No. bate KEYES, RICCI ANDREA 0. 3F Businos y- Ricafort ADM NO. 4544 | DEC: 22,1447 - FACTS Busines alarged Atty Ricafort with esta{a for misappropriating “um OF P 241000-00 . of this amounts 30 00 was entrusted to respondent for deposit In the bank account of complainant ’s fusbana, while the f aid represented the amount respondent gemanded from C for bond, when no such bond js required 1sSue: Won respondent is guilty of Violating Canon 1G of CPR? HELD: YES. Respondent's illegal use is cven made more manifest by his letters to BUSINOS, all Fromising to make pay the moncy he withdrew. f IS WEll-settled *hGl a lawyer is obligated promp- aly to report ne money of hi chents that has come iata his possession. Hc should not comminglé it with hic Private prop- erly or use it fOr Personal PUrPOSES withoul his cents con- sent He should maintain a reputation for honesty and ¢id- clity tO frust- In this “case, he has betrayed the confidence reposed in Timm by his clicnis-Not only has he degradea the henstle as unfaithful lanyer, but al6o has besmircheg the fair name of an honorable profess lon. Respondent likewke Violated 5-25 Rule (Be of the RAC. His transgressions manit ested dishonesty and amounted to grave misconduct and grossly upedhical behavior which caused dishonor. for It cannot be denied that respect tor lifigants in the profession is diminished when a member of ear betravs their yaust and @ontidende- this court has been nothing short of exacting Indemand for integritY and good moral character, Scanned with CamScannerer *Y oe Date REYES RICE ANDREA D. SF "| cinta Vv sbrcdo NN | AC NO. 5831 7 van. 13,2003 } FACTS BPI fli¢d two Complaints for repicvin and damages against €spliar Medival Center and its Presid ent and another Yohn Yoc- complainant alleged that espiriid and John Doe executed in favor of 6encacs a PN Which they obliged themselves yoinily and severally tO pay the 1atter 19 monthly 1nstall- ments pursvant f0 schedule they had agreed upon: itis ‘dated that qalure on Ahe part of Makers to Fay any wetalmen when due shal make subscquem installments immediately due and demand able. Espiritu engaged services of Atty. cabredo to represent him in two civil Cases. While CO5e5 pending IN Gurt. Atfy- aabredo advised €sphar to remit ine money and update payments to @PI- FSB through Arial Court - Accordingly. they deleted amount Df PSI, 000-00 10 Atly- Cabredo’s office- Lai¢r on, when Gabredo 4ailed +0 apPcar in two Civil casts, the management of EsPhar Found out that he did NOt aciver aid um to court ISSUE: won respondent violated canon (@ of CPR? HELD: YES. he relationship between clieNt and wyer tf highly fiduc- . iary vi Fequires high degree of Fidelity and good faith. Here, . ta dediing with trust propcrty, a Lawyer should be very scrup- i ulous. money or other arust Property of client coming into 7 poss 58100 of lawyer should be reportcO to the latter and 7 account any CircUm flyalte AG NO 20027 Feb:I7T 2004 FACTS some ‘ity: Pujaite - the suit was for specific performance with dqma- time in Mar-1995, complainants hired the services of ges 10 compel their sister, Pulumbarit, tO deliver them shares in the estate of their deceased mother. my the presence oF Toreto, clerk Of Curt divided the withdrawn amount Into cight shares -he gave defendam two stiares and the rem- aining amount (G shares) to respondent. However. complainants allege they did not receive their gnares from respondent despite repeated demands: thus. Wey engaged services Of Affy- chavez ,niho sent letter to respondents, demanding Yhat the amount entrustea to him by Clerk be Furned over to Complainants. what respondent delivercd 40 complainants was an amount trom which he deducted P 250,000 therefrom: He ckimed that this amount jehie atiy’s (eS per Ms Agreement with Alaoyind- ISSUE: won respondent violdied aanon to of OPK? HELD: YES- The (anyer is allowed to apply 50 much of the funds as may be necessary 40 satlsty his lawful Fees suryect to the cond- jion inat he shal Promptly notify his client: the lawyer cannot unilaterally app tor himselt the money of his client for pay meni of fe@S which client owes 10 dhe former. while Ht is te “nat he has lien over the funds, he should nave mtifled comphi- nanis about H in duetime. is act of holding movey without their acquiescence i Indicative of lack of lategrity. Scanned with CamScannerNo. i Date_ Frias y- Lozada” AC GOSG7 Det Br 2005 REYES, RIGCI ANDREA D. 3F FACTS Frias alleged that respondem become her retained counsel ‘and legal adviser in the carly part of 1990. she entrusted 40 respan- dent documents and titles of property in November that year * in pec 1990, respondent persuaded complainam to sell house iocated in Ayala Alabang. Respondent allegedly acted as broker. Respondent arranged meeting with complainam and prospective buyer, Dra san Viego. wNen they arrived at security Bank. san piego handed PLM cash and PIM in cnech. mstead of P3M in cash 05 downpayment - OUL of the PZM COs. respondent took PIM as her come isslon without compldinantS comem- when the transaction between complainant and san piego did rot materialize, the former tried to recover title from respondent . Respondent avoided her and refused t0 give back chech PIM she cok as his commission. ISSUE: won respondent violated PR ? HELD: YE5- There ( conflict of interest in this case. the test of cont ict oF imecedt 15 whether theacceptance of New relation will prevent attorney rom the full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to nis client or invite suspicion of untaith- fulness or double éedling in its performance. In this cox, respon gent admitied that she counseled both complainant and ‘an viego m ine sdle Of flabang property: Hr active partici yarn in the Case displayed utter dgregard of rule against discharging inconsistent duties to her chents- _ Scanned with CamScannerREYES. RICCI ANDREA D. 3F Rosacia ¥- Atty. eulalacao AC No. 3145: O-2, (105 Facts - fowacia, President of Tacma Fhils-,a duly registered corPo- rgtlom piled a complaint tor dmbarment against Bulalacao. The ranyer client relationship was severed as shown by another agrecment of ven date. Aftér almost 4 monihs trom date of respondent § agreement with Tacma fn terminated, =~ several emplovees of the corporation consulted respondent Yor purpose of filing an action far illegal dismissal- ISSUE: won respondent breadicd his cath of office tor represent ing the cmployees of his fOrmér ch ent, Tacma Ph aticr the termination of their attorney- chent relationsnie? — HELD: YES. Atlomey owes fidelity and loydity to his cient not only ia the COS in which he hOd represented him bul ato after the relgtion of attorney and client has terminated “as it 15 Mt good practice 10 permit hirn afterwards 10 def end another case of another ‘person against his former client under the pretext that the case & diétinck 40M, or independent of ine former COS. |t behooves respondent not only to keep inviolate the clients @ntidence, but also 40 avoid the appearance of treachéry and do uble-dealing- The relation beiween chentattorney is One of confidence and trust to the highest degree NO opportunity must te given attorneys 1 take advantage of SECTES Of his cient obtained while fe confidential celation of attorney - client exists« other- vise. (egal peor ession will suffer by (05s of confidence of Feopk. Scanned with CamScanner“No. a KEYES, RICCI ANDREA D. OF Date___ : — Traders Royal Bank Empoyees Union V. NLAC and cruz GR 120592; Mar. 4, MT FACTS “Traders Royal bank cmployees UNION and respondent cruz entered into Betdiner Agreement, where the former obligated itself 40 pay the (otter monihly retainer fee of P3:000-00, in consideration of law firm's undertaking 410 render Services enumerated in their contract- During tne existence of their agreement. union reterrcd to eeopondent the cidims of its members for holiday, mid-vear aNd year-end bonuses against their employer. After the 56 rendered a decision, fespondent notified pet Fioner UNION, ie TRE management ,and Fe NLRC of his right 10 KEICISe aNd enforce his attorney's lien over the award OF tolid ay pay differential fetitioner union fileg mation to ofpose~ TSSUE: On NLRC Committed grave abuse of dbcretion in uFrolaing athe award of attorney's Fees in the amount of (07 of 11, 104? ELD: YES- ) Tere arc tro commonly accepted Concepts of attorneys #005! *) ordinary concept - attomey’s fee Is the reasonable cOMPENsGtion paid to lawyer by Mis chent for legdl servi ces he has renderag. 8) Ext ordinary - indemnity for damages ordered by the court to pe paid by the tosing rorty in a litiga- ton. 7 Scanned with CamScannerAES, RCCL ANIREA 0. 3F Oe Respondents present claim wor atlomeys t€3 fefoe the NUR even though after its cartier decision had been reviewed and far- | tlaly affirmed. it is Well-sctiled thot attorney's fees may be asserted, either: a) in the Very GCtloN in which services of lawyer had been rendered + or b) in a separate action Hence, respondent was well within his rights when ne made his claim and waited tor the finality of judgment for holiday pay diferential, instead of Filing if ahead of the awards complete resblution. 10 declare *#hot a lawyer may file @ claim for fees the same action only before judgment is reviewed by higher tribunal would deprive him of his saia options ana render nefFechve the pronounce- meats Of this court: 3) in their contract, the 3000-00 which Petitioner pays monthly 40 respondent does not cover #ne services the latter actually rendered berore ihe LA- AS (dicated in Heir contract, the monthly fee ™ tended merely as comderation for Law firms Commitment Fo render services cnumeated a fart A ‘and fart 6 of their reiainer agreement There» a diffeeNCe in general Retainer and special HeLiner. In this case, the Pane ngs mremed mércly as General Reiner, a> said mominly tee cover only the law fwrn's pledge “Hs commitment to render legal ccrvices enumerated! D Genet Reiner & the fee paid to tamyer to secuc Me latter's fulure Services As generat (UNSE! for any ordinary legal popiem wh the maulinary business of cent ; while @ special refarner isa te paid ior epedfic cases handled oF rendered by lawyer Scanned with CamScannerNo, _—___—— Dates _—__—_— REYES: RICCI ANDREA D. 3 10 dient. a | | A the value of respondent's services should not be caablohed on the lone basis of Art OF the LC as the fcesmentioned there refers f0 Extraordinary Foes, recoverable 5 indemnity for damages sustained by ana payarle 10 the prevailing Patt in ascertaining ine attomey's fees by He courts it stat consder guidelines set forth in canon, ao Rule -a0-ol of the CPR. Scanned with CamScannerREYES. RICE ANDREA D- 3F Dausay -¥. Atty: Mauricio JT AC NO. 56557 san. 23, 2000. FACTS. on Ock-2001 » Dallsay engaged respondeM's services as aunel. Notwithstanding his receipt of documents an attorney's £065, : respondent never rendered legal services for her- As a reallly she terminated attorney-client reidtionship and demanaed for return Of her money and documents but respondent, re{ used. ISSUE: WON respondent violated CPR? BELD: YES. No Lawyer 1s obliged 40 act evther as adviser or advocate or every person who May wish to become his client- He kas right to decline employment: 6ut once he accepts money from client, an aHorney- cent relat tonship is established, giving rise t0 duty of fidélity 10 ae client's cause: rom then on. hé is expected 49 be mindful of the Hust and confidence reposed in him: He must serve client wlth competence and diligence and champion the latter's use with wholehéarted devotion. Moreover: there is nothing 1a the reaomds which show that he Filed any péttlon- the CPR Conon te Kule IG-ol thereof prov- ides that “qa pawyer shall account for all money or property collecied from the cllent- woncy entrusted to Lawyer for *pec- ific purposes such as for filing fe, bul Not Used 10 lle Case, must b¢ ummediately retuned to client on deManat In this case, he should have returned comelainany's money: sucly, Ne cannot De raid fordoing nothing. Scanned with CamScannerDate. REYES. RICCI ANDREA D- 3F Montano ¥- AtY. peda HWNO. 42157 May 2h 2001 © FACTS on Nov-1942, complainant hired services of Atty Dealca as fo counsel in collavo‘ation with Atty. Gerona: The fartics agrecd upon attorney's fees in in€ amount of ?15:00-, 607 of nnich, 15 payable upon acceptance of ihe case ard the remaining balance upon termination of the @S€- compli- nant paid respondem amount of # 7/600-00- Thercatter, even before respondent prepared ine appeliani& brief and contrary to ine Qgreement, Atty: Deaka demanded additional payment from complainant ang the latter obliged. Prior 10 FilING of appellant's brict, respondent again demand- ed payment for tne remaining bdlance- when complainant nas undole 40 dos, respondent withdrew his aPPearance as ‘counsel without his prior Knowledge [SSUE: won res pondeNt vidlatea canon 20 of CPR? HELD: YES- There is sufficiem Eridence which indicates com painams willingness t0 pay the atHomey's f€@S- this notwithstanding, respondem witndren his appearance .the court finds that such withdrawal Was unjustified as the complainant did not de like- rary failed 10 pay him QHomeys Ftts - Responders comempt- ous conduct docs not speak well oF member of Fare Comidering that the amount owing 10 him was ONY 3:500-00- Caron 20 of the CPR Provides that a lawyer shall avoid controversi¢s wilh clients Concerning his compensation and shall re sort to guaicial action only 40 prevent fraud. imposition ov wyustlcc- Scanned with CamScanner