PALE SLC-LAW

BATCH 1 DIGEST 2: BURBE vs. ATTY. MAGULTA

TOPIC: Lawyer-Client Relationship
DOCTRINE: A lawyer-client relationship was established from the very first moment complainant asked
respondent for legal advise regarding the former’s business. To constitute professional employment, it is not
essential that the client employed the attorney professionally on any previous occasion. It is not necessary
that any retainer be paid, promised, or charge; neither is it material that the attorney consulted did not
afterward handle the case for which his service had been sought.

CITATION: A.C. No. 5713. June 10, 2002

PETITIONERS: Dominador P. Burbe
RESONDENTS: Atty. Alberto Magulta

FACTS:

Burbe filed a disbarment case against Atty. Magulta with the Commission on Bar Discipline of the Integrated
Bar of the Philippines.

The petitioner procured the services of the respondent in connection to his business. Upon the suggestion of the
respondent to file a complaint against certain parties for breach of contract with a filing fee of P25,000.00 the
petitioner deposited the said amount to Atty. Magulta.

Respondent claims that complainant did not give him the filing fee, hence the former’s failure to file the
complaint in cour. Also, respondent alleges that the amount delivered by complainant to his office was for
attorney’s fees and not for filing fee. He also contends that the complainant never paid him for services
rendered and he only drafted the said documents as a personal favor for the kumpadre of one of his partners.

Based from the IBP’s report, Burbe deposited P25,000.00. However, Atty. Magulta failed to file the complaint
on behalf of his client and he appropriated for himself the money given for the filing fee.

With the gravity of the respondent’s offense, the IBP recommended that he will be suspended from the practice
of law for a period of one (1) year.

ISSUE:

Whether a lawyer-client relationship was established between the petitioner and the respondent.

HELD:

A lawyer-client relationship was established from the very first moment complainant asked respondent for legal
advise regarding the former’s business. To constitute professional employment, it is not essential that the client
employed the attorney professionally on any previous occasion. It is not necessary that any retainer be paid,
promised, or charge; neither is it material that the attorney consulted did not afterward handle the case for which
his service had been sought.

A lawyer-client relationship exists notwithstanding the close personal relationship between the lawyer and the
complainant or the nonpayment of the former’s fees.

Once a lawyers agree to take up the cause of a client, they owe fidelity to such cause and must always be
mindflu of the trust and confidence reposed in them. They owe entire devotion to the interest of the client, warm
zeal in the maintenance and the defense of the client’s rights, and the exertion of their utmost learning and
abilities to the end that nothing be taken or withheld from the client, save by the rules of law legally applied.

The practice of law is a profession and not a business. 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 is not a
professional but a secondary consideration. Duty to public service and to the administration of jutice should be
the primary consideration of lawyers, who must subordinate their personal interests or what they owe to
themselves.

The practice of law is a noble calling in which emolument is a byproduct, and the highest eminence may be
attained withouth making much money.

Page 1 of 2 © Prepared by: ANTOLIN

PALE SLC-LAW
WHEREFORE, Atty. Alberto C. Magulat is found guilty of violating Rules 16.01 and 18.03 of the CPR ans is
hereby SUSPENDED from the practice of law for a period of one (1) year.

Page 2 of 2 © Prepared by: ANTOLIN