Facts:

This case revolves around the complaint of Floraida Banares against Atty. Rosalino C. Barican for allegedly abandoning her custody case concerning her minor child. The incident took place in the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Branch II, where the case, referred to as Special Proceeding 7500, was being handled. Banares engaged the services of Atty. Barican to secure the custody of her daughter from her in-laws, Francisco Banares and Ester Macam. It is noted that Atty. Barican did file a petition for habeas corpus but failed to attend subsequent hearings, leading to the dismissal of the case on November 7, 1973.

In response, Atty. Barican contended that it was not the complainant who engaged his legal services but rather her mother, Percida Vasquez. According to Barican, he initially represented Baron Express, a transportation company involved in an accident that resulted in the death of Rolando Banares, who was the complainant's alleged husband. Vasquez approached Atty. Ba

...

Facts:

Background of the Case

• Floraida Banares, the complainant, filed a verified complaint alleging that Attorney Rosalino C. Barican “abandoned” her habeas corpus case.
• The subject matter involved a petition for habeas corpus filed before the Court of First Instance of Rizal concerning the custody of her minor child from Francisco Banares and Ester Macam.
• The dispute was set against the backdrop of a separate issue involving compensation for the death of Rolando Banares, who was identified as the alleged husband of the complainant and whose bus accident involved the Baron Express transportation firm.

Engagement and Representation

• The complainant claimed that she engaged the services of the respondent to secure the custody of her child and to pursue other legal benefits, asserting that his services were solicited without charge under an arrangement later characterized as contingent-fee.
• The respondent, however, testified under oath that it was not the complainant but her mother, Percida Vasquez, who had engaged his services.
• The respondent’s background involvement included representing the Baron Express, particularly after the firm became involved in a compensation claim related to the fatal bus accident.

Transactional and Procedural Developments

• After learning of the matter, the respondent initially prepared the petition for habeas corpus and communicated with both the complainant and her mother regarding the necessary documents and procedural requirements.
• Financial constraints played a role: the Baron Express advanced monetary assistance twice so that the petition could be filed, as the complainant and her mother lacked funds for litigation expenses.
• The petition was eventually filed with the court; however, due to contesting claims by Francisco Banares regarding the complainant’s marital status, the case was rescheduled and ultimately faced procedural complications.

Communication Breakdown and Alleged Abandonment

• On the day of the initial hearing, circumstances became complicated when the complainant’s mother indicated that the complainant’s common-law husband, Mr. Hilado, disapproved of retaining the respondent’s services, prompting the respondent to advise the complainant to seek another lawyer.
• An agreement was reached that if the complainant, after consulting with her common-law husband, still required the respondent’s presence, she would promptly notify him before the subsequent hearing; she was also to provide pertinent hospital records and coordinate a meeting with the attending physician.
• The complainant failed to fulfill these agreed conditions, and subsequent communications led her mother to officially terminate the respondent’s services on October 18, 1973, with final confirmation rendered on October 22, 1973.

Conflicting Allegations

• The complainant’s version stated that the respondent had volunteered his services, maintained that he promised to appear at court hearings, and later failed to do so; she also alleged inappropriate personal advances by the respondent, including suggesting a live-in relationship and planning a “date.”
• In contrast, the respondent denied these allegations, maintained that the engagement was initiated by the complainant’s mother, and stressed that he only attempted to accommodate the logistical and financial difficulties of the case.
• The material facts on record revealed that the complainant’s non-categorical responses to specific material allegations effectively amounted to admissions regarding the termination and handling of his services.

Issue:

Nature of Engagement

• Whether the respondent’s services were solicited by Floraida Banares herself or by her mother, Percida Vasquez.
• Whether the engagement was meant to be gratuitous (volunteered) or based on a contingent-fee arrangement.

Allegation of Abandonment

• Whether the respondent “abandoned” the habeas corpus case by failing to appear at subsequent scheduled hearings after the initial one.
• Whether the matter of non-appearance was attributable to the respondent’s willful neglect or to the complainant’s failure to secure his continued appearance by not fulfilling pre-agreed conditions.

Admissions by the Complainant

• Whether the complainant’s failure to specifically deny the respondent’s key material allegations constituted an admission that she had, in effect, dismissed him as counsel.
• Whether her non-categorical statements about the chronology and events regarding her communication with the respondent lead to a legally sufficient basis to dismiss the administrative complaint.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)