G.R. No. L-13078
Date: December 13, 1918
Case Title: In re W. H. Booram. Suspension as attorney-at-law.

FACTS:
A complaint for unprofessional conduct was filed against attorney W. H. Booram by A. T. Hashim. The complaint was investigated by the Attorney-General, who recommended Booram’s suspension from the practice of law under Section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The case stemmed from Booram’s handling of a collection case for Hashim against a debtor, Antonio Villeta, for the amount of P265.17. Booram collected a total of P132.58 from Villeta, consisting of P40 in cash and P92.58 in clothing made for Booram. Booram then rendered an account to Hashim claiming the entire amount collected (P132.58) as his attorney’s fees, which constituted 50% of the original debt but 100% of the amount actually recovered. Booram’s defense, that Hashim owed him for previous legal work, was not substantiated by the evidence.

ISSUE:
Whether attorney W. H. Booram’s act of retaining the entire amount collected from a debtor as his fee, despite it representing only half of the client’s claim, constitutes unprofessional and unethical conduct warranting suspension.

RULING:
Yes. The Supreme Court found Booram’s conduct to be unprofessional and unethical. By collecting half of the client’s account and claiming all of it as his fee without a satisfactory explanation or a valid, proven offset for other services, Booram violated his professional duties. The Court upheld the recommendation of the Attorney-General. Consequently, W. H. Booram was suspended from practicing as an attorney-at-law in the Philippine Islands for a period of two years from the date of the decision.