Buted vs.

Hernando AC 1359
TOPIC: Legal Ethics, Conflict of Interests
FACTS:
Atty. Hernando was counsel for Luciana Abadilla and Angela Buted for a partition case of the late Teofilo Buteds
lot. He successfully defended the case. When Luciana died, Hernando withdrew appearance. Luciana once sold
the property to Benito Bolisay but it appears that the TCT was issued to the Sy couple. Upon filing specific
performance, Bolisay got Atty. Hernando to represent him (free of charge). They succeeded in ejecting the
couple. Atty. Hernando claims to have terminated relationship with Bolisay. In February 1974, Atty. Hernando
filed a petition, in behalf of Lucianas heirs without their consent, to cancel TCT of Bolisay couple over the lot. The
couple filed disapproval. The case was dismissed for prescription. In August of 1974, Bolisay couple filed an
administrative complaint against Atty. Hernando for having abused personal secrets obtained by him as their
counsel

ISSUE:
Whether or not respondent Hernando had a conflict of interests

HELD:
Yes. The Supreme Court ruled that Atty. Hernando had a conflict of interest. In the action for specific
performance, Atty Hernando defended the Bolisay couples right to ownership but assailed the very same right in
the cadastral proceeding in favor of Lucianas heirs. The Canons of Professional Ethics prohibits conflicting
interests for lawyers. It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests, except by express consent of all
concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts. Within the meaning of this canon, a lawyer represents
conflicting interests when, in behalf of one client, it is his duty to contend for that which duty to another client
requires him to oppose. The obligation to represent the client with undivided fidelity and not to divulge his secrets
or confidence forbids also the subsequent acceptance of retainers or employment from others in matters
adversely affecting any interest of the client with respect to which confidence has been reposed.And despite Atty
Hernandos claim that he had never seen nor taken hold of the Transfer Certificate of Title or that he divulged any
confidential information belonging to the Bolisay couple, that the mere fact that respondent had acted as counsel
for Benito Bolisay in the action for specific performance should have precluded him from appearing as counsel for
the other side in in the cancellation of the Transfer Certificate of Title of the spouses. There is no necessity for
proving the actual transmission of confidential information to an attorney in the course of his employment by his
first client in order that he may be precluded from accepting employment by the second or subsequent client
where there are conflicting interests between the first and the subsequent clients. The prohibition on conflict of
interest was designed not only to prevent the dishonest practitioner from fraudulent conduct, but as well to
protect the honest lawyer from unfounded suspicion of unprofessional practice. Although the relation of attorney
and client has terminated, and the new employment is in a different case; nor can the attorney use against his
former client any knowledge or information gained through their former connection.

SUSPENDED for 5 months.