A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v.

Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

JURISPRUDENCE
1

2 (https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/31988?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b)

! (https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/55027?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b)

Cross Reference Cited In

Syllabus Decision
512 PHIL 486-495

THIRD DIVISION
Tools

[A.C. No. 5039. November 25, 2005.]

"
Spouses EDUARDO and TERESITA
GARCIA, complainants, vs. Atty.
#
(/jurisprudences/search? ROLANDO S. BALA, respondent.

$
citation_finder=&full_text=Garcia+v.+Bala&issue_no=&ponente=&syllabus=&title=&utf8=%E2%9C%93&year_end=&
SYLLABUS

% 1. LEGAL ETHICS; ATTORNEYS;

PRACTICE OF LAW; CONSIDERED A PRIVILEGE
& BESTOWED BY THE STATE ON THOSE WHO
SHOW THAT THEY POSSESSED AND CONTINUE
TO POSSESS THE LEGAL QUALIFICATIONS FOR
IT. — The practice of law is considered a privilege

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 1 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

bestowed by the State on those who show that they

' possessed and continue to possess the legal
qualifications for it. Indeed, lawyers are expected to
maintain at all times a high standard of legal
( proficiency and morality, including honesty, integrity
and fair dealing. They must perform their fourfold duty
Search Matches
to society, the legal profession, the courts and their
) *
clients, in accordance with the values and norms of
the legal profession as embodied in the Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883).
2. ID.; ID.; DUTY TO CLIENTS; ONCE
LAWYERS AGREE TO TAKE UP THE CAUSE OF A
CLIENT, THEY OWE FIDELITY TO THE CAUSE AND
MUST ALWAYS BE MINDFUL OF THE TRUST AND
CONFIDENCE REPOSED IN THEM. — The Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883) mandates
lawyers to serve their clients with competence and
diligence. Rule 18.02 states that "a lawyer shall not
handle any legal matter without adequate
preparation." Specifically, Rule 18.03 provides that "a
lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to
him and his negligence in connection therewith shall
render him liable." Once lawyers agree to take up the
cause of a client, they owe fidelity to the cause and
must always be mindful of the trust and confidence
reposed in them. A client is entitled to the benefit of
any and every remedy and defense authorized by law,
and is expected to rely on the lawyer to assert every
such remedy or defense.
3. ID.; ID.; ID.; A LAWYER SHALL KEEP
THE CLIENT INFORMED OF THE STATUS OF HIS
CASE AND SHALL RESPOND WITHIN A
REASONABLE TIME TO THE CLIENT'S REQUEST
FOR INFORMATION. — Rule 18.04 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883) states that a
"lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of
his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to
the client's request for information." Accordingly,
complainants had the right to be updated on the

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 2 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

developments and status of the case for which they

had engaged the services of respondent. But he
apparently denied them that right.
4. ID.; ID.; SHOULD UPHOLD THE
INTEGRITY AND DIGNITY OF THE LEGAL
PROFESSION AT ALL TIMES. — [F]or using
unsavory words against complainants, he should also
be sanctioned. Lawyers may be disciplined —
whether in their professional or in their private
capacity — for any conduct that is wanting in morality,
honesty, probity and good demeanor. Canon 7 of the
Code of Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883)
mandates a lawyer to "uphold the integrity and dignity
of the legal profession" at all times.
5. ID.; ID.; ATTORNEY'S FEES; QUANTUM
MERUIT; BASIS FOR DETERMINING A LAWYER'S
PROFESSIONAL FEES IN THE ABSENCE OF A
CONTRACT. — The Court may ascertain how much
attorney's fees are reasonable under the
circumstances. In the present case, the request of
complainants for a full refund of the attorney's fees
they had paid effectively challenged the contract; it
was as though the parties had no express stipulation
as to those fees. Quantum meruit therefore applies.
Quantum meruit — meaning "as much as he
deserves" — is used as basis for determining a
lawyer's professional fees in the absence of a
contract. Lawyers must be able to show that they are
entitled to reasonable compensation for their efforts in
pursuing their clients' case, taking into account certain
factors in fixing the amount of legal fees. Based on the
circumstances of the present case, the legal services
actually rendered by respondent were too insignificant
for remuneration because of the uselessness of the
remedy he took.

DECISION

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 3 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

PANGANIBAN, J : p

The practice of law is a privilege bestowed on

lawyers who meet the high standards of legal
proficiency and morality. Any conduct that shows a
violation of the norms and values of the legal
profession exposes the lawyer to administrative
liability.
The Case and the Facts
On April 8, 1999, Spouses Eduardo and
Teresita Garcia filed before this Court a Letter-
Complaint 1 against Atty. Rolando S. Bala. According
to complainants, he failed to render a legal service
contracted — the preparation of a petition for review
that he was to file with the Court of Appeals (CA) in
connection with DARAB Case No. 5532. Moreover, he
supposedly refused to return the P9,200 legal fees
they had paid him for the purpose. Finally, he
allegedly hurled invectives at them when they asked
him for a copy of the petition that he claimed to have
filed.
This Court required respondent to comment on
the Complaint. 2 He failed to comply; thus, he was
presumed to have waived his right to be heard. 3 In its
Resolution, the Court referred the case to the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) for
investigation, report, and recommendation. 4
Report of the Investigating Commissioner
In her September 23, 2004 Report, 5
Investigating IBP Commissioner Teresita J. Herbosa
found respondent guilty of violating the Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883).
Despite due notice, he neither submitted a
position paper nor appeared at any of the hearings 6
called by the Commission. Thus, the case was
decided on the basis of complainants' evidence.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 4 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

According to the findings of Commissioner

Herbosa, complainants engaged the services of
respondent (sometime in May 1998) 7 to appeal to the
CA the adverse Decision of the Department of
Agrarian Relations Adjudication Board (DARAB). 8
Instead, he erroneously filed a Notice of Appeal 9 with
the DARAB. Under Rule 43 of the Rules of Court
(/laws/514), appeals from the decisions of the DARAB
should be filed with the CA through a verified petition
for review. 10 Because of respondent's error, the
prescribed period for filing the petition lapsed, to the
prejudice of his clients. DCcTHa

Commissioner Herbosa gave no credence,

however, to the allegation of complainants that
respondent had deceived them by resorting to a
wrong remedy. While opining that he might not have
been in bad faith in filing a notice of appeal instead of
a petition for review, the commissioner in her Report
nonetheless held that his failure to use the proper
legal remedy constituted lack of professional
competency that warranted an appropriate sanction. 11
The Report also concluded that respondent
should be sanctioned for his unjustified refusal and
failure to return the money paid by his clients. 12 Their
payment totaled P9,200, broken down as follows:
P5,000 to write the appeal; P700 to mail it; and an
additional P3,500 for writing the pleading on short
notice. He, however, failed to return the money
despite his promise — and his obligation under the
circumstances — to do so. 13
Finally, Commissioner Herbosa held that
respondent should be sanctioned further for uttering
unsavory words against complainants during one
instance when they had called on him to ask for a
copy of the supposed appeal. Hence, she
recommended that, aside from a fine of P5,000 and

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 5 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

the return to complainants of the amount of P9,200,

suspension from the practice of law for a period of six
months should be imposed upon him.
Recommendation of the IBP Board of
Governors
On March 12, 2005, the Board of Governors of
the IBP passed Resolution No. XVI-2005-74, 14 which
adopted with modification the Report and
Recommendation of the investigating commissioner. It
recommended that respondent should be
reprimanded and suspended from the practice of law
for six months; and that he should return, within thirty
days from his receipt of the Decision, the amount of
P9,200, with legal interest from the filing of the
present Complaint with this Court. 15
The Court's Ruling
We agree with the findings and
recommendation of the IBP.
Administrative Liability of Respondent
The practice of law is considered a privilege
bestowed by the State on those who show that they
possessed and continue to possess the legal
qualifications for it. 16 Indeed, lawyers are expected to
maintain at all times a high standard of legal
proficiency and morality, including honesty, integrity
and fair dealing. 17 They must perform their fourfold
duty to society, the legal profession, the courts and
their clients, in accordance with the values and norms
of the legal profession as embodied in the Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883). 18
Negligence for
Wrong Remedy
The Code of Professional Responsibility
(/laws/27883) 19 mandates lawyers to serve their
clients with competence and diligence. 20 Rule 18.02
states that "a lawyer shall not handle any legal matter

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 6 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

without adequate preparation." Specifically, Rule

18.03 provides that "a lawyer shall not neglect a legal
matter entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable."
Once lawyers agree to take up the cause of a
client, they owe fidelity to the cause and must always
be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in
them. 21 A client is entitled to the benefit of any and
every remedy and defense authorized by law, and is
expected to rely on the lawyer to assert every such
remedy or defense. 22
Evidently, respondent failed to champion the
cause of his clients with wholehearted fidelity, care
and devotion. Despite adequate time, he did not
familiarize himself with the correct procedural remedy
as regards their case. Worse, he repeatedly assured
them that the supposed petition had already been
filed. 23
Since he effectively waived his right to be
heard, the Court can only assume that there was no
valid reason for his failure to file a petition for review,
and that he was therefore negligent. ScTIAH

Conduct Unbecoming
Having become aware of the wrong remedy he
had erroneously taken, respondent purposely evaded
complainants, refused to update them on the appeal,
and misled them as to his whereabouts. 24 Moreover,
on June 17, 1998, he uttered invectives at them when
they visited him for an update on the case. 25
Rule 18.04 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (/laws/27883) states that a "lawyer shall
keep the client informed of the status of his case and
shall respond within a reasonable time to the client's
request for information." Accordingly, complainants
had the right to be updated on the developments and

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 7 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

status of the case for which they had engaged the

services of respondent. 26 But he apparently denied
them that right.
Furthermore, for using unsavory words against
complainants, he should also be sanctioned. Lawyers
may be disciplined — whether in their professional or
in their private capacity — for any conduct that is
wanting in morality, honesty, probity and good
demeanor. 27 Canon 7 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility (/laws/27883) mandates a lawyer to
"uphold the integrity and dignity of the legal
profession" at all times.
In addition, the Court notes the nonparticipation
of respondent even in the present proceedings. He
ignored the directive for him to file his comment, 28 just
as he had disregarded the IBP hearing
commissioner's orders 29 for the conduct of hearings,
submission of documentary evidence and position
paper. Never did he acknowledge or offer any excuse
for his noncompliance.
Clearly, his conduct manifests his disrespect of
judicial authorities. Despite the fact that his profession
and honor are at stake, he did not even bother to
speak a word in his defense. Apparently, he has no
wish to preserve the dignity and honor expected of
lawyers and the legal profession. His demeanor is
clearly demeaning.
The Need to Reimburse
the Money Paid
Under the present factual circumstances,
respondent should return the money paid by
complainants. First, his legal services were virtually
nullified by his recourse to the wrong remedy.
Complainants would not have lost their right to appeal
had he acted competently.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 8 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

Second, the legal fees were not commensurate

to the services rendered. Complainants engaged his
legal services to appeal the DARAB Decision, but all
he did was to file a Notice of Appeal. 30
Additionally, he had already promised them a
refund of the money paid, yet he failed to do so.
The Court may ascertain how much attorney's
fees are reasonable under the circumstances. 31 In the
present case, the request of complainants for a full
refund of the attorney's fees they had paid effectively
challenged the contract; it was as though the parties
had no express stipulation as to those fees. 32
Quantum meruit therefore applies.
Quantum meruit — meaning "as much as he
deserves" — is used as basis for determining a
lawyer's professional fees in the absence of a
contract. 33 Lawyers must be able to show that they
are entitled to reasonable compensation for their
efforts in pursuing their clients' case, taking into
account certain factors in fixing the amount of legal
fees. 34 Based on the circumstances of the present
case, the legal services actually rendered by
respondent were too insignificant for remuneration
because of the uselessness of the remedy he took.
This Court has imposed the penalty of
suspension for six months for a lawyer's negligence in
failing to perfect an appeal. 35 Considering the
similarity of the circumstances with those prevailing in
this case, we find the imposition of the same penalty
reasonable. CDAcIT

WHEREFORE, Atty. Rolando S. Bala is found

guilty of negligence and conduct unbecoming a
lawyer; he is hereby SUSPENDED from the practice
of law for six months, effective upon his receipt of this
Decision. Furthermore, he is ORDERED to pay
Spouses Eduardo and Teresita Garcia the amount of
P9,200 — with legal interest from April 8, 1999 —

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 9 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

within 30 days from his receipt of this Decision. He is

further WARNED that a repetition of the same or
similar offenses will be dealt with more severely.

Let a copy of this Decision be entered in the

record of respondent as attorney. Further, let other
copies be served on the IBP and on the Office of the
Court Administrator, which is directed to circulate
them to all the courts in the country for their
information and guidance.
SO ORDERED.
Sandoval-Gutierrez, Corona, Carpio Morales
and Garcia, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

1. Rollo, pp. 2-10.

2. Resolution dated June 21, 1999; rollo, p. 21.
3. Resolution dated March 3, 2003; rollo, p. 22.
4. Ibid.
5. Rollo, pp. 62-68.
6. The hearings were conducted on May 2 and
15, and November 14, 2003. (Minutes of the
Meetings; rollo, pp. 25, 28 & 35)
7. See complainants' letter addressed to Atty. J.
V. Bautista, IBP President of Nueva Ecija
Chapter; rollo, p. 16.
8. Commissioner's Report, p. 4; rollo, p. 65.
9. Appearance with Notice of Appeal; rollo, p. 7.
10. Section 1, Rule 43 of the Rules of Court
(/laws/514) provides that the final judgments of
the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) under
Republic Act 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 10 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

Reform Law of 1988 (/laws/8574)) are

appealable to the CA. Section 5 of the same
Rule provides that the appeal to the CA may be
taken by filing a verified petition for review.
Section 50 of RA 6657 (/laws/8574) grants
quasi-judicial powers to the DAR to resolve
controversies involving agrarian reform.
11. Commissioner's Report, p. 4; rollo, p. 65.
12. Id., pp. 5 & 66.
13. Id., pp. 4-6 & 65-67.
14. Notice of Resolution; rollo, p. 61.
15. Ibid.
16. Eustaquio v. Rimorin (/jurisprudences/8098),
399 SCRA 422, 427, March 24, 2003; Sebastian
v. Calis (/jurisprudences/11745), 314 SCRA 1, 8,
September 9, 1999; Arrieta v. Llosa
(/jurisprudences/13005), 346 Phil. 932, 939,
November 18, 1997.
17. Tapucar v. Atty. Tapucar
(/jurisprudences/12745), 355 Phil. 66, 73, July
30, 1998; Maligsa v. Cabanting
(/jurisprudences/13448), 338 Phil. 912, 917, May
14, 1997.
18. Abay v. Montesino (/jurisprudences/7932),
417 SCRA 77, 82, December 4, 2003; Abragan
v. Rodriguez (/jurisprudences/2450), 380 SCRA
93, April 3, 2002; Tapucar v. Atty. Tapucar
(/jurisprudences/12745), supra, p. 74; Maligsa v.
Cabanting (/jurisprudences/13448), supra.
19. Promulgated on June 21, 1988.
20. Canon 18.
21. Anderson Jr. v. Cardeño
(/jurisprudences/730), 448 SCRA 261, 270,
January 17, 2005; Pariñas v. Paguinto
(/jurisprudences/9368), 434 SCRA 179, 184, July

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 11 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

13, 2004; Ong v. Grijaldo (/jurisprudences/8079),

402 SCRA 1, 8, April 30, 2003; Ramos v. Atty.
Jacoba (/jurisprudences/3678), 418 Phil. 346,
351, September 27, 2001; Atty. Navarro v. Atty.
Meneses III (/jurisprudences/12458), 349 Phil.
520, 528, January 30, 1998.
22. Sarenas-Ochagabia v. Ocampos
(/jurisprudences/8517), 421 SCRA 286, 290,
January 29, 2004.
23. Complainant's October 29, 1998 letter to
Atty. J. V. Bautista, IBP president of the Nueva
Ecija Chapter; rollo, pp. 8-9.
24. Ibid.
25. Ibid.
26. Garcia v. Manuel (/jurisprudences/7460),
395 SCRA 386, 390, January 20, 2003;
Macarilay v. Seriña (/jurisprudences/668), AC
No. 6591, May 4, 2005. See also Atty. Navarro v.
Atty. Meneses III (/jurisprudences/12458), 349
Phil. 520, 528, January 30, 1998.
27. Ducat Jr. v. Atty. Villalon Jr
(/jurisprudences/6274)., 392 Phil. 394, 402,
August 14, 2000; Tapucar v. Atty. Tapucar
(/jurisprudences/12745), supra, p. 74; Arrieta v.
Llosa (/jurisprudences/13005), supra.
28. Resolution dated June 21, 1999; rollo, p. 21.
29. Rollo, pp. 23-26.
30. The notice of appeal is hereby reproduced
as follows:
"Undersigned respectfully enters his
appearance as counsel for the respondent-
appellant, Eduardo C. Garcia, and by authority of
the latter respectfully tenders notice of appeal to
the Decision of the Honorable Adjudication Board

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 12 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

dated May 13, 1998, but received only on May

20, 1998, to the Honorable Court of Appeals on
errors of fact and law in the said Decision.
"The amount of P650.00 covered by the
attached Postal Money Order form the Post
Office of Cabanatuan City is submitted to cover
the docketing fee in the Court of Appeals to be
transmitted to the same." Rollo, p. 7.
31. Dalisay v. Mauricio (/jurisprudences/116),
AC No. 5655, April 22, 2005.
32. See Emiliano Court Townhouses v. Atty.
Dioneda (/jurisprudences/6961), 447 Phil. 408,
417, March 20, 2003.
33. Compania Maritima, Inc. v. Court of Appeals
(/jurisprudences/11025), 376 Phil. 278, 285,
November 16, 1999; Sesbreño v. Court of
Appeals (/jurisprudences/14805), 245 SCRA 30,
37, June 8, 1995.
34. Factors considered in determining
reasonable attorney's fees include time spent
and extent of services rendered; novelty and
difficulty of the questions involved; importance of
the subject matter; skill demanded; probability of
losing other employment as a result of
acceptance of the proffered case; customary
charges for similar services; amount involved in
the controversy and the benefits resulting to the
client; certainty of compensation; character of
employment; and professional standing of the
lawyer. Rule 20.1, Canon 20, Code of
Professional Responsibility (/laws/27883). See
also Sesbreño v. Court of Appeals
(/jurisprudences/14805), supra; Delgado v. De la
Rama (/jurisprudences/45060), 43 Phil. 419, 421,
June 1, 1922.

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 13 of 14
A.C. No. 5039 | Spouses Garcia v. Bala 5/16/20, 7:59 PM

35. Sps. Villaluz v. Judge Armenta

(/jurisprudences/12559), 348 Phil. 776, 784,
January 26, 1998; Guiang v. Antonio
(/jurisprudences/16117), 218 SCRA 381,
February 3, 1993. See also Roncal v. Paray
(/jurisprudences/9319), 435 SCRA 406, 411, July
30, 2004.

1 2 (https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/31988?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b)

! (https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/55027?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b)

https://cdasiaonline.com/jurisprudences/26?s_params=vRZ48azrZjc2edYg2j-b Page 14 of 14