Case Summary (A.C. No. 12661)
Petitioner
Benjamin M. Katipunan, Jr., alleging that his counsel’s negligence and deceit prevented him from availing the last available remedy after his petition for review on certiorari was denied.
Respondent
Atty. Rebene C. Carrera, who handled the labor and appellate proceedings but failed to inform his client of the Supreme Court’s resolution denying the petition.
Key Dates
• October 12, 1996–2003: Katipunan’s employment with PTC and subsequent disability claim
• January 25, 2005: Labor Arbiter awards US$60,000 total disability benefits
• February 25, 2010: Carrera receives Supreme Court resolution denying the petition
• March & May 2010: Katipunan’s inquiries met with false assurances that the case was pending
• June 23 & July 12, 2010: Demand letters for damages due to counsel’s alleged negligence
• July 21, 2011: IBP-CBD recommends censure
• March 20, 2013 & April 20, 2017: IBP Board of Governors affirms decision and denies reconsideration
Applicable Law
1987 Philippine Constitution; Code of Professional Responsibility (Canon 18, Rules 18.02, 18.03, 18.04); Canon 15 of the Canons of Professional Ethics; the Lawyer’s Oath; Section 27, Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court.
Allegations of Misconduct
Katipunan charged Carrera with failure to keep him informed of the Supreme Court’s February 2010 resolution, refusal to file a motion for reconsideration, and misrepresentation of the case status, resulting in the lapse of his client’s remedy.
Procedural History
After an NLRC award, the NLRC and Court of Appeals denied Katipunan’s claims on appeal. Carrera filed a petition for review with the Supreme Court but did not notify his client when the petition was denied. Katipunan only learned of the dismissal in May 2010. He lodged two demand letters, then filed an administrative complaint with the IBP. The IBP-CBD found Carrera remiss and recommended censure; the IBP Board affirmed. The Supreme Court elevated the records for its final disposition.
Issue
Whether Atty. Carrera violated the Lawyer’s Oath, Canons 15 and 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, and Section 27, Rule 138 by failing to inform his client of the Supreme Court’s denial and unilaterally forgoing further remedy.
Supreme Court’s Findings
• Carrera breached his fiduciary duty by neglecting to inform Katipunan of the resolution.
• He violated Rule 18.03 (duty not to neglect) and Rule 18.04 (duty to keep informed) of the CPR, and the Lawyer’s Oath’s requirement of competence and diligence.
• Under Canon 15, a lawyer must assert every remedy authorized by law and may not abandon a client’s last available option without consent
Case Syllabus (A.C. No. 12661)
Facts
- Benjamin M. Katipunan, Jr. worked as a Master Mariner for Philippine Transmarine Company, Inc. from October 12, 1996 until 2003.
- He contracted a heart ailment in service, resulting in total and permanent disability.
- Philippine Transmarine Company denied his claim for disability benefits, prompting him to file before the NLRC.
- On January 25, 2005, the Labor Arbiter awarded him US$60,000 in total disability benefits.
- He appealed for US$90,000 and engaged Atty. Rebene C. Carrera from NLRC through the Supreme Court.
- The NLRC reversed its decision on April 6, 2006; reconsideration was denied on August 28, 2006.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the NLRC rulings and denied reconsideration.
- On August 11, 2008, the Supreme Court required verified statements of material dates, affidavit of service, and certification against forum shopping.
- Carrera filed a “Verified Compliance and Statement of Material Dates” on October 3, 2009.
- On January 27, 2010, the Supreme Court denied the petition for lack of reversible error; respondent received copy February 25, 2010.
- Carrera did not inform Katipunan of the denial; in March and May 2010 visits, he wrongly stated the case was still pending.
- Katipunan discovered the denial resolution in the case file on May 11, 2010; Carrera admitted there was no further remedy.
- No motion for reconsideration was filed within 15 days, rendering the resolution final.
- Katipunan sent demand letters on June 23 and July 12, 2010; respondent replied August 8, 2010 accusing extortion.
- Katipunan filed an administrative complaint with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) alleging negligence and deceit.
Respondent’s Allegations
- Maintained a close pers