Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 186 views

    AC 1890 Digest

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his former client, Fedrico Suntay. As Fedrico's lawyer and confidant, Rafael gained confidential information about Fedrico's legal, financial, and political affairs. After their relationship ended due to political differences, Rafael used this confidential information against Fedrico by filing complaints and cases against him. The court found that Rafael violated the rules requiring lawyers to preserve client confidences and secrets, even after termination of the relationship. Rafael was not allowed to use confidential information to the disadvantage of his former client or for his own advantage.

    Copyright:

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

    AC 1890 Digest

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    186 views3 pages
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his former client, Fedrico Suntay. As Fedrico's lawyer and confidant, Rafael gained confidential information about Fedrico's legal, financial, and political affairs. After their relationship ended due to political differences, Rafael used this confidential information against Fedrico by filing complaints and cases against him. The court found that Rafael violated the rules requiring lawyers to preserve client confidences and secrets, even after termination of the relationship. Rafael was not allowed to use confidential information to the disadvantage of his former client or for his own advantage.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his former client, Fedrico Suntay. As Fedrico's lawyer and confidant, Rafael gained confidential information about Fedrico's legal, financial, and political affairs. After their relationship ended due to political differences, Rafael used this confidential information against Fedrico by filing complaints and cases against him. The court found that Rafael violated the rules requiring lawyers to preserve client confidences and secrets, even after termination of the relationship. Rafael was not allowed to use confidential information to the disadvantage of his former client or for his own advantage.

    Copyright:

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

    AC 1890 Digest

    Uploaded by

    Arleen Ingrid Santos
    Atty. Rafael Suntay was suspended from the practice of law for two years for violating the confidentiality of his former client, Fedrico Suntay. As Fedrico's lawyer and confidant, Rafael gained confidential information about Fedrico's legal, financial, and political affairs. After their relationship ended due to political differences, Rafael used this confidential information against Fedrico by filing complaints and cases against him. The court found that Rafael violated the rules requiring lawyers to preserve client confidences and secrets, even after termination of the relationship. Rafael was not allowed to use confidential information to the disadvantage of his former client or for his own advantage.

    Copyright:

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

    Arleen Ingrid A.

    Santos
    2016400089
    Case Digest - PALE

    FEDERICO SUNTAY vs. ATTY. RAFAEL SUNTAY


    A.C. NO. 1890
    August 7, 2002

    Facts:

    This complaint for disbarment was filed by complainant


    against his nephew, Atty. Rafael Suntay, alleging that the
    latter was the former’s legal counsel, adviser and confidant
    who was privy to all his legal, finance and political affairs.
    However, since they parted ways because of politics and
    respondent’s overweening political ambitions, respondent
    had been filing complaints and cases against complainant,
    making use of confidential information gained while their
    attorney-client relationship existed, and otherwise harassing
    him at every turn. Apparently, Atty. Rafael Suntay acted as
    counsel for clients in cases involving subject matters (two
    fishponds) regarding which he had either been previously
    consulted by complainant or which he had previously helped
    complainant to administer as the latter’s counsel and
    confidant.

    Respondent made use of the information he gained


    while he was the lawyer of complainant as basis for his
    complaint for the building of illegal dikes. His possession
    and examination of Transfer Certificate of Title and the
    blueprint plan provided him the information that there used
    to be two creeks traversing the fishpond covered by the title.
    Since he helped in the administration of the fishpond, he
    also came to know that the two creeks had disappeared.
    Thus, he gained the data which became the basis of his
    complaint when he was a lawyer and part administrator of
    complainant. Under the circumstances, there is a violation
    of professional confidence.
    The IBP found respondent guilty and recommended that
    he be suspended from the practice of law for two years for
    immoral conduct. The Court finds the IBP recommendation
    to be well taken.

    Issue:

    Whether or not Privilege communication of attorney-


    client relationship was violated

    Ruling:

    Atty. Rafael Suntay is suspended from the practice of


    law for two years for violating the confidentiality of lawyer-
    client relationship and for unethical conduct.

    A lawyer shall preserve the confidences and secrets of


    his clients even after termination of the attorney-client
    relation.

    Communications between attorney and client are, in a


    great number of litigations, a complicated affair, consisting
    of entangled relevant and irrelevant, secret and well known
    facts. In the complexity of what is said in the course of the
    dealings between an attorney and a client, inquiry in the
    nature suggested would lead to the revelation, in advance of
    the trial, of other matters that might only further prejudice
    the complainant’s cause.

    The following was violated:

    Rule 21.01. a lawyer shall not reveal the confidences or


    secrets of his client except:

    a) when authorized by the client after acquainting him of the


    consequences of the disclosure;
    b) when required by law;
    c) when necessary to collect fees or to defend himself, his
    employees ro associates or by judicial action.

    Rule 21.02. a lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his


    client, use information acquired in the course of
    employment, nor shall he use the same to his own
    advantage or that of a third person, unless the client with full
    knowledge of the circumstances consents thereto.

    You might also like