G.R. No. A.C. No. 10164 March 10, 2014
STEPHAN BRUNET and VIRGINIA ROMANILLOS BRUNET, Complainants, vs. ATTY. RONALD L. GUAREN, Respondent.

FACTS

Complainant spouses Stephan and Virginia Brunet engaged the services of respondent Atty. Ronald L. Guaren in February 1997 for the titling of a residential lot they acquired. They agreed on a fee of Ten Thousand Pesos (₱10,000.00), with full payment to be made after the delivery of the title. Complainants gave an advance fee of One Thousand Pesos (₱1,000.00) and later an additional Six Thousand Pesos (₱6,000.00) on March 10, 1997, after which Atty. Guaren took pertinent documents for the titling. From 1997 to 2001, complainants repeatedly followed up the case, with Atty. Guaren each time stating it was in progress. Eventually, they demanded the return of their money, and respondent agreed but proposed a deduction of Five Thousand Pesos (₱5,000.00) for his professional fees. Furthermore, complainants alleged that despite the existing attorney-client relationship, Atty. Guaren made a special appearance against them in a case before the Metropolitan Circuit Trial Court, Oslob, Cebu. Atty. Guaren admitted receiving ₱7,000.00 as partial payment of his acceptance fee but claimed the agreement was that the case would be filed only after full payment. He denied taking the original documents, except a photocopy of the tax declaration, and explained his appearance against the complainants was on behalf of the counsel on record who failed to appear.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Ronald L. Guaren violated the Code of Professional Responsibility.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found Atty. Ronald L. Guaren guilty of violating Canons 17 and 18 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. Canon 17 requires a lawyer to owe fidelity to the cause of his client and be mindful of the trust and confidence reposed in him. Canon 18 requires a lawyer to serve his client with competence and diligence. The Court held that Atty. Guaren breached his duty by failing to perform his obligation to file the case for the titling of the complainants’ lot despite receiving ₱7,000.00 and allowing five years to elapse without progress. The practice of law is a profession where public service, not money, is the primary consideration. The Court modified the penalty recommended by the IBP Board of Governors and suspended Atty. Guaren from the practice of law for a period of SIX (6) MONTHS, effective from receipt of the resolution, with a warning that a similar infraction in the future shall be dealt with more severely.