Scribd
Upload
185 views2 pages

Estrada, Jemmelyn M. Problem Areas in Legal Ethics Spouses Jonathan and Ester Lopez vs. Atty. Sinamar E. Limos

Spouses Lopez hired attorney Sinamar Limos to handle their adoption case, paying her 75,000 pesos. However, Limos failed to perform any work on the case for almost a year. The Lopez's withdrew from Limos and hired a new lawyer. Limos refused to return the 75,000 pesos paid. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines found Limos guilty of neglecting the legal matter entrusted to her. She was recommended for a 3-year suspension and ordered to return the 75,000 pesos with interest. The Court found Limos guilty of violating her duty of competence and diligence to her clients under the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Uploaded by

Dennis Dwane Macanas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
185 views2 pages

Estrada, Jemmelyn M. Problem Areas in Legal Ethics Spouses Jonathan and Ester Lopez vs. Atty. Sinamar E. Limos

Spouses Lopez hired attorney Sinamar Limos to handle their adoption case, paying her 75,000 pesos. However, Limos failed to perform any work on the case for almost a year. The Lopez's withdrew from Limos and hired a new lawyer. Limos refused to return the 75,000 pesos paid. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines found Limos guilty of neglecting the legal matter entrusted to her. She was recommended for a 3-year suspension and ordered to return the 75,000 pesos with interest. The Court found Limos guilty of violating her duty of competence and diligence to her clients under the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Uploaded by

Dennis Dwane Macanas
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

ESTRADA, JEMMELYN M.

PROBLEM AREAS IN LEGAL ETHICS

Spouses Jonathan and Ester Lopez vs. Atty. Sinamar E. Limos


A.C. No. 7618
February 02, 2016

FACTS:
Sometime in July 2006, complainants Spouses Lopez, while living abroad, secured the
services of respondent Limos as counsel in connection with their intention to adopt a
minor child, Ethan Benedict Victore. In consideration thereof, complainants, through a
representative, paid respondent P75,000. However, despite the lapse of almost a year
and for reasons unknown, respondent failed to perform anything in furtherance of the
legal matter entrusted to her by complainants.

Complainants withdrew all their documents from respondent’s custody and hired
another lawyer to handle the filing of the adoption case. Complainants also demanded
the return of the amount of P75,000.00 given as legal fees. However, respondent
refused to return such money, retorting that as a standard operating procedure, she
does not return "acceptance fees."

Complainants filed the instant administrative case against respondent. However,


despite numerous directives to file a comment, respondent failed to do so; thus, the
Court was constrained to dispense with the filing of the same and to impose a fine in the
amount of P2,000.00 against her.

The administrative case was then referred to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
The IBP Investigating Commissioner found respondent guilty of violating Rule 18.03,
Canon 18 of the CPR, as she neglected the legal matter entrusted to her by
complainants. The IBP found respondent administratively liable and accordingly,
recommended that she be meted the penalty of suspension from the practice of law for
3 years and ordered to return the amount of P75,000 with legal interest to the
complainants.

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent should be held administratively liable for violating the Code
of Professional Responsibility.

HELD:
Yes, respondent Atty. Sinamar E. Limos is GUILTY of violating the Code of Professional
Responsibility.
CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND
DILIGENCE.
Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his
negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable.

Under the foregoing provisions, once a lawyer takes up the cause of his client, he is
duty-bound to serve the latter with competence, and to attend to such client's cause with
diligence, care, and devotion whether he accepts it for a fee or for free. He owes fidelity
to such cause and must always be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed upon
him. Therefore, a lawyer's neglect of a legal matter entrusted to him by his client
constitutes inexcusable negligence for which he must be held administratively liable, as
in this case.

You might also like