#1. TEODORO R. RIVERA V.

ANGELES
(SUSPENSION: 1 YEAR ---- guilty of practicing deceit in dealing with his client)
LAWYERS OATH, RULE 1.01, CANON 16, RULE 16.01
FACTS:
Atty. Sergio Angeles was the counsel of record of the complainants in the civil cases
where they obtained a favourable decision in their favour and for which a writ of execution
was issued in said cases. Unfortunately, no leviable property was found in the premises of
defendants. Eventually, complainants found out that Mr. Rodolfo M. Silva, one of the
defendants in said cases had already given Atty. Angeles a partial settlement of the
judgment in the amount of P42, 999.00 without their knowledge. Atty. Angeles never
informed them nor remitted the same even a part of it. Complainants thereafter sent a
demand letter but received no reply, consequently, they filed a complaint for disbarment
against respondent
Respondent denied the accusations and claimed that he had the right to retain the
amount and to apply the same for his professional fees under the subsequent agreement
first with Teodoro Rivera and later with Mrs. Dely Rivera as embodied in the Deed of
assignment or under the previous agreement of P20% of P206, 000.00, but this fact was
denied by complainants.
However, due to respondents failure to appear on scheduled hearings, the SOLGEN
considered the case submitted for resolution by declaring his right to present evidence as
considered waived.
I.C. Julio C. Elamparo found respondent Angeles guilty of violating the Code of
Professional Responsibility specifically Rule 1.01, Canon 16 and Rule 16.01 and
recommended his indefinite suspension.
BOG adopted said report and recommendation and modified the penalty to
suspension from the practice of law for 1 year for being guilty of practicing deceit in dealing
with his client.
ISSUE:
W/N RESPONDENT ANGELES HAD VIOLATED THE CPR.
HELD:
YES, respondent was found guilty of practicing deceit in dealing with his client, and
hence, violated the following:
LAWYERS OATH and RULE 1.01 ---- for failure to live up to his sworn duties as a
lawyer. The SC repeatedly stressed the importance of integrity and good moral character as
part of a lawyers equipment in the practice of his profession. For it cannot be denied that
the respect of litigants for the profession is inexorably diminished whenever a member of
the Bar betrays their trust and confidence.
CANON 16 and Rule 16.01 ---- for appropriating the subject amount all to himself.
The Court is not oblivious of the right of a lawyer to be paid for the legal services he has
extended to his client but such right should not be exercised whimsically by appropriating to
himself the money intended for his clients. There should never be an instance where the
victor in litigation loses everything he won to the fees of his own lawyer.

The Court is not oblivious of the right of a lawyer to be paid for the legal services he
has extended to his client but such right should not be exercised whimsically by
appropriating to himself the money intended for his clients. There should never be an
instance where the victor in litigation loses everything he won to the fees of his own lawyer.