LEMOINE v BALON

FACTS:
-

ISSUE:
HELD:
-

Lemoine is a French national who filed an insurance claim with Metropolitan Insurance.
His friend Jesus Garcia arranged for the engagement of Balons services as his counsel
Balon advised Lemoine that he was charging 25% of the actual amount to being recovered payable upon
successful recovery. An advance payment of P50,000 to be deducted from whatever amount would be
successfully collected. P1,000 as appearance and conference fee for each and every court hearing and
legal expenses and other miscellaneous will be charged to Lemoines account which would be reimbursed
upon presentment of account. Lemoine never gave his consent as to the fee.
Lemoine signed an undated Special Power of Attorney authorizing Balon to bring any action against
Metropolitan Insurance for the satisfaction of Lemoines claim as well as to negotiate, sign, compromise,
encash and receive payments
Metropolitan Insurance offered to settle Lemoines claim and Balon confirmed his acceptance of the offer
December 1998, Metropolitan Insurance issued a China Bank check payable to Lemoine in the amount of
P525,000 which was received by Balon
When Lemoine asked Balon as to the status of the case, Balon answered that Metropolitan Insurance was
offering P350,000 for settlement which Lemoine suggested that Balon accept to avoid litigation
December 1999, Lemoine visited the office of Metropolitan Insurance to ask on the status of the case and
it answered that the case was long settled via a check given to Balon.
Balon acknowledge that he is in possession of the check and that he is keeping the check as attorneys lien
pending Lemoines payment of his attorneys fee equivalent to 50% of the entire amount collected. He
also threatened Lemoine that he will not hesitate to make proper representation with the Bureau of
Immigration and Deportation, DOLE and BIR if Lemoine will make any trouble to Balon and that he has
good network with the mentioned agencies.
Balon later claimed that he gave P233,000 to Garcia on the representation of Lemoine. No written
memorandum of the turn-over was made because Garcia was a co-Rotarian and co-attorney of Balon
Balon was in possession of the said check for 5 years
W/N Balon violated the Code of Professional Responsibility

YES! And he was ordered disbarred by the SC

The lawyers continuing exercise of his retaining lien presupposes that the client agrees with the amount of
attorneys fees to e charged. In case of disagreement, however, the lawyer must not arbitrarily apply the
funds in his possession to the payment of his fees. He can file the necessary action with the proper court
to fix the fees
Before receiving the check, he proposes a 25% attorneys fees, after receiving the check, he was already
asking for 50%.
under the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer shall not engage in unlawful acts , must observe
fairness in all his dealings with his client and must hold in trust all moneys and properties of his client
a lawyer who practices deceit in his dealings with his client not only violates his duty of fidelity loyalty and devotion
to the clients cause but also degrades himself and besmirches the name of an honorable profession.