Practice question
Counsel in a pending matter was formerly the judge’s coworker in a law office. Counsel had already been engaged in this same action during their association. Which accurately applies Canon III, Section 11(c)?
- Former coworker status can never matter
- The facts meet the listed former-associate ground, which requires both former association and engagement in the action during that association
- Every lawyer who ever met the judge necessarily triggers mandatory inhibition
- The ground exists only if counsel remains the judge’s present partner
- The judge may accept a private fee to remove the concern
Legal references
- https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/11/100836 — 2025 CJCA, Canon III, Sections 2 and 9–13.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_137_judicial.html — Rule 137, Sections 1–2, judicial disqualification.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.