Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pineda v. de Jesus
Pineda v. de Jesus
*
G.R. No. 155224. August 23, 2006.
_______________
* SECOND DIVISION.
609
610
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 2/7
10/25/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 499
CORONA, J.:
The subject of this petition for review is the April 30, 2002
1
decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CV No. 68080
2
which modified the order of the Regional Trial Court (RTC)
of Pasig City, Branch 151, in JDRC Case No. 2568 entitled
Ma. Aurora D. Pineda v. Vinson B. Pineda.
The facts follow.
On April 6, 1993, Aurora Pineda filed an action for
declaration of nullity of marriage against petitioner Vinson
Pineda in the RTC of Pasig City, Branch 151, docketed as
JDRC Case No. 2568. Petitioner was represented by
respondents Attys. Clodualdo de Jesus, Carlos Ambrosio
and Emmanuel Mariano.
During the pendency of the case, Aurora proposed a
settlement to petitioner regarding her visitation rights over
their minor child and the separation of their properties.
The proposal was accepted by petitioner and both parties
subsequently filed a motion for approval of their
agreement. This was approved by the trial court. On
November
_______________
611
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 3/7
10/25/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 499
_______________
612
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 4/7
10/25/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 499
_______________
613
13
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 5/7
10/25/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 499
13
they did. The “full payment for settlement” should have
discharged petitioner’s obligation to them.
The power of this Court to reduce or even delete the
award of at-torneys’ fees cannot be denied. Lawyers are
officers of the Court and they participate in the
14
fundamental function of administering jus-tice. When
they took their oath, they submitted themselves to the
authority of the Court and subjected their professional fees
15
to judicial control.
WHEREFORE, the petition is hereby PARTIALLY
GRANTED. The decision of the Court of Appeals dated
April 30, 2002 in CA-G.R.
_______________
614
——o0o——
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 6/7
10/25/2018 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED VOLUME 499
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166a95b4b95c3858adb003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False 7/7