A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. - October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. - October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. - October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
US Visa Revoked?
Confused About Your Options?
AHLO's attorney may be able to explain your current options and pricing is
transparent.
ahlo.app OPEN
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2003 >
October 2003 Decisions >
A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003
ChanRobles - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR.:
Professional Review,
Inc.
EN BANC
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 1/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
DECISION
PER CURIAM:
ChanRobles On-Line
Bar Review
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 2/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
appearance and conference fee for each and every court
hearings, conferences outside our law office and meetings
before the Office of the Insurance Commission which will be
also charged to our 25% recovery fee;" and legal expenses
"such as but not limited to filing fee, messengerial and
postage expenses . . . and other miscellaneous but related
expenses," to be charged to complainant’s account which
would be reimbursed upon presentation statement of
account.
ChanRobles Special
It appears that Metropolitan Insurance finally offered to
Lecture Series
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 3/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
ArbitrationOn&
December 6, 1999, on complainant’s personal visit to
the office of Metropolitan Insurance, he was informed that
Legal services
his claim had long been settled via a December 23, 1998
check given to respondent the year before. 10 Complainant
lost no time in going to the law office of respondent who
was not around, however, but whom he was able to talk by
telephone during which he demanded that he turn over the
proceeds of his claim. 11
trade of commodities
Arbitrationapproached,
&
we will not hesitate to make a proper
representation with the Bureau of Immigration and
Legal services
Deportation for the authenticity of your visa, Department of
Labor and Employment for your working status, Bureau of
Internal Revenue for your taxation compliance and the
National Bureau of Investigation [with] which we have a
good network . . .
trade of commodities
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 4/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
trade of commodities
US Visa
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 6/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
The records of the case are before this Court for final
October-2003 action.
Jurisprudence
Respondent, by a Motion for Reconsideration 35 filed with
this Court, assails the Investigating Commissioner’s Report
A.M. No. P-02-1548 and Recommendation as not supported by clear, convincing
October 1, 2003 - and satisfactory proof. He prays for the reopening of the
ROBERT E. VILLAROS v. case and its remand to the Investigator so that Garcia can
RODOLFO ORPIANO personally appear for his (respondent’s) confrontation.
A.M. Nos. P-03-1697 There is no need for a reopening of the case. The facts
& P-03-1699 October 1, material to its resolution are either admitted or
2003 - JOCELYN S. documented.
PAISTE v. APRONIANO
V. MAMENTA This Court is in full accord with the findings of the IBP
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 8/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
v. ROMEO H. LAMBID
RULE 1.01 — A lawyer shall not engage in unlawful,
G.R. No. 137554 dishonest, immoral or deceitful conduct.
October 1, 2003 -
AL.
CANON 15 — A lawyer shall observe candor, fairness and
G.R. No. 148198 loyalty in all his dealings and transactions with his clients.
October 1, 2003 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. RULE 15.06 — A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is
v. ELIZABETH CORPUZ able to influence any public official, tribunal or legislative
body.
v. JAIME OLAYBAR
CANON 16 — A lawyer shall hold in trust all moneys and
G.R. No. 152176 properties of his client that may come into his possession.
October 1, 2003 -
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. RULE 16.01 — A lawyer shall account for all money or
v. ROGER D. DELA property collected or received for or from the client.
CRUZ
RULE 16.02 — A lawyer shall keep the funds of each client
G.R. No. 154130 separate and apart from his own and those of others kept
October 1, 2003 - by him.
BENITO ASTORGA v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. RULE 16.03 — A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property
of his client when due or upon demand. However, he shall
G.R. No. 156034 have a lien over the funds and may apply so much thereof
October 1, 2003 - as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and
DELSAN TRANSPORT disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his
LINES, INC. v. C & A client. He shall also have a lien to the same extent on all
CONSTRUCTION, INC. judgments and executions he has secured for his client as
provided for in the Rules of Court.
v. ANTONIO T.
ECHAVEZ
CANON 17 — A lawyer owes fidelity to the cause of his
G.R. No. 128882 client and he shall be mindful of the trust and confidence in
October 2, 2003 - him.
October 2, 2003 - RULE 18.04 — A lawyer shall keep the client informed of
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable
v. LEE HOI MING time to the client’s request for information.
v. EDDIE BASITE RULE 21.02 — A lawyer shall not, to the disadvantage of his
client, use information acquired in the course of
A.C. No. 6061 employment, nor shall he use the same to his advantage or
October 3, 2003 - RAUL that of a third person, unless the client with full knowledge
C. SANCHEZ v. of the circumstances consents thereto.
SALUSTINO SOMOSO
Specifically with respect to above-quoted provision of
A.M. MTJ-00-1311 Canon 16 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, the
October 3, 2003 - Filipino lawyer’s principal source of ethical rules, which
SILVESTRE H. BELLO Canon 16 bears on the principal complaint of complainant,
III v. AUGUSTUS C. a lawyer must hold in trust all moneys and properties of his
DIAZ, ET AL. client that he may come to possess. This commandment
entails certain specific acts to be done by a lawyer such as
A.M. No. P-02-1547 rendering an accounting of all money or property received
October 3, 2003 - for or from the client 36 as well as delivery of the funds or
LEOPOLDO V. CAÑETE property to the client when due or upon demand. 37
v. NELSON MANLOSA Respondent breached this Canon when after he received
the proceeds of complainant’s insurance claim, he did not
A.M. No. P-02-1550 report it to complainant, who had a given address in
October 3, 2003 - Makati, or to his co-attorney-in-fact Garcia who was his
AMELIA L. contact with respect to complainant.
AVELLANOSA v. JOSE
G.R. No. 118375 claim was still pending and recommend "acceptance of the
October 3, 2003 - 50% offer . . . which is P350,000.00 pesos." His
CELESTINA T. NAGUIAT explanation that he prepared and sent this letter on
v. COURT OF APPEALS, Garcia’s express request is nauseating. A lawyer, like
ET AL. respondent, would not and should not commit
prevarication, documented at that, on the mere request of
G.R. No. 122134 a friend.
October 3, 2003 -
APPEALS, ET AL.
A lawyer who practices or utilizes deceit in his dealings with
G.R. No. 146569 his client not only violates his duty of fidelity, loyalty and
October 6, 2003 - devotion to the client’s cause but also degrades himself and
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. besmirches the fair name of an honorable profession. 39
v. JOHN NEQUIA
That respondent had a lien on complainant’s funds for his
A.M. Nos. P-03- attorney’s fees did not relieve him of his duty to account for
1744–45 October 7, it. 40 The lawyer’s continuing exercise of his retaining lien
2003 - FE ALBANO presupposes that the client agrees with the amount of
MADRID v. ANTONIO T. attorney’s fees to be charged. In case of disagreement or
QUEBRAL when the client contests that amount for being
unconscionable, however, the lawyer must not arbitrarily
G.R. No. 135377 apply the funds in his possession to the payment of his
October 7, 2003 - DSR- fees. 41 He can file, if he still deems it desirable, the
SENATOR LINES, ET AL. necessary action or proper motion with the proper court to
v. FEDERAL PHOENIX fix the amount of such fees. 42
In respondent’s case, he never had the slightest attempt to
G.R. No. 149453 bring the matter of his compensation for judicial
October 7, 2003 - determination so that his and complainant’s sharp
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., disagreement thereon could have been put to an end.
ET AL. v. PANFILO M. Instead, respondent stubbornly and in bad faith held on to
LACSON complainant’s funds with the obvious aim of forcing
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 11/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
complainant to agree to the amount of attorney’s fees
G.R. No. 149717 sought. This is an appalling abuse by respondent of the
October 7, 2003 - exercise of an attorney’s retaining lien which by no means
EASTERN ASSURANCE is an absolute right and cannot at all justify inordinate delay
& SURETY CORP. v. in the delivery of money and property to his client when
LTFRB due or upon demand.
G.R. No. 155258 Respondent was, before receiving the check, proposing a
October 7, 2003 - 25% attorney’s fees. After he received the check and after
CONRADO S. CANO v. complainant had discovered its release to him, he was
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. already asking for 50%, objection to which complainant
communicated to him. Why respondent had to doubly
A.C. No. 4881 increase his fees after the lapse of about one year when all
October 8, 2003 - RAU the while he has been in custody of the proceeds of the
SHENG MAO v. check defies comprehension. At any rate, it smacks of
ANGELES A. VELASCO opportunism, to say the least.
G.R. No. 120864 As for respondent’s claim in his June 2001, Supplement to
October 8, 2003 - his Counter-Affidavit that he had on several occasions from
MANUEL T. DE GUIA v. May 1999 to October 1999 already delivered a total of
COURT OF APPEALS, ET P233,000.00 out of the insurance proceeds to Garcia in
AL. trust for complainant, this does not persuade, for it is bereft
of any written memorandum thereof. It is difficult to believe
G.R. No. 136845 that a lawyer like respondent could have entrusted such
October 8, 2003 - total amount of money to Garcia without documenting it,
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. especially at a time when, as respondent alleged, he and
v. GUILLERMO Garcia were not in good terms. 43 Not only that. As stated
FLORENDO earlier, respondent’s Counter-Affidavit of February 18, 2000
and his December 7, 1999 letter to complainant
G.R. No. 145166 unequivocally contained his express admission that the
October 8, 2003 - total amount of P525,000.00 was in his custody. Such
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. illogical, futile attempt to exculpate himself only aggravates
v. ALBERTO ROMERO, his misconduct. Respondent’s claim discredited, the
ET AL. affidavits of Leonardo and Roxas who, acting allegedly for
him, purportedly gave Garcia some amounts forming part
G.R. No. 146118 of the P233,000.00 are thus highly suspect and merit no
October 8, 2003 - consideration.
SAMUEL SAMARCA v.
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 12/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
HENRY S. OAMINAL v.
PABLITO M. CASTILLO, It bears noting that for close to five long years respondent
ET AL. has been in possession of complainant’s funds in the
amount of over half a million pesos. The deceptions and lies
G.R. No. 153751 that he peddled to conceal, until its discovery by
October 8, 2003 - MID complainant after about a year, his receipt of the funds and
PASIG LAND his tenacious custody thereof in a grossly oppressive
DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. manner point to his lack of good moral character. Worse, by
COURT OF APPEALS, ET respondent’s turnaround in his Supplement to his Counter-
AL. Affidavit that he already delivered to complainant’s friend
Garcia the amount of P233,000.00 which, so respondent
G.R. No. 154579 claims, is all that complainant is entitled to, he in effect has
October 8, 2003 - MA. declared that he has nothing more to turn over to
LOURDES R. DE complainant. Such incredible position is tantamount to a
GUZMAN v. PEOPLE OF refusal to remit complainant’s funds, and gives rise to the
THE PHIL. conclusion that he has misappropriated them. 45
A.M. No. P-96-1179 In fine, by respondent’s questioned acts, he has shown that
October 10, 2003 - he is no longer fit to remain a member of the noble
WINSTON C. CASTELO profession that is the law.
v. CRISTOBAL C.
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 13/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
COURT OF APPEALS, ET
BUGAYONG, ET AL.
SO ORDERED.
October 13, 2003 - Davide, Jr., C.J., Bellosillo, Puno, Vitug, Panganiban,
SAAD ANJUM v. CESAR Quisumbing, Sandoval-Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez,
L. ABACAHIN, ET AL. Corona, Carpio Morales, Callejo, Sr., Azcuna and Tinga, JJ.,
concur.
v. EDGARDO L.
VARGAS Endnotes:
v. JIMMY PONCE
JAMON
3. Id. at 49–50.
v. MANGI L. ADAM
6. Rollo at 7–8.
v. COURT OF APPEALS,
ET AL.
9. Rollo at 67–68.
- IMELDA Y. MADERADA
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 14/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
MEDIODEA
12. Id. at 11–13.
PABLO B. FRANCISCO
ROLANDO G. HOW
17. Id. at 1 and 3.
PHILIPPINE AIRLINES
TONGSON
20. Id. at 43.
- EUGENIO K. CHAN v.
A.M. No. RTJ-02- 23. TSN, May 25, 2001, pp. 6–7.
PACO, ET AL. v.
ET AL.
26. Id. at 88 and 90.
PABLO P. BURGOS, ET
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 15/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
SANDIGANBAYAN, ET
GILDO B. PELOPERO
G.R. No. 138364 38. Daroy v. Legaspi, 65 SCRA 304, 312 [1975].
PHILIPPINE BLOOMING
v. JESSE CACHOPERO
44. Rollo at 18 and 102.
43 October 15, 2003 - 45. Castillo v. Taguines, 254 SCRA 554 [1996].
PEOPLE OF THE PHIL.
v. HERMENIO CANOY
MACTAN-CEBU INT’L.
AIRPORT AUTHORITY
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 17/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 18/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 20/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 22/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
v. JASON S. NAVARRO,
ET AL.
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 23/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 24/25
7/21/2021 A.C. No. 5829 October 28, 2003 - DANIEL LEMOINE v. AMADEO E. BALON, JR. : October 2003 - Philipppine Supreme Court Decisions
https://www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/2003octoberdecisions.php?id=1030 25/25