Case Summary (G.R. No. 7929)
Key Dates
The complaint was filed on December 5, 1916, and it was investigated by the Attorney-General, who recommended Booram's suspension in a report dated July 9, 1917. The decision to suspend Booram was made by the court on December 13, 1918.
Applicable Law
The relevant law governing the situation is Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which addresses unprofessional conduct by attorneys and provides for disciplinary action, including suspension from practice.
Facts of the Case
A. T. Hashim had an outstanding account of P265.17 against Antonio Villeta, which he entrusted to Booram for collection. Booram collected a total of P132.58, comprising P40 in cash and P92.58 through clothing made by Villeta. However, he claimed the entire amount collected as his attorney's fee, despite having only partially collected the original debt.
Findings of Unprofessional Conduct
Booram's actions were deemed unprofessional and unethical as he charged Hashim for legal fees that were disproportionate to the amount he effectively collected. His written response failed to provide a satisfactory explanation for his actions, including an unsubstantiated claim that Hashim owed him for previous legal services, which did not justify his fee arrangement.
Recommendation and Judgment
Based on the findings, the Attorney-General recommended Booram's suspension from the practice of law. The court agreed with this recommendation, determining that Booram's con
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 7929)
Case Overview
- The case involves a complaint against W. H. Booram, an attorney, filed by A. T. Hashim on December 5, 1916.
- The complaint was forwarded to the Attorney-General of the Philippine Islands for investigation.
- A report by the Attorney-General, dated July 9, 1917, recommended suspension of Booram from practicing law.
Investigation and Findings
- The investigation included evidence taken by a court-appointed commissioner.
- Although Booram objected to the commissioner's hearing, the court found it unnecessary to rule on these objections based on the evidence presented.
- The core issue revolved around Booram's handling of an account for A. T. Hashim against Antonio Villeta, a tailor.
Financial Transactions
- Hashim had an account totaling P265.17 against Villeta, which he entrusted to Booram for collection.
- Booram collected P40 in