7/26/2019 In Re Bayani and Basas vs Icawat Digest

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/in-re-bayani-and-basas-vs-icawat-digest 1/2

A.  LAWYER

1.  Duty to the Court/Negligence of a Lawyer 

In Re: Vicente Y. Bayani

A.C. No. 5307. August 9, 000

Facts: Atty. Vicente Bayani was the lawyer for the appellant in a criminal case. He failed to

submit his proof of service in his appellant's brief which subsequently caused the inability of the

appellee to file his own brief. The B! was order to investi"ate on the matter and despite

repeated notices# Bayani failed to submit the proof of service and his answer to the B!'s query.

Hence# this administrative complaint.

Held: $%&T. Atty. Bayani's failure to submit proof of service of appellant's brief and his

failure to submit the required comment manifest willful disobedience to the lawful orders of

the (upreme )ourt# a clear violation of the canons of professional ethics. t appears that

 Atty. Bayani has fallen short of the circumspection required of a member of the Bar. A

counsel must always remember that his actions or omissions are bindin" on his clients. A

lawyer owes his client the e*ercise of utmost prudence and capability in that representation.

Further# lawyers are e*pected to be acquainted with the rudiments of law and le"al

procedure and anyone who deals with them has the ri"ht to e*pect not +ust a "ood amount

of professional learnin" and competence but also a whole,hearted fealty to his client's

cause. Havin" been remiss in his duty to the )ourt and to the Bar# Atty. Bayani was

suspended from the practice of law for - months and until the time he complies with therder of the (upreme )ourt to submit the required proof of service.

2.  Duty to Client/Accounting of Client’s Money/Negligence

!eo"u#$o B. Basas %s. Atty. &igue# I. Ica'at

A.C. No. (). August (, 000

Facts: Atty. /i"uel cawat was the lawyer for Teodulfo Basas and some other laborers in their 

complaint a"ainst their employer. The 0&1) rendered an adverse decision. Basas and his

fellow wor2ers# however# insisted that they appeal the decision. Atty. cawat# however# failed to

file the required memorandum of appeal. Basas filed an administrative complaint# also alle"in"

that Atty. cawat issued a receipt for an amount less than that which they had paid him.

Held: $%&T. 1espondent's failure to file the memorandum of appeal required by the 0&1)

1ules of !rocedure reveals his poor "rasp of labor law. 1espondent practically admitted that he

7/26/2019 In Re Bayani and Basas vs Icawat Digest

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/in-re-bayani-and-basas-vs-icawat-digest 2/2

did not file the memorandum. His failure to file the memorandum clearly pre+udiced the interests

of his clients. 1espondent manifestly fell short of the dili"ence required of his profession# in

violation of )anon 34 of the )ode of !rofessional 1esponsibility# which mandates that a lawyer 

shall serve his client with competence and dili"ence. 1ule 34.5- further provides that a lawyer 

shall not ne"lect a le"al matter entrusted to him# and his ne"li"ence in connection therewith

shall render him liable. For his failure to issue the proper receipt for the money he received from

his clients# respondent also violated 1ule 36.53 of the )ode of !rofessional 1esponsibility which

states that a lawyer shall account for all money or property collected or received for or from the

client. The )ourt fined Atty. cawat in the amount of !h! 755# with a warnin" that a repetition of 

the same offense or a similar misconduct will be dealt with more severely.