Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 159 views

    PARSOMALA - Legal Ethics Quiz 2 Assignment

    Uploaded by

    Mae Becher
    1) A complaint was filed against attorney James Roulyn R. Alvarico for conflict of interest and betrayal of trust arising from settlement negotiations in a criminal theft case where Alvarico represented the accused. 2) During settlement discussions, Alvarico allegedly told the complainant he could convince his client to settle if given a 15% commission, which the complainant refused. 3) Both the IBP investigating commissioner and board of governors recommended dismissing the complaint, finding insufficient evidence. However, the complainant appealed. 4) The court dismissed the case, finding that negotiating settlement in the interest of one's client does not inherently create a conflict, and that Alvarico's offers were

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    PARSOMALA - Legal Ethics Quiz 2 Assignment

    Uploaded by

    Mae Becher
    159 views3 pages
    1) A complaint was filed against attorney James Roulyn R. Alvarico for conflict of interest and betrayal of trust arising from settlement negotiations in a criminal theft case where Alvarico represented the accused. 2) During settlement discussions, Alvarico allegedly told the complainant he could convince his client to settle if given a 15% commission, which the complainant refused. 3) Both the IBP investigating commissioner and board of governors recommended dismissing the complaint, finding insufficient evidence. However, the complainant appealed. 4) The court dismissed the case, finding that negotiating settlement in the interest of one's client does not inherently create a conflict, and that Alvarico's offers were

    Original Description:

    Case Digest

    Original Title

    PARSOMALA_Legal Ethics Quiz 2 Assignment

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) A complaint was filed against attorney James Roulyn R. Alvarico for conflict of interest and betrayal of trust arising from settlement negotiations in a criminal theft case where Alvarico represented the accused. 2) During settlement discussions, Alvarico allegedly told the complainant he could convince his client to settle if given a 15% commission, which the complainant refused. 3) Both the IBP investigating commissioner and board of governors recommended dismissing the complaint, finding insufficient evidence. However, the complainant appealed. 4) The court dismissed the case, finding that negotiating settlement in the interest of one's client does not inherently create a conflict, and that Alvarico's offers were

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    159 views3 pages

    PARSOMALA - Legal Ethics Quiz 2 Assignment

    Uploaded by

    Mae Becher
    1) A complaint was filed against attorney James Roulyn R. Alvarico for conflict of interest and betrayal of trust arising from settlement negotiations in a criminal theft case where Alvarico represented the accused. 2) During settlement discussions, Alvarico allegedly told the complainant he could convince his client to settle if given a 15% commission, which the complainant refused. 3) Both the IBP investigating commissioner and board of governors recommended dismissing the complaint, finding insufficient evidence. However, the complainant appealed. 4) The court dismissed the case, finding that negotiating settlement in the interest of one's client does not inherently create a conflict, and that Alvarico's offers were

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 3

    PARSOMALA, MAE BECHER

    A.C. No. 10933, November 03, 2020


    WILSON B. TAN, Complainant, vs. ATTY. JAMES ROULYN R. ALVARICO,
    Respondent.

    The primary purpose of administrative disciplinary proceedings against delinquent lawyers is to


    uphold the law and to prevent the ranks of the legal profession from being corrupted by unscrupulous
    practices – not to shelter or nurse a wounded ego.

    FACTS
    An administrative complaint for disbarment is filed by Wilson B. Tan (complainant)
    against respondent Atty. James Roulyn R. Alvarico on grounds of conflict of interest
    and betrayal of trust and confidence of client, in violation of the Code of Professional
    Responsibility.

    Mr. Tan (complainant) is the offended party in Criminal Case No. 2014-22652 for theft
    pending before Brand 44 of the Regional Trial Court of Dumaguete City. Atty. Alvarico
    (respondent) is the counsel for the accused Blas Fier “Buddy” Manco.

    Complainant alleged that Atty. Alvarico told him that he can convince his client Manco
    to settle, provided he will give him 15% commission. Complainant countered and told
    Atty. Alvarico that he can only give 5%. Despite meeting several times to discuss the
    proposal, no settlement was reached due to the latter’s insistence of a 15% commission.

    Complainant then presented Atty. Alvarico’s Affidavit proving the settlement talks were
    exclusively between himself and Atty. Alvarico. He also offered the Transcript of
    Stenographic Notes (TSN) taken during the Crim. Case No. 2014-22652 to support his
    argument that Atty. Alvarico’s failure to cross-examine him upon his testimony on the
    settlement and commission is an implied admission of the charges.

    In response, Atty. Alvarico denied the charges against him for being utterly baseless,
    fabricated, and unfounded. He admitted that he is the counsel for the accused Manco,
    and has asked the complainant (Mr. Tan) if there was any possibility of amicable
    settlement, as his client Manco is only willing to pay for the value of the stolen steering
    wheel which is ₱28,000.00. He argues that there is no conflict in this case because he
    never represented conflicting interest. No attorney-client relationship was established
    with complainant as the settlement negotiations were done according to his duty to
    defend his client Manco, the accused in the criminal case. He negotiated with the
    consent, authority and at the instance of his client Manco.

    Additionally, Atty. Alvarico explained that he did not cross-examine complainant on


    the commission-related allegations because such were incredible and outrageous, and
    were immaterial to the issues in Crim. Case No. 2014-22652 concerning the alleged
    theft of the steering wheel from complainant's car.
    The IBP Investigating Commissioner recommended the dismissal of the Complaint for
    failure of complainant to prove by preponderance of evidence the charges against Atty.
    Alvarico. Then, the IBP Board of Governors issued a Notice of Resolution adopting
    the findings of fact and recommendation of the IBP Commissioner to dismiss the
    Complaint. This prompted the complainant to file a Motion for Reconsideration.

    ISSUE
    Whether or not Atty. James Roulyn R. Alvarico is guilty on grounds of conflict of
    interest and betrayal of trust and confidence of client.

    RULING
    No, the Court finds that complainant failed to discharge his burden of proof as he did
    not establish his claims through relevant evidence to adequately support the conclusion
    that Atty. Alvarico is guilty of representing conflicting interests and betrayal of trust and
    confidence reposed in him by his client Manco.

    Engaging in negotiations with the adverse party is not per se representation of


    conflicting interests. A survey of jurisprudence shows that negotiation would lead to a
    violation of the rule on conflicting interests when the respondent-attorney negotiates
    with the client's adversary in opposition to his client's interest or claim.

    Þ Rule 15.03 of the Rules of Court, a lawyer shall not represent conflicting interests
    except by written consent of all concerned given after a full disclosure of the
    facts.
    Þ Canon 17 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, a lawyer owes fidelity to
    the cause of his client and he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed
    in him.

    Under these rules, a lawyer is prohibited from representing other persons whose
    interests oppose those of a former client in any manner, whether or not they are parties
    in the same action or on totally unrelated cases. Conflict of interest exists when a lawyer
    represents inconsistent interests of two or more opposing parties.

    In the case at bar, during the negotiations between complainant and Atty. Alvarico, the
    latter did not represent the former's interests because his offer to settle the civil aspect
    of the case through the payment of the value of the allegedly stolen steering wheel is in
    the interest of his client Manco who was criminally charged for the theft thereof. The
    settlement of the civil aspect of the theft case filed against his client was towards his
    client's interest, and even encouraged by our legal system and aligned with the duty of
    an attorney. The civil aspect of theft is subject to mandatory Court-Annexed Mediation
    and Judicial Dispute Resolution wherein parties are encouraged to reach a settlement
    and put an end to litigation. Further, a lawyer is encouraged under Rule 1.04 of the
    Code of Professional Responsibility to encourage his clients to settle a controversy if it
    would admit of a fair settlement.
    In negotiating with complainant, Atty. Alvarico remained loyal to the cause of his client
    Manco. The terms of settlement offered by Atty. Alvarico were designed pursuant to
    the interests of his client Manco, and not to the benefit of complainant.

    The Court, therefore, agrees with the IBP Board of Governor's finding that the
    complaint against Atty. Alvarico should be dismissed for failure of complainant to
    prove the charges.

    The Court resolved to DISMISS the case against Atty. James Roulyn R. Alvarico for
    lack of merit, and consider the same as closed and terminated.

    You might also like