{"id":3432,"date":"2018-06-15T00:31:23","date_gmt":"2018-06-15T04:31:23","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/revistajuridica.uprrp.edu\/?p=3432"},"modified":"2018-06-15T00:31:23","modified_gmt":"2018-06-15T04:31:23","slug":"etica-profesional","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/2018\/06\/15\/etica-profesional\/","title":{"rendered":"\u00c9tica Profesional"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>El profesor Guillermo Figueroa Prieto profundiza en varios casos sobre conducta profesional y aboga por la reglamentaci\u00f3n de sanciones. En particular, el autor analiza casos sobre (1) el deber del abogado defensor con respecto a su cliente; (2) el poder de los tribunales de primera instancia para disciplinar el comportamiento impropio del abogado, que en \u00faltima instancia es inofensivo, en lugar de recurrir innecesariamente a una queja formal; (3) la reticencia del Tribunal Supremo a adherirse a las recomendaciones del Comit\u00e9 de Disciplina Judicial; (4) la disparidad entre las posturas de los jueces del Tribunal Supremo de Puerto Rico al sancionar la conducta impropia judicial y profesional, y (5) la importancia de regular la imposici\u00f3n de sanciones en casos de disciplina profesional.<\/p>\n<p>Professor Guillermo Figueroa Prieto takes an in-depth look at several cases about professional conduct and argues for regulating the imposition of sanctions. In particular, the author analyzes cases about (1) defense lawyers\u2019 duty to their clients; (2) the ability of state district courts to discipline lawyers\u2019 improper albeit ultimately innocuous behavior instead of unnecessarily resorting to a formal complaint; (3) the Supreme Court\u2019s reluctance to adhere to the Judicial Discipline Committee\u2019s recommendations; (4) the disparity between Supreme Court Justices\u2019 views when sanctioning judicial and professional misconduct, and (5) the importance of regulating the imposition of sanctions in discipline cases.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Cita:<\/strong>\u00a0Guillermo Figueroa Prieto,\u00a0<em>\u00c9tica Profesional<\/em>, 87 Rev. Jur. UPR 522 (2018).<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/revistajuridica.uprrp.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/06\/10-Etica-1.pdf\">Enlace PDF (+)<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Guillermo Figueroa Prieto, 87 Rev. Jur. UPR 522 (2018).<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":17,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[83],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-3432","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-revista87-num2"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/17"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3432"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3432\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/derecho.uprrp.edu\/revistajuridica\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}