Legal & Judicial Ethics, 2011 Bar — Question 15

MULTIPLE CHOICE

On 17 April 2006 NWD, a local water district entity, hired Atty. Chito as private counsel for a year with the consent of the Office of the Government Corporate Counsel (OGCC). Shortly after, a leadership struggle erupted in NWD between faction A and faction B. Siding with the first, Atty. Chito filed several actions against the members of faction B. Eventually, the court upheld Faction B which thus revoked Atty. Chito's retainer on 14 January 2007. With OGCC's approval, NWD hired Atty. Arthur in his place. When Atty. Arthur sought the dismissal of the actions that Atty. Chito had instituted, the latter objected on the ground that his term had not yet expired and Atty. Arthur had no vacancy to fill up. Is Atty. Chito right? (A) No, because Atty. Chito's continued appearances in the cases was without authority since 14 January 2007. (B) No, because Atty. Arthur would have violated the rule on forum shopping. (C) Yes, because Atty. Chito's retainer and authority remained valid until 17 April 2006. (D) No, because Atty. Chito has the duty to expose the irregularities committed by the members of Faction B.

You can write freely without an account. Sign in to reveal the suggested answer and track your progress.