Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

HEIRS OF TIBURCIO F. BALLESTEROS v. ATTY. MANILEÑO N. APIAG

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 203288 2014-07-18	REMEDIOS M. MAULEON v. LOLINA MORAN PORTER PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
Petitioner's asseveration that her non-appearance in the March 27, 2009 hearing was due to her counsel's assurance that he had duly filed a motion for postponement, which the MeTC should have purportedly granted,[40] cannot be sustained since no party has the right to assume that such motion would be approved by the courts.[41] Consequently, absent any justifiable reason for her and her counsel's non-appearance at the said preliminary conference, the Court concurs with the RTC's finding that no grave abuse of discretion can be ascribed against the MeTC in submitting the case for decision[42] and, subsequently, ordering petitioner's ejectment from the subject property.
	AC. No. 7657 2008-02-12	VIVIAN VILLANUEVA v. ATTY. CORNELIUS M. GONZALES CARPIO, J.
The appropriate penalty on an errant lawyer depends on the exercise of sound judicial discretion based on the surrounding facts.[28] The Court finds the recommended penalty inadequate. In Rollon,[29] the Court suspended a lawyer from the practice of law for two years for failing to render any legal service after receiving money and for failing to return the money and documents he received. In that case, the Court held that:The circumstances of this case indubitably show that after receiving the amount of P8,000 as x x x partial service fee, respondent failed to render any legal service in relation to the case of complainant. His continuous inaction despite repeated follow-ups from her reveals his cavalier attitude and appalling indifference toward his client's cause, in brazen disregard of his duties as a lawyer. Not only that. Despite her repeated demands, he also unjustifiably failed to return to her the files of the case that had been entrusted to him. To top it all, he kept the money she had likewise entrusted to him.[30]
	ADM CASE NO. 6266 2006-11-16	ESTELA ANASTACIO-BRIONES v. ATTY. ALFREDO A. ZAPANTA QUISUMBING, J.
The appropriate penalty on an errant lawyer depends on the exercise of sound judicial discretion based on the surrounding facts. The penalties for a lawyer's failure to file a brief or other pleading range from reprimand, warning with fine, suspension and, in grave cases, disbarment.[16] In this case, this Court sustains the recommendation of the IBP for respondent's suspension of three months.
	AC. NO. 4676 2006-05-04	SPS. ANTONIO AND NORMA SORIANO v. ATTY. REYNALDO P. REYES CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Respondent's failure to file the pre-trial brief constitutes inexcusable negligence.[18] The importance of filing a pre-trial brief cannot be gainsaid. For one, the lawyers are compelled to prepare their cases in advance. They eliminate haphazard preparation. Since pre-trial is a serious business of the court, preparation of the lawyers and parties for the pre-trial in both questions of fact and of law cannot be overemphasized as an essential requirement for a pre-trial conference. They enable both parties to view the documentary evidence of the other even before they are presented in court. They enable the parties to know the testimonies of each other's witnesses. Pre-trial briefs also apprise the courts of the additional points the parties are willing to stipulate upon, or the additional points which could be inquired into for the purpose of additional stipulations. They also apprise the court of the respective demands of the parties, thus, enabling the court to discuss more intelligently an amicable settlement between or among the parties.[19] The failure to submit a pre-trial brief could very well, then, be fatal to the case of the client as in fact it is a ground for dismissal of the case. [20] For this reason, respondent's failure to submit the pre-trial brief to the court within the given period constitutes negligence which entails disciplinary action. Not only is it a dereliction of duty to his client but to the court as well. Hence, this Court, in Spouses Galen v. Atty. Paguirigan,[21] explained:An attorney is bound to protect his client's interest to the best of his ability and with utmost diligence. A failure to file brief for his client certainly constitutes inexcusable negligence on his part. The respondent has indeed committed a serious lapse in the duty owed by him to his client as well as to the Court not to delay litigation and to aid in the speedy administration of justice.