipino, of legal age, single, and
residing at Galaxy St., Brgy. Guinhawa, Malolos, Bulacan, where he may
be served with summons, papers and other process of this Honorable
Court.
 3. Both parties have capacity to sue and to be sued.

4. Defendant, is the registered owner of a NISSAN SUV, and

particularly described as follows:

Make and Type: NISSAN/TERRA

Plate No.: AHA-3499

5. On December 1, 2019, at about 12am midnight James May, drove

his vehicle, going back from work to his residence in Malolos.

6. At about 12:30 am after passing Tabang exit, James May fell asleep
while driving and lost control of the stirring which result to the vehicle
crashing to the plaintiff’s vehicle which at that moment, parked on the
side of the road below Tabang Bridge.

7. That because of the accident, the plaintiff sustained fracture and

multiple injuries. The copy of medical certificate is hereto attached as
Annex “A”.

8. A demand letter for indemnification for damages was sent by

plaintiff to defendants. The copy of demand letter is hereto attached as
Annex “B”

9. However the defendant promptly denied liability

 10. Due to the injuries of the plaintiff, he cannot report for work for
35 days in order to give way for his recovery and as advised by his
doctor. Hence, the defendant must be made to pay for damages for
medical expenses incurred and the supposed earnings, if the accident
had not happened, of the plaintiff, in the amount equivalent to
THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND PESOS (P 300,000.00).

11. Because of the accident, he and his wife and children suffered
mental anguish and serious anxiety.

12. Consequently, Plaintiff was constrained to engage the services of

counsel to whom it obligated itself to pay as Attorney's Fees the
amount equivalent to TWENTY FIVE PERCENT (25%) of the total
amount to be adjudged in favor of plaintiffs, and the costs of this suit.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, the above premises considered, it is respectfully

prayed of this Honorable Court after hearing on the merits, that:

a. Defendants be ordered to pay for damages for injuries

sustained by the plaintiff and the medical expenses incurred
and the supposed earnings in the amount of THREE
HUNDRED THROUSAND PESOS.
 b. Defendants be ordered to pay moral damages in the amount
of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (Php 50,000.00);

c. Defendants be ordered to pay attorney’s fees in an amount

equivalent to TWENTY FIVE PERCENT (25%) of the total
amount to be adjudged in favor of plaintiffs;

d. Defendants be ordered to pay the costs of this suit.

Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise
prayed for.

For the Plaintiff

By

ATTY. BILBO BAGGINS

BAGGINS-GAMGEE LAW OFFICE, Mc Arthur Hiway,
Malolos, Bulacan
IBP NO. 0976804-02/11/19 Malolos City
PTR NO. 2634405-01/31/19 Malolos City
Roll No. 89994
MCLE Ex. No. 111-000748 1-13-2018
Republic of the Philippines )
Malolos City )s.s
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM-SHOPPING

I Richard Hammond, Filipino, of legal age, married and residing

at Hermogenes St., Pulong Buhangin, Sta. Maria, Bulacan, after having
been duly sworn to in accordance with law depose and say, THAT:

That I am the Plaintiff in the above-entitled case; That I have

caused the preparation of the above Complaint and I have read the same
and knows the contents thereof; That the allegations contained therein
are true and correct of my own personal knowledge.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 7th day

of March, 2019 at Malolos City, Bulacan, Philippines.

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 7th day of March,

2019, by Richard Hammond, who exhibited to me her Driver’s license
No. 12345 issued at Sta. Maria, Bulacan, Philippines on Agust 22, 2016.

WITNESS MY HAND AND SEAL.

Doc. No. 0012;

Page No. 003;
Book No. 001;
Series of 2019.
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
METRO MANILA
Branch 83

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff FOR: ROBBERY
with HOMICIDE

-versus-

EDGAR BASTONERO aka “Bugoy”

& CARLOS TIRADOR aka “Pogi”
Accused
x-----------------------------------------------x

INFORMATION

The undersigned accuses Edgar Bastonero and Carlos Tirador

of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide, Art. 294 of the
Revised Penal Code, committed as follows:

That on or about 6:00pm of September 13, 2009, in corner

Dapitan and Dos Castillas St., Sampaloc, Manila, within the jurisdiction
of this court, the accused conspiring with each other, did then and there,
wilfully, unlawfully, feloniously, with intent of gain take the victim’s
cellular phone and wrist watch and on the occasion of the robbery or by
reason thereof, the accused committed homicide, by assaulting and
stabbing the victim several times with a knife in the chest, which
directly caused the death of Johnny Escolar.

CONTRARY TO LAW
Metro Manila, December 1, 2009

SGD. NIKKO FRANCHELLO J. SANTOS

Asst. City Prosecutor
 Republic of the Philippines
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
3RD Judicial Region
Branch 81
Malolos, Bulacan

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Criminal Case No:
656-CRIM-2019
-versus-
For:
TREVOR NOAH, RAPE (Article 266-A, paragraph
Accused 1(b) of The Revised Penal Code,
as amended)
x- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

INFORMATION

The undersigned Associate City Prosecutor accuses TREVOR

NOAH, a resident of Brgy. Pulong Buhangin, Sta. Maria Bulacan,
Philippines of the crime of RAPE, defined and penalized under Article
266-A, par. 1(b), of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed as
follows:
That on or about the 16th day of January 2019, in Bocaue, Bulacan
Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the
above-named accused, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously and with carnal knowledge, raped and abused the person of
Haji Won, by inserting his penis to the victim’s vagina, while the latter is
dizzy and weak due to alcohol intoxication.
 That the said victim suffered actual and moral damages in the
amount as maybe rewarded by the Honorable Court under the
provisions of the New Civil Code of the Philippines.

CONTRARY TO LAW.
Malolos, Bulacan, Philippines, March 12, 2019

ATTY. BONG GO-KONGWEI

Associate City Prosecutor

I hereby certify that a preliminary investigation have been

conducted in this case, the witnesses having been examined under oath;
that on the basis of the sworn statement and other evidence submitted
before, there is reasonable ground to believe that the offense charged.

ATTY. BONG GO-KONGWEI

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 12th day of March 2019, in

Malolos, Bulacan, Philippines.

WITNESSES:
Michael Myers- San Jose Del Monte, Bulacan
Carol Danvers- Malolos, Bulacan

Address of Accused: KM. 37, Brgy. Pulong Buhangin, Sta. Maria, Bulacan
 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Third Judicial Region
Branch 83
Malolos City, Bulacan

Richard Hammond, CIVIL CASE NO. 171-CIV-2019

Plaintiff,

-versus FOR: Damages, Medical expenses

and Attorney’s fees
James May
Defendant

x----------------------------------x

PRE-TRIAL BRIEF
For the Plaintiff

PLAINTIFF, through the undersigned counsel and unto this

Honorable Court, most respectfully submit this Pre-Trial Brief:

I. POSSIBILITY OF STATEMENT

Without waiving the Plaintiff’s right or defences, the

plaintiff are open for any possibility of amicably settling the dispute or
entering into alternative modes of dispute resolution.

II. STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

a. Plaintiff claim that the Defendant, by reason of his

negligence and lack of foresight in driving his car, has
resulted to the plaintiff’s inability to work
and loss of earning capacity because of his injuries.

b. That because of what happened to the plaintiff, he and his

wife and children suffered mental anguish and serious
anxiety.
 c. Plaintiff now claims 300,000 pesos for the hospital
expenses and the supposed earnings of the plaintiff.

d. 50,000 pesos for moral damages and 10,000 pesos for

Attorney’s fees

III. SUMMARY OF ADMITTED FACTS

a. The plaintiff admits that he is the registered owner of the

VW Golf with plate number LOL-6146 and it is the same
vehicle used by the plaintiff when it was hit by the
defendant

b. The Plaintiff admits only those facts stated in the

complaint and specifically denies all allegation presented
by the Plaintiff in his answer except for those
of their personal circumstances

IV. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

ANNEX A- Copy of the medical certificate of the plaintiff, indicating the

injuries he sustained.

ANNEX B-Copy of the demand letter sent to the defendant

ANNEX C- Copy of Hospital receipt showing the plaintiff’s medical

expenses.

ANNEX D- Monthly payslip of the plaintiff

Plaintiff reserves the right to present other additional

documentary exhibits and witnesses during the trial of the case if need
be.
V. ISSUES

1. Whether or not the Defendant is negligent.

2. Whether or not the Defendant is civilly liable for the damages
suffered by the Plaintiff.

VI. AVAILABLE TRIAL DATES

March 14, 2019, March 21, 2019, March 28, 2019

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
March 5, 2019, Malolos City

BAGGINS-GAMGEE LAW OFFICE, Mc Arthur Hiway,

Malolos, Bulacan (3000)
Counsel for Plaintiffs

By:

ATTY. BILBO BAGGINS

IBP NO. 0976804-02/11/19 Malolos City
PTR NO. 2634405-01/31/19 Malolos City
Roll of Attorney’s No. 53884
MCLE Compliance No. VI -0010257/ June 20, 2018

Copy furnished:

BENEDICT CUMBERBATCH
CUMBERBATCH AND SMAUG LAW OFFICE
No. 123 Street,
Dakila, Malolos, Bulacan
 NOTICE

TO THE CLERK OF COURT

Sir/Madam,

Kindly submit this Pre-Trial Brief for the kind

consideration and approval of the Honorable Court.

ATTY. BILBO BAGGINS

EXPLANATION

Due to distance and lack of personnel, the copy of the

foregoing Pre-Trial Brief intended for the defendant was served
upon her via registered mail.

ATTY. BILBO BAGGINS