7/7/2021
E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly
petition before the appellate courts, a new retainer contract would be executed by the
parties.
On April 25, 2011, Atty. Sevandal alleged that he executed an Addendum to Retainer
Contract with Merlina stating that the client agreed to contract his services as legal
counsel with respect to her claims for death and other monetary benefits as the legal
wife of Camilo from the following offices/agencies: (1) Bandila Maritime; (2) Del
Rosario Pandiphil, Inc. (DRPI); (3) Associated Maritime Officers' and Seamen's Union of
the Philippines; (4) Overseas Workers Welfare Administration; (5) Employees'
Compensation Commission; (6) SSS; and (7) other offices and/or agencies. Also, the
client promised to pay an acceptance and success fee amounting to 20% of the total
death/monetary benefits that the client may receive. Atty. Sevandal submitted an
Affidavit dated December 2, 2011 executed by Analyn B. Dingal, secretary of Atty. Cris
Paculanang who notarized the Addendum, stating that she handed the Addendum to
client Merlina, in the presence of Atty. Sevandal.[6]
On April 26, 2011, Atty. Sevandal filed a claim for death and other benefits that Merlina
may be lawfully entitled to with DRPI, the indemnity agent of Fuyoh Shipping and
Bandila Maritime.[7]
Meanwhile, on May 3, 2011, Atty. Adame, in behalf of Merlina, filed a Complaint with
the National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)[8] against Fuyoh Shipping and Bandila
Maritime for the payment of death benefits, sickness allowance, damages, and
attorney's fees.[9]
On May 4, 2011, DRPI informed Atty. Sevandal that Merlina's claim for death benefits
was discontinued due to the filing of the complaint by Atty. Adame with the NLRC.
However, it was intimated that if the NLRC complaint would he withdrawn, the
settlement of Merlina's claim would be resumed by DRPI and that in less than two (2)
months, Merlina would receive a check covering the death benefits. Atty. Sevandal
alleged that Merlina was amenable to the withdrawal of the NLRC complaint.[10]
On May 9, 2011, Atty. Sevandal filed with the NLRC a Manifestation Re: Withdrawal of
Complaint (filed by Atty. Adame), as well as a Formal Entry of Appearance as counsel
for Merlina. Atty. Sevandal attached a photocopy of the Addendum to Retainer
Contract.[11]
On May 10, 2011, Atty. Sevandal was informed by DRPI that the settlement claim for
death benefits would not be resumed since DRPI decided to enter its appearance at the
mandatory conference called by the NLRC.[12]
On May 23, 2011, Atty. Sevandal entered his appearance as counsel for Merlina at the
NLRC mandatory conference and a certain Atty. Ma. Bella Eviota (Atty. Eviota) entered
her appearance, for and in the absence of Atty. Adame, as counsel for Merlina. Atty.
Sevandal manifested his objection pursuant to Rule 8.02, Canon 8 of the CPR.[13]
On May 30, 2011, at the next mandatory conference, Atty. Adame filed her entry of
appearance as counsel for Merlina. Atty. Sevandal again reiterated his objection.[14]
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/66937
2/10