Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

BENEDICTO HORNILLA v. ATTY. ERNESTO S. SALUNAT

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 215764 2015-07-06	RICHARD K. TOM v. SAMUEL N. RODRIGUEZ PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
Accordingly, it cannot be doubted that the management and control of GDITI, being a stock corporation, are vested in its duly elected Board of Directors, the body that: (1) exercises all powers provided for under the Corporation Code; (2) conducts all business of the corporation; and (3) controls and holds all property of the corporation. Its members have been characterized as trustees or directors clothed with a fiduciary character.[48]
	ADM CASE NO. 6876 2008-03-07	HEIRS OF LYDIO “JERRY” FALAME v. ATTY. EDGAR J. BAGUIO TINGA, J,
A lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. A lawyer may not, without being guilty of professional misconduct, act as counsel for a person whose interest conflicts with that of his present or former client. [34] The test is whether, on behalf of one client, it is the lawyer's duty to contest for that which his duty to another client requires him to oppose or when the possibility of such situation will develop.[35] The rule covers not only cases in which confidential communications have been confided, but also those in which no confidence has been bestowed or will be used.[36] In addition, the rule holds even if the inconsistency is remote or merely probable or the lawyer has acted in good faith and with no intention to represent conflicting interests.[37]
	GR NO. 153413 2007-03-01	NECTARINA S. RANIEL v. PAUL JOCHICO AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
a corporation's board of directors is understood to be that body which (1) exercises all powers provided for under the Corporation Code; (2) conducts all business of the corporation; and (3) controls and holds all property of the corporation. Its members have been characterized as trustees or directors clothed with a fiduciary character. [12] Moreover, the directors may appoint officers and agents and as incident to this power of appointment, they may discharge those appointed.[13]
	AC. NO. 6656 2005-12-13	BOBIE ROSE V. FRIAS v. ATTY. CARMENCITA BAUTISTA LOZADA CORONA, J.
The test of conflict of interest is whether the acceptance of a new relation will prevent an attorney from the full discharge of his duty of undivided fidelity and loyalty to his client or invite suspicion of unfaithfulness or double-dealing in its performance.[24] The conflict exists if the acceptance of the new retainer will require the attorney to perform an act which will injuriously affect his first client in any matter in which he represented him and also whether he will be called upon in his new relation to use against the first client any knowledge acquired through their connection.[25]
	AC. NO. 6708 2005-08-25	FELICITAS S. QUIAMBAO v. ATTY. NESTOR A. BAMBA DAVIDE, JR., C.J.
In broad terms, lawyers are deemed to represent conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client, it is their duty to contend for that which duty to another client requires them to oppose.[11] Developments in jurisprudence have particularized various tests to determine whether a lawyer's conduct lies within this proscription. One test is whether a lawyer is duty-bound to fight for an issue or claim in behalf of one client and, at the same time, to oppose that claim for the other client.[12] Thus, if a lawyer's argument for one client has to be opposed by that same lawyer in arguing for the other client, there is a violation of the rule.