Scribd Logo
Hochladen

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Nakpil Vs Valdes (A.c. No. 2040. March 4, 1998)

    Uploaded by

    roa yuson
    35 views1 page
    Respondent attorney Valdes purchased a summer property in Baguio City for his client Jose Nakpil due to lack of funds, but took title under his own name. When Nakpil died, Valdes excluded the property from the estate inventory and transferred title to his own company. The Supreme Court found Valdes in conflict of interest for representing the estate while his accounting firm prepared claims against the estate from creditors. Valdes was suspended from practice for one year for placing his firm in a position where his loyalty to his client was doubted and for failing to uphold standards of integrity in the legal profession.

    Original Description:

    Nakpil vs Valdes [a.C. No. 2040. March 4, 1998]

    Original Title

    Nakpil vs Valdes [a.C. No. 2040. March 4, 1998]

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Respondent attorney Valdes purchased a summer property in Baguio City for his client Jose Nakpil due to lack of funds, but took title under his own name. When Nakpil died, Valdes excluded the property from the estate inventory and transferred title to his own company. The Supreme Court found Valdes in conflict of interest for representing the estate while his accounting firm prepared claims against the estate from creditors. Valdes was suspended from practice for one year for placing his firm in a position where his loyalty to his client was doubted and for failing to uphold standards of integrity in the legal profession.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    35 views1 page

    Nakpil Vs Valdes (A.c. No. 2040. March 4, 1998)

    Uploaded by

    roa yuson
    Respondent attorney Valdes purchased a summer property in Baguio City for his client Jose Nakpil due to lack of funds, but took title under his own name. When Nakpil died, Valdes excluded the property from the estate inventory and transferred title to his own company. The Supreme Court found Valdes in conflict of interest for representing the estate while his accounting firm prepared claims against the estate from creditors. Valdes was suspended from practice for one year for placing his firm in a position where his loyalty to his client was doubted and for failing to uphold standards of integrity in the legal profession.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Nakpil vs Valdes [A.C. No. 2040.

    March 4, 1998]
    FACTS:
    Jose Nakpil, husband of the complainant, became interested in purchasing a summer residence in
    Moran Street, Baguio City. For lack of funds, he requested respondent to purchase the Moran property
    for him. They agreed that respondent would keep the property in thrust for the Nakpils until the latter
    could buy it back. Pursuant to their agreement, respondent obtained two (2) loans from a bank which
    he used to purchase and renovate the property. Title was then issued in respondents name.
    The ownership of the Moran property became an issue in the intestate proceedings when Jose Nakpil
    died. Respondent acted as the legal counsel and accountant of his widow. Respondent excluded the
    Moran property from the inventory of Joses estate and transferred his title to the Moran property to his
    company, the Caval Realty Corporation.
    ISSUE:
    Whether or not there was conflict of interest between the respondent Atty. Valdes and the complainant.
    HELD:
    YES. Respondent was suspended from practice of law for one (1) year.
    RATIO:
    [T]here is no question that the interests of the estate and that of its creditors are adverse to each
    other. Respondents accounting firm prepared the list of assets and liabilities of the estate and, at the
    same time, computed the claims of two creditors of the estate. There is clearly a conflict between the
    interest of the estate which stands as the debtor, and that of the two claimants who are creditors of
    the estate.
    [R]espondent undoubtedly placed his law firm in a position where his loyalty to his client could be
    doubted. In the estate proceedings, the duty of respondents law firm was to contest the claims of
    these two creditors but which claims were prepared by respondents accounting firm. Even if the
    claims were valid and did not prejudice the estate, the set-up is still undesirable. The test to determine
    whether there is a conflict of interest in the representation is probability, not certainty of conflict. It
    was respondents duty to inhibit either of his firms from said proceedings to avoid the probability of
    conflict of interest.
    Public confidence in law and lawyers may be eroded by the irresponsible and improper conduct of a
    member of the bar. Thus, a lawyer should determine his conduct by acting in a manner that would
    promote public confidence in the integrity of the legal profession. Members of the bar are expected to
    always live up to the standards embodied in the Code of Professional Responsibility as the relationship
    between an attorney and his client is highly fiduciary in nature and demands utmost fidelity and good
    faith. In the case at bar, respondent exhibited less than full fidelity to his duty to observe candor,
    fairness and loyalty in his dealings and transactions with his clients.

    You might also like