Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Title: A.C. No. Complainant: Respondent: Date: Ponente: DOCTRINE: A Lawyer Shall Employ Only Fair and Honest Means To Attain Lawful Objectives. Facts

    Uploaded by

    Anselmo Rodiel IV
    181 views2 pages
    Villarin represented Purence Realty in a case before the HLURB where the complainants sought to compel Purence Realty to deliver property they had purchased. The HLURB ruled in favor of the complainants. Villarin subsequently filed a motion to set aside the decision and sent demand letters telling the complainants to vacate the property. The complainants filed a disbarment case against Villarin. The Court ruled that while Villarin was pursuing the lawful interests of his client by filing the motion, he improperly characterized one of the complainants as an illegal occupant in the demand letters despite the HLURB decision recognizing her right to the property. For employing unfair means, Villarin was repri

    Original Description:

    Original Title

    25. Trinidad vs Villarin

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Villarin represented Purence Realty in a case before the HLURB where the complainants sought to compel Purence Realty to deliver property they had purchased. The HLURB ruled in favor of the complainants. Villarin subsequently filed a motion to set aside the decision and sent demand letters telling the complainants to vacate the property. The complainants filed a disbarment case against Villarin. The Court ruled that while Villarin was pursuing the lawful interests of his client by filing the motion, he improperly characterized one of the complainants as an illegal occupant in the demand letters despite the HLURB decision recognizing her right to the property. For employing unfair means, Villarin was repri

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    181 views2 pages

    Title: A.C. No. Complainant: Respondent: Date: Ponente: DOCTRINE: A Lawyer Shall Employ Only Fair and Honest Means To Attain Lawful Objectives. Facts

    Uploaded by

    Anselmo Rodiel IV
    Villarin represented Purence Realty in a case before the HLURB where the complainants sought to compel Purence Realty to deliver property they had purchased. The HLURB ruled in favor of the complainants. Villarin subsequently filed a motion to set aside the decision and sent demand letters telling the complainants to vacate the property. The complainants filed a disbarment case against Villarin. The Court ruled that while Villarin was pursuing the lawful interests of his client by filing the motion, he improperly characterized one of the complainants as an illegal occupant in the demand letters despite the HLURB decision recognizing her right to the property. For employing unfair means, Villarin was repri

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    TITLE: Trinidad vs Villarin A.C. No.

    9310

    COMPLAINANT: RESPONDENT: Date: Feb 27, 2013


    Verleen Trinidad et. Al Atty. Angelito Villarin
    Ponente: Sereno, J

    DOCTRINE: A lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain lawful objectives.

    FACTS:
    The complainants were the plaintiffs in a prior case with HLURB.

    Before the HLURB, the complainants, as buyers of property in Don Jose Subd., sought to compel
    Purence Realty and Roberto Bassig to deliver to them the property they bought.

    The HLURB’s decision stated that the defendants n the case must accept the payments of the
    buyers under the old purchase price and ordered them to deliver the TCT and Deeds of Sale to the
    winning litigants. However, the HLURB did not prohibit the buyers to vacate the property.

    The HLURB’s decision became final and executory. It issued a writ of execution.
    However, Villarin was engaged as counsel of Purence. He filed a motion to set aside the decision
    and to quash the write of execution because the decision was allegedly VOID because of improper
    service of summons on his client.

    Further, he sent demand letters to the buyers to vacate their property. If they will not vacate, then
    he’ll file a forcible entry case against them. They did not heed to his demand so he filed the
    aforementioned complaint.

    Aggrieved, the buyers filed a disbarment case against him.

    ISSUE:
    Whether Villarin must be disciplined for sending demand letters despite the final and executory
    decision of HLURB
    HELD:
    The Court ruled in the affirmative.

    As a lawyer, respondent is expected to champion the cause of his client with wholehearted
    fidelity, care, and devotion. This means that he can avail of every remedy or defence, as long as it
    is within the bounds of the law. They should believe it to be honestly debatable under the law.

    Here, Villarin lawfully pursued the interests of his client because he had an honest belief that the
    client was improperly served of the summons. If his theory turned out to be correct, then the
    HLURB decision in favour of the complainants will be void.

    However, he is not free from error.

    Rule 19.01 provides that the lawyer shall employ only fair and honest means to attain the lawful
    objectives of his client, and shall not present, participate in presenting or threaten to present
    unfounded criminal charges to obtain improper advantage in any case or proceeding.

    Here, Villarin brazenly typified one of the complainants, Ms. Lander, as an illegal occupant.
    However, this is opposite from the truth, since the final and executory decision of HLURB had
    already recognised her as a subdivision lot buyer who had a right to complete her payments in
    order to occupy the property.

    He was very much aware of this ruling when he filed the motion.
    REPRIMANDED.

    You might also like