Lectures of :
Atty. Casador
which may cause, I dont know, life. So, you cannot just tell her I
cannot give you advice, I cannot counsel, there is conflict of interest,
what is mandated under the rule is for you to give immediate advice to
afford a client an opportunity. Tell her, okay maam, if you think your
husband is capable of hurting you, go to the baranggay, secure a
protection order, and tomorrow consult a lawyer in order for you to be
advice on the legal remedy, the legal course of action.
- So even, if their exist a valid reason that you cannot accept the case
of a client, your under obligation to render legal advice, only to the
extent necessary to safeguard his or her rights, thats rule 2.02.
Rule 2.03 A lawyer shall not do or permit to be done any act designed
primarily to solicit legal business.
- This is an important rule providing for the prohibition of improper
solicitation of legal business.
-Now we go back to the basic principles we have discussed early on:
practice of law is noble profession, it is not a money making venture,
practice of law being a noble profession, you must advertise your
services, not in a manner that you can be liken to an ordinary
merchant or like an ordinary businessman advertising his products.
Generally, according to the Supreme Court, for a solicitation of legal
services to be proper it must be consistent with the dignity of the
profession, it must be modest, it must be respectable in order not to
injure the lawyer as well as the profession.
- Now we ask, what are the permissible manners of advertisement as
provided or allowed by law or by the Supreme Court in its cases?
First, simple signs or signages usually located outside the office of the
lawyer providing for a brief information: the name of counsel, if its a
law firm or a law office composed of several lawyers, the name of
partners or associates if there is any, telephone and address, that is
permissible.
Rule2.01 provides that A lawyer shall not reject, except for valid
reasons, the cause of the defenseless or the oppressed.
- Who are the defenseless? Those who are not in position to defend
themselves, according to the Supreme Court, by reason of their
weakness, ignorance or poverty.
- Who are those oppressed? The oppressed are those persons who are
victims of acts of cruelty, unlawful exaction, domination or excessive
use of authority.
Second, the giving out of business cards or calling cards containing the
name of a lawyer, the law firm, the address, the phone number and the
email address. In fact now, it is also permissible that the business card,
if the business card or calling cards contain a formal photo daw of the
face of the lawyer. What if, in the signage or in the business card, there
is a catchy phrase, this is true, I dont know, you must have seen it,
medyo naka daan na siguro kayo sa harap ng office. There is this
lawyer may signage siya, sa labas, parang nakalagay, atty. Pedro Juan
(not his real name) mabilis, maaasahan, epektibo. Merong ganun, to
make the matter worst, sa baba, there are icons of credit cards (visa
cards, master card, we accept all kinds of cards), and of course
sanctions will not be automatic, it will be dependent upon the filling of
the complaint of a member of the IBP but according to the Supreme
Court, the inclusion of a self laudatory or a self praising, words or
sentence in the calling card or in a signage makes that advertisement
improper.
[3rd]Publication of your law firm or your law office in a reputable law list
or in a directory, in Davao city, IBP has an IBP directory. It is updated
annually, I think. It contains the complete list of all practicing lawyers
in Davao City including the office address and the phone numbers but
publication in this law list is permissible.
[4th] Legal aid programs as a public service is allowable. Legal aids in
schools, legal aids in the IBP of course, there are instances, however,
that big law firms, may be in celebration of their founding anniversary
will organize for short period of time, free legal aid, and legal and
medical clinics. So, according to the Supreme Court, it is pursuant to
an intent to serve the public which is also a function of the bar, so it is
permissible.
[5th] Advertisements in news papers
- The duty of the lawyer to accept the cause of the defenseless and the
oppressed. The purpose of this particular provision in mandating from a
lawyer to take-up cases of the defenseless and the oppressed is to
empower the courts to demand from counsels even if these lawyers
are appointed de officio or rendering their service pro bono, to be
efficient, to exert every effort necessary because in the absence of a
mandate provided under Rule 2.01, the lawyers will remain
complacent, not understanding or admitting that they were not hired
for a fee, they will just give a token defense or token.
- So in this particular case, empowers the court now, empowers the IBP
to require from lawyers even they are appointed merely de officio to
exact diligence and efficiency in rendering legal services.
- Also, under Rule 2.01, in compliance to the mandate, the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines Bar of the Philippines and its local chapter has
been establishing legal aid offices.
- Legal aid offices to render free legal aid services in the forms of
consultations and in some cases representations before the courts to
the indigence or to the poor segment of the community.
- One good thing declared by the Supreme Court in align of cases, is
the establishment of a legal aid by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines
is not a matter of charity that the IBP will only gave to the community
rather it is a means of correction for the social imbalance that may
often lead to injustice. Hence, the establishment of a legal aid system
by the Integrated Bar of the Philippines is your responsibility as
member of the Bar.
Rule 2.02 In such cases, even if the lawyer does not accept a case, he
shall not refuse to render legal advice to the person concerned if only
to the extent necessary to safeguard the latter's rights.
- If a lawyer for valid reasons cannot handle the case of a particular
client, he is still under the obligation to render legal advice, in this
case, immediate legal advice just in order to afford the client an
opportunity to protect his interest. For example, we have a client,
spouses, the husband and the wife, we have businesses, we are also
the lawyer for their personal concerns, they quarreled, the quarrel
escalated and we were informed that the husband discharge a firearm
inside their family home. So, the wife called us, (shaking) attorney
anong gagawin ko? Baka patayin ako ng aking husband.
Yes, there exists conflict of interest because again you cannot
represent one client against another client even if there were your
client in different instances or in different cases. You cannot invoke
conflict of interest in that case because it may escalate into violence
Atty. Casador
- That is the general rule, you cannot charge rates lower than that
prescribe. There are 3 allowable exceptions:
1.
If a client is a member of your family or close friend magpa
buhat imong mama ug affidavit, ma 250 kay ingon sa IBP
250 gyud daw, this is an exception.
2.
If your client is an indigent. If he/she is too poor, it is
inhumane for you to charge the prescribe rates. Ccording to
the supreme court, if your client is indigent and you charge a
fee lower than those prescribe or no fee at all, you can be
commended.
3.
If your client is a co-lawyer. There is a consensus among the
legal community that if mangangailangan ng legal services
is a fellow lawyer, it is permissible that you offer your
services for free or a lower amount.
CANON 3 A LAWYER IN MAKING KNOWN HIS LEGAL SERVICES
SHALL USE ONLY TRUE, HONEST, FAIR, DIGNIFIED AND
OBJECTIVE INFORMATION OR STATEMENT OF FACTS.
Rule 2.04 A lawyer shall not charge rates lower than those
customarily prescribed unless the circumstances so warrant
- In the Philippines, all IBP local chapters approve of schedules of
attorneys fees, the schedule of attorneys fees would contain the
minimum amount a lawyer could charge for a particular service r for a
particular document. For example in Davao City, the schedule of fees
provide for that standard affidavit like affidavit of loss, a lawyer should
charge a minimum of 150php and under this rule 2.04, lawyers are
requested to charge rates not lower than those prescribe by custom or
tradition or if there is a schedule of fees by the IBP in their particular
locality.
- Why is there such prohibition? According to the Supreme Court, the
prohibition not to charge rates lower to that prescribe will protect the
integrity afforded by the public to legal documents because imagine
one can procure from herself an affidavit or legal document which has
legal ramification which can affect the rights of the parties for a
meager amount for 50php. And also, this prohibition is for the purpose
of avoiding degrading competition.
Degrading competition, according to the Supreme Court, of course
people will approach lawyers who offer lower years than lawyers who
can show more competence, skills and knowledge. Dito sa Davao, as
the law mandates/prohibits as charging of fees lower than those
proscribe, there is no prohibition to charge higher. So the schedule of
fees just provides for the minimum. For example in Davao, 150 ang
affidavit, in our office we charge 250. And masyadong masakit
pakinggan may pumunta sayo, magpapagawa ng affidavit of loss and
will ask you how much, and will say, okay 250, murag ingnan ka na
atty 50 ra man gani to sa iyaha, didto na pud ka sa iyaha.
Atty. Casador
What if the lawyer say Ay mali, kadali lang. I do not intend to injure
nor have an intention to insult. I made those remarks in my pleading in
good faith. Is that a defense? Is that a valid justification? A lawyer
cannot escape responsibility by pleading then he has no intention to
insult. Lack or want of intention is not an excuse to use disrespectful
language use by the lawyer. But there is this one exception provided by
the SC in the case of Fernandez v. Tenio. April 13, 1960.
When the use of strong language by a lawyer has been impelled by the
same language used by the judge, the lawyer cannot be (inaudible). In
this case, the lawyer makes an insulting remarks in his quarter
pertaining to the lawyer. He provoke the petitioner. The judge has no
one to blame but himself according to the SC. If a Judge desires not to
be insulted, he should start using temperate language himself.
Atty. Casador
PNB V CEDO
The former PNB Officer by this rule 6.03., handled and accepted a case
against his previous employer that is the PNB in transactions which he
formally handled while he was officer of the bank. A lawyers violation
of this Rule 6.03 is tantamount to represent __ of litigations which is
also prohibited by different canons.
The IBP is the official organization of all the lawyers in the Philippines.
The integration of the Philippine Bar which means the establishment of
the IBP is an official unification of the entire population. It is expected
to foster unity and mission among the members of the legal profession
because the SC expected that this integration, the members of the
BAR will promote the objectives of the legal profession. IBP is the
national official organization.
Does the establishment of the IBP prohibits the establishment of any
other voluntary lawyers association?
SC: There is no such prohibition. Lawyers can join and establish other
voluntary associations and such may be actually be organized and
established for different causes and different purposes.
At present there are 2 lawyers organizations established to further the
specific fields in law like
IN RE MATTER: IBP
The Supreme Court actually answered 3 questions raised against the
bar integration.
1. Does the SC have the power to integrate the Bar?
Yes, pursuant to the authority power granted by the Constitution
(Sec. 13 of Art. 8), given the authority to promulgate rules,
regulations to a certain practice and procedure in all courts. In
essence, it has the power to regulate the Bar which also includes
the power to integrate the Bar.
2.
Atty. Casador
This case involves a lawyer who is charged with slight physical injuries
against him when he applied to take the Bar. Eventually he passed the
bar and it was discovered that the case is still pending.
In defense, he argued that it is a crime not involving moral turpitude.
SC: The disciplinary action is not actually because the crime involves
moral turpitude. It is the fact of concealment and not the commission
of the crime itself that makes him morally unfit.
Just for the sake of the argument , IBP does compel a lawyer
to be a member of the IBP Organization na hindi niya gusto
but it is still a justifiable compulsion because for how many
years it has been established which must be regulated
through a legislative measure considering of the importance
in their functions in the administration of justice. So it is a
justifiable compulsion in the valid exercise of police power of
the State.
b.
1.
2.
REQUIREMENT OF GMC
3 certificates of good moral character that must be issued by members
of the Bar in good standing
The premise of the requirement is that I will inform the SC that they
made something objectionable in the application of this particular
person.
The applicant must be personally known by the one who made the
certificate and can certify that the applicant is of good moral character.
There has been no crime charged and pending against him.
Determination whether a crime involving moral turpitude is a question
of fact In the case of Ramon Galang, there is a question of fact to
disclose any crime pending against him.
3)
IN RE VELASQUEZ
The lawyer stated, the decision of the lower court if allowed to stand
affirmed by this honorable court means only one thing that before our
courts of justice a man reputation of Atty. Claro M. Recto can do no
wrong, can commit no error. He has but to allow his name and
signature to be used in a case make inexcusable excuses of his
failure to attend any ___ and the case is won.
SC: The lawyer means that the case is being judge not on the merits
but the courts is in favor of Atty. Claro M. Recto who happened to be a
IN RE RAMON GALANG
Atty. Casador
IN RE ALMACEN
The lawyer pictures his client as a sacrificial victim at the altar of
hypocrisy and categorically renounces the justice administered by the
SC to be won, that they are deaf and dumb to be included to the court
the perpetration of silent injustices and shortcut justice and branding
its members as callous__of justice.
These kinds of words will lessen the confidence in the legal system.
Rule 9.01 A lawyer shall not delegate to any unqualified person the
performance of any task which by law may only be performed by a
member of the Bar in good standing.
TAPAY V. BANCULO (MARCH 20, 2013).
There was an allegation that the secretary of Atty. Banculo is the one
who is signing the pleadings. During the course of the trial, Atty.
Banculo even admitted that his name was that it was his secretary who
signed his name in the pleadings filed in the court, before the Office of
the Ombudsman. He even admitted that because of the
communication lapses, the pleadings filed against the complainant in
this case were signed by his secretary even without his consent or his
knowledge. According to the SC, Atty. Banculos authority and duty to
sign the pleadings are personal to him. These cannot be delegated to
another person even by the fellow lawyers, much more those the
persons who are not members of the Bar. Under the Rules of Court, the
counsels signature served as a certification that: 1) the lawyer has
read the pleadings; 2) to the best of the knowledge of the lawyer,
information and belief there is a good ground to support the case; and
3) it is not interpose for delay. So the signature of the lawyer is not
placed in the pleadings for a minor reason. This is a proof that the
lawyer has read the pleading, that the lawyer believe in good faith that
there is a proper cause of action and that the lawyer believe that it is a
valid case and not merely intended for delay. Thus by affixing ones
signature to a pleading, it is the counsel alone who has the power and
who has the responsibility to certify to these matters and give legal
effect to the document. Atty. Banculo has meted the penalty of
suspension from the practice of law for one year.
BIARE V ELARDE
The SC noted the improper and unethical language employed by the
lawyer of the counsel of the private respondent. The lawyer in his
pleading said that: a mad fury who speaks in slang english to conceal
her poor __.
SC: He does not but merely to obscure the case and his reliance to ___.
There is no place for these words in lega; proceedings and legal
documents
When you file a motion for reconsideration assailing an adverse
decision, it is necessary for you to point out the errors in the decision
of the court. The decision of the court is not contrary to law and to
jurisprudence. But you must temper your language in a way that it will
still be respectable.
You put respectfully and humbly all the time in your pleadings.
Rule 8.02. A lawyer shall not, directly or indirectly, encroach upon the
professional employment of another lawyer; however, it is the right of
the lawyer, without fear or favor, to give proper advice and assistance
to those seeking relief against unfaithful or neglectful counsel.
In essence, a lawyer should not steal anothers client it is high and
unethical to a lawyer to exert efforts to procure the contract with a
client who has a retained counsel. This effort may constitute maybe in
the form of a promise for better service than what he/she is giving you
or a promise for a lower attorneys fees or degrading the ability or
qualifications of the previous lawyer. These are very unethical. As soon
as a client already has a retained counsel, he is no longer a legitimate
prospective client, otherwise you will be encroaching on the
professional employment of another lawyer. So it follows that the first
lawyer was already dismiss or his services already dispense with by the
client, the entry or appearance by another lawyer is can no longer be
considered as encroachment. This happens almost everytime the
relationship between the client and the previous counsel has already
been terminated and as a matter of fact, there is already an agreement
that I am no longer my client and you are no longer my lawyer.
However, the previous lawyer is yet to file a formal motion to withdraw
his appearances as counsel in court. And now, the new lawyer has
already filed his motion or notice of his entry of appearance and with
his motion, the lawyer is now considered the new layer of the client. So
in this case, this must not be considered as an encroachment because
the attorney-client relationship between the client and the previous
lawyer has already been terminated as a matter of fact. So there could
be no encroachment. Corollary to this Rule 80.2, which prohibits
encroachment on the professional employment of a lawyer, a lawyer
should not also negotiate or communicate with opposite party whos
lawyer without the knowledge and permission and without even the
presence of the representing lawyer. This is the case of Camacho v.
Pangulayan.
Cambanisa v. Atty. Tristan Tenorio, we discuss this last night when Atty.
Tenorio allowed to be written to the letters of the firm the name of two
persons who are not members of the bar. Reasoning that these two
individuals have sufficient capitalizations or investments in his law
firm. According to the SC, holding oneself as a lawyer may be shown as
an indicative of that purpose that identifying oneself as attorney
appearing in court, presenting into a client associating oneself as
partner of the law. In this case, Tenorio is not a lawyer but he hold
himself as one and Atty. Tenorio abetted and aided him in the
unauthorized practice of the legal profession.
RULE 9.02- rule 9.02. a lawyer shall not divide or stipulate a fee for
legal service with persons not licensed to practice law, except:
a. where there is a pre-existing agreement with the partner or
associate that, upon the latters death, money shall be paid over a
reasonable period of time to his estate or to persons specified in the
agreement; or
b. where a lawyer undertakes to complete unfinished legal business of
a deceased lawyer; or
c. where the lawyer or law firm includes non-lawyer employees in a
retirement plan, even if the plan is based in whole as in part, on a
profit-sharing arrangement.
Atty. Pangulayan was suspended from the practice of law. There was a
pending case, Atty. Pangulayan represents the defendant. There is a
lawyer representing the plaintiffs. Now Atty. Pangulayan directly
negotiated with the plaintiffs themselves without the knowledge and
without the permission of their representing counsel. So Atty.
Pangulayan directly talk to the plaintiffs. Negotiate settlement, made
the plaintiffs withdraw their complaint the case they filed in court in
consideration of the settlement. So na dismiss ang case without the
knowledge and permission of the counsel representing the plaintiffs.
According to the SC, that is improper, that is prohibited under rule
8.02. He was suspended from practice of law for a period of three
months.
Atty. Casador
Rule 10.01: a lawyer shall not do any falsehood nor consent to the
doing of any in court; nor shall he mislead or allow the court to be
misled by any artifice.
In this case, Mendoza advised for the liquidation of the Gen. Bank, 2 nd
he advised how to go about the liquidation procedure. The legality of
the liquidation and the procedure are all provided under the law. Black
and White, it is there. In filing of the complaint, again, the definition
(MATTER) does not contemplate the drafting or mere invocation of a
particular rule or procedure. When Mendoza advised the Central Bank
who underwent liquidation and insolvency proceedings, he did not
have in mind giving advantage to Lucio Tan, in the expectation that he
will represent this group later on in a proceeding.
But assuming that these services rendered by Mendoza fall under the
definition of matter, it is still beyond the application of rule 6. 03. Why?
Because the MATTER in which Mendoza intervened and the matter he
is now helping the client with are entirely different things. In liquidation
proceedings, the issue is merely the legality and propriety of the
liquidation. In this particular case, we have to discover whether the
properties were improperly acquired by the respondents in order for
the govt to sequester and to revert the possession to the govt of RP.
INTERVENTION: 2 interpretations: 1 st- intervention may refer to any
act in any proceedings performed by any official regardless of whether
such act of the official has something to do with the outcome of the
proceedings or regardless of the fact that such official has power or
influence to affect the proceedings. 2nd is the more proper meaning
which we can give to Rule 6. 03: is an act substantial enough which is
performed by an employee or an official which has power or influence
to affect a particular proceeding.
The acts performed by Atty. Mendoza is not sufficient and substantial
enough. He merely gave advise, invoked the law, invoked the
procedure, he filed the complaint, merely indicatory of the records of
the case will not disclose to the extent of the participation of Mendoza
in the subsequent proceedings. He merely performed the functions of
the SG under the law. He filed and signed the case because under the
law, the person who will file the case and must sign the pleading is the
SG.
Lastly, policy considerations were made. The only way the govt can
recruit a lawyer, an able lawyer at that, to join the govt is to tell him to
sacrifice the salary he can get from the private sector which is
Atty. Casador
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Atty. Casador
The respect demanded by the canons is not only toward the Judges
and Justices but also to other officers of the courts like the Clerks of
Court, Sherrifs and other judicial officers who take part in the judicial
work. Lawyers must also exert efforst that others, including their own
clients and witnesses, shall deal with the courts and their judicial
officers with respect.
Contents of a paper;
Language or argument of opposing counsel; and
Text of a decision or authority.
2.
3.
It Is the duty of the lawyer not only to the courts, but also to his client,
opposing counsel and the public to be punctual in attendance. IN any
case, he is further demanded to delay no man for money or malice.
Lack of punctuality interferes in the speedy administration of justice.
Allied Banking Corp vs. CA, G.R. No. 144412. November 18, 2003
Muoz vs. CA and Delia Sutton
Adez Realty, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals
The duty to observe and maintain respect is not a one-way duty from a
lawyer to a judge. A judge should also be courteous to counsel,
especially those who are young and inexperienced and to all those
appearing or concerned in the administration of justice.
Case:
Case:
The rule does not preclude a lawyer from criticizing judicial conduct.
The rule allows such criticism so long as it is supported by the record or
is material to the case. His right to criticize the acts of courts and
judges in a proper and respectful way and through legitimate channels
is well recognized.
The reason for the rule is to prevent unfairness, to avoid surprises and
back-stabbing. Cards of the lawyers must be laid on the table for
openness and transparency. Parties must also furnish the adverse party
copies of all documents attached to their pleadings, this is no matter
how thick the annexes to the pleadings are.
Motions which do not prejudice the rights of the adverse party may be
heard and considered ex parte such as harmless motions for extension
of time to file pleadings to reset hearing, to cancel hearing.
Issue: Can you file through facsimile?
124893, 18 April 1997)
Atty. Casador
Case:
Test: The test to determine whether a party has violated the rule
against forum shopping is whether the elements of litispendentia are
present or whether a final judgment in one case will amount to res
judicata in the other.
This, however, does not apply to the Department of Justice which may
proceed with its investigation of and consequent filing of information
against a judge.
The dilatory tactics of the defense counsel and the failure of both the
judge and the fiscal to take effective counter measures to obviate the
delaying acts constitute obstruction of justice. (People v. Jardin, G.R.
Nos. L-33037-42, Aug. 17, 1983)
Q: What are acts which amount to obstruction of justice?
A: Instructing a complaining witness not to appear at trial, asking a
client to plead guilty to a crime he did not commit, advising a client to
escape from prison, employing dilatory tactics, prosecuting clearly
frivolous cases or appeals, filing multiple actions.
Rule 12.01 A lawyer shall not appear for trial unless he has
adequately prepared himself with the law and the facts of his
case, the evidence he will adduce and the order of its
profference. He should also be ready with the original
documents for comparison with the copies.
Rule 12.02 A lawyer shall not file multiple actions arising from
the same cause.
Forum Shopping: There is forum shopping when as a result of an
adverse opinion in one forum, a party seeks a favorable opinion (other
than by appeal or certiorari) in another or when he institutes two or
more actions or proceedings grounded on the same cause, on the
gamble that one or the other court would make a favorable disposition.
10
Atty. Casador
Lawyers should not resort to nor abet the resort of their clients, to a
series of actions and petitions for the purpose of thwarting the
execution of a judgment that has long become final and executory.
(Cobb-Perez v. Lantin, No. L-22320, May 22, 1968)
Rule 12.04 A lawyer shall not unduly delay a case, impede the
execution of a judgment or misuse court processes.
Relate to Rule 10.03 and case of Eternal Gardens.
A: TARCC
1. When as an attorney, he is to Testify on the theory of the case
2. When such would Adversely affect any lawful interest of the client
with respect to which confidence has been reposed on him
3. Having accepted a Retainer, he cannot be a witness against his
client;
4. He cannot serve Conflicting interests
5. When he is to violate the Confidence of his client
Although the law does not forbid an attorney to be a witness and at the
same time an attorney in a cause, the courts prefer that counsel
should not testify as a witness unless it is necessary and that they
should withdraw from the active management of the case. (PNB v. Uy
Teng Piao, G.R. No. L- 35252, Oct. 21, 1932) (
A: FETAD
1. On Formal matters, such as the mailing, authentication or custody of
instrument and the like;
2. Acting as an Expert on his fee;
3. On substantial matters in cases where his Testimony is essential to
the ends of justice, in which event he must, during his testimony,
entrust the trial of the case to another counsel;
4. Acting as an Arbitrator;
5. Deposition.
A: Art. 184, Revised Penal Code provides: The lawyer who presented a
witness knowing him to be a false witness is criminally liable for
Offering False Testimony in Evidence.
Note: The lawyer who is guilty of the above is both criminally and
administratively liable.
Q: Is the witness
criminally liable?
11
Atty. Casador
But counsel should not tell the witness what must be stated in order for
a successful resolution. This may put an undue influence on the
witness to provide false, fraudulent or misleading testimony.
The sub judice rule governs what public statements, whether orally or
in published writings, can be made about matters pending in legal
proceedings before the courts. The basis for the sub judice rule is that
the courts must be allowed to deal with the legal issues that are before
it free from undue interference and influences. The courts duty should
not be usurped by others making public statements about how these
issues should be dealt with.
No. A lawyer cannot simply raise the defense that he was merely asked
to sign the pleadings. Section 3, Rule 7 of the Rules of Court: The
signature of counsel constitutes a certificate by him that he has read
the pleading, that to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief
there is good ground to support it, and that it is not interposed for
delay.
DISTINGUISH WITNESS PREPARATION FROM WITNESS COACHING:
Like the executive and legislative, the judiciary is rooted in the soil of
democratic society, nourished by the periodic appraisal of the citizens
whom it is expected to serve.
12