[ G.R. NO. 169079. August 28, 2007 ] 558 Phil. 228
THIRD DIVISION
[ G.R. NO. 169079. August 28, 2007 ]
FRANCISCO RAYOS, PETITIONER, VS, ATTY. PONCIANO G. HERNANDEZ, RESPONDENT. R E S O L U T I O N
CHICO-NAZARIO, J.:
Before Us is a Motion for Reconsideration dated 16 March 2007 filed by respondent Atty. Ponciano G. Hernandez, seeking a modification of the Decision dated 12 February 2007. The dispositive portion of the Decision states:
WHEREFORE the Court Resolves that: Respondent is guilty of violation of the attorney’s oath and of serious professional misconduct and shall be SUSPENDED from the practice of law for six (6) months and WARNED that repetition of the same or similar offense will be dealt with more severely; Respondent is entitled to attorney’s fees in the amount equivalent to THIRTY-FIVE PERCENT (35%) of the total amount awarded[1] to petitioner in Civil Case No. SM-951; and Respondent is to return the amount of Two Hundred Ninety Thousand One Hundred Nine Pesos and Twenty-One Centavos (P290,109.21),[2] which he retained in excess of what we herein declared as fair and reasonable attorney’s fees, plus legal interest from date of finality of this judgment until full payment thereof. Let copies of this Decision be entered in the personal record of respondent as member of the Bar and furnished the Office of the Bar Confidant, the IBP, and the Court Administrator for circulation to all courts of the country.
Respondent received a copy of the Decision on 5 March 2007. Hence, the Motion for Reconsideration was filed within the reglementary period provided under the Rules. Respondent begs the compassionate understanding and magnanimity of the Honorable Court for some leniency regarding his unintentional transgression and prays that the penalty of suspension of six months imposed upon him be reduced to a fine, invoking his almost 15 years of patient, devoted, complete and successful professional services rendered to petitioner; for the bad faith of the latter in dismissing him as counsel without justifiable cause; and his good faith in retaining the money “contingently” with the view of winning petitioner’s cause. In light of respondent’s sincere plea for compassion from the Court, we take a second look at the penalty imposed. In several administrative cases, the Court has refrained from imposing the actual penalties in the presence of mitigating factors. Factors such as the respondent’s length of service, the respondent’s acknowledgement of his or her infractions and feeling of remorse, family circumstances, humanitarian and equitable considerations, respondent’s advanced age, among other things, have had varying significance in the Court’s determination of the imposable penalty.[3] Applying the rationale in the aforesaid catena of cases, it is appropriate for this Court, in the case at bar, to consider the following circumstances, to wit:
a) respondent had spent 15 years in defending petitioner’s cause from the trial court to the Supreme Court; b) his efforts at defending their cause were palpably real, complete, and total, with utmost devotion and zealousness; c) respondent’s advanced age; d) this is the first time that respondent has been found administratively liable per available record; and e) respondent’s good faith in retaining what he sincerely believed to be his contingent fee. As can be gleaned from the facts, petitioner and respondent entered into a contingent fee arrangement whereby the latter, as counsel, will be paid for the legal services only if he secures a judgment favorable for his client. When respondent retained the amount of P557,961.21 and P159,120.00 out of the P1,219,920.00, he did so believing in good faith that it was a reasonable payment for the contingent fees which he was entitled to retain. It cannot be ignored that respondent indeed successfully defended petitioner’s case in Civil Case No. SM-951.
We are persuaded to exhibit a degree of leniency towards the respondent. We, thus, maintain a more compassionate approach. WHEREFORE, the respondent’s Motion for Reconsideration is partly GRANTED. The Decision dated 12 February 2007 is MODIFIED in that the suspension of six months is DELETED, and in lieu thereof a fine of P20,000.00 is IMPOSED, effective from date of receipt of herein Resolution, with warning that repetition of the same or similar acts will be dealt with more severely. The said Decision is AFFIRMED in all other respects. SO ORDERED. Ynares-Santiago, (Chairperson), Austria-Martinez, and Nachura, JJ., concur. Reyes, J., no part.