Case Summary (A.C. No. 258)

Malpractice in Attorney-Client Relationship

• The respondent lawyer, Atty. Benjamin O. Barrios, was previously engaged by the complainant, Rufina Bautista, to draft a deed of partition.
• After the adverse party, Federico Rovero, refused to comply with the terms of the partition, Bautista sought Barrios's representation in a lawsuit against Rovero.
• Barrios refused to represent Bautista, compelling her to hire another attorney, Atty. Artemio S. Arrieta.
• Subsequently, Barrios appeared as counsel for Rovero, opposing Bautista's claims regarding the partition.
• This conduct is classified as malpractice, warranting corrective measures against Barrios.

Conflict of Interest and Representation Issues

• Barrios claimed that he was employed by both parties to draft the partition, raising questions about his ability to represent one party against the other in subsequent litigation.
• If Barrios could represent one party, it should have been Bautista, who sought to enforce the partition.
• Instead, Barrios represented Rovero, who was attempting to evade compliance with the partition, thereby creating a conflict of interest.

Evidence and Testimonies

• Bautista engaged Barrios in August 1955 to draft the partition, which was signed and distributed the properties of Rovero and his deceased wife.
• When Rovero refused to comply, Bautista's request for Barrios to represent her was met with refusal, leading her to seek alternative legal counsel.
• Barrios's defense that he was engaged solely by Rovero was contradicted by his own admission that he prepared the deed at the joint request of both parties.
• The Solicitor-General supported Bautista's claims, indicating that Barrios's assertions lacked credibility.

Ethical Violations and Consequences

• Barrios's actions in represen...continue reading

Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 258)

Case Overview

• The case revolves around the complaint filed by Rufina Bautista against Atty. Benjamin O. Barrios for malpractice.
• Atty. Barrios was engaged by Rufina Bautista to draft a deed of partition concerning conjugal properties between Rufina's family and Federico Rovero.
• The core issue arises when Atty. Barrios, instead of representing Rufina in litigation against Rovero for non-compliance with the deed, appears as counsel for Rovero, opposing Rufina's claims.

Background of the Case

• In August 1955, Rufina Bautista retained the services of Atty. Barrios to create an extra-judicial partition of properties inherited from Maria Bautista, who had died intestate.
• The deed of partition was signed by the involved parties, distributing the properties between Rufina Bautista, her siblings, and Federico Rovero.
• Following Rovero's refusal to comply with the partition, Rufina Bautista filed a lawsuit (Civil Case No. K-689) to enforce the deed.

Malpractice Allegations

• Rufina Bautista claims that Atty. Barrios committed malpractice by refusing to represent her in the enforcement suit...continue reading