Title
Bautista vs. Barrios
Case
A.C. No. 258
Decision Date
Dec 21, 1963
Atty. Barrios drafted a property partition for Rufina Bautista but later represented opposing party Federico Rovero, breaching loyalty and ethics, leading to a two-year suspension.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.C. No. 258)

Facts:

  1. Engagement of Atty. Barrios: In August 1955, Rufina Bautista engaged the services of Atty. Benjamin O. Barrios to draft an extra-judicial partition. The partition involved the distribution of conjugal properties between Rufina Bautista, her siblings, and Federico Rovero, the widower of Maria Bautista (Rufina’s deceased sister).
  2. Execution of the Deed: Atty. Barrios prepared the deed of partition, which was signed by the parties.
  3. Breach of Agreement: In September 1955, Federico Rovero refused to comply with the terms of the partition. Rufina Bautista filed a lawsuit (Civil Case No. K-689) to enforce the partition and sought Atty. Barrios’ representation.
  4. Refusal to Represent: Atty. Barrios refused to represent Rufina Bautista, forcing her to engage another lawyer, Atty. Artemio S. Arrieta.
  5. Appearance for the Opposing Party: Atty. Barrios subsequently appeared as counsel for Federico Rovero, opposing Rufina Bautista’s claims under the partition.
  6. Conflicting Claims: Atty. Barrios claimed that he was engaged by Federico Rovero, not Rufina Bautista, to draft the partition. However, he admitted in his answer to the complaint that he prepared the deed upon the joint request of Federico Rovero, Rufina Bautista, and Francisco Bautista.

Issue:

  1. Whether Atty. Barrios committed malpractice by refusing to represent Rufina Bautista and instead appearing for Federico Rovero, the opposing party.
  2. Whether Atty. Barrios violated professional ethics by taking inconsistent positions and raising issues that breached Rufina Bautista’s confidence.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.