A.C. No. 90 - APRIL 1956 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE A.C. No. 90April 28, 1956 Maria Aldana vs. Francisco Mendoza Abad G.R. No. L-9304April 28, 1956 Doroteo dela Cruz, et al. vs. Rafael L. Resureccion, et al. G.R. No. L-9088April 28, 1956 Elpidio Javellana, et al. vs. Public Service Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-8782April 28, 1956 Marcelino B. Florentino, et al. vs. Philippine National Bank G.R. No. L-8702April 28, 1956 Vicente Basilio vs. Zoilo David, et al. G.R. No. L-8694April 28, 1956 Manila Electric Company vs. City of Manila G.R. No. L-8654April 28, 1956 Antonino Dizon, et al. vs. Froilan Bayona, et al. G.R. No. L-8536April 28, 1956 Intestate of Fausto Bayot.Celeste Bayot vs. Director of Lands G.R. No. L-8219April 28, 1956 Benito Tan Chat vs. C. N. Hodges, et al. G.R. No. L-8277April 28, 1956 Thomas Buyayao, et al. vs. Itogon Mining Company,Inc. G.R. No. L-7059April 28, 1956 Laguna Tayabas Bus Co., et al. vs. Octavio Pabalan G.R. No. L-6202April 28, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Rafael Cabuena, et al. G.R. No. L-5510April 28, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Rafael Aranua, et al. G.R. No. L-4837April 28, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Datu Dima Binasing, et al. G.R. No. L-8772April 27, 1956 Ramcar, Inc. vs. China Banking Corporation G.R. No. L-8142April 27, 1956 Machine & Engineering Supplies, Inc. vs. Maximo A. Quintano G.R. No. L-7717April 27, 1956 G.B., Inc., etc. vs. Conrado V. Sanchez, et al. G.R. No. L-7643April 27, 1956 Pedro Casimiro vs. Leon Roque, et al. G.R. No. L-7175April 27, 1956 Government Service Insurance System vs. Modesto Castillo, et al. G.R. No. L-6848April 27, 1956 Manila Lighter Transportation, Inc. vs. Municipal Board of Cavite City, et al. G.R. No. L-8496April 25, 1956 Lim Si vs. Isabelo P. Lim G.R. No. L-7457April 25, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Buenconsejo Dacio G.R. No. L-6962April 25, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Kantong Ali G.R. No. L-8379April 24, 1956 Victorino Manalo vs. Foster Wheeler Corporation, et al. G.R. No. L-8369April 20, 1956 National City Bank of New York vs. Yek Tong Lin Fire & Marine Insurance Co. G.R. No. L-8026April 20, 1956 Natividad Angeles Vda. de Padilla vs. Luciano C. Dizon G.R. No. L-8546April 20, 1956 Genoveva S. Villalon, et al. vs. Bonifacio Ysip, et al. G.R. No. L-7361April 20, 1956 Province of Ilocos Norte vs. Compaña General de Tabacos de Filipinas G.R. No. L-6860April 18, 1956 Philippine Air Lines,Inc. vs. Leopoldo Prieto, et al. G.R. No. L-5203April 18, 1956 Standard Vacuum Oil Company vs. Luzon Stevedoring., Inc. G.R. No. L-9893April 13, 1956 Maura Lumanlan, et al. vs. Bernabe de Aquino, et al. G.R. No. L-9034April 13, 1956 Jose A. Suelto vs. Cecilia Muñoz Palma, et al. G.R. No. L-8724April 13, 1956 Pablo Española vs. Vicente T. Singson, et al. G.R. No. L-8667April 13, 1956 Urbano Tabora vs. Alfredo Montelibano, et al. G.R. No. L-8454April 13, 1956 Dolores Lopez Vds. De Jison, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-8257April 13, 1956 Jose R. Cruz vs. Reynaldo Pahati, et al. G.R. No. L-7801April 13, 1956 Testate Estate of Perpetua A. Vda. de SorianoDolores Albornoz vs. Dolores Albornoz, et al. G.R. No. L-9267April 11, 1956 Alfredo Tolentino, et al. vs. Antonio O. Alzate, et al. G.R. No. L-9121April 11, 1956 Leonisa B. Bacaltos, et al. vs. Francisco Esteban, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-8892April 11, 1956 Alfredo Halili, et al. vs. Arsenio H. Lacson G.R. No. L-8020April 11, 1956 Isabel Abesames, et al. vs. Adriano Garcia G.R. No. L-7448April 11, 1956 People of the Phil. vs. Flaviana Talao Perez The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Maria Aldana vs. Francisco Mendoza Abad Doroteo dela Cruz, et al. vs. Rafael L. Resureccion, et al. Elpidio Javellana, et al. vs. Public Service Commission, et al. Marcelino B. Florentino, et al. vs. Philippine National Bank Vicente Basilio vs. Zoilo David, et al. Manila Electric Company vs. City of Manila Antonino Dizon, et al. vs. Froilan Bayona, et al. Intestate of Fausto Bayot.Celeste Bayot vs. Director of Lands Benito Tan Chat vs. C. N. Hodges, et al. Thomas Buyayao, et al. vs. Itogon Mining Company,Inc. Laguna Tayabas Bus Co., et al. vs. Octavio Pabalan People of the Phil. vs. Rafael Cabuena, et al. People of the Phil. vs. Rafael Aranua, et al. People of the Phil. vs. Datu Dima Binasing, et al. Ramcar, Inc. vs. China Banking Corporation Machine & Engineering Supplies, Inc. vs. Maximo A. Quintano G.B., Inc., etc. vs. Conrado V. Sanchez, et al. Pedro Casimiro vs. Leon Roque, et al. Government Service Insurance System vs. Modesto Castillo, et al. Manila Lighter Transportation, Inc. vs. Municipal Board of Cavite City, et al. Lim Si vs. Isabelo P. Lim People of the Phil. vs. Buenconsejo Dacio People of the Phil. vs. Kantong Ali Victorino Manalo vs. Foster Wheeler Corporation, et al. National City Bank of New York vs. Yek Tong Lin Fire & Marine Insurance Co. Natividad Angeles Vda. de Padilla vs. Luciano C. Dizon Genoveva S. Villalon, et al. vs. Bonifacio Ysip, et al. Province of Ilocos Norte vs. Compaña General de Tabacos de Filipinas Philippine Air Lines,Inc. vs. Leopoldo Prieto, et al. Standard Vacuum Oil Company vs. Luzon Stevedoring., Inc. Maura Lumanlan, et al. vs. Bernabe de Aquino, et al. Jose A. Suelto vs. Cecilia Muñoz Palma, et al. Pablo Española vs. Vicente T. Singson, et al. Urbano Tabora vs. Alfredo Montelibano, et al. Dolores Lopez Vds. De Jison, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Jose R. Cruz vs. Reynaldo Pahati, et al. Testate Estate of Perpetua A. Vda. de SorianoDolores Albornoz vs. Dolores Albornoz, et al. Alfredo Tolentino, et al. vs. Antonio O. Alzate, et al. Leonisa B. Bacaltos, et al. vs. Francisco Esteban, Jr., et al. Alfredo Halili, et al. vs. Arsenio H. Lacson Isabel Abesames, et al. vs. Adriano Garcia People of the Phil. vs. Flaviana Talao Perez The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
A.C. No. 90 April 28, 1956
MARIA L. ALDANA,complainant,
vs.
ATTORNEY FRANCISCO MENDOZA ABAD,respondent.
Office of the Solicitor General Juan Liwanag and Solicitor Adolfo Brillantes for complainant.
Francisco M. Abad in his own behalf.
PARAS,C. J.:
Maria L. Aldana filed a complaint for disbarment against Attys. Francisco M. Abad and Dominador Somera. In view of the failure to file an answer to the complaint within the period granted them. And upon motion Atty. Francisco M. Abad, the Court referred the matter to the Solicitor General for investigation, report and recommendation. On January 30, 1954, the Solicitor General filed a formal complaint only against Atty. Francisco M. Abad Aldana, deceased husband of Maria de Aldana, under the Osmeña Retirement Act No. 2589; that the respondent caused Maria de Aldana to execute in his favor a power of attorney to receive and sign the retirement check; that the respondent delivered to Maria de Aldana the sum of P696, out which she paid to the respondent the sum of P50 as fee; that subsequently Maria de Aldana learned from other sources that the retirement gratuity collected by the respondent amounted to P4,000; that without notice to and previous conformity of Maria de Aldana, the respondent disposed of the said P4,000 in the following manner: P2,500 to the heirs of Feliciano de Aldana (in representation of the heirs of Feliciano Aldana by his second marriage); and P800 for expenses and fees are excessive and unreasonable; that the act of the respondent constitute abuse of the confidence reposed in him by Maria de Aldana. The Solicitor General prayed that the proper disciplinary action be taken against the respondent; that the fee of respondent be fixed, considering that the laws of the United States and the Philippines allow only ten per cent; and that the respondent be ordered to return to the heirs of the deceased Feliciano Aldana the difference between P800 and the fee to be thus fixed by this Court. In his answer the respondent alleged in substance and effect that he acted in good faith in the matter, having divided the sum of P4,000 in the manner alleged by the Solicitor General, bearing in mind the interest of the heirs of the deceased Feliciano Aldana both by his first marriage and by his second marriage, the heirs of the first marriage being represented by Lt. Emiliano Aldana who was in a more solvent position and willing to make necessary adjustments should Maria de Aldana claim and be entitled to an amount more than P696; that the sum of P800 kept by the respondent was not excessive, considering that he took many steps, went from one office to another, and made several trips from Pangasinan to Manila, all because Maria de Aldana wanted to collect the gratuity as soon as possible.
All things considered, we held that while the disbursements made by the respondent might have been in good faith, because there are admittedly two sets of heirs and the sum of P800 kept by the respondent represented not only his fee but also his expenses, nevertheless the respondent should have informed his principal, Maria de Aldana, about the exact amount paid by the Government and consulted her before delivering to the heirs of Feliciano Aldana by his first marriage the sum of P2,500. In failing to observe that formality which seems to be elementary, but which is not so grave an omission as to warrant suspension or disbarment, the respondent merits at least a reprimand.
It may be claimed on behalf of Maria de Aldana or the heirs of Feliciano Aldana by his second marriage that the sum of P696 is legally insufficient or out of proportion; the matter of adjustment may be threshed out by said heirs on the one hand and the heirs by the first marriage.
Wherefore, the respondent is hereby reprimanded, with the warning that are petition of similar acts will be dealt with more severely.
Reyes, A., Jugo, Bautista Angelo, Concepcion and Reyes, J. B. L.,concur.