CANONS 2 AND 3

MARY MALECDAN vs. PEKAS and KOLLIN

A.C. No. 5830. January 26, 2004

Facts:

Atty Pekas and Kollin substituted Atty. Bustamante as a counsels for the Fanged
Spouses.

Petitioner Malecdan bought a parcel of land located in Baguio City from the
Fanged spouses. The money was received by Eliza Fanged and deposited in the
account of Atty. Artemio Bustamante, then counsel for the latter. The complainant
later found out, however, that the said lot was the subject of a controversy
between the former owners and the Fanged Spouses.

Then Kollin replaced Bustamante. He filed for a petition for rescission over the
contract of sale, without returning the amount of money to Malecdan. While
Malecdan was in the US, the Fanged spouses, Atty Bustamante and the PCIB
(bank) signed a compromised contract, and Malecdan was not made a signatory
to such contract. They caused the transfer of P30K from the account of
Bustamante to a separate account for Kollin and Pekas as attorney’s fees.

Now, Malecdan files a case for disbarment against Kollin and Pekas, because
not only was she prejudiced from such withdrawal of money, but they also
committed acts against the IBP in contravention/violation to the lawyer’s oath that
they shall uphold the laws of the land.

Issue:

WON Kollin and Pekas should be suspended? YES

Held:

It is a settled principle that the compensation of a lawyer should be but a mere

incident of the practice of law, the primary purpose of which is to render public
service. The practice of law is a profession and not a money-making trade. The
process of imbibing ethical standards can begin with the simple act of openness
and candor in dealing with clients, which would progress thereafter towards the
ideal that a lawyer’s vocation is not synonymous with an ordinary business
proposition but a serious matter of public interest.

DECISION: Pekas suspended for 6 months, Kollin for 3 years.