Miranda vs. Atty.

Carpio

CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL MONEYS AND

PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY COME INTO HIS
POSSESSION.

Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when
due or upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds and may
apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and
disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also
have a lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he has
secured for his client as provided for in the Rules of Court.

An attorney's retaining lien is fully recognized if the presence of the

following elements concur: (1) lawyer-client relationship; (2) lawful
possession of the client's funds, documents and papers; and (3) unsatisfied
claim for attorney's fees.[9]  Further, the attorney's retaining lien is a
general lien for the balance of the account between the attorney and his
client, and applies to the documents and funds of the client which may
come into the attorney's possession in the course of his employment.

Respondent's further submission that he is entitled to the payment of

additional professional fees on the basis of the principle of quantum
meruit has no merit.  "Quantum meruit, meaning `as much as he deserved'
is used as a basis for determining the lawyer's professional fees in the
absence of a contract but recoverable by him from his client." [12]  The
principle of quantum meruit applies if a lawyer is employed without a price
agreed upon for his services.  In such a case, he would be entitled to receive
what he merits for his services, as much as he has earned.[13]  In the present
case, the parties had already entered into an agreement as to the attorney's
fees of the respondent, and thus, the principle of quantum meruit does not
fully find application because the respondent is already compensated by
such agreement.