UY CHICO vs. UNION LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY

I dunno. In some way I kinda miss Atty. Edward Chico's class in Civil Law Review. I love that class. The teacher was such a stand up comedian you are kept smiling and laughing from the moment you enter the room up to your way out. Atty. Chico is such a genius when it comes to punchlines. The guy reminds me of this stand-up comedian turned gov. official.. what's his face?. Arnel Ignacio. They kinda look alike too LOL. Word of advice to students behind me. If you look at the subject list to enroll this year and you see the teacher is that guy, by all means enlist your name in that class. I think the dude is sui generis hahaha. Sya lang talaga yung ganon, mahirap makausap ng matino. But I admire his wisdom sometimes. We have the same viewpoint on life.  And I guarantee you, it'll be an experience you'll never regret. Well the fact that genuinely mabait si sir ok na yon. And di sya  gaanong nangbabagsak. He even helps you to remember and push you to dig into your stock knowledge while reciting. That's a real review class. Walang pressure. 

What's the case today..

UY CHICO vs..“Uyy chikoo!!” I remember back in my freshmen year in my previous law school we sort of make fun of the names on the case titles just so it would stick and we wouldn’t forget.  This kinda remind me of an old favorite Bamboo song “..amoy chiko na ako..”. 

To tell you frankly the fruit doesn’t even taste a bit like wine, its so sweet. I remember being introduced to the fruit by my grandma back when I was a little boy swinging on a vine during summer vacation in the province. My grandpa lived in this big old house that got a stuck river like a lagoon right in front of it where me and my cousins took a dip almost everyday. It got this big chico tree standing overlapped on the waters, thing was, the best ones were all at the top of the water so we tied a rope to swing like monkeys. The best part was landing on water with a chico on your mouth. (grabe.. ngiting kasama ng hangin) Tsk.. I guess the best ones are really the ones that’s hard to get huh? (don't believe that crap). And whenever my grandma slides this big bowl full of ripe chicos on the table in the morning when I woke? That’s what I say “Uyyy chikoo!!” It’s really one of my fave fruits.

You know it's awesome living then. Every part of the day is a best part. Morning we feed the ducks and pigs, and then laugh and go fishing. Afternoon we take a dip at the lagoon and climb trees and eat fruits. Evening comes we smile and play and play some more.  Play in the garden under the light of the sky full of stars or the full moon. And all sudden bushes would shake so we'd all stop and stare and then "Awwooooooo!!" boy split second were all running to the veranda when we hear that and our uncles would pop out of the flower bushes laughing so hard. So we'd get the remaining hard chikos and throw at them. But the part I like the most is the haunting part in the mid evening. Co'z the big house was fuckin' infested with ghosts. So it's so exciting when we're all inside the big mosquito net and we hear footsteps in shackles (this is really true) and we were all shaking Aw! coz the old huge house was once used by the japs durin the war I guess, I dunno, I heard stories from my uncles and aunts, and it's got a long silent romantic history I swear. And  I so love the adventure of ghost hunting. One time I secretly took a ball of thread from my aunt's sewing box, tied my lolo's damn rocking chair and secretly kept pulling hahahahaha!.. everyone was screaming like crazy when they saw it movin right before their very eyes. And then my aunt caught me laughing I was almost kicked out of the mosquito net still laughing ahahahahaha!!!  

Anyway let's get to the case (LOL).

This case is ah.. an insurance case. But we will tackle the evidence aspect of this case zeroing in on the attorney-client privilege.

FACTS:

Plaintiff Uy Chico had his dry goods insured. He availed of the insurance upon stocks of dry goods Union Life Assurance had to offer then. And he signed the insurance policies himself. You must understand these were Chinese businessmen and security in their commerce is utmost to them. And subsequent to signing his insurance contract with Union Life, his goods were gutted down by fire. Perfect timing huh?

It appears that the dad of Uy Chico died in 1897 (Am I correct? 1897? This must have been a very old case) . At which time he was conducting business under his own name Uy Layco. (Uuyyy! Like ko!! ehehehe, that’s what you say when you’re liking what you read on facebook and itching to click the ‘like’ button... nahawa na yata ako kay papa Jack este.. papa Edward Chico).  

The thing was, when the dad died Uy Chico and his brother took over the business and merely continued it under the same name “Uy Layco”. (I can attest that this really is an old case, just take a close look at the Chinese names. None of the Chinese names I know nowadays precedes their first names by their last names, which was very prevalent during the Rizal era, sorry I didn’t check the decision date).   

Ok so what happened was.. during years of conducting business with his brother, which was subsequent to the death of the dad and preceding the incident of fire. The plaintiff Uy Chico bought off his brother’s interest in the business. So probably holding a handsome amount his brother ventured on a different business, of course we all know how these Chinese are. Which is a good and wise practice of course, you don't put your eggs in just one basket, right?  So Uy Chico continued the dry goods business on his own, but the thing was, he was still carrying on the business under his father’s name whom we all know was already deceased.

Now there’s quite a controversy that surfaced on this. You see at the time of the fire, the dad was heavily indebted and Uy Chico inheriting the business became even more indebted even to the creditors of the estate of his dad.

Now here comes the attorney-client privilege issue. During the course of the legal proceedings, Uy Chico’s attorney due to the indebtedness of his client had no choice but to enter a compromise with the insurance company for half the face value of the signed insurance policy. Here's what the counsel did. He took the insurance policy documents, surrendered it to the court assigned administrator of his dad’s estate, who in turn compromised with the insurance company. So money was paid into court and held by the court sheriff.

(I take that ah.. I dunno, I'm trying to rationalize the counsel's behavior. Maybe he's trying to salvaged what's there to save, I dunno, maybe by virtue of a promise to the former's deathbed to guard and help diminish future loss. He must've belonged to the older Uy's retainer. He must be originally a lawyer of his dad to be able to behave like that. You know most of the time as I have observed, those who served the predecessor automatically or even unawarely pay tribute to or consider the former's will).

Uy Chico  now brings this action maintaining that the policies and goods insured belonged to him and not to the estate of his deceased father, and together with it he alleges that he is not bound by the compromise effected by the administrator of his father’s estate (see what I'm talking about? there you go). (I wonder if this was Uy Chico’s ploy not to transfer his dad’s title of ownership under his own name, maybe to evade 3^rd party creditors. Thing was, his dad's lawyers therefore operated on the former premise, if that be the case).

Nevertheless, plaintiff was asked by the court if he had any objection to his attorney’s testifying concerning the surrendering of the policies. Plaintiff replied in the negative. Counsel was then called for that purpose. (Imagine you’re supposed to stand as counsel for a party in court and you end up finding yourself on your way to the witness stand, but hey, as I have said, there must be an underlying reason behind all of these. Subject of course to whether such counsel's move was proper).

ISSUE:

The gist of this case is the Attorney-Client Privilege. Whether or not the attorney-client privilege was violated by the attorney’s act of surrendering the insurance policies to the administrator of the estate to effect a compromise agreement with the insurance company.   

The counsel based his argument of the proposition anchoring on a jurisprudence that a waiver of the client’s privilege may be withdrawn at any time before acted upon. 

Let’s see if it will hold.

RULING:

SC ruled that “A lawyer must strictly maintain inviolate the confidence and preserve the secrets of his client. He shall not be permitted in any court, without the consent of his client, to testify to any facts imparted to him by his client in professional consultation, or for the purpose of obtaining advice upon legal matters”

So it’s clear. It's a question of Legal Ethics. I will not further expound on this. This is interlocutory in nature. We have not even touched on the real legal issue of this case. So if I may close this case post without further ado. The act amounts to a violation of the Attorney-Client Privilege Rule stated under the Rules of Court. 

Atty. E. Chico.... a este... Uy Chico wins this case.