Friday, July 11, 2008 Malilong: Improper solicitation By Frank Malilong The Other Side
AN ambulance chaser, says Wikipedia, is a trial lawyer who specializes in representing accident victims and who solicits business from accident victims or their families at the scene of an accident or disaster or immediately thereafter. The term also refers to funeral directors who solicit business from dying individuals.
Because we do not want to be lumped in the same group with people who depend on death for a living, our code of professional ethics expressly prohibits lawyers from improperly soliciting clients, including advertising our services.
Early this week an advertisement, addressed to Cebu-based relatives of victims in the Princess of the Stars tragedy, appeared in a local paper. As translated by Cebu Daily News, the ad read:
“We can help if you are the parents, husband, wife or child of the victim; you have not yet received P200,000 from Sulpicio or insurance; and you want to sue for damages against Sulpicio aside from the P200,000 offer but have no money to do so and no lawyer.”
After the solicitation drew a vehement reaction from the local bar, one of those behind the ad surfaced to defend their action, saying that “You can question the way I am doing it, but I am offering my services for free.”
The “free services” do not however prevent him from collecting a certain percentage of whatever amount the victim’s family can collect through his efforts.
One of the most widely-cited cases in legal ethics involved a lawyer whose card read:
“As a notary public, he can execute for you a deed of sale for the purchase of land as required by the cadastral office, can renew lost documents of young animals, can make your application and final requisites for your homestead, and execute any kind of affidavit. As a lawyer, he can help you collect your loans, altogether long overdue, as well as any complaints for or against you. He offers free consultation and is willing to help the poor.”
The Supreme Court said it was an “ugly practice of solicitation of cases” which it condemns, as a matter of duty, “in no uncertain terms.” The High Court said the solicitation of cases is “destructive of the honor of a great profession, lowers the standards of that profession and works against the confidence of the community in the integrity of the members of the bar, and results in needless litigation and in incenting to strife otherwise peacefully inclined citizens.”
“The solicitation of employment by an attorney is a ground for disbarment or suspension. That should be distinctly understood,” the Supreme Court warned.
In another case, a lawyer was charged with malpractice for advertising in the Sunday Tribunal, thus:
“Marriage license promptly secured thru our assistance and the annoyance of delay or publicity avoided if desired and marriage arranged to wishes of parties. Consultation on any matter free for the poor. Everything confidential.”
The Supreme Court declared the advertisement as a flagrant violation of the ethics of the legal profession.
I laud the two chapters of the Integrated Bar in Cebu for immediately taking action on the ad and hope that they will pursue the matter up to the very end, meaning until the Supreme Court declares whether or not the lawyers concerned acted like funeral directors.
