Clark Vincent Ponla JD WT EH201

Judge Francisco A. Seville Jr. Legal Profession

CUETO v. JIMENEZ, JR. (A.C. No. 5798, January 20, 2005)

FACTS:
Engr. Alex B. Cueto filed a complaint for disciplinary action against Atty. JoseJimenez, Jr. with the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), Commission on Bar Discipline. Cueto engaged the services of
Jimenez as notary public and after notarizing the Construction Agreement, Cueto paid the agreed
Php50,000 as notarial fee. He paid Php30,000 in cash and issued a check for the balance in the amount
of Php20,000. Cueto informed Jimenez that he ran short of funds especially since Jimenez’s son Jose III
failed to pay his own obligation to Cueto. As a result, the check that Cueto issued was dishonored for
insufficient funds, so Atty. Jimenez filed a complaint against Cueto for violation of BP 22. Hence, this
administrative complaint was filed by Cueto against Jimenez, alleging that Jimenez violated the Code of
Professional Responsibility when he filed the criminal case against Cueto so he could collect the balance
of his notarial fee. In its report, the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline found respondent guilty of
violating Canon 20, Rule 20.4 of the Code of Professional Responsibility and recommended that Atty.
Jose B. Jimenez, Jr. be reprimanded.

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent Jimenez, Jr. is guilty of violating Canon 20, Rule 20.4 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility

HELD:
Canon 20, Rule 20.4 of the Code of Professional Responsibility mandates that a lawyer shall avoid
controversies with clients concerning his compensation and shall resort to judicial action only to prevent
imposition, injustice or fraud. There was clearly no imposition, injustice or fraud obtaining in this case to
justify the legal action taken by respondent. As borne out by the records, complainant Cueto had
already paid more than half of respondent’s fee. To resort to a suit to recover the balance reveals a
certain kind of shameful conduct and inconsiderate behavior. The duty of a lawyer is to uphold the
integrity and dignity of the legal profession by faithfully performing his duties to society, the bar, the
courts and his clients. The legal profession is imbued with public service and remuneration is a mere
incident. Although every lawyer must be paid what is due to him, he must never resort to judicial action
to recover his fees, in a manner that detracts from the dignity of the profession. Therefore, the Supreme
Court severely reprimanded Atty. Jose Jimenez, Jr. for violating Canon 20, Rule 20.4 of the Code of
Professional Responsibility.