G.R. No.

L-54171 October 28, 1980

JEWEL VILLACORTA, assisted by her husband, GUERRERO VILLACORTA,

petitioner,
vs.
THE INSURANCE COMMISSION and EMPIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,
respondents.

TEEHANKEE, Acting C.J.:

FACTS: Villacorta had her Colt Lancer car insured with the respondent company for a
general check-up and repair and while the car was in the repair shop, the car was
allegedly taken by six (6) persons for a joyride. This resulted to the death of the driver
and some of the passengers as well as to extensive damage to the car. Villacorta filed a
claim for total loss with the said insurance company, but the claim was denied.
ISSUE: Whether or not the Empire Insurance Company be held liable for the total loss
of the insured vehicle?
RULING: Yes, the Empire Insurance Company is liable for the total loss of the insured
vehicle.
An "Authorized driver" clause is that a person other than the insured owner, who
drives the car on the insured's order, such as his regular driver, or with his permission,
such as a friend or member of the family or the employees of a car service or repair
shop must be duly licensed drivers and have no disqualification to drive a motor
vehicle. A car owner who entrusts his car to an established car service and repair shop
necessarily entrusts his car key to the shop owner and employees who are presumed to
have the insured's permission to drive the car for legitimate purposes of checking or
road-testing the car.
In this case, the insured’s car was wrongfully taken without the insured’s consent from
the car service and repair shop to whom it had been entrusted for check-up and repairs,
respondent insurer is liable and must pay insured for the total loss of the insured
vehicle under the Theft Clause of the policy. Moreover, despite the totally inadequate
evidence, that the taking was “temporary” and for a “joy ride”, a person who takes
possession of a vehicle belonging to another, without the consent of its owner, he is
guilty of theft because his intent to gain is evident since he derives utility, satisfaction,
enjoyment and pleasure.
 ACC LAW GOT TALENT MECHANICS:

The competition is open to all the bona fide Juris Doctor students of Aklan Catholic College.

Each year level must have at least two (2) representatives who will perform at the event. Group,
duo, or solo performance are welcome. No minimum or maximum number of performers. They
may showcase a dance number, song number, play or a combination of any other talents.

No dangerous stunts are allowed. Use of fire, pyrotechnics, dangerous stunts (i.e. lifting), foul
language and disrespectful gestures are strictly prohibited. The presentation, as much as
possible, is in line with the theme.

An allotted time of five (5) minutes minimum and a maximum of eight (8) minutes presentation
per performer is permitted. Preparation for the presentation is included in the time allotted for
each performer.

No daring costumes are allowed.

The tabulators assigned by the College of Law: Law Week Committee will be in-charge for the
computation of scores.

There will be three (3) judges that will come from the Faculty of ACC College of Law.

The decision of the judges is final.

Performers who will not abide with the mechanics provided, shall be disqualified.

There shall be only one winner who garnered the highest score.
 2.1. ADVANTAGES OF USING SOCIAL MEDIA IN YOUR PROFESSION

As she said earlier, a prospective client who does not know me can out a face to
the name. That’s all.

2.2. LIMITED USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA APPLICATIONS

It's possible to use different social media applications. There is no limitation

because it is your right, that is your freedom. Especially when it comes to
commenting, it is freedom of speech. But according to my interviewee, she is
not active in things like commenting because it only gives her stress. Like for
example in politics, you just commented or posted about what your thoughts
are or what your stand is. Then when you came back someone already
replied and started fighting with you. Then the conversation will be even
longer and even more disturbing. So, for her, it’s better to keep quiet and
keep her comments to herself. She always picks her battles.

2.3. THE FEELING ON A NEGATIVE FEEDBACK FROM CLIENT

She has never seen or heard a negative comment about her work. But she said
that, you can see on the face of the client if they are happy and pleased or not
with the work you did. But if ever they are not pleased, you shouldn't be affected.
Think where you went wrong and focus on the things that you should have done
and what you shouldn't. Just relax and tell yourself that you will do better next
time.

3. NEGLIGENCE OR DERELICTION OF DUTY

 Lawyers owe their clients a duty of care. Negligence is a failure to exercise
the degree of care considered reasonable in the circumstances, resulting in financial or
other loss. In the case of negligence, it is up to a court to decide if the lawyer breached
their duty of care and whether the client is entitled to compensation for any loss.

3.1. A FEELING THAT YOU MIGHT FAIL TO DO YOUR OBLIGATION

She stated that it’s not the obligation that she might fail but sometimes she
can’t help but be anxious of a mistake she might make along the way.
Because she knows that in herself, she is dedicated. But there are certain
points in the case which you sometimes say that I should have done this
should not have done that. That's the only thing that sometimes comes to her
mind, that sometimes you cannot be, or you can’t really handle your case
without going through rough patches.

3.2. IS LOSING A CASE EQUIVALENT TO FAILING YOUR DUTY AND

OBLIGATION?

She said No. When you lose a case it does not mean that you failed to do your
obligation. And she also stated that if she failed to remedy that, through the
means afforded by law and the rules, then that would be a failure.

3.3. OVERCOMING FAILURES IN THE PRACTICE OF LAW

In an honest answer, my interviewee is still having a fear of speaking in public or

in a court room. She is terrified until now. So, her way of handling it is she
expose herself to situations that requires her to speak publicly as often as
possible. And it gets easier over time.

3.4. LAWYERS OWING THEIR CLIENTS A STANDARD DUTY OF CARE

 My interviewee believes in that. You must know that a client has entrusted
something very important to you. And for that, you owe the client the highest
standard of care.

3.5. EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PERFORM THE OBLIGATION

If you failed to perform, not only could you suffer administratively, but the client’s
case could also be negatively impacted from the lawyer’s failure.

3.6. OPINION ON A CLIENT PLEADING “NOT GUILTY” OF MURDER BUT

LATER ON PLEADED “GUILTY” AND LEAVING THE CLIENT TO SIDE
WITH THE OTHER GROUP

She would say, it is more of a violation of ethics rather than negligence. You
were bound to that first client the moment you represented him and going to the
other party is obviously a conflict of interest.

In the situation stated, maybe the way to handle it is to withdraw your

representation as that client’s lawyer. Not because he admitted to the murder,
but because trust no longer exists between you and him. And you must
remember that trust is the center of a lawyer-client relationship.

3.7. PROMISING YOUR CLIENT THAT YOU WILL WIN BUT EVENTUALLY NOT

It is unethical to promise your client that you will win the case but eventually
not. As lawyers, when advising the client, we should only give a candid and
honest opinion on the merits and probable results of the client's case. We
should never overstate or understate the prospects of the case. Always
remember that a lawyer should only impress his client upon compliance with
the laws and the principles of fairness.
 ANALYSIS

In this whole interview, each lawyer has a different unique personality. And every day
for them is a journey that faces a lot of constant struggles in relation to work or even
personal but what is important is that you learned something from it. Facing different
clients is a day of facing a lot of different kinds of legal problems that they needed
lawyers to help them solve it. Lawyers may have different opinions and methods in
handling and dealing with their clients. but they only have one goal and that is to help
those who are in need.

As to lawyers, not all clients can be pleased. Each client has also a different personality.
Not all of them are the same, some are nice, and some are rude, but it is the duty of the
lawyer to always serve the client with competence and diligence and shall not decline to
represent a person solely on account of the latter's race, sex. creed or status of life, or
because of his own opinion regarding the guilt of said person. It means, whether he is a
nice or rude client, a lawyer shall not refuse his services to the needy.