Vivian Villanueva vs Atty. Cornelius Gonzales

A.C. No. 7657 – 568 Phil. 379 – 544 SCRA 410 – Legal Ethics – Lawyer’s Duties to Clients; Case Update

In 2000, Vivian Villanueva engaged the services of Atty. Cornelius Gonzales to help her transfer a title to her name. Villanueva gave Atty. Gonzales Php8, as acceptance fee. She also gave her the Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) subject of the legal services she engaged Atty. Gonzales for.

However, after receiving the fee and the TCT, Atty. Gonzales did not do anything. Villanueva then asked Atty. Gonzales to return the acceptance fee as well as the TCT. But instead of returning said money and property, Atty. Gonzales ignored and avoided Villanueva.

It was only in 2003 that Atty. Gonzales returned the Php8, to Villanueva but only after the latter’s daughter confronted and pressured the lawyer. But still, Atty. Gonzales failed to return the TCT. Consequently, Villanueva filed a administrative case against Atty. Gonzales. The latter did not even respond to the administrative complaint.

ISSUE: Whether or not Atty. Cornelius Gonzales violated the Code of Professional Responsibility.

HELD: Yes. He violated Canons 16, 17, and 18.

More particularly Canon 18 which provides:

A lawyer shall keep the client informed of the status of his case and shall respond within a reasonable time to the client’s request for information.

Atty. Cornelius Gonzales avoided Villanueva for three years and kept her in the dark. He did not give her any information about the status of her case or respond to her request for information. After giving the money, Villanueva never heard from Atty. Gonzales again. Complainant went to the lawyer’s office several times to request for information. But every time, Atty. Gonzales avoided Villanueva and gave her the run-around.

Atty. Cornelius Gonzales was suspended for two years from the practice of law.

Read full text.