G.R. No. 1110 : April 22, 1904
ROMAN SARMIENTO, plaintiff-appellee, vs. MONTAGNE & DOMINGUEZ, defendants-appellants.

FACTS:
Roman Sarmiento was the accused in a criminal case. During the proceedings, a certain Mr. Mobley paid the sum of 300 pesos into court. One of the defendants, the law firm Montagne & Dominguez, who appeared as counsel for Sarmiento, requested that this money be delivered “to the wife of the accused,” Angela Cabrera, citing their poverty. Sarmiento’s wife subsequently executed an express written authorization in favor of Montagne & Dominguez to receive the said amount from the court clerk, which authorization was approved by the judge. By virtue of this authorization, the defendants received the money. Sarmiento later filed an action to recover the 300 pesos from the defendants. The defendants contended that they were entitled to retain the money as payment for their unpaid attorney’s fees.

ISSUE:
Whether the defendants, Montagne & Dominguez, may rightfully retain the 300 pesos they received by virtue of an agency contract, as compensation for their alleged unpaid attorney’s fees.

RULING:
No. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment in favor of the plaintiff, Roman Sarmiento. The Court ruled that the relationship established by the written authorization from Sarmiento’s wife was one of agency, whereby the defendants received the money as agents for and in the name of their principal, Angela Cabrera (the wife). An agent does not acquire ownership of the property or money received in the name of the principal. The defendants’ claim for unpaid fees arises from a separate contract for professional services with their client, Sarmiento. Their proper remedy is to institute an independent action against Sarmiento to recover such fees, not to appropriate the funds held in their capacity as agents. The evidence presented by the defendants regarding fees was deemed irrelevant and incompetent in this action for the recovery of money received under an agency contract.