Problem areas in legal ethics

A.Y. 2018-2019

CASE TITLE: PNB V CEDO

G.R. NO/DATE: A.C. NO. 3701 MARCH 28, 1995
SUBJECT: SUSPENSION

FACTS:

Atty. Telesforo Cedo is the former Assistant Vice President of the Asset Management Group of
PNB, who is now the counsel of Milagros Ong Siy in a case against PNB. Complainant-bank charged Atty
Cedo with violation of Canon 5, rule 6.03 of the Code of Professional Responsibility, which states that:

“A lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or employment in
connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service.”

PNB stated that while Atty Cedo was still employed in their bank, he participated in arranging sale
of steel sheets in favor of Mrs. Ong Siy for P200,000. He even “noted” the gate passes issued by his
subordinate, Mr. Emmanuel Elefan, in favor of Mrs. Ong Siy authorizing the pull-out of the steel sheets from
the DMC Man Division Compound.

Similarly, Atty. Cedo already appeared as a counsel for Mr. Elefan in an administrative case against
PNB, but was disqualified by the Civil Service Commission.

Atty. Cedo also became the counsel of Ponciano and Eufemia Almeda against PNB as they were
represented by the law firm “Cedo, Ferrer, Maynigo & Associates” (of which Cedo is one of the Senior
Partners). PNB added that while Atty Cedo was still with them, he intervened in the handling of the loan
account of the spouses.

ATTY CEDO’s DEFENSE:

He appeared as counsel for Mrs. Ong Siy but only with respect to the execution pending appeal of
the RTC decision. He did not participate in the litigation of the case before the trial court.

In the Almeda Case, he never appeared as counsel for them. Only Atty. Pedro Ferrer of the said
law firm handled the case. He also added that the law firm was not of a general partnership. They are only
using the name to designate a law firm maintained by lawyers, who although not partners, maintain one
office as well as one clerical and supporting staff. They handle their cases independently and individually.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Atty. Cedo was guilty of violating Canon 6

HELD:

This case was referred to the IBP. Their findings are the ff:

Ong Siy case: He was the counsel through the law firm and was fined by the court in the amount
of P1,000 for forum shopping.

Almeda case: Atty Pedro Singson of PNB attested that in one of the hearings, Atty. Cedo was
present although he did not enter his appearance, and was dictating to Atty. Ferrer what to say and
argue before the court. He also admitted in one of the hearings that he was the partner of Atty
Ferrer.

1
 Problem areas in legal ethics
A.Y. 2018-2019

IBP recommended suspension from the practice for 3 years. Cedo violated Rule 15.02 of the CPR,
since the client’s secrets and confidential records and information are exposed to the other lawyers and
staff members at all times.

There also was a deliberate intent to devise ways and means to attract as clients former borrowers
of PNB since he was in the best position to see the legal weaknesses of PNB. He sacrificed ethics in
consideration of money.

It is unprofessional to represent conflicting interests, except by express conflicting consent of all

concerned given after a full disclosure of the facts.

The Court resolves to suspend Atty Cedo from the practice of law for 3 years.