Under Section 26, Rule 138 of the
Rules of Court and established jurisprudence, a valid substitution of counsel has the following requirements: (1)
the filing of a written application for substitution; (2) the client’s
written consent; (3) the consent of the substituted lawyer if such
consent can be obtained; and, in case such written consent cannot be procured,
(4) a proof of service of notice of such motion on the attorney to be
substituted in the manner required by the Rules [See Bernardo v. Court of Appeals (Special Sixth Division), G.R. No.
106153, July 14, 1997, 275 SCRA 413, 427, citing Yu v. Court of Appeals, 135
SCRA 181, 189-190 (1985), citing Aban v. Enage, 120 SCRA 778 (1983) and Phil.
Apparel Workers Union v. NLRC, 125 SCRA 391 (1983) cited in HEIRS OF FRANCISCO RETUYA
et.al. vs. C. A., G.R. No. 163039, April 6, 2011, PERALTA, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.