Flashcards Studio

In an action for collection filed in the Regional Trial Court, Zenith Enterprises is the plaintiff represented by Atty. Marco Dizon, the counsel of record. Atlas Manufacturing, the defendant, is represented by Atty. Lilia Campos. At the first scheduled pre-trial conference, Atty. Dizon did not appear despite proper service of summons on Atlas and notice to Atlas’s counsel. The court proceeds with the conference and orders Atlas to file a verified answer within 15 days. After the conference, Atty. Dizon files a verified motion to withdraw as counsel of record, citing a pending conflict of interest with another client, and requests substitution. The court does not designate substitute counsel immediately. Atlas remains unrepresented for 13 days, during which time no pleading is filed. The court later grants substitution to Atty. Jomar Reyes, but substitution occurs after the 13-day unrepresented period. The court eventually dismisses the case for want of prosecution. (a)Identify the controlling doctrine on the Duty of Counsel of Record to appear and to represent the client, including the rule on withdrawal and substitution. (b)Apply the facts to determine whether Atty. Dizon violated his duty and whether the court’s dismissal was proper. (c)Explain what remedies are available to protect Atlas Manufacturing's right to due process if timely substitution is not effected.