Facts:

• The case "Quirante v. Intermediate Appellate Court" involved John C. Quirante and Dante Cruz as petitioners, and the Intermediate Appellate Court, Manuel C. Casasola, and Estrellita C. Casasola as respondents.
• The decision was rendered on January 31, 1989, under G.R. No. 73886, with Justice Regalado as the ponente.
• The dispute arose from a contract between Dr. Indalecio Casasola and building contractor Norman Guerrero, with PHILAMGEN as Guerrero's bondsman.
• Guerrero failed to fulfill the contract, prompting Dr. Casasola, represented by Atty. John Quirante, to sue Guerrero and PHILAMGEN for damages in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila.
• The RTC ruled in favor of Dr. Casasola, awarding various damages and attorney's fees.
• PHILAMGEN's appeal was dismissed for being filed late, leading to a writ of execution.
• Dr. Casasola passed away on November 16, 1981, leaving behind a widow and children.
• Atty. Quirante filed a motion for confirmation of his attorney's fees based on an alleged oral agreement with Dr. Casasola, confirmed in writing by some heirs.
• The trial court granted the motion, but the Intermediate Appellate Court found the confirmation premature and set aside the trial court's orders.
• The case was elevated to the Supreme Court.

Issue:

• (Unlock)

Ruling:

1. Yes, the confirmation of attorney's fees by the trial court was premature.
2. The determination of whether the alleged agreement on attorney's fe...(Unlock)

Ratio:

• The Supreme Court affirmed the Intermediate Appellate Court's decision, ruling that the confirmation of attorney's fees was premature because the main case from which the fees may arise had not yet become final.
• Attorney's fees as an incident of the main action can only be recovered when something is due to the client.
• The alleged contract for attorney'...continue reading