Spouses Aranda vs Atty.

Emmanuel Elayda

FACTS: Atty. Emmanuel Elayda was hired by Spouses Aranda to be their counsel in a civil case.
However, to their surprise, an adverse judgment was issued against them, thus they lost
possession of their car. Apparently, their counsel never appeared in court for them. Atty. Elayda
failed to inform the spouses of the date of hearing as well as the order of judgment. No motion
for reconsideration or appeal was interposed by the lawyer as well.

ISSUE: Whether or not Atty. Elayda should be disciplined.

HELD: Yes. Although it is true that the client and their counsel must equally share the burden of
communication, it is the primary duty of the counsel to inform the client of the status of their case
in court and the orders which have been issued by the court. He cannot simply wait for his clients
to make an inquiry about the developments in their case. Close coordination between counsel
and client is necessary for them to adequately prepare for the case, as well as to effectively
monitor the progress of the case. Also, his excuse that he did not appear in court because the
spouses failed to appear in court is not tenable. His attendance at the hearing should not be made
to depend on the whether the spouses Aranda will come or not.