Canon 18 Full Cases

8/9/2019 Canon 18 Full Cases

1/30

TRINIDAD H. CAMARA,

Complainant,

- versus -

ATTY. OSCAR AMANDY REYES,

Respondent.

A.C. No. 6121

Present:

YNARES-SANTIAGO,J., Chairperson,

CICO-NA!ARIO,"E#ASCO, $R.,

NAC%RA, andPERA#TA,JJ.Promul&ated:

$ul' (), *++

x------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x

RESOLUTION

NACHURA,J.:

eore us is a #etter-Complaint/)0 iled 1' 2omplainant Trinidad . Camara a&ainst respondent Att'Os2ar Amand' Re'es.

Sometime in *++(, 2omplainant 3ired t3e servi2es o respondent to 3andle 3er 2ase. As partial a22eptan2e

ee, respondent re2eived rom 2omplainant P4+,+++.++ eviden2ed 1' a re2eipt/*0pla2ed on 3is 2allin&2ard. Respondent, 3o5ever, too6 no steps to prote2t 2omplainant7s interest. As no servi2e 5as rendered 1'respondent, 2omplainant as6ed t3at 3e return t3e amount &iven 3im so t3at s3e 2ould use it in repairin& 3er3ouse. Respondent oered t3at 3e 5ould ta6e 23ar&e o repairin& t3e 3ouse. Yet, 3e a&ain ailed to ulill 3ispromise, 53i23 prompted t3e 2omplainant to reiterate 3er demand or t3e return o t3e mone'./(0 As respondentailed to &ive 1a26 t3e amount demanded, 2omplainant initiated t3e instant 2ase.

In 3is Ans5er, respondent pra'ed t3at t3e 2ase 1e 2losed and terminated, simpl' 1e2ause t3e matter 3asalread' 1een resolved 1' all t3e parties 2on2erned. e added t3at 2omplainant 5ent to 3is oi2e and e8plainedt3at s3e si&ned t3e letter-2omplaint not 6no5in& t3at it 5as a&ainst respondent, as s3e 5as made to 1elieve t3atit 5as a 2omplaint a&ainst 3er nei&31or./90

Complainant and respondent ailed to attend t3e mandator' 2oneren2e and to su1mit t3eir respe2tive

position papers.

On ;e1ruar' ), *++ orinvesti&ation, report and re2ommendation./40

In 3is Report and Re2ommendation, IP Commissioner Salvador . a1a1a& made t3e ollo5in&

indin&s:
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn1


2/30

T3ere is proo t3at respondent re2eipted t3e amount o P3p4+,+++.++ in 3is o5n3and5ritin&. Even 3is 2allin& 2ard 5as &iven to t3e 2omplainants.

Canon )?, Rule )?.+) provides t3at a la5'er s3all a22ount or all mone' or propert'2olle2ted or re2eived or or rom t3e 2lient.

Canon )@, Rule )@.+( provides t3at a la5'er s3all not ne&le2t a le&al matter entrusted to3im, and 3is ne&li&en2e in 2onne2tion t3ere5it3 s3all render 3im lia1le.

Canon )@, Rule )@.+9 provides t3at a la5'er s3all 6eep t3e 2lient inormed o t3e status

o 3is 2ase and s3all respond 5it3in a reasona1le time to 2lient7s reuest or inormation.

%sin& t3e a1ove 'ardsti26s, 2learl' t3e respondent is lia1le and ailed to live /up0 to /t3e0a1ove mentioned standards.

B3ile it is true t3at 2omplainant Trinidad Camara alle&edl' e8e2uted an aidavit, t3esame 5ill not save t3e respondent.

As a &eneral rule, dis1arment pro2eedin& s3all not 1e interrupted or terminated 1' reason

o t3e desistan2e, settlement, 2ompromise, restitution, 5it3dra5al o t3e 23ar&es or ailure o t3e2omplainant to prose2ute unless t3e Court motu proprio determines t3at t3ere is no 2ompellin&reason to 2ontinue 5it3 t3e dis1arment or suspension pro2eedin&s a&ainst t3e respondent.

Be reiterate t3at t3e respondent did not traverse t3e 23ar&es a&ainst 3im. e simpl'5anted t3is 2ase to 1e 2losed and terminated alle&edl' 1e2ause 3e and rs. Camara 3ad alread'resolved t3eir pro1lem and t3e latter7s son, 53o also si&ned t3e letter-2omplaint as attorne'-in-a2t 3as no aut3orit' to do so.

BERE;ORE, premises 2onsidered, it /is0 most respe2tull' re2ommended t3at t3erespondent 1e suspended or si8 =?> mont3s rom t3e a2tive pra2ti2e o la5./?0

In its Resolution No. D"III-*++@-4**, t3e IP oard o Governors adopted and approved t3e report andre2ommendation o t3e investi&atin& Commissioner, t3us:

RESO#"E to AOPT and APPRO"E, as it is 3ere1' AOPTE and APPRO"E t3e Reportand Re2ommendation o t3e Investi&atin& Commissioner o t3e a1ove-entitled 2ase, 3erein madepart o t3is Resolution a/s0 Anne8 FA and, indin& t3e re2ommendation ull' supported 1' t3eeviden2e on re2ord and t3e appli2a1le la5s and rules, and or respondent7s violation o Canon)?, Rule )?.+), Canon )@, Rule )@.+( and )@.+9 o t3e Code o Proessional Responsi1ilit', Att'.Os2ar Amand' Re'es is 3ere1' S%SPENE rom t3e pra2ti2e o la5 or si8 =?> mont3s.

Be a&ree 5it3 t3e ore&oin& re2ommendation.T3e Court notes t3at despite t3e opportunit' a22orded to respondent to reute t3e 23ar&es a&ainst 3im, 3e

ailed to do so or even oer a valid e8planation. /


3/30

pra'ed t3at t3e 2ase 1e 2losed and terminated, simpl' 1e2ause t3e pro1lem 5it3 2omplainant 3ad alread' 1eenresolved.

T3e alle&ed 2ompromise 1et5een 2omplainant and respondent is not enou&3 to e8onerate t3e latter romt3e present dis2iplinar' 2ase. A 2ase o suspension or dis1arment ma' pro2eed re&ardless o t3e interest or la26o interest o t3e 2omplainant. B3at matters is 53et3er, on t3e 1asis o t3e a2ts 1orne out 1' t3e re2ord, t3e23ar&e o ne&li&en2e 3as 1een dul' proved./0

is2iplinar' pro2eedin&s involve no private interest and aord no redress or private &rievan2e. T3e'are underta6en and prose2uted solel' or t3e pu1li2 5elare, and or t3e purpose o preservin& 2ourts o Husti2erom t3e oi2ial ministration o persons unit to pra2ti2e in t3em. T3e attorne' is 2alled to ans5er to t3e 2ouror 3is 2ondu2t as an oi2er o t3e 2ourt. T3e 2omplainant is in no sense a part', and 3as &enerall' no interestin t3e out2ome o t3e 2ase./)+0 T3is is also t3e reason 53' t3is Court ma' investi&ate 23ar&es a&ainst la5'ersre&ardless o 2omplainant7s standin&./))0

B3en respondent a22epted t3e amount o P4+,+++.++ rom 2omplainant, it 5as understood t3at 3e

a&reed to ta6e up t3e latter7s 2ase, and t3at an attorne'-2lient relations3ip 1et5een t3em 5as esta1lis3ed. ;romt3en on, it 5as e8pe2ted t3at 3e 5ould serve 3is 2lient, 3erein 2omplainant, 5it3 2ompeten2e, and attend to 3er2ause 5it3 idelit', 2are and devotion./)*0

T3e a2t o re2eivin& mone' as a22eptan2e ee or le&al servi2es in 3andlin& 2omplainant7s 2ase and

su1seuentl' ailin& to render su23 servi2es is a 2lear violation o Canon )@ o t3e Code o ProessionalResponsi1ilit', 53i23 provides t3at a la5'er s3all serve 3is 2lient 5it3 2ompeten2e and dili&en2e/)(0 Spe2ii2all', Rule )@.+( states:

A la5'er s3all not ne&le2t a le&al matter entrusted to 3im, and 3is ne&li&en2e in

2onne2tion t3ere5it3 s3all render 3im lia1le.

A mem1er o t3e le&al proession o5es 3is 2lient entire devotion to t3e latter7s &enuine interest, and5arm eal in t3e maintenan2e and deense o 3is ri&3ts. An attorne' is e8pe2ted to e8ert 3is 1est eorts and

a1ilit' to preserve 3is 2lient7s 2ause, or t3e un5averin& lo'alt' displa'ed to 3is 2lient, li6e5ise, serves t3e endso Husti2e. "eril', t3e entrusted privile&e to pra2ti2e la5 2arries 5it3 it t3e 2orrespondin& duties, not onl' to t3e2lient, 1ut also to t3e 2ourt, to t3e 1ar and to t3e pu1li2./)90

T3e idu2iar' dut' o a la5'er and advo2ate is 53at pla2es t3e la5 proession in a uniue position o

trust and 2oniden2e, and distin&uis3es it rom an' ot3er 2allin&. On2e t3is trust and 2oniden2e is 1etra'ed, t3eait3 o t3e people, not onl' in t3e individual la5'er 1ut also in t3e le&al proession as a 53ole, is eroded. Tot3is end, all mem1ers o t3e 1ar are stri2tl' reuired at all times to maintain t3e 3i&3est de&ree o pu1li22oniden2e in t3e idelit', 3onest' and inte&rit' o t3eir proession./)40

T3e a2tual ante2edents inReyes v. Vitan/)?0and Sencio v. Atty. Calvadores/) mont3s. T3us, 5e impose t3e

same penalt' on respondent 3erein, as re2ommended 1' t3e IP oard o Governors.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn10http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn11http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn12http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn13http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/6121.htm#_ftn17


4/30

WHEREFORE,Resolution No. D"III-*++@-4** o t3e IP oard o Governorsis AFFIRMED. A22ordin&l', Att'. Os2ar Amand' Re'es is 3ere1' SUSPENDEDor a period o SIX (6)MONTHSrom t3e pra2ti2e o la5.

#et 2opies o t3is e2ision 1e urnis3ed t3e Oi2e o t3e ar Conidant, to 1e appended to respondent7s

personal re2ord as an attorne', t3e Inte&rated ar o t3eP3ilippines, and all 2ourts in t3e 2ountr' or t3eirinormation and &uidan2e.

SO ORDERED.

[A.C. No. 6297. July 13, 2004]

DOLORES D. PARIAS, complainant, vs. ATT. OSCAR P. PA!"INTO, respondent.


5/30

D E C I S I O N

CARPIO, J.#

The Case

A lawyer has the duty to give adequate attention and time to every case he accepts. A lawye

impliedly warrants that he possesses the necessary diligence, learning and skill to handle each case.He should exert his best judgment and exercise reasonable and ordinary care and diligence in the

pursuit or defense of his clients cause.

The Facts

ometime in !ctober "##$, complainant %olores %ryden &ari'as ()&ari'as*+ engaged the

services of respondent Atty. !scar &. &aguinto ()&aguinto*+ to annul her marriage to %anilo oriano.

hey agreed that for the legal services, &ari'as would pay &aguinto an acceptance fee of &"-,###,

the filing fee of &",-## and other incidental expenses.

!n " %ecember "##$, &ari'as paid &aguinto &$#,### in cash as partial payment of the

acceptance fee. An acknowledgment receipt evidenced this payment.$/&ari'as gave &aguinto a

diskette containing a narration of what happened between her and her estranged husband %anilo

oriano. &ari'as also furnished &aguinto with a copy of her marriage contract with oriano. 0efore

the end of %ecember "##$, &ari'as gave &aguinto &",-## for the filing fee.

ometime between 1anuary and April "##", &ari'as inquired from &aguinto on the progress of

her annulment case. &aguinto informed her that the case was filed with the 2egional rial 3ourt of

4anila, 0ranch 56 ()2374anila, 0ranch 56*+, before 1udge 2icaforte and that the hearing was

scheduled on "- April "##". 0efore the hearing, &ari'as requested for a meeting with &aguinto butthe secretary informed her that the hearing was cancelled. he secretary further informed &ari'as

that the judge reset the succeeding hearings originally scheduled on "8 4ay "##" and "5 1une "##"

because the judge was sick or out of town.

!n the first week of 1uly "##", &ari'as went to the trial court to inquire about her case but the

court personnel in 2374anila, 0ranch 56 informed her that there was no such case filed in their

court. &ari'as asked &aguinto for the case number, date of filing, copy of the petition and the court

where the annulment case was pending. &aguinto told &ari'as that the records were at his office and

that he was in 4alolos, 0ulacan attending to a case. 9t turned out that there was no annulment case

filed in 2374anila, 0ranch 56. &aguinto promised to return the money that &ari'as paid as down

payment. However, &aguinto returned the &$#,### only after &ari'as filed with the 3ommission on

0ar %iscipline ()30%*+ of the 9ntegrated 0ar of the &hilippines ()90&*+ the present complaint for

disbarment.

9n the !rder dated $6 :ebruary "##;, "/the 30% directed &aguinto to answer the complaint.

&aguinto asked for an extension of $- days to file his Answer. he 30% granted the extension in the

!rder dated $8 4arch "##;.;/However, &aguinto failed to file his Answer within the extended period

and thus the 30% declared him in default in the !rder dated $- 1uly "##;. 6/After the hearing
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2004/jul2004/ac_6297.htm#_ftn4


6/30

&ari'as submitted her &osition &aper praying that the 30% declare &aguinto guilty of violation of 2ule

$5.#$ and 2ule $ed to &ari'as for his actuations claiming )himself solely to be

blamed.* He further declared that he failed to timely prepare and file the petition for annulment

because he spends his time mostly in @en. 4ariano Alvare>, 3avite where he practices law catering

to those )clients who have less in life.*

Commissioners Report & Recommendation

he 90& designated Atty. 2ebecca illanueva74aala ()3ommissioner*+ as 3ommissioner to

conduct a formal investigation of the case. he 3ommissioner found &aguinto negligent in performing

his duties as a lawyer and as an officer of the court. he 3ommissioner declared that a lawyer has

the duty to give adequate attention, care and time to his cases, accepting only as many cases as he

can handle. &aguinto failed to comply with this duty. he 3ommissioner recommended the

suspension of &aguinto from the practice of law for six months.

The Courts Ruling

=e agree with the 3ommissioner.

&ari'as gave &aguinto &$#,### cash as partial payment of the acceptance fee. &ari'as also

gave &aguinto &",-## for the filing fee. &aguinto led &ari'as to believe that he had filed the

annulment case. &aguinto informed &ari'as that the case was filed with the 2374anila, 0ranch 56

before 1udge 2icaforte. However, &ari'as later found out that &aguinto never filed the annulment

case in court.

2ule $5.#$ of the 3ode of &rofessional 2esponsibility ()the 3ode*+ provides that a lawyer shall

account for all money or property collected for or from the client. Acceptance of money from a client

establishes an attorney7client relationship and gives rise to the duty of fidelity to the clients cause.B/4oney entrusted to a lawyer for a specific purpose, such as for filing fee, but not used for failure to

file the case must immediately be returned to the client on demand.


7/30

judgment in the prosecution or defense of the case entrusted to him and to exercise reasonable and

ordinary care and diligence in the pursuit or defense of the case.

A lawyer should give adequate attention, care and time to his case. !nce he agrees to handle a

case, he should undertake the task with dedication and care. 9f he fails in this duty, he is not true to

his oath as a lawyer. Hence, a lawyer must accept only as much cases as he can efficiently handle,

otherwise his clients interests will suffer.8/9t is not enough that a lawyer possesses the qualification to

handle the legal matter. He must also give adequate attention to his legal work.

he lawyer owes it to his client to exercise his utmost learning and ability in handling his cases. A

license to practice law is a guarantee by the courts to the public that the licensee possesses sufficient

skill, knowledge and diligence to manage their cases.$#/he legal profession demands from a lawye

the vigilance and attention expected of a good father of a family.

9n Gamalinda vs. Alcantara,$$/we ruledC

A la5'er o5es idelit' to t3e 2ause o 3is 2lient and must 1e mindul o t3e trust and 2oniden2e reposed in 3im.

e s3all serve 3is 2lient 5it3 2ompeten2e and dili&en2e, and 3is dut' o entire devotion to 3is 2lient7s 2ause notonl' reuires, 1ut entitles 3im to emplo' ever' 3onora1le means to se2ure or t3e 2lient 53at is Hustl' due 3imor to present ever' deense provided 1' la5 to ena1le t3e latter7s 2ause to su22eed. An attorne'7s dut' tosae&uard t3e 2lient7s interests 2ommen2es rom 3is retainer until 3is ee2tive release rom t3e 2ase or t3e inal

disposition o t3e 53ole su1He2t matter o t3e liti&ation. urin& t3at period, 3e is e8pe2ted to ta6e su23reasona1le steps and su23 ordinar' 2are as 3is 2lient7s interests ma' reuire.

And failure to do so violates 3anon $< of the 3ode.$"/

2ule $


8/30

2alled upon to ans5er to t3e 2ourt or 3is 2ondu2t as an oi2er o t3e 2ourt. T3e 2omplainant or t3e person 53o2alled t3e attention o t3e 2ourt to t3e attorne'7s alle&ed mis2ondu2t is in no sense a part', and 3as &enerall' nointerest in t3e out2ome e82ept as all &ood 2itiens ma' 3ave in t3e proper administration o Husti2e.

$%ERE&ORE, we find respondent Atty. !scar &. &aguinto @E9FG of violation of the 3ode of&rofessional 2esponsibility. Accordingly, we penali>e Atty. !scar &. &aguinto with E&I9!I for

9J (5+ 4!IH from the practice of law effective upon receipt of this %ecision.

Fet copies of this %ecision be furnished the !ffice of the 0ar 3onfidant, to be appended to

respondents personal record as an attorneyK the 9ntegrated 0ar of the &hilippinesK and all courts in

the country for their information and guidance.

SO ORDERED.

FIRST DIVISION

CARLITO P. CARANDANG, A.C. No. !1"

Complainant,Present:

P%NO, C.J., C3airperson,

CARPIO, CORONA, - versus - #EONARO-E CASTRO, and ERSAIN,JJ.

ATTY. GIL#ERT S. O#MINA, Promul&ated:

Respondent. April *), *++8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8

D E C I S I O N

CARPIO,J.:

T$% C&'%


9/30

T3is is a 2omplaint iled 1' Carlito P. Carandan& =Carandan&> a&ainst Att'. Gil1ert S. O1mina =Att'

O1mina>. Att'. O1mina 5as 2ounsel or Carandan& in Civil Case No. -4)+ entitled FSps. Emilia A.

Carandan& and Carlito Carandan& v. Ernesto Alona. Carandan& 1rou&3t suit or Att'. O1mina7s ailure to

inorm Carandan& o t3e adverse de2ision in Civil Case No. -4)+ and or ailure to appeal t3e de2ision.

T$% F&'

T3e a2ts o C Case No. +?-)@? in t3e Report and Re2ommendation o t3e Commission on ar

is2ipline o t3e Inte&rated ar o t3e P3ilippines =IP> read as ollo5s:

Complainant7s S5orn Statement is 3ereto reprodu2ed as ollo5s:

SBORN STATEENT

A6o si CAR#ITO P. CARANANG, nasa 5aston& &ulan&, ma' asa5a7tm&a ana6, at na6atira sa 494+ Al1erto Apt., St. ;ran2is omes, alan& iJan,#a&una.

Na a6o a' ma' 6ason& isinampa 6a' ERNESTO T. A#SONA tun&6ol saamin& 1a3a' at lupa, at isinampa sa IKAN RTC RANC *4, CI"I# CASENO. -4)+.

Na an& naturan& 6aso a' natapos at nadisis'unan noon& Enero *@, *+++ ata6o a' natalo sa naturan& 6aso.

Na an& a6in& na&in& a1o&ado a' si ATTY. GI#ERT S. OINA, tu1on&Lueon at 1ilan& 6a1a1a'an a6o a' na&ti5ala sa 6an'an& 6a6a'a3an upan&maipa&tan&&ol sa naturan& 6aso, n&unit tali5as sa a6in& pananali& sa 6an'a an&nasa1in& 6aso a' napa1a'aan 3an&&an& sa ma&6aroon n& desis'on an& 6orte na6unin an& a6in& lupa7t 1a3a', sa madali7t sa1i 6ami a' natalo n& 3indi 6o manlan& nalalaman at 3uli na an& la3at n& malaman 6o da3il 3indi na 6ami p5eden&umapila.


10/30

Na nalaman 6o lan& na ma' desis'on na pala an& 6orte pa&6atapos n&anim na 1u5an. An& a6in& ana6 na si ROSEARIE a' na&punta sa IKAN, saRTC a' 1inati at tinatanon& 6un& saan 6a'o na6atira at an& sa&ot /n&0 a6in& ana6AMIT At an& sa&ot naman /n&0 ta&a RTC, INI O A A#A NA ANGINYONG MASO AY TAPOS NA. Nan& marini& 'on a' umu5i na si'a at sina1ia&ad sa a6in. Tapos na da5 'un& 6aso /n&0 atin& 1a3a' at a6o a' pumunta saopisina ni ATTY. OINA at a6in& tinanon& FAMIT I O SINAI SA AMINNA TAPOS NA ANG MASO At an& sa&ot ni'a sa a6in FAY BA#A MANG

IAAYA SA AOGAO AI# BA#A MANG PERA PANG-API#A da3il sa sa&ot sa a6in a' para a6on& na5alan /n&0 pa&-asa sa 6aso.

#umapit a6o sa ala2aJan& at 1ini&a' 'un& sulat pero doon a' a6in&na6ausap 'un& isan& a1o&ado at a6o7' 6an'an& pina6in&&an at a6in& ina1ot an&papeles at a6in& pina6ita at an& sa1i a' 3indi na p5ede da3il anim na 1u5an na/nan&0 lumipas an& 6aso. Ma'a a6in& sina1i sa ATTY. n& ala2aJan& na 3indisina1i sa a6in a&ad ni ATTY. OINA na ma' order na pala an& 6aso.

Ma'a an& &ina5an& paraan a' 1ini&'an a6o n& sulat para i1i&a' sa IP, atnan& ma1asa an& sulat a' sina1i sa a6in na doon sa SAN PA#O an& 3earin&, at

tinanon& a6o 6un& nasaan an& ATTORNEY7S BITRABA# NYO An& sa&ot6o a' FBA#A O, 6a'a inutusan a6o na 6unin an& ATTORNEY7SBITRABA# at a&ad a6on& na&punta sa opisina ni ATTY. OINA attinanon& 6o sa se6retar'a ni'a 6un& nasaan si ATTY. OINA an& sa&ot sa a6ina' nasa AERICA NA Ma'a7t a6in& tinanon& 6un& sinon& p5ede ma&1i&a' saa6in n& attorne'7s 5it3dra5al at an& sa1i a' 'un& ana6 n'a na si CARE#ITSAOINA. umali6 a6o noon& ara5 n& i'ernes at a6in& na6u3a, pero 3indi naa6o na6a1ali6 sa IP da3il noon& ara5 na i'on a' 3indi 6o na 6a'an& ma&la6ad,6a'a 3indi na natulo' an& 3earin& sa SAN PA#O.

CAR#ITO P. CARANANG

AiantCTC No. *))@4 2opies, and urnis3 t3e 2omplainant 5it3 a 2op't3ereo, 5it3in iteen =)4> da's rom re2eipt o t3e Order.

On e2em1er )*, *++?, t3is Commission 5as in re2eipt o a aniestation datede2em1er )), *++? iled 1' a 2ertain Att'. a. Carmen2ita C. O1mina-uaJa. Alle&edl', s3e ist3e dau&3ter o respondent Att'. Gil1ert S. O1mina. S3e urt3er alle&ed t3at /3er0 at3er isalread' a permanent resident o t3e %nited States o Ameri2a sin2e ar23 *++) and 3ad alread'retired rom t3e pra2ti2e o la5.

T3at on ;e1ruar' *+, *++


11/30

On ar23 ), *++


12/30

T$% I#P*' R%+o &- R%o//%-&0o-

In a Report/*0dated * O2to1er *++ ound t3at Att'. O1mina 5as still 2ounsel o re2ord or 2omplainant at t3e time

t3e de2ision 5as rendered and up to t3e time o t3e issuan2e o t3e 5rit o e8e2ution. Att'. O1mina re2eived t3e

e2ision dated *@ $anuar' *+++ on ) ar23 *+++. Att'. Carmen2ita O1mina-uaJa maniested in Court t3a

3er at3er 3as 1een livin& in t3e %nited States o Ameri2a sin2e *++). T3ere is not3in& on re2ord t3at 5ill s3o5

t3at Att'. O1mina notiied 2omplainant in an' manner a1out t3e de2ision.

Alt3ou&3 Commissioner e #a Rama o1served t3at 2omplainant is partl' to 1lame or 3is loss or

ailure to maintain 2onta2t 5it3 Att'. O1mina and to inorm 3imsel o t3e pro&ress o 3is 2ase, Commissioner

e #a Rama nonet3eless unders2ored t3e dut' o Att'. O1mina to noti' 3is 2lient as to 53at 3appened to 3is

2ase. T3us:

One 2annot es2ape t3e a2t t3at t3e 2omplainant 3imsel ailed to 2ommuni2ate 5it3 3is

2ounsel or uite sometime. T3ere is not3in& in t3e 2omplainant7s S5orn Statement t3at 5oulds3o5 t3at 3e re&ularl' visited t3e oi2e o t3e respondent, Att'. Gil1ert S. O1mina. Complainantis partl' to 1lame or 3is loss and it s3ould not 1e attri1uted solel' to t3e respondent.

T3e Supreme Court 3eld t3at Fclients should maintain contact with their counsel fromtime to time and inform themselves of the progress of their case, thereby exercising that standard

of care which an ordinary prudent man bestows upon his business =#eonardo vs. S.T. est, In2.,9** SCRA (9
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn2


13/30

o5ever, t3e respondent 53o 3as in 3is possession t3e 2omplete iles and address o t3e2omplainant, s3ould 3ave e8erted eorts to even noti' r. Carandan& as to 53at 3appened to3is 2ase. B3et3er t3e de2ision is adverse /to0 or in avor o 3is 2lient, respondent is dut' 1oundto noti' t3e 2lients pursuant to Canon )@ o t3e Code o Proessional Et3i2s 53i23 provides t3atFa lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence. ;urt3er under Rule )@.+( oCanon )@, Fa lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence inconnection therewith shall render him liable. #astl', under Rule )@.+9, !a lawyer shall "eepthe client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to client#s

re$uest for information.

T3at as a result o t3e respondent7s ailure to noti' t3e 2omplainant, t3e latter lost t3e2ase leadin& to 3is evi2tion.

In t3e 2ase o iHares vs. Romana 9*4 SCRA 4


14/30

Atty. Obmina Failed to Serve Complainant

with Competence and Diligence

Canon )@ states t3at F/a0 la5'er s3all serve 3is 2lient 5it3 2ompeten2e and dili&en2e. Rules )@.+( and

)@.+9 provide t3at F/a0 la5'er s3all not ne&le2t a le&al matter entrusted to 3im, and 3is ne&li&en2e in 2onne2tion

t3ere5it3 s3all render 3im lia1le and F/a0 la5'er s3all 6eep t3e 2lient inormed o t3e status o 3is 2ase and

s3all respond 5it3in a reasona1le time to t3e 2lient7s reuest or inormation.

In 3is emorandum, Att'. O1mina admitted t3at 3e 5as 2ounsel or Carandan& in Civil Case No. -

4)+. Att'. O1mina 1lamed Carandan& or t3e adverse de2ision in Civil Case No. -4)+ 1e2ause Carandan&

did not tell 3im t3at t3ere 5as a Compromise A&reement e8e2uted prior to Att'. O1mina7s ilin& o t3e

2omplaint in Civil Case No. -4)+. Carandan&, on t3e ot3er 3and, stated t3at Att'. O1mina made 3im 1elieve

t3at t3e' 5ould 5in t3e 2ase. In a2t, Carandan& en&a&ed t3e servi2es o Att'. O1mina on a 2ontin&ent

1asis. Carandan& s3all pa' Att'. O1mina 9+Q o t3e sale pro2eeds o t3e propert' su1He2t matter o t3e

2ase. Att'. O1mina promised to noti' Carandan& as soon as t3e de2ision o t3e 2ourt 5as &iven.

Contrar' to Att'. O1mina7s promise, t3ere is no eviden2e on re2ord t3at Att'. O1mina too6 t3e initiative

to noti' Carandan& o t3e trial 2ourt7s adverse de2ision. Att'. O1mina a&ain put Carandan& at ault or

ailure to advan2e t3e appeal ee. Att'. O1mina7s version o Carandan&7s 2onrontation 5it3 3im 5as limited to

t3is narrative:


15/30

Sometime in t3e 'ear *+++, 2omplainant 5ent to respondent7s la5 oi2e. e 5as umin&mad and 5as 1lamin& respondent or 3avin& lost 3is 2ase. e as6ed or t3e re2ords o t3e 2ase1e2ause a22ordin& to 3im, 3e 5ill reer t3e 2ase to a 2ertain Att'. Ed&ardoSalandanan. Respondent &ave 2omplainant t3e 2ase ile. Complainant did not return to pursuet3e appeal or at least 3ad &iven an appeal ee to 1e paid to Court in order to pere2t t3e appeal./40

Att'. O1mina7s utile eorts o s3itin& t3e 1lame on Carandan& onl' serve to emp3asie 3is ailure to noti'

Carandan& t3at t3e trial 2ourt alread' promul&ated a de2ision in Civil Case No. -4)+ t3at 5as adverse to

Carandan&7s interests. Att'. O1mina 2annot overloo6 t3e a2t t3at Carandan& learned a1out t3e promul&ation o

t3e de2ision not t3rou&3 Att'. O1mina 3imsel, 1ut t3rou&3 a 23an2e visit to t3e trial 2ourt. Instead o lettin&

Carandan& 6no5 o t3e adverse de2ision 3imsel, Att'. O1mina s3ould 3ave immediatel' 2onta2ted Carandan&,

e8plained t3e de2ision to 3im, and advised t3em on urt3er steps t3at 2ould 1e ta6en. It is o1vious

t3at Carandan& lost 3is ri&3t to ile an appeal 1e2ause o Att'. O1mina7s ina2tion. Not5it3standin& Att'

O1mina7s su1seuent 5it3dra5al as Carandan&7s la5'er, Att'. O1mina 5as still 2ounsel o re2ord at t3e time

t3e trial 2ourt promul&ated t3e de2ision in Civil Case No. -4)+.

In &olentino v. 'angapit,5e stated t3at: As an oi2er o t3e 2ourt, it is t3e dut' o an attorne' to inorm 3er 2lient o 53ateverinormation s3e ma' 3ave a2uired 53i23 it is important t3at t3e 2lient s3ould 3ave 6no5led&eo. S3e s3ould noti' 3er 2lient o an' adverse de2ision to ena1le 3er 2lient to de2ide 53et3er tosee6 an appellate revie5 t3ereo. Meepin& t3e 2lient inormed o t3e developments o t3e 2ase5ill minimie misunderstandin& and /loss0 o trust and 2oniden2e in t3e attorne'./?0

T3e relations3ip o la5'er-2lient 1ein& one o 2oniden2e, t3ere is ever present t3e need or t3e la5'er to

inorm 0/%5 &- &%&%5t3e 2lient o important developments ae2tin& t3e 2lient7s 2ase. T3e la5'er

s3ould not leave t3e 2lient in t3e dar6 on 3o5 t3e la5'er is deendin& t3e 2lient7s interests./


16/30

T3e Court inds 5ell-ta6en t3e re2ommendation o t3e IP to suspend Att'. Gil1ert S. O1mina rom t3e

pra2ti2e o la5 or one 'ear. In t3e 2ases o Credito v. Sabio/@0and%ineda v. 'acapagal,/05e imposed t3e

same penalt' upon attorne's 53o ailed to update t3eir 2lients on t3e status o t3eir 2ases. Considerin& Att'

O1mina7s advan2ed a&e, su23 penalt' serves t3e purpose o prote2tin& t3e interest o t3e pu1li2 and le&al

proession.

WHEREFORE, t3e Court AFFIRMS t3e resolution o t3e IP oard o Governors approvin& and

adoptin& t3e report and re2ommendation o t3e Investi&atin& Commissioner. A22ordin&l', Att'. Gil1ert S

O1mina is ound GUILTYo violation o Canon )@ and o Rules )@.+( and )@.+9 o t3e Code o Proessiona

Responsi1ilit'. T3e Court SUSPENDS Att'. Gil1ert S. O1mina rom t3e pra2ti2e o la5 or one 'ear

and WARNS 3im t3at a repetition o t3e same or similar oense 5ill 1e dealt 5it3 more severel'

#et 2opies o t3is e2ision 1e urnis3ed t3e Oi2e o t3e ar Conidant, to 1e appended to respondent7s

personal re2ord as attorne'. #i6e5ise, 2opies s3all 1e urnis3ed t3e Inte&rated ar o t3e P3ilippines and all

2ourts in t3e 2ountr' or t3eir inormation and &uidan2e.

SO ORDERED.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn9http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn8http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/april2009/7813.htm#_ftn9


17/30

Republic of the Philippines

Supreme Court

Manila

SECOND DIVISION


18/30

ATTY E!MER C SO!IDON"

Complaina

nt,

- versus -

ATTY RAMI! E MACA!A!AD"

Responde

nt.

AC No #$%#

Present:

CARPIO,J.,Chairperson,

BRION,

DEL CA!ILLO,

ABAD, and

PERE",JJ.

Promul#ated:

$e%ruar& '(, ')*)

&'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''&

D E C I S I O N

(RION"J:

In a veri+ed omplaint*%e/ore t0e Commission on Bar Disipline o/ t0e Inte#rated

Bar o/ t0e P0ilippines 1IBP Commission on Bar Discipline2, Att&. Elmer C. olidon 1Atty.

Solidon2sou#0t t0e dis%arment o/ Att&. Ramil E. 3aalalad 1Atty. Macalalad2 /or violations
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn1http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn1


19/30

o/ Rule *4.)*,'Rule *5.)6,6and Rule *5.)((o/ t0e Code o/ Pro/essional Responsi%ilit&

involvin# ne#li#ene in 0andlin# a ase.

The )acts

Att&. 3aalalad is t0e C0ie/ o/ t0e Le#al Division o/ t0e Department o/ Environment

and Natural Resoures 1DENR2, Re#ional O7e 5, !alo%an Cit&. Alt0ou#0 0e is in pu%li

servie, t0e DENR eretar& 0as #iven 0im t0e aut0orit& to en#a#e in t0e pratie o/ la8.

90ile on o7ial visit to Eastern amar in Oto%er ')), Att&. 3aalalad

8as introdued to Att&. olidon %& a mutual a;uaintane, $lordeli< Ca%o-Borata 1Ms.

CaboBorata2. Att&. olidon as=ed Att&. 3aalalad to 0andle t0e >udiial titlin# o/ a parel

o/ land loated in Boron#an, Eastern amar and o8ned %& Att&. olidon?s relatives. $or a

onsideration o/ Ei#0t& !0ousand Pesos 1P5),))).))2, Att&. 3aalalad aepted t0e tas=

to %e ompleted 8it0in a period o/ ei#0t 152 mont0s. Att&. 3aalalad reeived $i/t&
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn4http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn2http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn3http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn4


20/30

!0ousand Pesos 1P),))).))2 as initial pa&ment@ t0e remainin# %alane o/ !0irt&

!0ousand Pesos 1P6),))).))2 8as to %e paid 80en Att&. olidon reeived t0e erti+ate

o/ title to t0e propert&.

Att&. 3aalalad 0as not +led an& petition /or re#istration over t0e propert& sou#0t

to %e titled up to t0e present time.

In t0e Complaint, Position Papersand doumentar& evidene su%mitted, Att&

olidon laimed t0at 0e tried to ontat Att&. 3aalalad to /ollo8-up on t0e status o/ t0e

ase six 142 mont0s a/ter 0e paid t0e initial le#al /ees. e did t0is t0rou#0 p0one alls

and text messa#es to t0eir =no8n a;uaintanes and relatives, and, +nall&, t0rou#0 a

letter sent %& ourier to Att&. 3aalalad. o8ever, 0e did not reeive an&

ommuniation /rom Att&. 3aalalad.

In t0e Ans8er,4Position Paper,and a7davits o/ 8itnesses, Att&. 3aalalad

posited t0at t0e dela& in t0e +lin# o/ t0e petition /or t0e titlin# o/ t0e propert& 8as

aused %& 0is lients? /ailure to ommuniate 8it0 0im. e also explained t0at 0e 0ad no
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn7http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn5http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn6http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn7


21/30

intention o/ rene#in# on 0is o%li#ation, as 0e 0ad alread& prepared t0e dra/t o/ t0e

petition. e /ailed to +le t0e petition simpl& %eause 0e still la=ed t0e needed

doumentar& evidene t0at 0is lients s0ould 0ave /urnis0ed 0im. Lastl&, Att&. 3aalalad

denied t0at Att&. olidon tried to ommuniate 8it0 0im.

The )in*in+s of the I(P

In 0is Report and Reommendation dated une ', '))5, Investi#atin#

Commissioner Randall C. !a%a&o&on# made t0e /ollo8in# +ndin# o/ ne#li#ene a#ainst

Att&. 3aalalad:

omplainant su%mitted in 0is position paper t0e a7davit o/ $lordelioins a la8&er not to ne#let a le#al

matter entrusted to 0im. In /at, Rule *5.)6 even provides t0at 0is

ne#li#ene in onnetion t0ere8it0 s0all render 0im lia%le.

Atin# on t0is reommendation, t0e Board o/ overnors o/ t0e IBP Commission on

Bar Disipline passed Resolution No. FGIII-'))5-664 dated ul& *, '))5, 0oldin# t0at:

RES!"#ED $! AD!P$ and APPR!#E, as it is hereby %nanimo%sly

AD!P$ED and APPR!#ED, with modifcation,the Report and

Recommendation o& the In'esti(atin( Commissioner o& the abo'eentitled

case, herein made part o& this Resol%tion ) and, *ndin( the

recommendation &%lly s%pported by the e'idence on record and the

applicable la+s and r%les, and considerin( Respondents 'iolation o& R%le

-./0 o& the Code o& Pro&essional Responsibility, Atty. Ramil E. Macalalad

is hereby SUSPENDED &rom the practice o& la+ &or three 102 months

and Ordered to Return the amo%nt o& 3i&ty $ho%sand Pesos 1P4/,///2

+ith -56 interest per ann%m to complainant )

!0e ase is no8 %e/ore t0is Court /or our +nal ation pursuant to etion *'1%2, Rule *6H-

B o/ t0e Rules o/ Court, onsiderin# t0at t0e IBP Commission on Bar Disipline imposed

t0e penalt& o/ suspension on Att&. 3aalalad.


23/30

The Court,s Rulin+

-e a+ree .ith the I(P,s factual /n*in+s an* le+al conclusions

In administrative ases a#ainst la8&ers, t0e ;uantum o/ proo/ re;uired is

preponderane o/ evidene 80i0 t0e omplainant 0as t0e %urden to dis0ar#e. 5 9e

/ull& onsidered t0e evidene presented and 8e are /ull& satis+ed t0at t0e omplainant?s

evidene, as outlined a%ove, /ull& satis+es t0e re;uired ;uantum o/ proo/ in provin# Att&

3aalalad?s ne#li#ene.

Rule *5.)6, Canon *5 o/ t0e Code o/ Pro/essional Responsi%ilit& provides /or t0e

rule on ne#li#ene and states:

Rule $#01 2 A la.3er shall not ne+lect a le+al matter entruste*

to him an* his ne+li+ence in connection there.ith shall ren*er

him liable


24/30

!0is Court 0as onsistentl& 0eld, in onstruin# t0is Rule, t0at t0e mere /ailure o/ t0e

la8&er to per/orm t0e o%li#ations due to t0e lient is onsideredper se a violation.

!0us, in Villauerte v. Cortez,H8e 0eld t0at a la8&er is ne#li#ent i/ 0e /ailed to

do an&t0in# to protet 0is lient?s interest a/ter reeivin# 0is aeptane /ee. In n Re!

"tt#. $rione%,*)8e ruled t0at t0e /ailure o/ t0e ounsel to su%mit t0e re;uired %rie/

8it0in t0e re#lementar& period 1to t0e pre>udie o/ 0is lient 80o lan#uis0ed in >ail /or

more t0an a &ear2 is an oense t0at 8arrants disiplinar& ation. In &arcia v. "tt#.

'anuel, 8e penali


25/30

!0e irumstane t0at t0e lient 8as also at /ault does not exonerate a la8&er

/rom lia%ilit& /or 0is ne#li#ene in 0andlin# a ase. In Canoy, 8e aordin#l& delared

t0at t0e la8&er annot s0i/t t0e %lame to 0is lient /or /ailin# to /ollo8 up on 0is ase

%eause it 8as t0e la8&er?s dut& to in/orm 0is lient o/ t0e status o/ t0e ase. *( Our

rulin#s in'acarila# v. Seri(a"*in )eir% o $alle%tero% v. "*ia+"

*4andinVilla,ore% v. -imo%*8ere o/ t0e same tenor. In #illa7ores, 8e opined t0at

even i/ t0e lient 0as %een e;uall& at /ault /or t0e la= o/ ommuniation, t0e main

responsi%ilit& remains 8it0 t0e la8&er to in;uire and =no8 t0e %est means to a;uire t0e

re;uired in/ormation. 9e 0eld t0at as %et8een t0e lient and 0is la8&er, t0e latter 0as

more ontrol in 0andlin# t0e ase.

All t0ese rulin#s drive 0ome t0e +duiar& nature o/ a la8&er?s dut& to 0is lient

one an en#a#ement /or le#al servies is aepted. A la8&er so en#a#ed to represent a

lient %ears t0e responsi%ilit& o/ protetin# t0e latter?s interest 8it0 utmost *ili+ence

*5 !0e la8&er %ears t0e dut& to serve 0is lient 8it0 ompetene and dili#ene, and to
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn18http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn14http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn15http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn16http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn17http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn18


26/30

exert 0is %est eorts to protet, 8it0in t0e %ounds o/ t0e la8, t0e interest o/ 0is or 0er

lient.*H Aordin#l&, ompetene, not onl& in t0e =no8led#e o/ la8, %ut also in t0e

mana#ement o/ t0e ases %& #ivin# t0ese ases appropriate attention and due

preparation, is expeted /rom a la8&er.')

!0e reords in t0is ase tell us t0at Att&. 3aalalad /ailed to at as 0e ommitted

80en 0e /ailed to +le t0e re;uired petition. e annot no8 s0i/t t0e %lame to 0is lients

sine it 8as 0is dut& as a la8&er to ommuniate 8it0 t0em. At an& rate, 8e re>et Att&

3aalalad?s de/ense t0at it 8as 0is lients 80o /ailed to ontat 0im. Alt0ou#0 no

previous ommuniation transpired %et8een Att&. 3aalalad and 0is lients, t0e reords

nevert0eless s0o8 t0at Att&. olidon, 80o ontrated Att&. 3aalalad?s servies in %e0al/

o/ 0is relatives, tried 0is %est to rea0 0im prior to t0e +lin# o/ t0e present dis%arment

ase. Att&. olidon even enlisted t0e aid o/ 3s. Ca%o-Borata to /ollo8-up on t0e status o/

t0e re#istration appliation 8it0 Att&. 3aalalad.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn19http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn20http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn19http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/february2010/8158.htm#_ftn20


27/30

As narrated %& 3s. Ca%o-Borata in 0er a7davit,'*s0e sueeded several times in

#ettin# in tou0 8it0 Att&. 3aalalad and on t0ose oasions as=ed 0im a%out t0e

pro#ress o/ t0e ase. !o use 3s. Ca%o-Borata?s o8n 8ords, s0e reeived Jno lear-ut

ans8ers /rom 0imK@ 0e >ust in/ormed 0er t0at ever&t0in# 8as Jon proess.K 9e #ive

redene to t0ese narrations onsiderin# Att&. 3aalalad?s /ailure to ontradit t0em or

den& t0eir verait&, in mar=ed ontrast 8it0 0is vi#orous denial o/ Att&. olidon?s

alle#ations.

9e onsider, too, t0at ot0er motivatin# /ators spei+all&, t0e monetar&

onsideration and t0e +xed period o/ per/ormane s0ould 0ave made it more

imperative /or Att&. 3aalalad to promptl& ta=e ation and initiate ommuniation 8it0

0is lients. e 0ad %een #iven initial pa&ment and s0ould 0ave at least underta=en

initial deliver& o/ 0is part o/ t0e en#a#ement.


28/30

9e /urt0er +nd t0at Att&. 3aalalad?s ondut re/utes 0is laim o/ 8illin#ness to

per/orm 0is o%li#ations. I/ Att&. 3aalalad trul& 8anted to +le t0e petition, 0e ould 0ave

a;uired t0e neessar& in/ormation /rom Att&. olidon to ena%le 0im to +le t0e petition

even pendin# t0e IBP Commission on Bar Disipline investi#ation. As matters no8 stand

0e did not ta=e an& ation to initiate ommuniation. These omissions une4ui5ocall3

point to Att3 Macalala*,s lac6 of *ue care that no. .arrants *isciplinar3

action

In addition to t0e a%ove +ndin# o/ ne#li#ene, 8e also +nd Att&. 3aalalad

#uilt& o/ violatin# Rule *4.)* o/ t0e Code o/ Pro/essional Responsi%ilit& 80i0 re;uires a

la8&er to aount /or all t0e mone& reeived /rom t0e lient. In t0is ase, Att&. 3aalalad

did not immediatel& aount /or and promptl& return t0e mone& 0e reeived /rom Att&.

olidon even a/ter 0e /ailed to render an& le#al servie 8it0in t0e ontrated time o/ t0e

en#a#ement.''


29/30

The Penalt3

Based on t0ese onsiderations, 8e modi/& t0e IBP Commission on Bar Disipline?s

reommended penalt& %& inreasin# t0e period o/ Att&. 3aalalad?s suspension /rom

t0e pratie o/ la8 /rom t0ree 162 mont0s, to six 142 mont0s. '6 In t0is re#ard, 8e /ollo8

t0e Court?s lead in Pari8as '. Pa(%into'(80ere 8e imposed on t0e respondent la8&er

suspension o/ six 142 mont0s /rom t0e pratie o/ la8 /or violations o/ Rule *4.)* and

Rule *5.)6 o/ t0e Code o/ Pro/essional Responsi%ilit&.

-7ERE)ORE, premises onsidered, 8e 0ere%& A))IRM -IT7

MODI)ICATION Resolution No. FGIII-'))5-664 dated ul& *, '))5 o/ t0e Board o/

overnors o/ t0e IBP Commission on Bar Disipline. 9e impose on Att&. Ramil E

3aalalad t0e penalt& o/ SI8 9:; MONT7S S


30/30

Att&. 3aalalad is also ORDEREDto RET

Canon 18 Full Cases

Documents

Transcript of Canon 18 Full Cases