G.R. No. 7150, September 6, 1911
THE UNITED STATES vs. JACINTO BORROMEO, ET AL.

FACTS

Jacinto Borromeo was convicted of rapto (abduction) in the Court of First Instance of Manila in November 1910, represented by attorney Mariano Legaspi. After conviction, a notice of appeal was filed on November 17, 1910, by “Sr. M. Legaspi Florendo” as Borromeo’s attorney. Subsequently, on July 7, 1911, Alfonso Mendoza filed a notice of appearance as attorney for the accused in the Supreme Court. Later, on August 31, 1911, Macario Adriatico filed a motion alleging himself to be the attorney for Borromeo and requested time to study the case and prepare for appeal. No formalities, such as the client’s written consent or the consent of the previous attorneys, were observed in these changes of representation.

ISSUE

Whether the motion for substitution of attorneys filed by Macario Adriatico should be granted despite non-compliance with procedural formalities for attorney substitution.

RULING

No. The Supreme Court, sitting en banc, denied the motion. It held that attorney substitutions cannot be permitted without complying with the following requisites:
1. A written application for substitution;
2. The written consent of the client to the substitution;
3. The written consent of the attorney being substituted, if obtainable;
4. If such consent cannot be obtained, proof of service of notice of the motion upon the attorney to be substituted, as required by the rules.

Since Macario Adriatico failed to comply with these formalities, he had no standing in the case. The Court ruled that the attorney who last properly appeared before the application for substitution (in this case, Alfonso Mendoza) remains the attorney of record and is responsible for the case. The denial was without prejudice to subsequent proceedings for substitution in accordance with the established requirements.