Canon 16

15) Shirley Olayta-Camba vs. Atty. Ottillo Sy Bongon (A.C. No. 8826. 25 March 2015)

Q: Pallogan - Ms. Guillermo-Is the lawyer bound to return the money given by the client for a
specific purpose if it was not used accordingly?

A: YES. In the case of Camba v. Bongon, Bongon’s contention that he only received
P55,000.00 and that the rest of the money was received by a person who was not an employee
of his law firm was held untenable. He failed to exercise such skill, care, and diligence as men
of the legal profession commonly possess and exercise in such matters of professional
employment and, hence, must be disciplined accordingly. If not used accordingly, the money
must be returned immediately to the client. A lawyer’s failure to return the money to his client
despite numerous demands is a violation of the trust reposed on him and is indicative of his lack
of integrity. 

16) Vicka Marie D. Isalos vs. Atty. Luz B. Crystal (A.C. No. 11822, 22
November 2017)

Q: Guillermo-Mallong-How can you characterize the act of a lawyer not delivering

the client’s funds upon demand.

A: In Isalos v Atty Crystal, money was entrusted to a lawyer for a specific

purpose, particularly for the processing of transfer of land title, but not used for
the intended purpose,  such money should be immediately returned upon
demand according to the court.

A lawyer's failure to return upon demand the funds held by him on behalf of his
client gives rise to the presumption that he has appropriated the same for his
own use in violation of the trust reposed to him by his client. Such act is a gross
violation of general morality, as well as of professional ethics. It impairs public
confidence in the legal profession and deserves punishment.

17) Iluminada D. Yuzon vs. Atty. Arnulfo M. Agleron (A.C. No. 10684, 24 January
2018)      Mallong- Osngal

If a lawyer used a client’s money to help another client, did he disregard his duty as a
lawyer with respect to his client who owns the said money?

Yes.

The highly fiduciary nature of this relationship imposes upon the lawyer the duty to
account for the money or property collected or received from his client. Thus, a lawyer's
failure to return upon demand the funds held by him on behalf of his client gives rise to
the presumption that he has appropriated the same for his own use in violation of the
trust reposed in him by his client.
In the case of Yuzon v. Atty Agleron, Atty Agleron was suspended for one year for not
returning his client’s money upon the latter’s demand despite alleging that he used the
money not for his own benefit but to help another client having financial woes. 

18) Remegio P. Segovia, et. al. vs. Atty. Rolando S. Javier (A.C. No. 10244, 12
March 2018)      Osngal-Padchonga

Question: When does the lawyer’s duty to protect the interest of his client starts
or commences?                                                                                                                 
Answer: In the case of Segovia vs Atty. Javier, it was undisputed that the
respondent lawyer failed to file the case of falsification of public documents and
recovery of property in favor of complainants despite receiving the money in connection
with the said case. Respondent's inaction despite repeated follow-ups and his promise
that the case will be resolved in complainants' favor demonstrated his cavalier attitude
and appalling indifference to his clients' cause. The court suspended the respondent by
stressing that “A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and must be mindful of
the trust and confidence reposed in him. An attorney's duty to safeguard the client's
interests commences from his retainer until his effective release from the case or the
final disposition of the whole subject matter of the litigation. During that period, he is
expected to take such reasonable steps and such ordinary care as his client's interests
may require.In other words, acceptance of money from a client establishes an attorney-
client relationship and gives rise to the duty of fidelity to the client's cause. “

19) Dario Tangcay vs. Atty. Honesto Ancheta Cabarroguis (A.C. No. 11821, 2 April 2018)
Padchonga-Pallogan
Q: Why is it that the lending of money by a lawyer to his client is frowned
upon?

A: The lending of money by a lawyer is frowned upon because the rule is

intended to safeguard the lawyer's independence of mind so that the
free exercise of his judgment may not be adversely affected. It seeks
to ensure his undivided attention to the case he is handling as well as his
entire devotion and fidelity to the client's cause. If the lawyer lends money
to the client in connection with the client's case, the lawyer in effect acquires
an interest in the subject matter of the case or an additional stake in its
outcome. Either of these circumstances may lead the lawyer to consider his
own recovery rather than that of his client, or to accept a settlement which
may take care of his interest in the verdict to the prejudice of the client in
violation of his duty of undivided fidelity to the client's cause.

Canon 17

1) Nenita Ko vs. Atty. Ladimir Ian G. Maduramente et. al. [A.C. No. 11118 (formerly CBD
Case No. 08-2140), July 14, 2020]
Pallogan-Sagamla
Q. What lessons for lawyers transpired in the case of Nenita v. Atty. Mercy?

 A. The ruling of the case emphasized some lessons for lawyers:

First, lawyers are discouraged from going into business with their clients. This is founded on
public policy for, by virtue of his office, an attorney is in an easy position to take advantage of
the credulity and ignorance of his client. Thus, no presumption of innocence or improbability of
wrongdoing is considered in an attorney's favor.

Second, no influence peddling. By giving the impression that justice is served depending on
one's connections, and insinuating that the administration of justice is susceptible to corruption
and misconduct place the judiciary in a bad light thereby eroding the public's trust and
confidence in the judicial system.

Third, lawyers must not co-mingle their client’s funds with their own funds; this is in connection
to the lawyer’s mandate to “keep funds of each client separate and apart from his own and
those of others kept by him”.

2) Pesto vs. Atty, Milo (A.C. No. 9612, 13 March 2013)

Sagamla-Mallong

Q: How can you describe the duty of a lawyer to the cause or interest of his client?

A: In the case of Pesto v Atty. Milo, Atty Milo was suspended because of his inaction
for the legal matter entrusted to him by his client, particularly, the cases for the transfer
of title and child adoption. He made unreasonable excuses and even gave wrong
information to his client regarding the case resulting in an adverse outcome.

Every attorney owes fidelity to the causes and concerns of his client. He must be
mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him by the clients. His duty to safeguard
the clients' interests commences from his engagement as such, and lasts until his
effective release by the clients. In that time, he is expected to take every reasonable
step and exercise ordinary care as his clients' interests may require.

3) Paces Industrial Corporation vs. Edgardo M. Salandanan (A.C. No. 1346, 25 July 2017)

Mallong-Sagamla

Q. In this case, how did the lawyer violate the rule prohibiting conflict of interest and at
the same time the provision of Canon 17?

 A. Here, Atty. Salandanan represented Paces in two (2) different cases, he had the duty to fight
a cause for Paces, but it later became his duty to oppose the same for E.E. Black Ltd, and
eventually opposed his defenses for Paces when he argued for the latter. Salandanan had
obtained knowledge of matters affecting the rights and obligations of Paces, the same
knowledge that eventually made the attachment and garnishment against Paces a success. To
allow him to utilize said information for his own personal interest or for the benefit of E.E. Black
Ltd., would be to violate the element of confidence which lies at the very foundation of a lawyer-
client relationship.

The nature of that lawyer-client relationship is one of trust and confidence of the highest
degree.Lawyers should not only to keep inviolate the client's confidence, but also must avoid
the appearance of treachery and double-dealing, for only then can litigants be encouraged to
entrust their secrets to their lawyers, which is important in the administration of justice. 

4) Atty. Villonco vs. Atty. Roxas (A.C. No. 9186, 11 April 2018)
Sagamla-Pallogan
Q: How was Canon 17 of the CPR applied in the case of Atty. Villonco vs. Atty. Roxas?

A: It is settled that the relationship between a lawyer and his client is one imbued with
utmost trust and confidence. In this regard, clients are led to expect that lawyers would
be ever-mindful of their cause, and accordingly, exercise the required degree of
diligence in handling their affairs. 

In engaging the services of an attorney, the client reposes on him special powers of
trust and confidence. Their relationship is strictly personal and highly confidential and
fiduciary. The relation is of such delicate, exacting, and confidential nature that is
required by necessity and public interest. Only by such confidentiality and protection will
a person be encouraged to repose his confidence in an attorney. Thus, the preservation
and protection of that relation will encourage a client to entrust his legal problems to an
attorney, which is of paramount importance to the administration of justice. 

In the said case, Atty. Roxas's defiant attitude ultimately caused his client to lose its
trust in him. He intentionally denied his client's requests on how to proceed with the
case and insisted on doing it his own way. He could not possibly use the supposed
blanket authority given to him as a valid justification, especially on non-procedural
matters, as in this case, if he would be contradicting his client's trust and confidence in
the process. Atty. Roxas clearly disregarded the express commands of Canon 17.

PALE Group 2 Canon 18-19 (Case # 1-9)

1. De Leon vs Atty Geronimo

Question- Colleen: Hello, we are group 2 and so to begin, Kara-How should a lawyer conduct
himself in the service of his clients?
Answer-KARA:  Canon 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility provides that a lawyer
shall serve his client with competence and diligence such that the relationship between a lawyer
and a client is imbued with utmost trust and confidence. 

Hence in De Leon vs Atty Geronimo, and Llunar vs Atty Ricafort, the court found the respondent
lawyers remiss of their duty in serving their clients with utmost diligence and competence. In
both cases, the courts had emphasized that a lawyer is expected to maintain at all times a high
standard of legal proficiency, and to devote his full attention, skill, and competence to the case,
regardless of its importance and whether he accepts it for a fee or for free and that rather than
ignore or waste time and opportunity, a lawyer must act promptly in establishing a proper
communication and coordination with his client. 

2. Edquibal vs Ferrer

 Question-Kaye: What is the degree of diligence required of a lawyer?

Answer-Aira: Diligence is "the attention and care required of a person in a given

situation and is the opposite of negligence." 

A lawyer serves his client with diligence by adopting that norm of practice expected of
men of good intentions. It is axiomatic in the practice of law that the price of success is
eternal diligence to the cause of the client.

In the case of Edquibal vs Atty. Ferrer, it is stated that All that is required is ordinary
diligence (diligentia) or that degree of vigilance expected of a bonus pater familias. Yet, 
Atty. Ferrer still failed to file the appeal of his client to the Court of Appeals.

3. Reynaldo G Ramirez vs Atty Mercedes Buhayang-Margallo

Question-Aira: Does the mere failure of the Lawyer to perform the obligations due to his client
is considered a violation of the CPR?

Answer- Miller: Yes, it is a violation.

In the case of Ramirez vs Atty. Margallo where she made it appear that the case was dismissed
on its merits when, in truth, it was dismissed because she failed to file the Appellant’s Brief on
time.

The court said that the act of Atty Margallo constitutes negligence. A lawyer’s duty of
competence and diligence includes not merely reviewing the cases entrusted to the counsel’s
care or giving sound legal advice, but also consists of properly representing the client before
any court or tribunal, attending scheduled hearings or conferences, preparing and filing the
required pleadings, prosecuting the handled cases with reasonable dispatch, and urging their
termination without waiting for the client or the court to push him or her to do so.

4. Johnny M Pesto vs MArcelito M Millo

Question-Krystan: Does the concealment of a lawyer of his inefficiency and lack of diligence
by giving wrong information to his client regarding the matter subject of their professional
relationship makes him guilty of conduct unbecoming an officer of the Court?

Answer-Miller: Yes, he is guilty.

In the case of Pesto vs Atty. Millo, where Atty. Millo concealed his inefficiency and lack of
diligence by giving false information about the proceedings and where he said that he already
paid the taxes. Also where he did not act on the adoption proceedings for 2 years and claimed
that there is an interview for the complainant but in truth, there is none.

The court held that every attorney owes fidelity to the causes and concerns of his clients. He
must be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him by the clients. His duty to safeguard
the clients’ interests commences from his engagement as such, and lasts until his effective
release by the clients. She is expected to take every reasonable step and exercise ordinary care
as his clients’ interests may require. Thus, Atty. Millo’s act violates the Canon 18 and Rule
18.03 of the CPR

5. Ma. Jennifer Tria-Samonte vs. Epifania Obias

Question-Miller: Can a lawyer raise the defense of “no client-lawyer relationship” even he willfully
notarized a deed of sale over the same property in favor of another person violating the Canon 18?
Answer-Lordeliza:  NO
No. In the case of Samonte vs. Obias, the lawyer, instead of delivering the deed of sale covering
the subject property to her clients, she willfully notarized a deed of sale over the same property in
favor of another person. The court said that the lawyer’s defense of no client-lawyer relationship is
NOT VALID because if a person consults a lawyer with a view to obtain professional advice or
assistance, and the attorney voluntarily permits or acquiesces with the consultation, then the
professional employment is established. Therefore, the lawyer in this case, violated Canon 18
because she did not serve his client with diligence when she willfully notarized a deed of sale of
the same property.

 6. SPOUSES GEORGE A. WARRINER and AURORA R. WARRINER, Complainants, vs. ATTY.
RENI M. DUBLIN, Respondent.

Question-Colleen: As mentioned in the Case of Sps Warriner vs Atty Dublin, what is the
obligation of a lawyer in court processes?

Answer-Kaye: 

Canon 18 – A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence.
Rule 18.03 – A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.
"As an officer of the court, a lawyer is expected to know that a resolution of Court is not a mere
request but an order which should be complied with promptly and completely.

A lawyer is also allowed to withdraw his services for good cause such as "when the client pursues
an illegal or immoral course of conduct with the matter he is handling" or "when the client insists that
the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons and rules."

7. JOSE ALLAN TAN, Complainant, vs. PEDRO S. DIAMANTE, Respondent.

Question-Aira: Based on the case of Tan vs Diamante, should a client be informed of the
status of his case?

Answer-Krystan: Under Rule 18.04, Canon 18 of the CPR, it is the lawyer’s duty to keep his client
constantly updated on the developments of his case as it is crucial in maintaining the latter’s
confidence, to wit:
CANON 18 – A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.
Rule 18.04 – A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond
within a reasonable time to client’s request for information.
As an officer of the court, it is the duty of an attorney to inform his client of whatever important
information he may have acquired affecting his client’s case. He should notify his client of any
adverse decision to enable his client to decide whether to seek an appellate review thereof. Keeping
the client informed of the developments of the case will minimize misunderstanding and loss of trust
and confidence in the attorney. 
(The lawyer should not leave the client in the dark on how the lawyer is defending the client’s
interests. In this connection, the lawyer must constantly keep in mind that his actions, omissions, or
nonfeasance would be binding upon his client. Concomitantly, the lawyer is expected to be
acquainted with the rudiments of law and legal procedure, and a client who deals with him has the
right to expect not just a good amount of professional learning and competence but also a whole-
hearted fealty to the client’s cause.)

9. Roberto P Nonato vs Atty Eutiquio P Fudolin Jr 

Question-Lordeliza: To end this discussion, Colleen- Can the medical condition of a

lawyer serve as a valid reason for his failure to execute his duty?

Answer-Colleen: 
NO. A lawyer-client relationship is one of trust and confidence, there is a need for
the client to be adequately and fully informed about the developments in his
case. (A client should never be left groping in the dark; to allow this situation is to
destroy the trust, faith, and confidence reposed in the retained lawyer and in the
legal profession in general.)

In Nonato V. Atty. Fudolin, the court find the respondent’s excuse – that he had
an undetected stroke and was suffering from other illnesses – unsatisfactory and
merely an afterthought. Even assuming that he was then suffering from
numerous health problems (as evidenced by the medical certificates he
attached), his medical condition cannot serve as a valid reason to excuse
the omission to file the necessary court pleadings. Atty. Fudolin could have
requested an extension of time to file the required position paper, or at the
very least, informed his client of his medical condition; which Atty. Fudolin
failed to do so. 

(Canon 18 — A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence.
Rule 18.03 — A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.
Rule 18.04 — A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond
within a reasonable time to the client's request for information.)

Diana: Let’s start with our discussion. Ms, Anonuevo, what is expected from a lawyer in
handling the affairs of his clients?

Hannah: Canon 18 provides that a lawyer is expected to serve his client with
competence and diligence. Rule 18.03 and 18.04 further states that a lawyer shall not
neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and shall keep his clients informed of the case.
This includes not merely reviewing the cases, but also consists of properly representing
the client before any court, attending scheduled hearings, preparing the pleadings,
prosecuting the cases with reasonable dispatch, and urging their termination without
waiting for the client or the court to prod him or her to do so. 

Hannah: Now, Mr. Balegan, what is the relation of Canon 18 to the case of Brunet vs.
Atty. Guaren?

Rossbrent: Canon 18 provides that a lawyer shall serve his client with competence and
diligence. In this case, Atty. Guaren admitted that he accepted a partial payment of his
acceptance fee. However, he failed to perform his obligation to file the case for the
titling of complainants' lot despite the lapse of 5 years. Thus, Atty. Guaren breached his
duty to serve his client with competence and diligence when he neglected a legal matter
entrusted to him.

Rossbrent: Miss Dadaan, what do we mean by “a lawyer shall represent a client with
zeal within the bounds of the law”?

Avelyn: It means that the duty of a lawyer to represent his client with zeal must be
within the bounds provided by law.

Rossbrent: Why so?

Avelyn: Because Courts should not be made to bow down to the wiles of litigants who
bully judges into inhibiting from cases or deciding cases in their favor, but neither should
we shut our doors from litigants brave enough to call out the corrupt practices of people
who decide the outcome of their cases.

Avelyn: Mr. Gacayan, does the failure to inform the client of the status of his/her case
warrants disciplinary action?

Ryan: Yes, In the case of Julian Penilla vs. Atty. Quintin P. Alcid Jr, Atty. Alcid, after
collecting such attorneys fees and filing fees, neglected to inform his client about the
status of the case. Rule 18.04 provides that a lawyer shall keep the client informed of
the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client’s request
for information.
(Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his
negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.)

Ryan: Mr. Lapira, what does it mean when we say a lawyer shall serve his client with
competence and diligence?
 
Ariel: It means that a lawyer who accepts professional employment from a client
undertakes to serve his client with competence and diligence. He must conscientiously
perform his duty arising from such a relationship. He must bear in mind that by
accepting a retainer, he promises that he will exert his best judgment in the prosecution
or defense of litigation entrusted to him, and he will exercise reasonable care and
diligence in doing such. 

Ariel: Ms. Likigan, are lawyers allowed to give unsolicited advice? 

Cresa: No. An attorney has no power to act as counsel or legal representative for a
person without being retained. In doing so, he is evidently in conflict with the interests of
his own client. Thus, to establish the professional relation, it is sufficient that the advice
and assistance of an attorney are sought and received in any manner pertinent to his
profession.
Cresa: Ms. Mendoza, what is the duty of a lawyer if he is a collaborating counsel in the
case?
Diana: In the case of Sublay vs. NLRC, Although working merely as a collaborating
counsel, Atty. Alikpala had the bounden duty to monitor the progress of the case. It is
reminded to the members of the legal profession that every case they handle deserves
their full and undivided attention, diligence, skill and competence, regardless of its
importance and whether they accept it for a fee or for free keeping in mind that not only
the property but also the life and liberty of their clients may be at stake. 
Diana: Ms. Anonuevo, how should a lawyer represent his/her client?

Hannah: Canon 19 of the CPR mandates lawyers to represent their clients with zeal but
within the bounds of the law. Rule 19.01 further commands that "a lawyer shall employ
only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client and shall not
present, participate or threaten to present unfounded criminal charges to obtain an
improper advantage in any case or proceeding. Thus, a lawyer’s responsibility to protect
and advance the interests of his client does not warrant a course of action propelled by
ill motives and malicious intentions against the other party.

Hannah: Ms. Likigan, must a lawyer who accepts a case know the history of his client's
cause? 

Cresa: Yes. Any lawyer who assumes the responsibility for a client's cause has the duty
to know the entire history of a case, Especially if any litigation has commenced. A
lawyer should never take advantage of the seemingly endless channels left dangling by
our legal system in order to wangle the attention of the court. When court dockets get
clogged and the administration of justice is delayed, our judicial system may not be
entirely blameless, yet the greater fault lies in the lawyers who had taken their privilege
so lightly, and in such mindless fashion.
Cresa: Ms. Mendoza, can a lawyer disregard a client’s cause if it is contrary to his
personal view?
Diana: No. Regardless of a lawyer’s personal view, once a lawyer agrees to take up the
cause of a client, his client is entitled to the benefit of any and every remedy and
defense that is authorized by the law and he may expect his lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense. A lawyer who performs his duty with diligence and candor not only
protects the interest of his client; he also serves the ends of justice, does honor to the
bar, and helps maintain the respect of the community to the legal profession.
****In the case of Samonte vs Jumamil, it is apparent that respondent breached this duty when he
admittedly failed to file the necessary position paper before the NLRC, which resulted into an
adverse ruling against his client. Complainant failure to produce any credible witnesses in support of
her position paper is not a valid justification for respondent to completely abandon his client's cause.
By voluntarily taking up complainant's case, respondent gave his unqualified commitment to
advance and defend the latter's interest therein.
Diana: And that’s it. Thank you for listening to our concise panel discussion. 

GROUP 4, CASES 19-27

Case 19
  
Franie: To start our panel discussion, Mr. Bentican, can you tell us what is expected of the
lawyer in service of his client as held in the case of Samonte vs. Jumamil?
 
Diokno: The client is entitled to the benefit of any and every remedy and defense that is
authorized by the law of the land and he may expect his lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense. In Rule 18.03 – A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him,
and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable. 
 
Case 20.

Franie : Why is the practice of law imbued with public interest as discussed in the case of
Villonco vs. Roxas?

Diokno: It is due to the fact that a lawyer owes substantial duties, not only to his client, but also
to his brethren in the profession, to the courts, and to the public, and takes part in the
administration of justice, one of the most important functions of the State, as an officer of the
court.  A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust
and confidence reposed in him.

Case 21
Rhoda: Ms Bumilao, what happens if the Court turns a blind eye on irregular acts of lawyers
who claim that they are only serving their client with zeal?
Franie: In the case of Espanto vs. Atty. Belleza, it was held that if the Court allows irregular
practices for the reason that lawyers are constrained to suit their client's interests, the Court
would, in effect, sanction impropriety and wrongdoing. 

Canon 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility mandates lawyers to represent their clients
with zeal but within the bounds of the law. The lawyer's fidelity to his client must not be pursued
at the expense of truth and justice, and must be held within the bounds of reason and common
sense. 
 
Case 22
Zhaira: Ms Cabal, is the mere failure of a lawyer to perform the obligation due to the client a per
se violation of the Canon 18, specifically Rule 18.03? 

Rhoda: Yes. In the case of Domingo v Atty. Revilla, the SC held that a the mere failure of the
lawyer to perform the obligation due to the client is a per se violation of his duty to serve his
client with competence and diligence, which mandates that a lawyer shall not neglect a matter
entrusted to his, for his negligence therewith shall render him liable. So in this case, Atty.
Revilla, after accepting money for his legal service, failed to render the contracted legal service,
that act of Atty. Revilla as found by the Court is a violation of said duty of a lawyer to his client. 

Also, in the said case, the Court held that the filing of the action after receiving a letter or
demand that contained the threat of filing an administrative charge against him, did not cure the
violation of such duty. 

Case 23
Julie: Ms Chinayo, what is implied when the lawyer accepts a case?

Zhaira: In Segovia vs. Javier, the Court discussed that when a lawyer accepts a case, his
acceptance is an implied representation that he possesses the requisite academic learning, skill
and ability to handle the case. The lawyer has the duty to exert his best 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.

Case 24
Christian: Ms Lalwet, A relationship between a lawyer and a client is imbued with utmost trust
and confidence. What is the expectation of clients’ to their lawyers?

Julie: As discussed in the case of De Leon vs. Atty. Geronimo, Clients are led to expect that
lawyers would be ever-mindful of their cause and accordingly exercise the required degree of
diligence in handling their affairs. Verily, a lawyer is expected to maintain at all times a high
standard of legal proficiency, and to devote his full attention, skill, and competence to the case,
regardless of its importance and whether he accepts it for a fee or for free.

Atty. Geronimo's failure to inform his client about the adverse ruling of the NLRC, thereby
precluding her from further pursuing an appeal, is a clear breach of Canons 17 and 18 of the
CPR

Case 25
Hazel: Mr Tabadero, can you explain the relation of blackmailing in relation to the lawyer’s duty
under Canon 19.

Christian: In the case of Malvar v Feir, the court defined blackmailing based on common
parlance, as equivalent to and synonymous with extortion, the exaction of money either for the
performance of a duty, the prevention of an injury, or the exercise of an influence.

The monetary consideration Feir was demanding from Malvar in the amount of ₱18,000,000.00
cannot be considered as the subject of blackmail or extortion. Feir’s demand for said amount is
not an exaction of money for the exercise of an influence but is actually a legitimate claim for the
remaining balance subject of a legitimate sale transaction.

A lawyer may be tasked to enforce his client's claim and to take all the steps necessary to
collect it, such as writing a letter of demand requiring payment within a specified period.

 The act of the lawyer in this case does not constitute blackmailing which could violate canon
19, that is representing his client with zeal within the bounds of law. 

Cases 26-27

Diokno: To wrap up our panel discussion, Ms. Say-ao, what is the rationale of Canon 19?
 
Hazel: The rationale of Canon 19 is that a lawyer’s duty is not to his client but to the
administration of justice; to that end, his client’s success is wholly subordinate; and his conduct
ought to and must always be scrupulously observant of law and ethics. [Maglasang vs. People
(G.R. No. 90083, 4 October 1990)]
 
In a line of cases, the Supreme Court held that filing a number of baseless pleadings and
actions results in the mockery and abuse of the judicial processes. Under Canon 19 of the CPR,
a lawyer is required to represent his client within the bounds of the law. The Code enjoins a
lawyer to employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his client (Rule
19.01) and warns him not to allow his client to dictate the procedure in handling the case (Rule
19.03). [Millare vs. Montero (A.C. No. 3283, 13 July 1995)]

  CANONS 18-19
10) Josefina Carranza Vida Zaldivar vs. Atty. Ramon SG Cabanes Jr. (A.C. No. 7749, 8
July 2013)

Respondent Atty. Ramon SG Cabanes, Jr. was charged for gross negligence in violation
of Canon 17, and Rules 18.03 and 18.04 of Canon 18 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility. The Supreme Court held him guilty of gross negligence. The relationship
between an attorney and his client is one imbued with utmost trust and confidence. In
this light, clients are led to expect that lawyers would be ever-mindful of their cause and
accordingly exercise the required degree of diligence in handling their affairs. Verily, a
lawyer is expected to maintain at all times a high standard of legal proficiency, and to
devote his full attention, skill, and competence to the case, regardless of its importance
and whether he accepts it for a fee or for free. 
A lawyer’s duty of competence and diligence includes not merely reviewing the cases
entrusted to the counsel’s care or giving sound legal advice, but also consists of properly
representing the client before any court or tribunal, attending scheduled hearings or
conferences, preparing and filing the required pleadings, prosecuting the handled cases
with reasonable dispatch, and urging their termination without waiting for the client or
the court to prod him or her to do so. While such negligence or carelessness is incapable
of exact formulation, the Court has consistently held that the lawyer’s mere failure to
perform the obligations due his client is per se a violation. 

11) Stephan Brunet and Virginia Romanillo Brunet vs. Atty. Ronald L. Guaren (A.C.
No. 10164, 10 March 2014)
Atty. Ronald L. Guaren has received money from the respondents for the titling of a residential
lot after 5 years Atty. Guaren failed to deliver the title, in fact there was no progress in the titling
of the land even though he was paid and given funds for the action. Atty. Guaren although
claimed that he did not filed the case because he was not fully paid.

It was held by the Court that ‘’CANON 18 - A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and
diligence’’ was violated. Because he failed to perform his obligation to file the case for the titling
of complainants' lot despite the lapse of 5 years. Atty. Guaren breached his duty to serve his
client with competence and diligence when he neglected a legal matter entrusted to him.

What is the main duty of a lawyer? 

The practice of law is not a business. It is a profession in which duty to public service, not
money, is the primary consideration. Lawyering is not primarily meant to be a money-making
venture, and law advocacy is not a capital that necessarily yields profits. The gaining of a
livelihood should be a secondary consideration. The duty to public service and to the
administration of justice should be the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate
their personal interests or what they owe to themselves.

12) Re: Verified Complaint of Tomas S. Merdegia against Hon. Vicente S.E. Veloso,
etc./Re: Resolution dated 8 October 2013 in OCA IPI No. 12-205- CA-J against Atty.
Homobono Adaza II, IPI No. 12-205-CA-J/A.C. No. 10300, 10 December 2013

Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.

CANON 19 - A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE
BOUNDS OF THE LAW.

Rule 19.03 - A lawyer shall not allow his client to dictate the procedure in handling the case.

While a lawyer has a duty to represent his client with zeal, he must do so within the
bounds provided by law. He is also duty–bound to impress upon his client the propriety
of the legal action the latter wants to undertake, and to encourage compliance with the
law and legal processes.
Atty. Homobono Adaza II was required by the court to respond on why he should not
be charged with indirect contempt in relation to  an administrative complaint of Tomas
S. Merdegia, his client, against Court of Appeals Associate Justice Vicente S.E. Veloso,
He explained that he and his client observed Justice Veloso’s partiality during the oral
arguments, prompting them to file a Motion to Inhibit against Justice Veloso, and when
the latter refused, Merdegia filed another motion to inhibit acceded by Atty. Adaza
claimed he believed in the merits of the client’s cause.

SC found Adaza guilty of indirect contempt. When the motion to inhibit was dismissed
by the Justice, the proper remedy would have been to file a petition for certiorari, had
Adaza doubted the validity of the resolution of the judge. Further, the repeated filing of
motions for inhibition not only to the Justice but with also with the judge who handled
the the case is a proof of baseless administrative complaints filed by Adaza, an act that
constitute an improper conduct that tends to degrade the administration of justice, and
is thus punishable for indirect contempt.

13) Julian Penilla vs. Atty. Quintin P. Alcid Jr. (A.C. No. 9149, 4 September 2013)

Rule 18.03[, Canon 18 – A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable; and

Rule 18.04[, Canon 18 – A lawyer shall keep his client informed of the status of his case and shall
respond within a reasonable time to the client’s request for information.

In the case Penilla vs. Atty Alcid, Atty Alcid was plainly negligent and did not apprise complainant of
the status and progress of both cases he filed for the latter. He paid no attention and showed no
importance to complainant’s cause despite repeated follow-ups. Clearly, he is not only guilty of
incompetence in handling the cases. His lack of professionalism in dealing with complainant is also gross
and inexcusable. In what may seem to be a helpless attempt to solve his predicament, the complainant
even had to resort to consulting a program in a radio station to recover his money from respondent, or at
the very least, get his attention. A lawyer must be consistently mindful of his obligation to respond
promptly should there be queries or requests for information from the client.

- A client pays his lawyer hard-earned money as professional fees. In return, "every case a lawyer
accepts deserves his full attention, skill and competence, regardless of its importance and whether he
accepts it for a fee or for free. Rule 18.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility enjoins a lawyer not
to ‘neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him
liable.’ He must constantly keep in mind that his actions or omissions or nonfeasance would be binding
upon his client. He is expected to be acquainted with the rudiments of law and legal procedure, and a
client who deals with him has the right to expect not just a good amount of professional learning and
competence but also a whole-hearted fealty to the client’s cause." 

14) 14) Heirs of Lydio “Jerry” Falame vs. Atty. Edgar J. Baguio (A.C. No.
6876, 7 March 2008)

Question:

Can a lawyer advocate a position opposed to a former client by reason of death or

termination of lawyer-client relationship?
Answer:

No.

In the course of a lawyer-client relationship, the lawyer learns all the facts connected
with the client's case, including the weak and strong points of the case. The nature of
that relationship is, therefore, one of trust and confidence of the highest degree.

The client's confidence once reposed should not be divested by mere expiration of
professional employment.  

The protection given to the client is perpetual and does not cease with the termination of
the litigation, nor is it affected by the party's ceasing to employ the attorney and
retaining another, or by any other change of relation between them. It even survives the
death of the client.

15) Solatan vs. Inocentes (A.C. No. 6504, 9 August 2005)

Rule 18.03. A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.

QUESTION:
What is the duty of a lawyer who holds supervisory capacities?

ANSWER:
In Solatan vs. Inocentes, it was held that partners and practitioners who hold
supervisory capacities are legally responsible to exert ordinary diligence in apprising
themselves of the comings and goings of the cases handled by the persons over which
they are exercising supervisory authority and in exerting necessary efforts to foreclose
the occurrence of violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility by persons under
their charge. 

A lawyer charged with the supervision of a fledgling attorney prone to rookie mistakes
should bear greater responsibility for the culpable acts of the underling than one
satisfied enough with the work and professional ethic of the associate so as to leave the
latter mostly to his/her own devises.

16) Sublay vs. NLRC (G.R. No. 130104, 31 January 2000)

Q:

Are the mistakes or negligence of a lawyer binding upon the client?

A:
 Yes, clients are bound by the action of their counsel in the conduct of their case.
Otherwise, if the lawyer's mistake or negligence was admitted as a reason for the opening of a
case, there would be no end to litigation so long as counsel had not been sufficiently diligent or
experienced or learned.

The members of the legal profession that every case they handle deserves their full and
undivided attention, diligence, skill and competence, regardless of its importance and whether
they accept it for a fee or for free keeping in mind that not only the property but also the life and
liberty of their clients may be at stake.

17) Ong vs. Unto (Adm. Case No. 2417, 6 February 2003)
Atty. Unto coerce Ong to comply with his letter-demand by threatening to file various charges
against the latter. When the complainant did not heed his warning, he made good his threat and
filed a string of criminal and administrative cases against the complainant. They, however, did
not have any bearing or connection to the cause of his client. The records show that the
respondent offered monetary rewards to anyone who could provide him any information against
the complainant just so he would have leverage in his actions against the latter.

The Court held that Atty Unto violated Canon 19 of the Code of Professional Responsibility
mandates lawyers to represent their clients with zeal but within the bounds of the law. Rule
19.01 further commands that a lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the
lawful objectives of his client and shall not present, participate, or threaten to present unfounded
criminal charges to obtain an improper advantage in any case or proceeding. The ethics of the
legal profession rightly enjoin lawyers to act with the highest standards of truthfulness, fair play
and nobility in the course of his practice of law

18) Dimagiba vs. Montalvo Jr. (Adm. Case No. 1424, 15 October 1991)

What is required of a lawyer before filing a complaint

Any lawyer who assumes the responsibility for a client's cause has the duty to know the entire
history of a case, especially if any litigation has commenced.

Rule 1.01 — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful, dishonest immoral or deceitful conduct.
Rule 1.03 — A lawyer shall not for any corrupt motive or interest encourage any suit or
proceeding or delay any man's cause.

CANON 19 - A LAWYER SHALL REPRESENT HIS CLIENT WITH ZEAL WITHIN THE
BOUNDS OF THE LAW.

Atty. Jose Montalvo, repetitively filed several complaints in various forms involving the same
parties and the same subject matter, persistently raising issues long laid to rest by final
judgment and letting a litigation last for half a decade
Atty. Jose Montalvo was disbarred for stubbornly refusing to accept the court’s judgment, and
the act of indiscriminately filing of suit shows the ill intention of harassing the complainant and of
his violation of his oath not to delay any man for money or malice

19) Joy T. Samonte vs. Atty. Vivencio V. Jumamil (A.C. No. 11668, 17 July 2017)

Regardless of a lawyer's personal view, the latter must still present every remedy or defense within the
authority of the law to support his client's cause. In the case of Samonte vs Atty Jumamil, Atty jumamil
violated Canon 18 of the CPR by failing to submit a position paper making his client pay a large sum of
money. 

Once a lawyer agrees to take up the cause of a client, the lawyer owes fidelity to such cause and must
always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. He must serve the client with competence
and diligence, and champion the latter's cause with wholehearted fidelity, care, and devotion. Otherwise
stated, he owes entire devotion to the interest of the client, warm zeal in the maintenance and defense of
his client's rights, and the exertion of his utmost learning and ability to the end that nothing be taken or
withheld from his client, save by the rules of law, legally applied. This simply means that his client is
entitled to the benefit of any and every remedy and defense that is authorized by the law of the land and
he may expect his lawyer to assert every such remedy or defense. If much is demanded from an attorney,
it is because the entrusted privilege to practice law carries with it the correlative duties not only to the
client but also to the court, to the bar, and to the public. A lawyer who performs his duty with diligence and
candor not only protects the interest of his client; he also serves the ends of justice, does honor to the
bar, and helps maintain the respect of the community to the legal profession.

CANONS 18-19

 What is imbued in the relationship between an attorney and his client?

ARIANNE: In the case of Zaldivar vs. Cabanes,  the SC ruled that atty-client
relationship is one imbued with utmost trust and confidence. Clients are led to
expect that lawyers would be ever-mindful of their cause and accordingly exercise
the required degree of diligence in handling their affairs.

A lawyer’s duty of competence and diligence includes not merely reviewing the
cases, but also of properly representing the client before any court, attending
scheduled hearings, preparing and filing the required pleadings, and prosecuting
the handled cases with reasonable dispatch without waiting for the client or the
court to prod him to do so.

Is there a limit for a lawyer to render his/her service?

ROD: Yes, it was discoursed in the case of Re: Verified Complaint of Tomas S.
Merdegia against Hon. Vicente S.E. Veloso, etc. where the repeated filing of
motions for inhibition not only to the Justice but also with the judge as proof of
baseless administrative complaints, that

While a lawyer has a duty to represent his client with zeal, he must do so within the
bounds provided by law. He is also duty–bound to impress upon his client the
propriety of the legal action the latter wants to undertake, and to encourage
compliance with the law and legal processes.

The same doctrine applies to the case of Ong vs. Unto,. which commands that a
lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful objectives of his
client and shall not participate, or threaten to present unfounded criminal charges
to obtain an advantage in any case. 

What is the duty of a lawyer to his client in relation to the queries of a

client?

BHEA In the case Penilla vs. Atty Alcid, Atty Alcid was negligent and did not apprise
complainant of the status and progress of both cases he filed. He paid no attention
and showed no importance to complainant’s cause despite repeated follow-ups. The
complainant even had to resort to consulting a program in a radio station to recover his
money from Atty Alcid, or to get his attention. A lawyer must be consistently mindful of
his obligation to respond promptly should there be queries or requests for information
from the client.  

Can a lawyer advocate a position opposed to a former client by reason of

death or termination of lawyer-client relationship?

THESS: No. In a lawyer-client relationship, the lawyer learns all the facts
connected with the client's case, including the weak and strong points.

In Heirs of Falame vs. Atty. Baguio, the termination of attorney-client relation

provides no justification for a lawyer to represent an interest adverse to or in
conflict with that of the former client. The client's confidence once reposed should
not be divested by mere expiration of professional employment. Even after the
severance of the relation, a lawyer is barred from disclosing or using any of the
client's information that is prejudicial to his previous client.

 What is the duty of a lawyer who holds supervisory capacities?

KIMERALD: In Solatan vs. Inocentes, it was held that partners and practitioners
who hold supervisory capacities are legally responsible to exert ordinary diligence in
apprising themselves of the comings and goings of the cases handled by the
persons over which they are exercising supervisory authority and in exerting
necessary efforts to foreclose the occurrence of violations of the CPR by persons
under their charge.

 A lawyer charged with the supervision of a fledgling attorney prone to rookie

mistakes should bear greater responsibility for the culpable acts of the underling
than one satisfied enough with the work and professional ethic of the associate so
as to leave the latter mostly to his own devises.

 Are the mistakes or negligence of a lawyer binding upon the client?

YVELLE: Yes, clients are bound by the action of their counsel in the conduct of their
case. If the lawyer's mistake or negligence was admitted as a reason for the
opening of a case, there would be no end to litigation so long as counsel had not
been sufficiently diligent or experienced or learned as held in Sublay vs. NLRC.

Every case handled by lawyers deserves their full and undivided attention,
diligence, skill and competence, regardless of its importance and whether they
accept it for a fee or for free keeping in mind that not only the property but also the
life and liberty of their clients may be at stake.

What is required of a lawyer before filing a complaint?

ROD: This was tackled in the case of Dimagiba vs. Montalvo Jr., where Atty.
Jose Montalvo, repetitively filed several complaints in various forms involving the
same parties and the same subject matter, persistently raising issues long laid to
rest by final judgment and letting a litigation last for half a decade. The court
implies that any lawyer who assumes the responsibility for a client's cause has the
duty to know the entire history of a case, especially if any litigation has
commenced.

 Should a personal view of a lawyer be superior over the remedy that can
be applied to a case?

BHEA: No, regardless of a lawyer's personal view, a lawyer must still present every
remedy or defense within the authority of the law to support his client's cause. In
the cases Samonte vs Atty Jumamil and Brunet vs Atty Guaren,  Once a lawyer
agrees to take up the cause of a client, the client is entitled to the benefit of any
and every remedy and defense that is authorized by the law. If much is demanded
from an attorney, it is because a lawyer who performs his duty with diligence and
candor not only protects the interest of his client; he also serves the ends of
justice, does honor to the bar, and helps maintain the respect of the community to
the legal profession.