Terminating and Establishing

attorney-client relationship

Problem Areas in Legal Ethics

Arellano University School of Law – Arellano Law Foundation
2016-2017

1
 N atu re o f atto rn ey-clien t relatio n sh ip

 An atto rney-c lien t re la tion sh ip is sa id to ex ist w hen a

lawyer acquiesces or voluntarily permits the consultation
of a person, w ho in respect to a busin ess o r tro ub le o f any
k ind, consu lts a law yer w ith a v iew o f ob ta in ing
pro fessiona l adv ice o r assistance.

 It is not essential that the client should have employed

the lawyer on any prev io us o ccasion o r that any retainer
should have been paid, promised or charged for; ne ither is
it m ate ria l that the attorney consulted did not afterward
undertake the case abou t w h ich the consu lta tion w as had, fo r
as long as the advice and assistance of the attorney is
sough t and rece ived in m atte rs pe rtinen t to h is pro fession.
- Virgo v. Atty. Amorin A.C. No. 7861 [2009]

2
 C an trig g er a law yer-clien t relatio n sh ip

 A law yer-c lien t re la tionsh ip w as estab lished from the very

first moment com pla inan t asked responden t fo r le ga l adv ise
regard ing the fo rm er's business. To constitu te pro fessiona l
em ploym en t, it is no t essen tia l that the c lien t em ployed the
atto rney profe ssiona lly on any prev ious occasion.
 It is not necessary that any retainer be paid, promised, or
charged; ne ithe r is it m ate ria l that the a tto rney consu lted
d id no t a fterw ard hand le the case fo r w h ich h is se rv ice had
been sough t.- Hadjula v. Atty. Madianda, A.C. No. 6711
July 3, 2007

3
 V erb al ag reem en t

 There is no ga in say ing that a verbal engagement is

su ffic ien t to create an atto rney-c lien t re la tionsh ip. -
Urban Bank Inc. vs. Atty. Pena, A.C. No. 4863 [2001]

4
 Court finds that no attorney-client
relationship exists
 The relationship of complainant and [counsel] is mainly personal
or business in nature, and that whatever legal services may have
been rendered or given to them by Atty. Amorin for free were
only incidental to said relationship. Noteworthy also is the fact
that complainant was not able to specify any act or transaction in
which [counsel] acted as her or her husband' s counsel. - Vi r go v.
Att y. Amori n A. C. No. 7861 [ 2009]
 There are instances, however, when the Court finds that no
attorney-client relationship exists between the parties, such as
when the relationship stemmed from a personal transaction
between them rather than the practice of law of respondent or
when the legal acts done were only incidental to their personal
transaction. - Vi r go v. Atty. Amori n A. C. No. 7861 [ 2009]

5
 D u ty o n ce a law yer-clien t relatio n sh ip
exist

 Canon 18 o f the Code o f P ro fessiona l Responsib ility, that

“a law yer sha ll se rve his c lien t w ith com petence and
d ilig ence.”

6
N o n -p aym en t o f fees d o es n o t d im in ish
a law yer’ s d u ty

 A ssum ing the non-paym en t to be true, such fa ilu re should not

be a reason not to inform the client of an important
development, o r w o rse, to withhold vital information from
her. - Somosot v. Atty. Lara A.C. No. 7024 [2009]

7
 R em ed y fo r d elib erate refu sal to p ay

 It is bu t just and proper that if refusal to pay just

compensation en sues in any tran saction, the proper rem edy is
to institute an action be fo re the proper cou rt and such
actuation o f the responden t here in did not constitute
deceit, malpractice or gross misconduct. - Urban Bank Inc.
vs. Atty. Pena, A.C. No. 4863 [2001]

 Ru le 20.04 - A law yer sha ll avo id con tro versies w ith c lien ts
concern ing his com pensation and shall resort to judicial
action only to prevent imposition, injustice or fraud.

8
 Im p lied d u ty to fin ish th e case

 Am ong the fu ndam enta l ru le s o f e th ics is the princip le that

an a tto rney who undertakes an action impliedly stipulates to
carry it to its termination, that is, un til the case becom es
fin a l and execu to ry. - Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme,
A.C. No. 7421 [2007]

 Am ong the fu ndam enta l ru le s o f e th ics is the princip le that

an a tto rney who undertakes to conduct an action impliedly
stipulates to carry it to its conclusion.- Francisco v.
Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155, March 14, 2006

9
 Term in atin g th e atto rn ey-clien t relatio n

 CLIEN T: The ru le in th is ju risd ictio n is that a c lien t has

the absolute right to terminate the attorney-client
relation at anytime with or without cause.

 ATTORN EY: The righ t o f an atto rney to w ithd raw or te rm inate

the re la tion o ther than fo r su ffic ie n t cause is, how ever,
considerab ly restric ted. Xxx He is n o t a t lib e rty to abandon
it w ithou t reasonab le cause. A law yer’s righ t to w ithd raw
from a case befo re its fin a l adjud ication arises only from
the client’s written consent o r from a good cause. -
Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155, March 14, 2006

10
 CANON 22 - A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW
HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND
UPON NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE
CIRCUMSTANCES.
 Rule 22.01 - A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the following
case:
(a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in
connection with the matter he is handling; [see Rule 19.02]
(b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of
these canons and rules;
(c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the best
interest of the client;
(d) When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer renders it difficult
for him to carry out the employment effectively;
(e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services or
fails to comply with the retainer agreement;
(f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public office [see Rule
3.03]; and
(g) Other similar cases.
11
 Ru le 3.03 - Where a partner accepts pub lic o ffice, he sha ll
withdraw from the firm and his name shall be dropped from
the firm name un less the law a llow s h im to practice law
concu rren tly.

 Ru le 15.06. - A law yer sha ll no t state o r im ply that he is

able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body.

 Ru le 19.02 - A law yer w ho has received information that h is

c lien t has, in the cou rse o f the represen ta tion, pe rpe tra ted
a fraud upon a pe rson o r tribuna l, sha ll p rom ptly ca ll upon
the c lien t to rectify th e sam e, and failing which he shall
terminate the relationship w ith such c lien t in acco rdance
w ith the Ru les o f Cou rt.

12
 C h an g in g law yer d o es n o t n eed th e
ap p ro val o f th e C o u rt
 [A c lien t] m ay d ischarge h is a tto rney a t any tim e w ith o r
w ithou t cause and thereafte r em ploy ano ther law yer w ho m ay
then en te r his appearance. Thus, it has been held that a
c lien t is free to change h is counse l in a pend ing case and
the rea fte r reta in ano ther law yer to represen t h im . That
m anner o f chang ing a law yer does not need the consent of the
lawyer to be dismissed. Nor does it require approval of the
court. - Atty. Jalandoni v. Atty. Villarosa, AC 5303, June
15, 2006

13
 Term in atio n o f services w ith o u t th e
w ritten co n sen t o f clien t
 A law yer w ho desires to retire from an action w ithout the w ritten
consen t o f h is c lien t m ust file a petition fo r w ithdraw a l in cou rt.
He m ust se rve a copy o f h is pe tition upon h is c lien t and the
adverse party - Atty. Jalandoni v. Atty. Villarosa, AC 5303, June
15, 2006

14
 A lawyer must see to it that a new
lawyer is recorded before terminating
his services
 An attorney may only retire from a case either by written
consent of his cli ent or by per mi ssi on of t he court after due
noti ce and heari ng, in which event the attorney shoul d see t o it
t hat t he name of t he ne w l awyer i s recor ded i n t he case. -
Att y. Jal andoni v. Atty. Vill ar osa, AC 5303, June 15, 2006

15
C essatio n o f law p ractice is n o t a “
good
cau se”to w ith d raw
 N either is the cessation of his law practice an excuse for
his failure to file the required brief. Even if it w ere
true that A tty. Briones has stopped practic ing law , he still
cou ld no t ig no re the d irectives com ing from the Court. I t
does no t appear from the reco rd s o f G.R. N o. 130965 that
A tty. Briones has w ithd raw n h is appearance. U n less he has
w ithd raw n h is appearance in the case, the Court would still
consider him as counsel fo r the accused -appe llant and he is
expected to com ply w ith a ll its o rders and d irectives. - In
Re: Atty. David Briones, A.C. No. 5486. August 15, 2001]

16
 Th e o n ly w ay to b e relieved as co u n sel

 Thus, the only w ay to be re lieved as counse l is to have

either the written conformity of his client o r an order from
the court relieving him of the duties of counsel, in
acco rdance w ith Ru le 138, Section 26 o f the Ru les o f Cou rt.
- Balatbat v. Atty. Arias, A.C. No. 1666, April 13, 2007

17
 Duty of lawyer once he is discharged as
counsel
 Rule 22. 02 - A lawyer who withdraws or is discharged shall,
subj ect to a retainer lien, imme di at el y t ur n over all papers and
pr opert y t o whi ch t he client i s entitl ed, and shall cooper ati ve
wi t h hi s successor i n t he or derl y transf er of t he matt er,
including all information necessary for the proper handling of the
matter.

 The discharged attorney must likewise see to it that the name of

the new counsel is pr operl y recor ded and t he recor ds pr operl y
handed over. - Bal at bat v. Atty. Ari as, A. C. No. 1666 [ 2007]

18
 A sim p le tu rn o ver o f th e reco rd s d o es
n o t en d a law yer’ s d u ty
 Con tra ry to responden t’s con ten tion, h is p ro fessiona l
re la tion s as a law yer w ith h is c lients are not terminated by
the simple turnover of the records of the case to h is
c lien ts. - Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C. No. 7421
[2007]

 xxx and shall cooperative with his successor in the orderly

transfer of the matter, in c lud ing a ll in fo rm atio n necessary
fo r the proper hand ling o f the m atter. - Ru le 22.02

19
C lien t refu sal to g ive h is co n sen t is still
su b ject to C o u rt’
s d iscretio n
 A law yer m ay re tire a t any tim e from any action o r spec ia l
proceed ing w ith the w ritten consen t o f h is c lient filed in
cou rt and w ith a copy thereo f se rved upon the adverse party.
Shou ld the client refuse to give his consent, the law yer
m ust file an app lica tion w ith the cou rt. The cou rt, on
no tice to the c lien t and adverse party, shall determine
whether the lawyer ought to be allowed to retire. The
app lica tion fo r w ithd raw a l m ust be based on a good cause. -
Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C. No. 7421 [2007]

20
 C o n sen t to w ith d raw m u st b e g iven b y
th e litig an t
 Responden t’s de fense com ple te ly crum b les in face o f the
fact that Salvado r Ram irez is no t even a party in C iv il C ase
No. 981 and, hence, had no au tho rity to w ithd raw the reco rd s
o f the sa id case from responden t o r to te rm inate the
la tte r’s serv ices. - Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C.
No. 7421 [2007]

21
 P en d en cy o f p etitio n fo r w ith d raw al
d o es n o t relieve law yer o f h is d u ty
 The law yer has no righ t to presum e that h is pe tition fo r
w ithd raw a l w ill b e g ran ted by the cou rt. U n til h is
w ithd raw a l sha ll have been approved, the law yer rem ain s
counse l o f reco rd w ho is expected by h is c lien ts, as w e ll as
by the cou rt, to do w hat the in te rests o f h is c lien ts
requ ire. He m ust still a ppear be fo re the cou rt to pro tect
the in te rest o f h is c lie n ts b y ava iling h im se lf o f the
proper rem edy, for the attorney-client relations are not
terminated formally until there is a withdrawal of record.
- Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C. No. 7421 [2007]

22
A valid cau se to w ith d raw m u st still b e su b ject
to fo rm alities o f w ith d raw in g as co u n sel

 W ithou t a proper revocation o f h is au tho rity and w ithd raw a l

as counse l, responden t rem ain s counse l o f reco rd fo r the
com pla inan ts in C iv il C ase N o. 981; and whether he has a
valid cause to withdraw from the case, he cannot
immediately do so and leave his clients without
representation. - Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C.
No. 7421 [2007]

23
 V erb al su b stitu tio n o f co u n sel n o t
allo w ed
 A verba l substitu tion o f counse l, a lbe it im p liedly g ran ted
by respondent judge, contravenes Section 26 o f Ru le 138 o f
the Ru les o f Cou rt w h ich p rescribes the requirements for
change of attorneys. Said p ro v is ion requ ires th at the
w ritten consen t o f the clien t shou ld be filed in cou rt and
the adverse party shou ld be g iven w ritten no tice o f the
sub stitu tion. A s co rrectly po in ted ou t by the OCA, if he r
in ten tion w as to obvia te de lay, then she shou ld have o rdered
the counse l o f reco rd, A tty. N ueva, who w as presen t du ring
the hearing, to file the requ ired comm ent o r opposition. -
Requirme, Jr. v. Judge Yuipco, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1427.
November 27, 2000

24
 D eath o f a p artn er

 Petitioner's counse l w as the law firm o f BA IZAS, A LBERTO &

ASSOCIA TES and no t m ere ly A tty. C risp in Ba izas. Hence, the
death o f the la tte r did not extinguish the lawyer-client
relationship be tw een sa id firm and petitioner.
 Upon rece ip t o f the no tice to file Brie f, the law firm
should have re-assigned the case to another associate o r,
it could have withdrawn as counsel in the m anner p ro v ided by
the Ru les o f Cou rt so that the pe titioner cou ld con tract the
se rv ices o f a new law yer. - B.R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc.
v. CA, G.R. No. L-41862 [1992]

25
G ro u n d s to w ith d raw fro m a case b efo re
its fin al ad ju d icatio n
 A law yer’s righ t to w ithd raw from a case before its final
adjudication a rises on ly from the client’s written consent
o r from a good cause. - Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C.
No. 6155 [2006]

26
 W ritten co n tract is n o t essen tial in
estab lish in g law yer-clien t relatio n sh ip

 A w ritten con tract is not an essen tia l e lem en t in the

em ploym en t of an a tto rney; the con tract m ay be express o r
im p lied. - Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155 [2006]

27
 P erceived in su fficien cy o f rem u n eratio n
n o t a g ro u n d to d im in ish p ro fessio n al
zeal

 Hence, even if respondent felt under-compensated in the case

he undertook to de fend, h is ob lig ation em bod ied in the
Law yer’s Oath and the Code o f P ro fessiona l Responsib ility
still rem a ins unw avering. The zea l and the deg ree o f fe rvo r
in hand ling the case shou ld ne ithe r d im in ish no r cease just
because o f his pe rce ived in su ffic iency o f rem unera tion. -
Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155 [2006]

28
Close personal relationship will not bar a
lawyer-client relationship

 Likewise, a lawyer-client relationship exists not wi t hstandi ng t he

cl ose personal rel ati onshi p between the lawyer and the
complainant or the non-payment of the former' s fees. - Hadj ul a
v. Atty. Madi anda, A. C. No. 6711 Jul y 3, 2007

29
 H eavy w o rklo ad

 Stand ing a lo ne, heavy w ork lo ad is not sufficient reason fo r

the w ithd raw a l o f her serv ices. - Ceniza v. Atty. Rubia,
A.C. No. 6166 [2009]

30
 Lo st o f co n fid en ce

 Responden t's w ithd raw a l w as m ade on the g round that "there

no longer exist[ed ] the xxx con fid ence" betw een them and
that there had been "se riou s d iffe rences betw een them
re la ting to the m anner of p riva te prosecu tion.”- Orcino v.
Atty. Gaspar, A.C. No. 3773 September 24, 1997

31
 “
H urt feelings”is not a valid gro und to
autom atically w ithdraw
 Com pla inan t's w o rd s and actions m ay have hu rt responden t's
fee ling s consid e ring the w o rk he had pu t in to the case. Bu t
her w o rd s w ere u tte red in a bu rst o f passion. A nd even at
that m om ent, com pla inan t d id no t expressly te rm inate
responden t's se rv ices. She made this clear when she refused
to sign h is "Mo tion to Withd raw as C ounse l.“ - Orcino v.
Atty. Gaspar, A.C. No. 3773 September 24, 1997

32
 W ithd raw al m ust be g ranted by the court

 A ssum ing, neverthe less, that responden t w as ju stified in

te rm inating h is se rv ices, he, how ever, canno t just do so and
leave com plain an t in the co ld unpro tected. The law yer has
no righ t to presum e that h is pe titio n fo r w ithd raw a l w ill be
g ran ted by the cou rt. Until his withdrawal shall have been
approved, the lawyer remains counsel of record who is
expected by his client as well as by the court to do what
the interests of his client require. He m ust still appear on
the date o f hearing fo r the a tto rney-c lien t re lation does
no t te rm inate fo rm a lly un til the re is a w ithd raw a l o f
reco rd.- Orcino v. Atty. Gaspar, A.C. No. 3773 September 24,
1997

33
 Lawyer’s responsibility

 CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HI S CLI ENT WI TH

C OMPETENCE AND DI LI GENCE.


 xxxx


 Rule 18. 03 - A lawyer shall not negl ect a legal matter

entrusted to him and his negligence in connection therewith shall
render him liable.


 Rule 18. 04 - A lawyer shall keep t he cli ent inf or med of

t he stat us of hi s case and shall respond wi t hi n a reasonabl e
ti me t o t he cli ent’ s request f or i nf ormati on.

34
 C lien t sh o u ld n o t file th e N o tice to
W ith d raw
 Certa in ly, responden t ough t to know that he w as the one w ho
shou ld have filed the N otice to W ith d raw and no t the
accused. - Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155 [2006]

35
 H avin g an ad d itio n al law yer d id n o t
n ecessarily m ean co n fo rm ity
 The appearance o f A tty. A lm inaza in fact w as no t even to
sub stitu te fo r respondent bu t to act as add itiona l counse l.
Mrs. Ja landon i’s conformity to having an additional lawyer
did not necessarily mean conformity to respondent’s desire
to withdraw as counsel. Responden t’s speculations on the
pro fessiona l re la tion sh ip o f A tty. A lm inaza and Mrs.
Ja landon i find no suppo rt in the reco rd s o f th is case.
 That M rs. Ja landon i continued w ith A tty. A lm inaza’s
pro fessiona l engagem en t on her beha lf d esp ite responden t’s
w ithd raw a l did not absolve the latter of the consequences of
his unprofessional conduct. - Atty. Jalandoni v. Atty.
Villarosa, A.C. No. 5303 [2006]

36
Thank you for your attention!!

37