This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2015-04-22 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| In Aninon v. Sabitsana,[31] the Court laid down the tests to determine if a lawyer is guilty of representing conflicting interests between and among his clients. | |||||
|
2013-07-29 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Moreover, in Aniñon v. Sabitsana, Jr.,[27] the Court stated:The proscription against representation of conflicting interests applies to a situation where the opposing parties are present clients in the same action or in an unrelated action. The prohibition also applies even if the lawyer would not be called upon to contend for one client that which the lawyer has to oppose for the other client, or that there would be no occasion to use the confidential information acquired from one to the disadvantage of the other as the two actions are wholly unrelated. To be held accountable under this rule, it is enough that the opposing parties in one case, one of whom would lose the suit, are present clients and the nature or conditions of the lawyer's respective retainers with each of them would affect the performance of the duty of undivided fidelity to both clients.[28] (Citation omitted) | |||||