Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Miranda vs. Atty. Carpio

    Uploaded by

    Ella Kriziana Cruz

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Miranda vs. Atty. Carpio

    Uploaded by

    Ella Kriziana Cruz
    21 views1 page

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    21 views1 page

    Miranda vs. Atty. Carpio

    Uploaded by

    Ella Kriziana Cruz

    Copyright:

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

    Miranda vs. Atty.

    Carpio

    CANON 16 - A LAWYER SHALL HOLD IN TRUST ALL MONEYS AND


    PROPERTIES OF HIS CLIENT THAT MAY COME INTO HIS
    POSSESSION.

    Rule 16.03 - A lawyer shall deliver the funds and property of his client when
    due or upon demand. However, he shall have a lien over the funds and may
    apply so much thereof as may be necessary to satisfy his lawful fees and
    disbursements, giving notice promptly thereafter to his client. He shall also
    have a lien to the same extent on all judgments and executions he has
    secured for his client as provided for in the Rules of Court.

    An attorney's retaining lien is fully recognized if the presence of the


    following elements concur: (1) lawyer-client relationship; (2) lawful
    possession of the client's funds, documents and papers; and (3) unsatisfied
    claim for attorney's fees.[9]  Further, the attorney's retaining lien is a
    general lien for the balance of the account between the attorney and his
    client, and applies to the documents and funds of the client which may
    come into the attorney's possession in the course of his employment.

    Respondent's further submission that he is entitled to the payment of


    additional professional fees on the basis of the principle of quantum
    meruit has no merit.  "Quantum meruit, meaning `as much as he deserved'
    is used as a basis for determining the lawyer's professional fees in the
    absence of a contract but recoverable by him from his client." [12]  The
    principle of quantum meruit applies if a lawyer is employed without a price
    agreed upon for his services.  In such a case, he would be entitled to receive
    what he merits for his services, as much as he has earned.[13]  In the present
    case, the parties had already entered into an agreement as to the attorney's
    fees of the respondent, and thus, the principle of quantum meruit does not
    fully find application because the respondent is already compensated by
    such agreement.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy