Terminating and Establishing Attorney-Client Relationship
Terminating and Establishing Attorney-Client Relationship
Terminating and Establishing Attorney-Client Relationship
WARNING
Unauthorized reproduction or claim of ownership of this original [derivative] work by any person amounts
to copyright infringement.
Who is a “client”?
A "client" is a person, public officer, or corporation, association, or other organization or entity, either
public or private, who is rendered professional legal services by a lawyer, or who consults a lawyer with a
view to obtaining professional legal services from him. - Westinghouse Electric Corporation v. Kerr-McGee
Corporation et. al., 580 F.2d 1311 1978
It is not essential that the client should have employed the lawyer on any previous occasion or that
any retainer should have been paid, promised or charged for; neither is it material that the attorney
consulted did not afterward undertake the case about which the consultation was had, for as long as
the advice and assistance of the attorney is sought and received in matters pertinent to his profession. -
Virgo v. Atty. Amorin A.C. No. 7861 [2009]
1
employment does not result." - Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Kerr-McGee Corp., 580 F.2d 1311, 1319 (7th
Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 955, 99 S. Ct. 353, 58 L. Ed. 2d 346 (1978)
Verbal agreement
There is no gainsaying that a verbal engagement is sufficient to create an attorney-client relationship. -
Urban Bank Inc. vs. Atty. Pena, A.C. No. 4863 [2001]
Presumption of Authority
The presumption in favor of the counsels authority to appear in behalf of a client is a strong one. A lawyer is
not even required to present a written authorization from the client. In fact, the absence of a formal notice
of entry of appearance will not invalidate the acts performed by the counsel in his clients name. - LBP v.
Pamintuan Development Corp., G.R. No. 167886, October 25, 2005
There are instances, however, when the Court finds that no attorney-client relationship exists between the
parties, such as when the relationship stemmed from a personal transaction between them rather than the
practice of law of respondent or when the legal acts done were only incidental to their personal transaction.
- Virgo v. Atty. Amorin A.C. No. 7861 [2009]
2
A client may form an attorney-client relationship with more than one attorney or law firm on the
same legal matter.
Each attorney or law firm representing the client owes the client all of the fiduciary duties arising from an
attorney-client relationship. A law firm is not immune from liability for a breach of fiduciary duty simply
because another attorney also owed a fiduciary duty to the client. – Morris v. Arthur Margulis and Margulis
& Grant, P.C., 718 N.E.2d 709 (1999)
Lawyer’s responsibility
CANON 18 - A LAWYER SHALL SERVE HIS CLIENT WITH COMPETENCE AND DILIGENCE.
xxxx
Rule 18.03 - A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him and his negligence in
connection therewith shall render him liable.
Rule 18.04 - A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond
within a reasonable time to the client’s request for information.
Implied duty to finish the case
Among the fundamental rules of ethics is the principle that an attorney who undertakes an action
impliedly stipulates to carry it to its termination, that is, until the case becomes final and executory. -
Venterez, et. al. v. Atty. Cosme, A.C. No. 7421 [2007]
Among the fundamental rules of ethics is the principle that an attorney who undertakes to conduct an
action impliedly stipulates to carry it to its conclusion.- Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155,
March 14, 2006
As is said xxx "where the necessary elements of a contract (of employment) exist, the creation of the
relation is not prevented merely by the fact that a blood relationship exists between the attorney and
client."
It is true that Shockey made no charge to his mother for his services, but that was not necessary to the
creation of the relation of attorney and client. – Nicholson v. Shockey, 192 Va. 270 (1951)
3
When dealing with unrepresented parties, especially when they are related to the client or are partners of
the client, it is crucial to have a writing that clarifies who the lawyer represents and who the lawyer does
not represent. A letter to the unrepresented parties may contain language similar to the following:
I enjoyed [meeting you] [talking with you] yesterday regarding [legal matter]. As I mentioned, I
am only representing [client] in this matter. I am not representing you and cannot advise you regarding
your interests in this matter. You should consider consulting with a lawyer of your choice. [By Thomas P.
Sukowicz]
……..
When an action or proceeding is initiated in our courts, lawyers become the eyes and ears of their clients.
Lawyers are expected to prosecute or defend the interests of their clients without need for reminders. The
privilege of the office of attorney grants them the ability to warrant to their client that they will manage the
case as if it were their own.
The relationship between an attorney and client is a sacred agency. It cannot be disregarded on the flimsy
excuse that the lawyer accepted the case only because he or she was asked by an acquaintance. The
professional relationship remains the same regardless of the reasons for the acceptance by counsel and
regardless of whether the case is highly paying or pro bono. – Ramirez v. Atty. Mercedes Buhayang-
Margallo, A.C. No. 10537, February 3, 2015
The existence of the relationship "turns largely on the client's subjective belief that it exists". The client's
subjective belief, however, does not control the issue unless it is reasonably formed based on the attending
circumstances, including the attorney's words or actions. – Bohn v. Cody, 832 P.2d 71 (1992)
A non-engagement letter
A non-engagement letter under these circumstances would prevent any misunderstanding about the
absence of an attorney-client relationship. It might include the following language:
We have received [your communication][the documents you delivered] regarding [subject matter]. While
we appreciate the confidence you have expressed in our firm, for various reasons we are unable to represent
you in this matter. We are returning under cover of this letter the materials you provided for our review.
[By Thomas P. Sukowicz]
4
Because courts have found a duty to inform the client of the requirement of filing within the statutory
period, a non-engagement letter should address that issue, without necessarily giving an opinion about
when the time within which to file will expire. The non-engagement letter should include language similar
to the following:
Please note that the law limits the time within which individuals may file law suits. Allowing
too much time to pass may forever bar you from asserting your claim. We are not providing our opinion as
to the date by which you must file any law suit against [adverse party]. We encourage you, however, to
immediately contact another attorney if you wish to pursue your claim. [By Thomas P. Sukowicz]
Disclaimers
Appropriate disclaimers which would inform the potential client that it cannot rely on information supplied
by the attorney would minimize the attorney’s liability exposure. – Ethical Considerations by Stephanie
Friese of Friese and Price Law Firm, [email protected]
http://pftlegal.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/EthicalConsiderations.NBISeminar.2004.pdf
In declining to take your case, we are not expressing an opinion about the merits of your position. We
encourage you to consult with another attorney regarding your case if you so choose. Our decision not to
accept this representation should not be interpreted as an adverse opinion about the merits of your case.
[By Thomas P. Sukowicz]
Listening to his client's preliminary statement of his case establishes attorney-client relationship
If a person, in respect to his business affairs or troubles of any kind, consults with his attorney in his
professional capacity with the view to obtaining professional advice or assistance, and the attorney
voluntarily permits or acquiesces in such consultation, then the professional employment must be
regarded as established. . . .
A mere principal and agent relationship does not create a lawyer-client relationship
In order to constitute the relation (of attorney and client) a professional one and not merely one of
principal and agent, the attorneys must be employed either to give advice upon a legal point, to prosecute
or defend an action in court of justice, or to prepare and draft, in legal form such papers as deeds, bills,
contracts and the like. - Hilado v. Atty. Guitierrez, et. al., G.R. No. L-961, September 21, 1949
………
An attorney-client relationship may be implied "when:
(1) a person seeks advice or assistance from an attorney,
(2) the advice or assistance sought pertains to matters within the attorney's professional competence, and
5
(3) the attorney expressly or impliedly agrees to give or actually gives the desired advice or assistance.“
– Todd v. State of Nevada, 931 P.2d 721 (1997)
The agreement “can only be canceled by notice within a restrictive thirty-day period.”
In the event of premature termination, client shall pay counsel the lump sum of the remaining period of
retainer agreement.”
……..
When an action or proceeding is initiated in our courts, lawyers become the eyes and ears of their clients.
Lawyers are expected to prosecute or defend the interests of their clients without need for reminders. The
privilege of the office of attorney grants them the ability to warrant to their client that they will manage the
case as if it were their own.
The relationship between an attorney and client is a sacred agency. It cannot be disregarded on the flimsy
excuse that the lawyer accepted the case only because he or she was asked by an acquaintance. The
professional relationship remains the same regardless of the reasons for the acceptance by counsel and
regardless of whether the case is highly paying or pro bono. – Ramirez v. Atty. Mercedes Buhayang-
Margallo, A.C. No. 10537, February 3, 2015
ATTORNEY: The right of an attorney to withdraw or terminate the relation other than for sufficient cause
is, however, considerably restricted. Xxx He is not at liberty to abandon it without reasonable cause. A
lawyer’s right to withdraw from a case before its final adjudication arises only from the client’s written
consent or from a good cause. - Francisco v. Atty. Portugal, A.C. No. 6155, March 14, 2006
CANON 22 - A LAWYER SHALL WITHDRAW HIS SERVICES ONLY FOR GOOD CAUSE AND UPON
NOTICE APPROPRIATE IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Rule 22.01 - A lawyer may withdraw his services in any of the following case:
(a) When the client pursues an illegal or immoral course of conduct in connection with the matter he is
handling; [see Rule 19.02]
(b) When the client insists that the lawyer pursue conduct violative of these canons and rules;
(c) When his inability to work with co-counsel will not promote the best interest of the client;
(d) When the mental or physical condition of the lawyer renders it difficult for him to carry out the
employment effectively;
(e) When the client deliberately fails to pay the fees for the services or fails to comply with the
retainer agreement;
(f) When the lawyer is elected or appointed to public office [see Rule 3.03]; and
(g) Other similar cases.
6
Rule 3.03 - Where a partner accepts public office, he shall withdraw from the firm and his name shall be
dropped from the firm name unless the law allows him to practice law concurrently.
Rule 15.06. - A lawyer shall not state or imply that he is able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body.
Rule 19.02 - A lawyer who has received information that his client has, in the course of the
representation, perpetrated a fraud upon a person or tribunal, shall promptly call upon the client to rectify
the same, and failing which he shall terminate the relationship with such client in accordance with the
Rules of Court.
……..
Because of this fiduciary relationship, "a client has the absolute right to discharge the attorney and
terminate the relation at any time, even without cause."
A client's discharge of his attorney "is not a breach of the contract of employment but the exercise of his
right."
This right to terminate is a term of the contract implied by public policy because of the peculiar
relationship between attorney and client.
A client must be free to end the relationship whenever "`he ceases to have absolute confidence in either the
integrity or the judgment or the capacity of the attorney.'"
Change of attorney
Section 26 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court provides:
"Sec. 26. Change of attorneys -- An attorney may retire at any time from any action or special proceeding,
by the written consent of his client filed in court. He may also retire at any time from an action or special
proceeding, without the consent of his client, should the court, on notice to the client and attorney, and on
hearing, determine that he ought to be allowed to retire. In case of substitution, the name of the attorney
newly employed shall be entered on the docket of the court in place of the former one, and written notice
of the change shall be given to the adverse party.
Rule 20.04 - A lawyer shall avoid controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort
to judicial action only to prevent imposition, injustice or fraud.
7
Nonpayment of fees is not a sufficient basis, standing alone
Courts [] generally allow legal counsel to withdraw where there is a breakdown in the attorney-client
relationship. This may include the client's failure to pay legal fees where the failure to pay would impose an
unreasonable financial burden on the attorney. On the other hand, "the nonpayment of fees is usually not a
sufficient basis, standing alone, to override the attorney's ethical responsibilities of continued
representation of a client . – In re: Schley & Schley, May 9, 2012
A lawyer must see to it that a new lawyer is recorded before terminating his services
An attorney may only retire from a case either by written consent of his client or by permission of the
court after due notice and hearing, in which event the attorney should see to it that the name of the
new lawyer is recorded in the case. - Atty. Jalandoni v. Atty. Villarosa, AC 5303, June 15, 2006
The discharged attorney must likewise see to it that the name of the new counsel is properly recorded and
the records properly handed over. - Balatbat v. Atty. Arias, A.C. No. 1666 [2007]
8
……..
An attorney must make an application to the court to withdraw as counsel, for the relation does not
terminate formally until there is a withdrawal of record; at least, so far as the opposite party is concerned,
the relation otherwise continues until the end of the litigation. Unless properly relieved, the counsel is
responsible for the conduct of the case. Until his withdrawal shall have been approved, the lawyer remains
counsel of record who is expected by his client as well as by the court to do what the interests of his client
require. He must still appear on the date of hearing for the attorney-client relation does not terminate
formally until there is a withdrawal of record. – Sps. Saligumbas v. Palanog, G.R. No. 143365, December 4,
2008
xxx and shall cooperative with his successor in the orderly transfer of the matter, including all
information necessary for the proper handling of the matter. - Rule 22.02
Death of a partner
9
Petitioner's counsel was the law firm of BAIZAS, ALBERTO & ASSOCIATES and not merely Atty. Crispin
Baizas. Hence, the death of the latter did not extinguish the lawyer-client relationship between said
firm and petitioner.
Upon receipt of the notice to file Brief, the law firm should have re-assigned the case to another
associate or, it could have withdrawn as counsel in the manner provided by the Rules of Court so that
the petitioner could contract the services of a new lawyer. - B.R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, G.R.
No. L-41862 [1992]
Lost of confidence
Respondent's withdrawal was made on the ground that "there no longer exist[ed] the xxx confidence"
between them and that there had been "serious differences between them relating to the manner of private
prosecution.”- Orcino v. Atty. Gaspar, A.C. No. 3773 September 24, 1997
10
If an attorney is found to have violated the ethical rules, a court may find that any claim to fees from the
matter is invalid.
Accordingly, an attorney contemplating withdrawal must consider whether it would be with or without
cause to determine if the client is required to pay fees because an attorney's lien will always be invalid
when the client is not required to pay fees.
The lawyer has no right to presume that his petition for withdrawal will be granted by the court. Until his
withdrawal shall have been approved, the lawyer remains counsel of record who is expected by his client as
well as by the court to do what the interests of his client require.
He must still appear on the date of hearing for the attorney-client relation does not terminate formally until
there is a withdrawal of record. – Orcino v. Atty. Gaspar, A.C. No. 3773. September 24, 1997
The attorney-client relationship between J.T. Barrera & Associates and the respondent was not thereby
severed upon the one-year suspension of Atty. Barrera from the practice of law. The law firm continued to
be the counsel of record of the respondent. Any member of the law firm could appear for trial and sign
pleadings for the firm as the respondents counsel in the trial court.
…….
As the Court ruled in one case, [w]hen a client employs the services of a law firm, he does not employ the
services of the lawyer who is assigned to personally handle the case. Rather, he employs the entire law firm.
In the event that the counsel appearing for the client resigns, the firm is bound to provide a replacement.
We see no reason why the same principle should not apply to a case where a partner or associate is
suspended from the practice of law, as in this case. – Balgami, et. al. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 131287.
December 9, 2004
Death of a client
Respondent court therefore erred in ruling that since upon the demise of the party-appellant, the attorney-
client relationship between her and her counsels "was automatically severed and terminated," whatever
pleadings filed by said counsel with it after the death of said appellant "are mere scraps of paper."
If at all, due to said death on May 25, 1975 and severance of the attorney-client relationship, further
proceedings and specifically the running of the original 45-day period for filing the appellant’s brief should
be legally deemed as having been automatically suspended, until the proper substitution of the
deceased appellant by her executor or administrator or her heirs shall have been effected within the time
set by respondent court pursuant to the cited Rule. – The Heirs of the late Florentina Nuguid vda. De
Haberer v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-42699 to L-42709. May 26, 1981
11
Death of a party RRC
Rule 3 RRC, Section 16. Death of party; duty of counsel. — Whenever a party to a pending action dies, and
the claim is not thereby extinguished, it shall be the duty of his counsel to inform the court within thirty
(30) days after such death of the fact thereof, and to give the name and address of his legal representative or
representatives. Failure of counsel to comply with his duty shall be a ground for disciplinary action.
The heirs of the deceased may be allowed to be substituted for the deceased, without requiring the
appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor
heirs.
…….
The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be substituted
within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.
If no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if the one so named shall fail to
appear within the specified period, the court may order the opposing party, within a specified time to
procure the appointment of an executor or administrator for the estate of the deceased and the latter shall
immediately appear for and on behalf of the deceased. The court charges in procuring such appointment, if
defrayed by the opposing party, may be recovered as costs.
…….
Section 17. Death or separation of a party who is a public officer. — When a public officer is a party in an
action in his official capacity and during its pendency dies, resigns, or otherwise ceases to hold office, the
action may be continued and maintained by or against his successor if, within thirty (30) days after the
successor takes office or such time as may be granted by the court, it is satisfactorily shown to the court by
any party that there is a substantial need for continuing or maintaining it and that the successor adopts or
continues or threatens to adopt or continue to adopt or continue the action of his predecessor. Before a
substitution is made, the party or officer to be affected, unless expressly assenting thereto, shall be given
reasonable notice of the application therefor and accorded an opportunity to be heard.
Section 18. Incompetency or incapacity. — If a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, the court,
upon motion with notice, may allow the action to be continued by or against the incompetent or
incapacitated person assisted by his legal guardian or guardian ad litem.
……..
Although Rule 3, Section 16 of the Rules of Court is directly applied more often in civil actions for the
substitution of the deceased party, the rule that the counsel of the deceased party must inform the court of
the death of his or her client also properly applies in criminal actions. Regardless of the nature of the action,
courts cannot be expected to assume the death of the party without the counsel's proper manifestation.
Furthermore, the rules presume that "the attorney for the deceased party is in a better position than the
attorney for the adverse party to know about the death of his [or her] client[.]“
As officers of the court and as protectors of the legal interests of their clients, counsels have a duty to
properly act in case of their clients' death by notifying the Court of this development. – Tuano v. PP, G.R.
No. 205871, September 28, 2016
12
The duty of counsel under the aforecited provision is to inform the court within thirty (30) days after the
death of his client of the fact of death, and to give the name and address of the deceased's legal
representative or representatives. Incidentally, this is the only representation that counsel can undertake
after the death of a client as the fact of death terminated any further lawyer-client relationship. – Judge
Sumaljag v. Sps. Literato, G.R. No. 149787 , June 18, 2008
…….
There is no question that this duty applies in this case where a party dies after filing of the complaint and
during the pendency of the case, nor is there any argument against the rule that counsel's inexcusable
negligence is binding on his client. – Chittick v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-25350 October 4, 1988
Consequently, it is evident that the motion for substitution filed by the counsel for the deceased and which
was subsequently approved by the Court of Appeals is null and void because the party in whose name it was
presented was dead, and therefore, the authority of the attorney to represent her had ceased. – Chittick v.
Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-25350 October 4, 1988
Contract for legal services will not defeat the right of the heirs
The immediate issue in this case is whether or not Atty. Felipe C. Navarro, the petitioner, is the proper
party to represent Marcelo Yadno, the deceased.
Petitioner, Atty. Felipe Navarro, is invoking the contract of legal services he entered with his former client
Marcelo Yadno and others as his authority to take the place of Yadno in case of the latter’s death. Hence,
when the supervening event of death came during the pendency of Yadno’s appeal to the Court of Appeals,
petitioner Navarro simply filed a notice of substitution and a motion for reconsideration rolled into one and
upon receipt of an adverse decision, he is now before this Court pursuing the case in lieu of the late Marcelo
Yadno.
13
……..
Private respondent counters that the "contract of legal services" could not have transmitted any right to
Atty. Navarro to succeed the late Marcelo Yadno considering that the alleged document is neither a
substitution of heirs nor transmittal of rights on the land in litigation in the case at bar. He avers that the
title of the contract itself states that it is a contract for legal services and its contents which states." . . our
rights shall only be transmitted to our heirs . . ." meaning the legal heirs could not have possibly made Atty.
Navarro as heir of Marcelo Yadno.
……..
The contention of the private respondent is well taken.
Section 17, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court sets the rule on substitution of parties in case of death of any of the
parties. Under the Rule, it is the court that is called upon, after notice of a party’s death and the claim is not
thereby extinguished, to order upon proper notice the legal representative of the deceased to appear within
a period of thirty (30) days or such time as it may grant. - Atty. Navarro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
100257. June 8, 1992
……..
Section 16 of Rule 3 provides:
"Whenever a party to a pending case dies . . . it shall be the duty of his attorney to inform the court
promptly of such death . . . and to give the name and residence of the executor, administrator,
guardian or other legal representative of the deceased."cralaw virtua1aw library
In the case at bar, petitioner Navarro did not give any explanation why he failed to give the name and
residence of the executor, administrator or guardian of the deceased, if there was any, and in their absence
at least the name and residence of the heirs of Yadno who shall take the place of the deceased.
………
Clearly, priority is given to the legal representative of the deceased, that is, the executor or
administrator of his estate. It is only in cases of unreasonable delay in the appointment of an executor or
administrator, or in cases where the heirs resort to an extrajudicial settlement of the estate, that the court
may adopt the alternative of allowing the heirs of the deceased to be substituted for the deceased.
Petitioner Navarro took the short cut route of making himself the legal representative of Yadno on the basis
of the contract of legal services. This mode resorted to by Navarro is clearly without any legal basis.
Even at this point in time, the record is bereft of any evidence that would grant herein petitioner Navarro
any authority to represent the late Marcelo Yadno. In the same vein, there is also no showing of any
evidence granted to herein counsel Jose Edward Navarro to file and prosecute the case and any other
incidental cases for and in behalf of Yadno’s heirs. - Atty. Navarro v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 100257. June
8, 1992
WON an employer-employee relation exists between the contending parties or whether or not the
private respondent was hired on a retainer basis
On October 24, 1978, petitioner corporation hired the private respondent Aban as its "Legal Assistant." He
received a basic monthly salary of P1,500.00 plus an initial living allowance of P50.00 which gradually
increased to P320.00.
On September 4, 1980, Aban received a letter from the corporation informing him that he would be
considered terminated effective October 4, 1980 because of his alleged failure to perform his duties well.
On October 6, 1980, Aban filed a complaint against the petitioner for illegal dismissal.
…….
The petitioner contends that its relationship with Aban is that of a client with his lawyer. It is its position
that "(a) lawyer as long as he is acting as such, as long as he is performing acts constituting practice of law,
14
can never be considered an employee. His relationship with those to whom he renders services, as such
lawyer, can never be governed by the labor laws. For a lawyer to so argue is not only demeaning to himself
(sic), but also his profession and to his brothers in the profession."
……
The contention is without merit.
A lawyer, like any other professional, may very well be an employee of a private corporation or even of the
government. It is not unusual for a big corporation to hire a staff of lawyers as its in-house counsel, pay
them regular salaries, rank them in its table of organization, and otherwise treat them like its other officers
and employees.
At the same time, it may also contract with a law firm to act as outside counsel on a retainer basis. The two
classes of lawyers often work closely together but one group is made up of employees while the other is not.
A similar arrangement may exist as to doctors, nurses, dentists, public relations practitioners, and other
professionals.
….
This Court has consistently ruled that the determination of whether or not there is an employer-employee
relation depends upon four standards: (1) the manner of selection and engagement of the putative
employee; (2) the mode of payment of wages; (3) the presence or absence of a power of dismissal; and (4)
the presence or absence of a power to control the putative employee's conduct. Of the four, the right-of-
control test has been held to be the decisive factor.
Aban was employed by the petitioner to be its Legal Assistant as evidenced by his appointment paper. The
petitioner paid him a basic salary plus living allowance. Thereafter, Aban was dismissed on his alleged
failure to perform his duties well.
…….
Aban worked solely for the petitioner and dealt only with legal matters involving the said corporation and
its employees. He also assisted the Personnel Officer in processing appointment papers of employees. This
latter duty is not an act of a lawyer in the exercise of his profession but rather a duty for the benefit of the
corporation.
The above-mentioned facts show that the petitioner paid Aban's wages, exercised its power to hire and fire
the respondent employee and more important, exercised control over Aban by defining the duties and
functions of his work.
-Hydro Resources Contractors Corporation v. NLRC and Aban, G.R. No. L-62909 April 18, 1989
WON a Vice-President for the Legal Department and General Counsel of a corporation is a regular
employee whose services could only be terminated in accordance with the Labor Code or WON the
same as legal counsel could be dispensed with at anytime pursuant to the provision on the
cessation of lawyer-client relationship under Rule 138 of the Rules of Court.
We would like to emphasize that our decision as a Board did not dismiss you from the service of the Bank.
All that the Board is saying to you is that it has lost its confidence in you and therefore it is patiently
awaiting your resignation of course with your right of retirement pay in accordance with the policy adopted
by the Bank under these situations. Trust or confidence like love are feelings which emanate from the heart
and, as the song goes, "once a heart is torn apart it is never the same again." So also confidence like a tooth
once pulled can never be restored.
…….
After learning of the filing of the complaint, the Board of Directors, on 21 November 1989, adopted
Resolution No. 5803 terminating the services of private respondent "in view of his belligerence" and the
Board's "honest belief that the relationship" between private respondent and petitioner bank was one of
"client and lawyer." Private respondent was removed from his office occupancy in the bank and ordered
15
disentitled, starting 10 August 1989, to any compensation and other benefits. The Board instructed
management to take the necessary steps to "defend itself and all the members of the Board of Directors"
from private respondent's complaint.
Pursuing their stand that the association between the bank and private respondent was one of a client-
lawyer relationship, petitioners filed a motion to dismiss the complaint with the NLRC on the ground of
lack of jurisdiction. Private respondent, opposing the motion, insisted on the existence of an employer-
employee relationship between them.
…….
Confident that no employer-employee existed between the bank and private respondent, petitioners have
put aside the procedural requirements for terminating one's employment, i.e., (a) a notice apprising the
employee of the particular acts or omissions for which his dismissal is sought, and (b) another notice
informing the employee of the employer's decision to dismiss him. Failure to comply with these
requirements taints the dismissal with illegality. This procedure is mandatory, any judgment reached by
management without that compliance can be considered void and inexistent. While it is true that the
essence of due process is simply an opportunity to be heard or, as applied in administrative proceedings, an
opportunity to explain one's side, meetings in the nature of consultation and conferences such as the case
here, however, may not be valid substitutes for the proper observance of notice and hearing. - Equitable
Banking Corporation v. National Labor Relations Commission, G.R. No. 102467 June 13, 1997
WON a company which has been hailed to court by its own in-house counsel is obliged to continue
his employment and entrust its legal affairs to him, specially when his cause of action has been
shown to be devoid of merit
WON a firm is bound to retain in its service a personnel manager who has incited the very
employees under his supervision and control to file complaints against it.
……
The petitioner was appointed Legal Counsel of the Central Azucarera de Pilar. Later, concurrently with his
position as Legal Counsel, he was named Head of its Manpower and Services Department.
Petitioner had encouraged his co-employees to file complaints against the Central over the rations issue,
and this, as well as his institution of his own actions, had created an atmosphere of enmity in the Central,
and caused the loss by the Central of that trust and confidence in him so essential in a lawyer-client
relationship as that theretofore existing between them; and that under the circumstances, petitioner's
discharge as the Central's Legal Counsel and Head of the Manpower & Services Department was justified. -
Asis vs. Minister of Labor and Employment, G.R. No. 58094-95 March 15, 1989
……..
Its success is thus dependent on his being able to sustain the burden of demonstrating that what was done
by respondent Bank, through its Board of Directors, all of whom were likewise named respondents, could in
law be characterized as removal without cause contrary to the explicit mandate of the Constitution.
The transfer of petitioner from the Legal Department is justified by the following facts and circumstances:
a) The position of Chief Legal Counsel carries a special confidential relationship of lawyer and client. In this
regard, the Bank has the prerogative to designate or change its lawyer, that is, to choose the lawyer, in
whom it may have confidence, to head its Legal Department.
16
…….
c) The transfer of petitioner from the Legal Department was made by the respondent Board, in the exercise
of its powers, upon the recommendation of their respondent PNB President. The respondent Board had
authorized the PNB President to revitalize the Legal Department.
Petitioner's reliance on the constitutional provision against removal without cause is misplaced. It is
appropriate to invoke it when an officer or employee in the civil service enjoying a fixed term is made to
lose his position without warrant or justification. It certainly finds no application when the duration of
one's term depends on the will of the appointing power. That is so where the position held is highly
confidential in character. Such is the case of the Chief Legal Counsel of respondent Philippine National
Bank.
………
Our decision is limited to the validity of the action taken by respondent Bank. We do not by any means
intimate an opinion as to the legal consequences attaching to an action similar in character taken by any
other office or agency of the government concerning a lawyer in its staff, especially one who was not
employed precisely because of the marked degree of confidence reposed in him, but rather because of his
technical competence.
As far as the petitioner is concerned, however, it is our conclusion that he could not plausibly contend that
there was a removal in the constitutional sense as what did take place was a termination of official relation.
………
Accepting as he did the position of chief legal adviser, the essence of which is the utmost degree of
confidence involving such "close intimacy which insures freedom of intercourse without embarrassment or
freedom from misgivings of betrayals" whether of personal trust or official matters, he could not have been
unaware that his term could be cut short any time without giving rise to any alleged infringement of the
above constitutional safeguard. There was no removal which according to such a mandate is only allowable
for cause. Hence the lack of persuasive character of petitioner's plea.
……..
For as above noted, the decisive issue is the confidential character of petitioner's position, which negates
reliance on the removal-for-cause guarantee of the Constitution. We thus leave open for future
determination, when and if such a litigation arises, case involving the other vice-presidents of the
respondent Bank, where it would appear the overriding factor in their selection is not that degree of the
utmost confidence reposed in a lawyer but their technical skills in the performance of the duties entrusted
to them. – Besa v. PNB, G.R. No. L-26838 May 29, 1970
………
Disciplinary of the Code provides that an attorney who withdraws from the representation of a client must
deliver "to the client all papers and property to which the client is entitled." Moreover, [the code] contains a
prohibition against intentionally prejudicing or damaging a client during the course of the professional
relationship. - People of the State of Colorado ex rel. J. D. MacFarlane v. Carl L. Harthun, 581 P.2d 716 (1978)
17
Unless there is a demonstrated conflict of interest, or counsel and defendant are embroiled in an
irreconcilable conflict that is so great that it results in a total lack of communication preventing an
adequate defense.
"Even where good cause for withdrawal exists, it is `incumbent on the court to assure that the prosecution
of the lawsuit before it is not disrupted by the withdrawal of counsel.'" xxx "This requires the court to
consider certain additional factors before allowing an attorney to withdraw.
The only way to be relieved as counsel is to have either the written conformity of his client or an
order from the court
Based on respondent’s own admissions, he did not properly withdraw as counsel for complainant. The
settled rule is that the attorney-client relation continues until the client gives a notice of discharge, or
manifests to the court or tribunal where the case is pending that counsel is being discharged, with a copy
served upon the adverse party. Thus, the only way to be relieved as counsel is to have either the
written conformity of his client or an order from the court relieving him of the duties of counsel, in
accordance with Rule 138, Section 26 of the Rules of Court.
This rule is consistent with the principle that an attorney who undertakes to conduct an action
impliedly stipulates to carry it to its termination, and is not at liberty to abandon it without
reasonable cause. The duty of a lawyer to safeguard his client’s interests commences from his retainer
until his effective discharge from the case or the final disposition of the entire subject matter of the
litigation. The discharged attorney must likewise see to it that the name of the new counsel is
properly recorded and the records properly handed over. Verily, the abandonment of a client in
violation of the attorney’s contract amounts to an ignorance of the most elementary principles of
professional ethics. - Balatbat v. Atty. Arias, A.C. No. 1666, April 13, 2007
Dismissal must be for a justifiable cause if a written contract between the lawyer and the client
exists.
But, as earlier pointed out, although a client may dismiss her lawyer at any time, the dismissal must be
for a justifiable cause if a written contract between the lawyer and the client exists.
18
In the absence of the lawyer’s fault, consent or waiver, a client cannot deprive the lawyer of his just fees
already earned in the guise of a justifiable reason. Here, Malvar not only downplayed the worth of the
Intervenor’s legal service to her but also attempted to camouflage her intent to defraud her lawyer by
offering excuses that were not only inconsistent with her actions but, most importantly, fell short of being
justifiable. – Malvar v. Kraft Food Phils., Inc., et. al., G.R. No. 183952, September 9, 2013
Attorneys should withdraw and assert an attorney lien only when they are certain that they have
good cause to do so. The Ausler standard delineates when an attorney has good cause to withdraw from
representation in Washington. When the attorney does not have good cause to withdraw, the court
will likely hold the attorney lien void." Recall that an improperly asserted attorney lien is likely to
constitute an ethical violation. - Elsner, Zach, “Rethinking Attorney Liens: Why Washington Attorneys are
Forced into "Involuntary" Pro Bono; Seattle University Law Review; Vol. 27:827, 2004
A "disengagement" letter
In terms of malpractice avoidance, a "disengagement" letter to the client not only will serve to document
the discharge of the lawyer's duty in the event of a dispute, but it should also signal to the client, in
concrete terms, that the attorney-client relationship has ended. Consider sending a disengagement letter at
the conclusion of each matter you undertake for a client. The letter might include language similar to the
following:
We are pleased to have represented you for the past [time period] in [legal matter]. This will confirm
that our engagement to represent you in this matter has concluded. We will take no further action
regarding this matter. We are returning to you under cover of this letter [documents] related to your
case. [By Thomas P. Sukowicz]
19