9 Plus Builders Vs Revilla Digest
9 Plus Builders Vs Revilla Digest
RESOLUTION
NACHURA, J.:
FACTS:
Respondent maintains that he did not commit the acts complained of. He
avers that he merely exhausted all possible remedies and defenses to which
his clients were entitled under the lawHe posits that he was only being
protective of the interest of his clients as a good father would be protective
of his own family,5 and that his services to Leopoldo de Guzman, et. al were
almost pro bono.61avvphi1
Issue:
Whether or not the respondent is guilty of violating the Code of Professional
Responsibilityspecifically Canon 9.
Held:
He indeed violated Canon 9. The Canon states that "— A lawyer shall not
directly or indirectly assist in the unauthorized practice of law.”
'Rule 9.01 — A lawyer shall notdelegate to any unqualified person the
performance of any task which by law may only beperformed by a member
of the Bar in good standing.
It is the rule that when a lawyer accepts a case, he is expected to give his
full attention, diligence, skill and competence to the case, regardless of its
importance and whether he accepts it for a fee or for free.11 A lawyer’s
devotion to his client’s cause not only requires but also entitles him to
deploy every honorable means to secure for the client what is justly due him
or to present every defense provided by law to enable the latter’s cause to
succeed.
Thus, after a careful consideration of herein respondent’s motion for reconsideration and humble
acknowledgment of his misfeasance,