Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Legarda with a new counsel sought relief (petition for Certiorari) in the Supreme Court alleging, among others, that she was deprived of proper representation in court and divested her of property through the gross negligence of her previous counsel, Atty. Coronel. Supreme Court found merit in petitioners motion and ordered the annulment of all the decisions rendered by the lower court. It also ordered Atty. Coronel to show cause why he should not be held administratively liable for his acts and omissions which caused grave injustice to the petitioner. Even after he was granted a 30 day extension, he failed to respond to the Courts order, and asked for another extension on the grounds that he was hospitalized. DECISION: The second motion for extension of Atty. Coronel was denied, and he was suspended for 6 months for gross negligence in the defense of petitioner Legarda. Atty. Coronel's failure to exercise due diligence in protecting and attending to the interest of his client caused the latter material prejudice. The Court held that the facts of the case clearly showed that Atty. Coronel violated Canon 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility which mandates that "A lawyer shall serve his client with competence and diligence." He failed to observe particularly Rule 18.03 of the same Code which requires that "A lawyer shall not neglect a legal matter entrusted to him, and his negligence in connection therewith shall render him liable."