View full case

ANGELITA C. ORCINO v. ATTY. JOSUE GASPAR

FACTS:

Complainant Angelita Orcino engaged the services of respondent Atty. Josue Gaspar to prosecute a criminal case involving the slaying of her husband. They entered into a contract stating that the complainant would pay legal fees of P20,000, with P10,000 to be paid upon signing and the balance before the conclusion of the case. It was also agreed that the complainant would pay P500 per appearance of the respondent. The complainant made payments totaling P20,000 in accordance with the contract. Respondent diligently performed his duties, interviewing witnesses, gathering evidence, and attending the preliminary investigation. The case was then filed before the Regional Trial Court. However, during a hearing in August 1991, respondent failed to attend and the court granted bail to the accused. Complainant confronted respondent about his absence and accused him of jeopardizing the case. Respondent claimed that he did not receive formal notice of the hearing. Complainant demanded the case records and respondent gave them to her. Complainant never returned the records nor saw respondent again. On September 18, 1991, respondent filed a Motion to Withdraw as Counsel without the complainant's consent. The court ordered respondent to secure complainant's consent before his withdrawal. Complainant refused to sign, and respondent did not appear at subsequent hearings. Complainant had to engage another lawyer. A complaint was filed, and the case was referred for investigation.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not Atty. Josue Gaspar abandoned his duties as complainant's counsel.

  2. Whether or not Atty. Josue Gaspar failed to return the legal fees paid by the complainant.

RULING:

  1. Yes, Atty. Josue Gaspar abandoned his duties as complainant's counsel. The court held that a lawyer's right to withdraw from a case before its final adjudication arises only from the client's written consent or from a good cause. In this case, Atty. Gaspar filed a motion to withdraw as counsel without the complainant's consent. He failed to attend the hearings and did not contact the complainant, which compelled her to engage the services of another lawyer. These actions clearly demonstrate the abandonment of his duties as counsel.

  2. Yes, Atty. Josue Gaspar failed to return the legal fees paid by the complainant. The court found that the complainant fully paid the legal fees of P20,000.00 as stipulated in the contract. However, Atty. Gaspar did not fulfill his obligation to complete the case and provide the necessary legal services. Thus, he should reimburse the complainant for the legal fees she paid.

PRINCIPLES:

  • A client has the absolute right to terminate the attorney-client relation at any time with or without cause.

  • An attorney who undertakes to conduct an action impliedly stipulates to carry it to its conclusion and is not at liberty to abandon it without reasonable cause.

  • A lawyer's right to withdraw from a case before its final adjudication arises only from the client's written consent or from a good cause.

  • An attorney who withdraws from a case without the client's consent may be held liable for abandonment of duties.

  • When an attorney fails to fulfill his obligation to provide legal services, he should reimburse the client for any fees paid.