Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Wallen R. De Vera (respondent) is found GUILTY of violating the Lawyer’s Oath and Rule 10.01, Canon 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
WHEREFORE, respondent Atty. Wallen R. De Vera (respondent) is found GUILTY of violating the Lawyers Oath and Rule 10.01, Canon 10 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Accordingly, he is SUSPENDED for six (6) months from the practice of law, effective upon receipt of this Decision, with a stern warning that any repetition of the same or similar acts will be punished more severely. Moreover, respondent is ORDERED to return to complainants Spouses Willie and Amelia Umaguing the amount of P60,000.00 which he admittedly received from the latter as fees intrinsically linked to his professional engagement within ninety (90) days from the finality of this Decision. Failure to comply with the foregoing directive will warrant the imposition of further administrative penalties. Let copies of this Decision be furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant, to be appended to respondents personal record as attorney. Further, let copies of this Decision be furnished the Integrated Bar of the Philippines and the Office of the Court Administrator, which is directed to circulate them to all courts in the country for their information and guidance. SO ORDERED.
A.C. No. 9390 - EMILIA O. DHALIWAL, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. ABELARDO B. DUMAGUING. R E S O L U T I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
A.C. No. 9390
CaseA.C. No. 11078 - VERLITA V. MERCULLO AND RAYMOND VEDANO, COMPLAINANTS, VS. ATTY. MARIE FRANCES E. RAMON.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
A.C. No. 11078
CaseA.C. NO. 3569 - FIDELA VDA. DE ENRIQUEZ, COMPLAINANT, VS. ATTY. MANUEL G. SAN JOSE. RESOLUTION - Supreme Court E-Library
A.C. NO. 3569